Society has evolved and so has the definition of the traditional family. Society has become increasingly complex. The members that constituted a family and the legal ties that bound them have become blurred. One study estimates that “only ten percent. of households consist of a married couple with one or more children under eighteen, an employed father, and a mother who did not work outside the home” (Minow 20). My own group of students reflects an even lower percentage that fit. the above profile.
The “change” of the traditional family has required a shift. of legal emphasis. The state has become more aggressive in its involvement in areas that were traditionally the sole domain of the parent/family which in itself has raised many legal/ethical issues and concerns.
When examining these complicated and sometimes controversial issues many important points need to be clarified. The authors of the classic book
Before the Best Interests of the Child
(1979) highlight three of these important concerns: 1) the advantages and disadvantages of state intervention a) merits and demerits of present day parents in general 3) the risk when parents are entrusted with the final say in the serious matters of child rearing which used to be their sole prerogative in bygone days” (Goldstein ix). My curriculum unit will concentrate in helping to clarify the issues addressed.
One of the main reasons for the breakdown of the traditional family is poverty. “33 million (one seventh of all Americans including 13 million children) are now poor as a result of economic recession , structured changes in the economy, stagnated wages, and the changing family demographics that result. in one in every five American children living in a female headed household, and one in four being dependent on welfare at some point in his or her lifetime” (Edelman ix). Research reflects an ever increasing percentage of families that fit into this category.
Often, impoverished areas are a sad reflection of these statistics that represent the breakdown of the traditional family (although it is becoming more prevalent in all walks of society). Decisions that were once made within the nuclear family are now more gradually being taken over by state interventions.
One may question when and why the state has the right to intervene into personal lives. Many argue that. the state’s interference often leads to additional problems. For instance a child taken from his family may be brought up in a permanent foster care system that may be more emotionally and psychologically damaging. However, others may dispute that a child in an abusive situation may face much more serious consequences such as repeated physical harm possibly leading to death. Issues such as this one lead to much debate.
In examining these situations, we need to also address the rights of the parent. When does the state have the right to deem parents inadequate caregivers of their own children? When do parents cross the fine-line into losing their right to raise their own children?
One definition has been offered: “The child’s well being - not the parent’s, the family’s or the child care agency’s - must be the determinate for justification of state intervention” (Goldstein 5). It. is evident, that the safety and security of the child should take priority over all other concerns
