Ralph LaRossa

Symbolic Interactionism and Family Studies

Symbolic interactionism occupies a unique and important position in family studies. The principal theoretical orientation of the 1920s and 1930s (when family studies was endeavoring to establish itself as a science) and one of the most popular family perspectives today, symbolic interactionism probably has had more of an impact on the study of families than almost any other theoretical perspective (Hays, 1977; Howard, 1981).

On Qualitative Family Research

Using historical and content analysis, we examine the role of qualitative family research andfind that, although it has a long and impressive heritage, it generally is ignored by contemporary social scientists. The argument is made that qualitative as well as quantitative research are indispensible and that the failure of scholars, as of late, to recognize this simple fact seriously undermines the progress of family social science.

The Transition to Parenthood and the Social Reality of Time.

Ever since LeMasters (1957) defined the arrival of the first child as a crisis, transition to parenthood researchers have been preoccupied with testing his hypothesis (for example, see Dyer, 1963; Hobbs, 1965, 1968; Hobbs and Cole, 1976; Hobbs and Wimbish, 1977; Russell, 1974; Steffensmeier, 1982; Wylie, 1979). In fact, researchers have been so engrossed in the crisis orientation to the transition to parenthood-an orientation that is principally concerned with how people cope with becoming parents-that they have failed to provide much information on what actually happens in a family when an infant is added to the fold. Lately, however, the focus seems to be shifting, in that we are beginning to see studies that attempt to document how the social organization of a family changes during the transition to parenthood (for example, see Cowan et al., 1978; Entwisle and Doering, 1981; LaRossa and LaRossa, 1981). What are these studies finding? Although the evidence is meager, with more research sure to come, a definite pattern may already be emerging. It appears that when new parents are asked not whether they are bothered or gratified with parenthood but how their lives have changed since their babies were born, they consistently talk about one variable more than any other: time. Complaining that their lives have become if anything more hectic, new fathers and mothers report that sleep time, television time, communication time, sex time, and even bathroom time are all in short supply, thanks to their newborns. Paradoxic lly, they also say that they are more often bored. Sudden weight gains and soap opera addictions are commonly attributed to having too many idle moments.

After He Hits Her.

This study examines the interactional dynamics following woman battering, and specifically addresses the question of whether, as time goes on, male batterers are less likely to offer accounts or aligning actions (i.e., apologies, excuses, justifications, and dismissals) for acts of violence, and whether female victims are less likely to honor the mens accounts. Based on in-depth interviews with 50 white women who had come to a battered womens shelter, the study finds that abusers generally are not likely to stop accounting for their violent behavior but that shelter victims are progressively less likely to honor the accounts. It also is found that, as time goes on, men are more likely to blame their victims for the battering. Similarities and differences between these findings and the research results used to support Walkers (1979, 1984) cycle theory of violence are discussed. Implications for practitioners working with batterers and victims are outlined.

The Culture of Fatherhood in the Fifties: a Closer Look:

Based on a comparative analysis of popular magazine articles, premier childrearing manuals, and prime-time television shows, this article strives to heighten our understanding of the culture of fatherhood in the fifties (1945-1960) while chronicling the textual configurations that were emerging at the time. A close reading of the materials suggests that the culture of fatherhood in the fifties was neither a simple continuation of previous patterns nor a more progressive version of what had come before, but rather a more traditional strain of patriarchal fatherhood. Also, the culture of fatherhood in the late fifties appears to have been more traditional/patriarchal than the culture of fatherhood in the early fifties. The changes, however, were not clear-cut. Different media industries manufactured a culture of fatherhood that was more textured than smooth. The patriarchal patterns in the fabric were no doubt evident, but so were the distinct threads.

Men in Families: When Do They Get Involved? What Differences Does It Make?

Contents: Preface. Part I: Mens Roles in Families: A Look Back, A Look Forward. S. Mintz, From Patriarchy to Androgyny and Other Myths: Placing Mens Family Roles in Historical Perspective. L.M. Burton, A.R. Synder, The Invisible Man Revisited: Comments on the Life Course, History, and Mens Roles in American Families. A.J. Cherlin, On the Flexibility of Fatherhood. M.E. Lamb, Fatherhood Then and Now. Part II: Mens Investment in Parenthood. H.S. Kaplan, J.B. Lancaster, K.G. Anderson, Human Parental Investment and Fertility: The Life Histories of Men in Albuquerque. P. Draper, Who Should Fathers Father? W. Marsiglio, In Search of a Theory: Mens Fertility and Parental Investment in Modern Economics. C.A. Surra, Subjectivity and Practicality in Mating and Parenting Decisions. Part III: Marital Relations: What Do Men Contribute? J.M. Gottman, Toward a Process Model of Men in Marriages and Families. S. Coltrane, Gender, Power, and Emotional Expression: Social and Historical Contexts for a Process Model of Men in Marriages and Families. J. McQuillan, M.M. Ferree, The Importance of Variation Among Men and the Benefits of Feminism for Families. S.L. Nock, Marriages in Mens Lives. Part IV: Fathers: When Do They Make a Difference? P.R. Amato, More Than Money? Mens Contributions to Their Childrens Lives. J. Belsky, Paternal Influence and Childrens Well-Being: Limits of, and New Directions for, Understanding. F.F. Furstenberg, Jr., Social Capital and the Role of Fathers in the Family. J.A. Seltzer, Mens Contributions to Children and Social Policy. S.L. Brown, M.F. Bumpus, Men in Families: Looking Back, Looking Forward.

Teaching Family Sociology through Case Studies.

A family sociology course is both easier and more difficult to teach than other sociology courses. It is easier because, unlike statistics, methods, and even introduction to sociology, family sociology deals with topics that students currently find interesting (e.g., dating and divorce). It is more difficult because students often do not expect or want a sociology of the family (i.e., a course that describes how social scientists look at family groups); rather, they anticipate and prefer a rap session on families, something along the lines of The Phil Donahue Show. In an attempt to provide the kind of classroom atmosphere that students seem to like and, at the same time, offer a substantially sound course-one that will impress students with the utility of a sociological perspective-I began several years ago to integrate carefully selected nonfictional family case studies in both my undergraduate and graduate family courses. The purpose of this article is to describe the features of this approach.

Gender Disparities in Mother's Day and Father's Day Comic Strips: A 55 Year History

A content analysis of 495 humorous comic strips published on Mothers Day and Fathers Day from 1945 to 1999 indicates that gender stereotypes in this set of Sunday funnies have fluctuated since the end of World War II. Patriarchal gender disparities in the fictional families (i.e., gender disparities favoring father characters) were at their highest between 1945 and 1959, declined between 1960 and 1974, increased between 1975 and 1984, dropped below zero between 1985 and 1989, and went up again between 1990 and 1999. Along with the fluctuation, there was progress. From 1945 to 1999 in the holiday strips, mothers were afforded more freedom and their domestic workload became less onerous; the ratio of daughters to sons improved; and, beginning especially in the 1990s, the families became more racially and ethnically diverse.

Warfare and Parent Care: Armed Conflict and the Social Logic of Child and National Protection

A fair amount has been written on intergenerational issues in military families, with special consideration given to the difficulties that active-duty (or soon-to-be-active-duty) parents experience. Less attention, however, has been paid to the soldiers’ parents. Inquiries pertaining to this group are provocative as much for the questions they raise as for the answers they offer, especially when it comes to sorting out the parents’ attitudes and behaviors. The mindsets of these fathers and mothers would seem to warrant special scrutiny, in that how parents of soldiers are expected to think, and how they actually think (the two are not always in sync), can make an enormous difference in how individual parents and entire populations interpret military life. What do fathers and mothers of adult children ponder when their nation is engaged in armed conflict and needs combatants? What do they contemplate when it is their children who might be drafted or called upon to volunteer? Drawing on a social constructionist approach and offering a variety of family illustrations, I explore these and other questions. My specific objective is theoretical, in that I aim to delineate the quandaries that arise in times of war and articulate the thought patterns of parents of soldiers (or potential recruits/draftees). Essentially, I outline a “paradox of care” that, at its core, entails two mandates: a mandate to protect the children and a mandate to protect the nation. The social logic that parents use to decipher the paradox yields five scenarios, which differ depending on the weight accorded to one mandate or the other and on the extent to which the two are thought to be mutually incompatible or overlapping.

Superdads: How Fathers Balance Work and Family in the 21st CenturySuperdads: How Fathers Balance Work and Family in the 21st Century, by KaufmanGayle. New York: New York University Press, 2013. 264 pp.

How are fathers currently changing, and how are they not? To answer this question, Gayle Kaufman interviewed 70 fathers in California and North Carolina, focusing her conversations on the difficulties that men face as they navigate between job-related demands and family demands. Specifically, Kaufman set out to inquire: In a world that, at least in some quarters, places a premium on men being economic providers and child nurturers, how are dads trying to be both? How are fathers nowadays dealing with the ‘‘second shift’’ (a child-care shift over and above a put-food-on-the-table shift) that women have been wrestling with for centuries? At the heart of Superdads is the distinction that Kaufman makes among different types of fathers. First, there are the ‘‘old’’ dads. These are fathers who tend to be more traditional in both their attitudes and behaviors. They are prone to view breadwinning as their primary father role, and when they spend time with their children they often do so by fitting that time around their breadwinning responsibilities. Second, there are the ‘‘new’’ dads. These are the guys who, as a rule, earnestly strive to balance work and family and struggle to be both breadwinners and caregivers. These men may alter some of their at-work practices to be available to their kids, but the changes they make are decidedly circumscribed and offer, at best, only partial solutions to the workfamily quandaries they find themselves up against. Finally, there are the ‘‘super’’ dads. These are the men who are inclined to perceive their caregiving role as more important than their breadwinning role, and who are willing to modify their at-work habits and schedules in order to be with, and available to, their children. According to the latest evidence (some based on time-diary studies), for the past 10 or so years, there has been an uptick in the percentage of fathers who fall into the ‘‘new’’ dad and ‘‘super’’ dad categories. This is especially noteworthy, since for the closing decades of the twentieth century, the conduct of fatherhood changed, to the extent it changed at all, very little. This, despite the fact that the culture of fatherhood was increasingly encouraging men to be more involved in their children’s lives. Noteworthy are Kaufman’s efforts to assemble a diverse sample, particularly in terms of class, race, and ethnicity. Though her attempts to recruit Hispanic and Latino fathers were, as she said, largely unsuccessful, she had a high representation of African American fathers. Family-status wise, 55 of the men were married, while 15 were single (most as a result of divorce); and 12 of the men had stepchildren or children with multiple partners. Kaufman, however, was able to recruit only one father who was openly gay. The best parts of the book are the stories of the men who were interviewed. Kaufman does an outstanding job of weaving into her narrative the day-in-and-day-out experiences of ‘‘old’’ dads, ‘‘new’’ dads, and ‘‘super’’ dads. I particularly liked the fact that she did not limit herself to presenting, here and there, juicy quotes from one father or another, but also offered mini-case studies throughout (e.g., ‘‘Matt’s story,’’ ‘‘Russell’s story,’’ ‘‘Hector’s story,’’ etc.). Some of Kaufman’s findings are very interesting. She found, for one thing, that ‘‘super’’ dads reported low levels of stress. Thus, the changes that the ‘‘super’’ dads were willing to make helped them create more balanced lives. Also compelling were the accounts of how a number of single fathers became ‘‘super’’ dads as a result of divorce, renegotiating their concepts of masculinity in the process. Readers will find Kaufman’s ‘‘case for ‘super’ dads’’ informative. As others have done, she details the benefits of involved fatherhood not just for men, but also for women and children as well as society at 222 Reviews