The scientific foundations for the emergence and development of the family were most consistently formed by Lewis Morgan (1818-1881) and are undeniable to this day. Initially, there was a form of social life where there were no any family groups. There were unlimited sexual relations between all members of society - promiscuity. Further, five successive forms of the family are distinguished, each of which has its own order of marriage.

1. consanguineous family based on group marriage between those who belonged to the same generation. Brothers and sisters, regardless of the degree of kinship, formed a family.

2. Punalual family was based on group marriage, marriage partners were a group of sisters from the same clan and a group of brothers from the same clan. The family becomes exogamous, an organization of an archaic type is formed - the genus. It consists of mothers, their children and descendants in the female line, connected by consanguinity (matriarchy).

3. Syndiasmic or paired family based on the marriage of individual couples, but without exclusive cohabitation. The duration of the union depended on the goodwill of the parties. In this family, the biological father becomes known.

4. patriarchal family based on the marriage of one man with several women (polygamous marriage). The basis of the family is the power of the father, the man, which is associated with the development of cattle breeding and agriculture.

5. Monogamous family- marriage enters one couple and for life. The development of an agrarian society leads to the fact that relations of production exist and develop through the family. This is the essence of the patriarchal family. Children are not only on the content, but also workers in the family. The family needed economic support for children in old age and is interested in transferring family resources to the next generations. A large peasant family prevailed.

With the development of industrial production in the family, changes occur. The family from a production cell becomes a consumer one. Having more children loses its economic importance. The decrease in mortality and the employment of women in production weakens the norms for having many children. Childlessness is becoming the norm. The modern family is characterized as a matrimonial one, with the weakening of the ties of kinship and parenthood. There are various classifications of families.

Family Approaches

1. Social formational (Marxism) - in a patriarchal (or matriarchal) society, where there is an excess of the product, the institution of inheritance of property is established. Initially, it is a function of the rich (financial continuation of oneself), then, through the superstructure, a family culture arises (regulation of sexual relations, predictability of behavior). Under communism (a classless society), this need will disappear.
2. Cultural-historical - initially within the framework of religion. The need to inherit tribal traditions + the influence of biological factors contributes to the formation of a taboo on incest. Spiritual unions, initially of groups of people, then of individuals, are established following the example of unions of tribes. Maintaining the reproduction of certain strata, roles (leader, shaman, warrior). In modern society - spiritual perpetuation of oneself + traditions + government incentives.
3. Existential - initially group marriage after the formation of the state (transition from the communal to the social system) acquires a mosaic, differentiation. A person, born in a community, realizes himself in society. Due to a number of reasons formed in the course of social life, or their combination, a person arranges his own community.
1. gaining a stable status and making a decision to stop in career growth or an excess of strength that does not correspond to the pace of career growth.
2. resting on the limit of their capabilities and placing their unfulfilled hopes on children. You have to be overly talented not to feel this in society - the very nature of society limits the personality - role-playing communication, functionalism, pressure from norms, social expectations, etc. (The community recognizes a person as he is).
3. trying to get rid of existential loneliness and pinning hopes on getting rid of social alienation. The closest thing to an inauthentic marriage.
4. accepting marriage as the next stage of self-realization (wishing to part with the parental family) - "inauthentic" marriage is not a communal, but a social basis; immature personality, still a child marries; marriage as a means, not an end
5. Modern society is doomed to demographic crises (along with the traditional one). In a traditional society, a significant place is occupied by traditions + marriage helps to strengthen the status, the registration of a full-fledged member of the community (gave a debt, the same as everyone else)
4. Psychoanalytic - a man, under the influence of the Oedipus complex, is looking for a prototype of his mother, a woman - a father + self-realization (Adler - an inferiority complex). Does not explain origin.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

BELARUSIAN STATE UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

Department of Sociology

Course work

Family and its social essence

1st year students

departments of sociology

Bazyleva Olga

Scientific adviser:

Burova Svetlana Nikiforovna,

associate professor, candidate of legal sciences.

Minsk, 2005

Introduction ................................................ ................................................. ................3

Chapter 1. Historical development of the family .............................................. .....................eight

Chapter 2. The concept of "family" ............................................. .........................................thirteen

Chapter 3. The social significance of the family and its functions .............................................. .nineteen

Conclusion................................................. ................................................. .........31

List of used sources .................................................................. ...................32

Introduction

Marriage and the family are among such phenomena, the interest in which has always been stable and massive. For society, the question of knowledge of these institutions and the ability to direct their development is of paramount importance, because the reproduction of the population largely depends on their condition. In addition, the content of the concepts of “family” and “marriage”, with some similarities, differs significantly: family is a small social group based on marriage or consanguinity, whose members are connected by common life, mutual assistance, moral and legal responsibility; marriage- these are socially regulated sexual relations between a woman and a man, involving the establishment of their rights and obligations in relation to each other and to children.

The economic importance of the family is especially great in the sphere of organization of consumption and everyday life. The family not only satisfies, but partly forms the material needs of a person, creates and maintains certain household traditions, and provides mutual assistance in housekeeping.

The active role of the family is not limited to the area of ​​social life, but continues in other areas of public life. As the primary form of community of people, the family directly combines the individual and the collective principles. In this sense, it is a link that connects not only the biological and social, but also the individual and social life of people, serves for them as the first source of social ideals and criteria of behavior. At the same time, the family not only transmits, but also creates spiritual values, such as marital and parental love, respect and love of children for their parents, and family solidarity.

The transformation and strengthening of marriage and family relations on the scale of the whole society and the creation of a strong, friendly family in each individual case require, in addition to desire, certain knowledge. Family development, both socially and individually, is a complex and contradictory process. Of course, each person has some individual experience of living in a family, but this does not always coincide with social experience and scientific data, and most importantly, it is usually lacking just when it is especially needed: upon marriage and in the first years of life. young family.

Of course, we are not talking about the development of some rules of human behavior in marriage and the family, not about petty guardianship over people's personal lives, but about exploring modern marriage and family relations, patterns and prospects for their development as fully as possible.

Marriage and the family act for each person both as a social and as an individual necessity. This means that the more they are studied and the more the results of their study become the property of the masses, the more fully and firmly the freedom of people is ensured in one of the most important spheres of life for them. In turn, the degree of freedom in making a decision directly and directly determines both the degree of responsibility for it and the magnitude of the efforts that will be directed towards its implementation.

Thus, the scientific study of the family, the dissemination of sociological knowledge about the family are not only cognitive, but also of great moral and educational significance, they serve as one of the means of shaping the personality and social relations.

The family is such a foundation of society and such a microenvironment, the climate of which contributes or hinders the development of the moral and physical forces of a person, his formation as a social being. It is in the family that the moral foundations are laid that contribute to the development of the individual. The family has the greatest influence on a child's personality. In the sphere of influence of the family, the intellect and emotions of the child, his views and tastes, skills and habits are simultaneously affected. Family education has a practically comprehensive character, because it is not limited to suggestion, but includes all forms of influence on a developing personality: through communication and direct observation, work and personal example of others. In other words, the development of the child is organically inscribed in the life of the family. The educational function of the family cannot be overestimated.

Society is vitally interested in a strong, spiritually and morally healthy family. It requires attention and assistance from the state in the performance of social functions, the upbringing of children, and the improvement of material, housing and living conditions.

All of the above indicates the relevance of the topic chosen for the course work.

The purpose of the course work:

The disclosure of the topic "The family and its social essence" consists in the most detailed consideration of its most important distinctive features and features, that is, it is necessary to consider the family as a social institution and as a small social group. Conduct a thorough analysis and understand the meaning and role of the family considered in these aspects.

Work tasks:

1 . describe the historical development of the family

2 . consider the family as a social institution and a small social group; the family performing a number of functions and satisfying such needs of society as the continuation of the human race and the continuity of generations

3 .consider the family as a community that satisfies the basic needs of individuals - members of society

Methodological base of work

In the course work, the works of the following authors were used:

1. Antonov A.I., Medkov M.V."Sociology of the family", M., 1996

In this book, the main attention is paid to the family as an institution - those specific functions for the birth, maintenance and upbringing of children that provide society with the replenishment of generations and their socialization in specific historical conditions. More precisely, societal analysis focuses on the role of family structures in producing social change and on the impact of these changes on the implementation of the institutional functions of the family. It also considers a microsociological analysis of the family, which is designed to reveal how the upbringing of members of society is achieved in millions of individual families, soldered not by duty to society, but by satisfying diverse individual needs through a family lifestyle.

2. Jan Szczepanski. "Elementary concepts of sociology", M., 1969

In one of the sections of this book, the author gives a general description of the family. And also considers the two most important functions of the family, which it performs within the broader society and which determines its social essence. The family is the group that maintains the biological continuity of society and encapsulates the transmission of the cultural heritage of wider communities in its main features. He pays great attention to the structure of the family and its internal organization, factors and phases of development.

3. Giddens Anthony."Sociology", M., 1999

In special sections of this fundamental work, the author emphasizes that the study of family and marriage is one of the most important tasks facing sociology. He clearly distinguishes between these two concepts, considers some of their differences, shows how they can help in studying the features of family life and marital relations, forms of marriage and divorce in modern Western society.

In the course work, these works were used, because. in my opinion, it was these authors who were able to most clearly reveal the social essence of the family, which consists in a detailed examination of its functions.

Work structure

The course work consists of an introduction, three chapters and a conclusion. The introduction presents arguments confirming the relevance of the topic. The first chapter describes the development and change in the structure of the family throughout history. The second chapter presents the definitions of "family" according to Kharchev, Medkov and Jan Szczepanski based on their work. In the third chapter, the family is considered as a social institution and a small social group, the structure of the family, its significance in modern society is presented, its functions are described. In conclusion, it is confirmed that it is the family that is the basis of all social institutions, and when we talk about the development of the family, we mean the development of society as a whole.

Chapter 1. Historical development of the family

The family is one of the most ancient social institutions: it arose in the depths of primitive society much earlier than classes, nations and states. The social value of the family is due to its "production and reproduction" of immediate life, the upbringing of children, the formation of their individual consciousness.

In the process of historical development, the relations of family and society, family and individual, have systematically changed, primarily under the influence of the mode of production, lifestyle and social relations that prevail in a given society.

In their historical development, the family and marriage have gone through a number of stages at which they were born, formed into independent social institutions and transformed in accordance with the actual needs of social life, civilizational foundations and sociocultural norms.

According to scientists, many forms of the family were inherited from the animal world. Even today they are found among “our smaller brothers”. One of these forms is the harem family. But at the dawn of mankind, it was not like the medieval or modern "harem-type" families. The ancestral community of our distant ancestors consisted of several unstable harem associations. And these harems regrouped from time to time. This happened either when the head died, or when he conceded leadership in a fight to the new head.

Another form of the human family, also observed in the herds of higher apes, was maternal-tribal, when a woman became the head. In such families, marriage relations within the clan were prohibited. And later, from this form of matriarchy, a dual-clan group marriage developed, in which all members of one clan had the right and had to marry any members of the second “fraternal” clan: women of the first - with men of the second kind, men of the first - with women of the second and vice versa.

By the end of the era of the early tribal community, a pair marriage gradually developed. However, his “pairing” was relative, and usually spouses who entered into a pair marriage continued to have “additional” wives and husbands. Society was tolerant of both premarital and extramarital sex. In addition, the husband and wife throughout their lives remained connected each with their own family and did not have common property, and the children belonged only to the mother and her family.

Matriarchy has been replaced by patriarchy. And fragile pair-marriage relations were supplanted by the patriarchal family, in which the spouses were firmly united by the conduct of a common household. At the same time, the increased role of the man (provider and head) led to the fact that it was no longer the husband who moved to his wife, but the wife lived with her husband.

The establishment of patriarchy was accompanied by a gradual deterioration in the family and social status of women. If at first the marriage ransom to some extent still resembled traditional gifts to the bride's relatives, then in the future, the size of the ransom increased. And they began to look at a woman as an ordinary object of sale. Therefore, a married woman had to unquestioningly obey the family that bought her: her husband, the “senior” and “senior”. And if a woman wanted to return to her parents' house, her relatives had to return the ransom. Because of this, divorce became almost impossible for a woman, which did not give her a chance to break out of bondage. Under patriarchy, property passed from father to son, and this required a firm belief in paternity, which gave rise to new norms of marital morality. The wife's adultery was punished not only by sending home or self-mutilation, but even by death, while the husband continued to enjoy his former sexual freedom. Wealthy people could afford to have concubines. What led to the emergence of legalized polygamy.

In feudal society, monogamous marriage became a matter of speculation. A man who wanted to marry sought to acquire property with his wife in order to improve the financial situation of his family and increase its influence. Marriage became a means of multiplying wealth and was entered into as an ordinary business agreement - the prototype of a marriage contract. In bourgeois society, as, indeed, in feudal society, it was characteristic of families of the ruling class that often both spouses had lovers. The financial situation allowed the spouses to support them, and even in old age “buy” young lovers for themselves. At the same time, bourgeois morality forgave the “mistakes” of the husband, but severely condemned the infidelity of the wife. True, almost a century of struggle for gender equality has led to the fact that at present the adultery of both spouses is evaluated almost equally, and most often, unfortunately, as something quite acceptable.

Christianity - one of the religions adapted to private property relations - did not contribute much to the equality of spouses. Even the evangelists Peter and Paul in their teaching affirmed the dominance of men. And the Catholic preachers of the Middle Ages - Thomas Aquinas, for example - portrayed a woman as inferior and created only for lust and lust. Only with the spread of the cult of the Virgin Mary did the church begin to idealize a woman, and even then only as a penitent sinner and sufferer - it was still very far from equality.

In the depths of capitalist society, new family relations were born - the proletarian family. In it, despite the fact that a woman received less for labor than a man received for the same labor, the spouses had the same position (in relation to the means of production, because they both sold their labor and were equal in this). This equality also affected family relations, and the husband ceased to be the master of his wife and children. There were more opportunities to marry for love, because it was easier for the proletarians to marry for mutual love, which could develop into true conjugal love. But these opportunities have led to few people happiness because of the low standard of living, culture and education.

All changes in the form of the family and intra-family relationships, leading to private tragedies, were reflected in literature: from ancient epics and myths to modern drama and cinema. Most of the literary plots are devoted to the family theme, which in an entertaining way warn people against mistakes, helping them to find the true values ​​in life, the main of which is the family.

The socialist family, like the proletarian one, was based on the equality of spouses. The absence of private property and class distinctions contributed to this. And small differences between the layers were not a serious hindrance, although a person does not take ingenuity to make others feel superior to someone, even in some small things. And yet, social equality, common interests and views, common responsibility for children are good ground for building family happiness, but the lack of real goals, traditions, and sexual literacy did not allow millions of families to find family happiness under socialism. And the “average” care of the state for spouses and their children, as well as the lack of healthy competition (struggle for existence) partially extinguished the interest of spouses in the family and even “blurred” the meaning of their life, although marital happiness was accessible to many.

However, happiness is also available in developed capitalist countries, where middle-class people, which include small proprietors, employees and workers, have the opportunity to enter into an equal love marriage, raise children and live in harmony and harmony. True, there are enough problems there, because so far few people are aware of the true place of marriage in the life of economically independent people. Yes, and the liberalization of modern society and the reduction of the pressure of public morality on the family have paved the way for the creation of alternative families, which leads people away from seeking happiness in a family of the usual type. However, we do not deny the appropriateness of creating other forms of the family that exist in our time. Some people need such families, but most people live in ordinary, traditional families based on the equal marriage of two spouses of different sexes, on mutual love, respect, trust and the desire to raise common children.

Thus, the main stages of the historical development of the family and marriage are:

· primitive horde, characterized by the dominance of promiscuity (disordered sexual relations, which even close relatives could enter into)

· group family, which also arose during the primitive communal system of the matriarchy period, but already on the basis of tabooing and streamlining certain forms of social relations (for example, on the basis of tabooing closely related sexual relations; killing a relative);

· couple family first arises while maintaining matriarchy and collective marriage, is characterized by the allocation of one man as the "main husband", around which the family's property begins to concentrate, there is a division of labor, the emergence of crafts and private property;

· patriarchal family takes shape during the transition to patriarchy, when a man begins to occupy a leading position in the family and community, which is fixed in mythology and early religions; in a patriarchal family, the remnants of collective marriage in the form of polygamy are still preserved; a pedigree begins to be conducted from a man, and a woman falls into complete dependence on a man;

· monogamous family- a kind of pair marriage that accompanies the entire period of civilization from the slave system to the present day, having its own history and many options for marriage: from parental choice, bride stealing and matchmaking to the free choice of spouses for love.

The family as a social institution historically arose on the basis of pair marriage at a certain stage in the formation of society. At the beginning of its development, relations between a man and a woman, between the older and younger generations were regulated by tribal and tribal customs. With the emergence of morality, religion, and then the state, the regulation of sexual life acquired a moral and legal character. This allowed for even greater social control over marriage and family life. With the development of society, there were certain changes in marriage and family relations.

Chapter 2. The concept of "family"

The family, from whatever point of view it is considered, is such a multi-layered social formation that it is not surprising that it is mentioned in almost all sections of sociology. It combines the properties of social organization, social structure, institution and small group, is included in the subject of study of the sociology of education and, more broadly, socialization of the sociology of education, politics and law, labor, culture, etc., allows you to better understand the processes of social control and social disorganization, social mobility, migration and demographic changes. Without referring to the family, applied research in many areas of production and extermination, mass communications is unthinkable; it is easily described in terms of social behavior, decision-making, the construction of social realities, etc.

Interest in the family, in addition to the actual meaningful study of its multifunctionality, is supported by a cognitive interest in its unique mediating role, due to its sociocultural nature as a phenomenon that is borderline in its essence, located at the intersection of structures in any construction of society and at the border of macro- and microanalysis. The family has the ability to reduce societal processes to the results of the social behavior of the microenvironment, and allows deriving global trends from empirically researched facts.

Proceeding from this, the definitions of the family should strive to combine different-quality manifestations of family universality and, above all, the definitions should combine, and not oppose each other, the signs of the family as a social institution and as a social group. By resorting to ideas about family activities or family behavior, one can obtain satisfactory definitions of the family that combine the different qualities of family, marriage and kinship.

There are many definitions of the family that single out various aspects of family life as family-forming relations, ranging from the simplest and extremely expansive (for example, a family is a group of people who love each other, or a group of people who have common ancestors or live together) and ending with extensive lists family signs. Among the definitions of the family, taking into account the criteria for population reproduction and socio-psychological integrity, the definition of the family as a historically specific system of relationships between spouses, between parents and children, as a small group, whose members are connected by marriage or kinship, common life and mutual moral responsibility and social necessity, which is due to the need of society for the physical and spiritual reproduction of the population, which belongs to the Russian sociologist A.G. Kharchev.

The main idea in the book by A.G. Kharchev “Marriage and the Family in the USSR” (1964) is that among social functions he emphasizes the need to distinguish between those that are associated with its very essence and specificity and which no other social institution in given specific historical conditions can perform, and those to which the family is only "adapted" along with other social organizations. The first includes the very life of the family, the performance of its members of marital, parental and other roles determined by their family status, the second - such functions as the creation and accumulation of property, representation in economic and legal relations with the state, etc.

Based on this, Kharchev A.G. defined the family as a historically specific system of relationships between spouses, between parents and children, as a small social group whose members are connected by marriage or kinship, common life and mutual moral responsibility, and the social need for which is due to the need of society for the physical and spiritual reproduction of the population.

In this work, he sought to emphasize the following key points: the socio-historical conditionality of family relations and family organization; the presence in the family, along with features and qualities common to all social phenomena, of a number of specific features (small size of the family group, proximity of kinship, common life, mutual moral responsibility), that the existence of the family and its specific social function are the result of an objective necessity associated with one of the two most important forms of production and reproduction of immediate life.

According to the well-known Polish sociologist Jan Szczepanski, the life of the family, the phases of its development, its structure and changes in the inner life depend on changes in the development of civilization, wider communities and global society. The industrial revolution, according to Szczepanski, entailed a number of processes that, through the emancipation of women, women's access to education and professional work, changed their role in the family, led to the restriction of many functions, primarily economic ones, etc. The development of industrial society, the change in the demographic structure, the transformations taking place in social classes, social and political revolutions always bring about certain changes in the life of the family. However, the theories persistently repeated over the past 150 years about the widespread and fundamental crisis of the family, arguing that in modern industrial civilization the family ceases to fulfill its social functions, that it becomes a decaying institution, in decline - in a word, various catastrophic theories of family decomposition are not supported by facts. . The family changes structure and functions, adapts to the changed global society. These changes cause various phenomena, unknown before. However, the number of marriages is not falling in any country. The internal forces of the family are powerful enough that any external pressure could "destroy" it as an institution.

According to Russian sociologists A.I. Antonov and M.V. Medkov (“Sociology of the Family”, 1996), the social essence of the family lies in its reproduction function. The reproduction of the population is characterized by the birth of individuals, the quantitative replacement of the bearers of statuses and roles. Population reproduction creates the demographic environment of society, while social processes related to the formation and functioning of individuals not only maintain existing structures and institutions, but also change them. These changes in society, in turn, affect demographic processes. The same applies to the family processes of socialization and maintenance of children.

Thus, Antonov and Medkov emphasize that the family occupies a key position in the environment of social institutions in its existential essence - to maintain the existence of family members and by birth - the socialization of children. The family is such an evolutionary invention of mankind that harmoniously combines existence with the extension of the family clan, surname, and thus provides other social institutions with status-role performers, contributing to their survival and the existence of society as a whole.

The family is the subject of study of many social sciences. Each of these sciences seeks to define the family and determine its functions. From the point of view of the content, structure and forms of the family, there is a historically changing social group, the universal features of which are:

a heterosexual relationship

kinship system

provision and development of social and individual qualities of a person

implementation of certain economic activities.

The family is a social group in which men and women naturally satisfy sexual and other (spiritual, ethical, aesthetic) needs and ensure the reproduction of society through the birth of offspring. In the family, productive-consumer or only consumer types of economic activity are carried out.

The sociological definition of the family as a partial social group indicates that the nature of relations in the family, its structure and form are historically changeable, which is why the family itself is a historically changeable social group. At the same time, the sociological definition of the family indicates its biological, biosocial and economic basis.

In any society, the family has a dual character. On the one hand, it is a social institution, on the other, a small social group, which has its own patterns of functioning and development. Hence its dependence on the social system, existing economic, political, religious relations and, at the same time, relative independence. Another social institution, the institution of marriage, is closely connected with the institution of the family. Marriage can be defined as a socially and personally expedient, sustainable form of sexual relations sanctioned by society. Family - a small group based on kinship ties and regulating relations between spouses, parents and children, as well as immediate relatives. A distinctive feature of the family is the joint conduct of the household.

Families are built primarily on relationships. "parents-children", and marriage turns out to be a legitimate recognition of those relations between a man and a woman, those forms of cohabitation or sexual partnership that are accompanied by the birth of children. For a more complete understanding of the essence of the family, one should keep in mind the spatial localization of the family - housing, house, property - and the economic basis of the family - the family-wide activities of parents and children that go beyond the narrow horizons of everyday life and consumerism.

In this way, a family is a community of people based on a single family-wide activity, connected by bonds of matrimony - parenthood - kinship, and thus carrying out the reproduction of the population, the continuity of family generations, as well as the socialization of children and the maintenance of the existence of family members. Only the presence of a triune relationship of matrimony - parenthood - kinship allows us to talk about the constitution of the family as such in its strict form. The fact of one or two or these relationships characterizes the fragmentation of family groups that were formerly families proper (due to the “growing up” and separation of children, family breakup due to illness, death of its members, due to divorces and other types of family disorganization) or did not become more families. For example, families of newlyweds, characterized only by marriage and, due to the absence of children, do not have “parenthood” (paternity, motherhood), and kinship, consanguinity of children and parents, brothers and sisters.

The presence of such relationships (i.e., families in the strict sense of the word) is found in the vast majority of families in the country. On the other hand, the non-family population consists of those who are a parent but are not married, or are in de facto or legal marriage without children. For all these fragmented, "splintered" forms of the family, the term "family group" is better suited, which means a group of people who lead a joint household and are united only by kinship, or by parenthood or marriage.

Usually, a married couple is considered the "core" of a family, and all statistical classifications of family composition are built depending on the addition of children, relatives, parents of spouses to the "core" (2). From a sociological point of view, it is more correct to take as a basis the most common type of family in the population with a trinity of named relationships - the main type of family, and those family associations that are formed by subtracting one of the three relationships, it is better to call family groups. This clarification is due to the fact that in recent years in the sociology of the family in the West and in our country, a tendency has become noticeable to reduce the essence of the family to any of the three relationships, most often to marriage, and even partnership. It is no coincidence that in the American Encyclopedia of Marriage and the Family by M. Sasmen and Susan Stenmets, a number of chapters are devoted to "alternative forms" of the family, i.e. what is more accurate to call family groups, although in fact these chapters refer to marriage, rather even to partnership or cohabitation.

Chapter 3. The social significance of the family and its functions

Structure and functions of the family

Family life and its social functions are multifaceted. They are associated with the intimate life of spouses, procreation, and the upbringing of children. All this is based on the observance of certain moral and legal norms: love, respect, duty, fidelity, etc.

The sociology of the family gives priority to elucidating the structure and functions of the family. Family structure- this is not only its quantitative composition and the number of generations living together, but also a system of positions, social roles of relations between its members. Structural features distinguish between nuclear and extended families. Nuclear family is a family structure consisting of adult parents and dependent children. In most societies, such a family is considered an important and even basic social unit. Extended a family is a family structure that, in addition to the nuclear family (spouses and their children), includes other relatives, such as grandparents, grandchildren, uncles, aunts, etc.

The structure of the family does not always coincide with the structure of marriage, which is due to the differences between these two closely related, but still different social phenomena.

According to their structural parameters, the following are distinguished forms of marriage :

1. Monogamy is a marriage between one woman and one man;

2. Polygamy- marriage between one and several friendly individuals;

3. group marriage- a marriage between several men and women.

Depending on the preferred partner, marriage can be exogamy(characteristic of the primitive communal system by the prohibition of marriages within the same kindred group) and endogamy(marriage within a particular social group, for example, within a tribe).

As society developed, marriage from a predominantly economic institution more and more turned into a moral and legal union of a man and a woman, based on love, personal choice. There is a redistribution of the duties of husband and wife in the economic provision of the family, housekeeping and raising children. As a result of the weakening of the pressure of economic and legal ties in the modern family, the role of intra-family relations in ensuring its stability and strength is increasing.

Role interaction in the family is a set of norms and patterns of behavior of some family members in relation to others. The traditional roles, when a woman ran the household, raised children, and the husband was the owner, owner of property and ensured the economic independence of the family, have changed. To date, the vast majority of women are involved in production activities, economic support for the family, and take an equal part in public decisions. On the one hand, this contributed to the development of a woman as a person, the equality of spouses, but on the other hand, it led to a decrease in the birth rate and an increase in the number of divorces.

Speaking of family functions, it should be remembered that we are talking about the social results of the life of millions of families, which are found at the level of society, have generally significant consequences, and characterize the role of the family as a social institution. It is impossible to divide the functions of the family into main and secondary; all family functions are the main ones, but the need to distinguish among them those special ones that make it possible to distinguish the family from other social institutions has led to the identification of specific and non-specific functions of the family.

The specific functions of the family stem from the essence of the family and reflect its features as a social phenomenon, while non-specific functions are those to which the family was forced or adapted in certain historical circumstances. Thus, the specific functions of the family, which include the birth (reproductive function), maintenance, socialization of children, remain with all changes in society, although the nature of the relationship between the family and society may change in the course of history.

Non-specific functions of the family associated with the accumulation and transfer of property, status, organization of production and consumption, household, recreation and leisure, reflect the historical nature of the relationship between the family and society, reveal a historically transitional picture of how exactly the birth, maintenance and upbringing of children in the family takes place. . Therefore, family changes are most noticeable when comparing non-specific functions at different historical stages: under new conditions, they are modified, narrowed or expanded, carried out completely or partially, and even disappear altogether.

The family performs a number of functions, among which the most important are reproductive, cultural heritage, social control, emotional and psychological stabilizer, etc.

· reproductive function(from lat. Productjo - self-reproduction, reproduction, production of offspring) is due to the need to continue the human race.

The reproductive function includes the reproduction in children of the number of parents, i.e. takes part in the quantitative and qualitative reproduction of the population. We can say that this is the most important function. After all, logically speaking, in order for the population of our country to be no less in 25-30 years than it is now, it is necessary that there be no less children in the family than parents.

At present, due to the predominance of the urban lifestyle, the increase in the employment of women, the most difficult economic situation, the birth rate is falling. Of course, it is worth noting the connection between the total number of divorces and abortions.

The main factors causing a reduction in the size of the family are: a drop in the birth rate; a tendency to separate young families from their parents; an increase in the proportion of families with one parent in the population as a result of an increase in divorces, widowhood, and the birth of children by single mothers; the quality of public health and the level of health care development in the country. According to experts, 10-15% of the adult population is unable to have children for health reasons due to poor ecology, immoral lifestyle, diseases, poor nutrition, etc.

· Cultural heritage function through which the family maintains the cultural continuity of society by passing on the cultural heritage to the next generations.

· social control function, occupies a special place among the younger generation. Its content is the moral regulation of the behavior of family members in various spheres of life, as well as the regulation of obligations between spouses, parents and children, representatives of the older and younger generations. This includes the formation and maintenance of moral and legal sanctions in violation of social norms by family members.

· The function of an emotional and psychological stabilizer is that the family provides individuals with the satisfaction of emotional needs, the consumption of an intimate life together, gives a sense of security, provides emotional balance, and therefore prevents the disintegration of the individual.

An important role in the process of primary socialization is played by the upbringing of the child ( educational function) in family. Parents were and remain the first educators of the child.

Raising a child in a family is a complex socio-pedagogical process. It includes the influence of the entire atmosphere and microclimate of the family on the formation of the child's personality. The possibility of educational influence on the child is already inherent in the very nature of the relationship of parents to children, the essence of which lies in the reasonable guardianship, the conscious care of the elders and the younger ones. Father and mother show care, attention, affection for their child, protect from life's hardships and difficulties. There are various requirements of parents and features of the relationship between parents and children.

The parents' demands are realized in their conscious upbringing activity with the help of persuasion, a certain way of life and activities of the child, and so on. The personal example of parents is the most important means of influencing the upbringing of the child. Its educational value is based on the tendency to imitate inherent in childhood. Without sufficient knowledge and experience, the child copies adults, imitates their actions. The nature of the relationship of the parents, the degree of their mutual consent, attention, sensitivity and respect, ways of solving various problems, the tone and nature of conversations - all this is perceived by the child and becomes a model for his own behavior.

Economic and household function. Historically, the family has always been the main economic unit of society. The family, functioning as a social institution, is closely connected with the production and distribution of material goods. Involved in the process of production of material goods, able-bodied family members perform the function of means of subsistence, including for disabled and underage family members, i.e. economic function. The successful implementation of this function by the family allows it to be directly included in the economic structure of social production, to have a beneficial effect on it, and at the same time determine the level of material well-being of the family as a special social institution. It is closely related to the household function, which is manifested in the provision of household services by some family members to others. Joint housekeeping increases the satisfaction of both spouses with both the household arrangement of family life and the spouse's housekeeping, but at the same time reduces the level of social tension and conflict that arises when one of the spouses is in charge in the family.

Leisure function The goal of the family is to organize a rational and beneficial leisure time for family members, to provide them with support in developing their abilities and talents, in meeting the needs for joint leisure activities, and mutual enrichment of interests.

Intertwined with her recreational function, focused on the joint rest of family members, on the restoration of their strength expended in the process of work or training.

Function of Spiritual Communication ensures the development of family members, their spiritual mutual enrichment, the maintenance of friendly relations and moral responsibility to each other.

Family performs in society social status function which determines the important role of the family in the reproduction of the social structure of society. Its content is realized in granting family members a certain status and in meeting their needs for social advancement to more favorable and prestigious statuses and roles.

It is impossible to imagine a family without its fulfillment sexual function, without which it is impossible to carry out reproductive and some other functions. The sexual function includes the satisfaction of the sexual needs of the husband and wife and a certain control over the ways of realizing these needs, the direction of which should move from sexual orientations from “I” to “We” - the concept.

The presence of these functions makes it possible to understand that the family is not only human material and relations between family members, but also the place of residence itself, the economic activities of family members, and the living conditions of their existence.

Protective function. In all societies, the institution of the family provides, to varying degrees, the physical, economic, and psychological protection of its members. We are accustomed to the fact that, hurting the interests and safety of any person, we hurt his family, whose members protect their loved one or take revenge for him. In most cases, guilt or shame for a person is shared by all family members.

Socialization function. Despite the large number of institutions involved in the socialization of the individual, the central place in this process, of course, is occupied by the family. This is explained, first of all, by the fact that it is in the family that the primary socialization of the individual is carried out, the foundations of his formation as a personality are laid. Many thinkers, starting with Plato, spoke about the socialization of the upbringing of children, but all attempts at socialization outside the institution of the family were unsuccessful. For example, after the revolution in the Soviet Union, specialized programs for public education of children were created so that women could participate in the labor process. However, this experiment was not widely used. At present, our society is trying to combine the efforts of educational institutions and the institution of the family for the successful socialization of children, but the family still holds the lead in the socialization of individuals. In modern Israel, children in kibbutzim (cooperative farms) are brought up in common cottages and are under the supervision of special caregivers, while their mothers perform various work in the same kibbutzim. Parents usually spend about two hours a day with their children and all day on Saturday. According to some observers, such an upbringing is successful, although it has many opponents. True, only a small number of the children of Israel are brought up in this way. These rare exceptions, perhaps, only emphasize the paramount importance of the family for the socialization of children. The family for the child is the primary group, it is with her that the development of the personality begins. Despite the appearance of other primary groups later, the personality always retains the basic patterns of behavior instilled in early childhood. The main method of family socialization is the copying of behavior patterns of adult family members by children. Difficulties in socialization arise if the child is guided by unsuccessful patterns of parental behavior that come into conflict with what the child sees in other families. In this case, dissatisfaction with the actions of the mother or father often arises, and the child begins to look for acceptable models of behavior from other personalities, in other primary groups.

Generative function characterized by the need to continue the human race, which is not only a biological need, but also of great economic importance for the preservation of the population. Society is interested in ensuring that each next generation is at least as numerous as the previous ones.

In the last decade, Belarus and Russia have seen a slowdown in population growth, an increase in mortality, and a reduction in life expectancy. In the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), on the whole, the overall demographic situation can be considered more favorable than in other Russian regions.

To date, there is a setting for childlessness. And this trend is spreading among spouses of childbearing age, which is associated, on the one hand, with growing economic difficulties, the transformation of the child “into an object of social luxury”, and on the other hand, some spiritual and moral degradation that has struck modern society, in the value system of which there are often - not people, but prestigious things, cars, a thoroughbred dog, etc.

The fulfillment of the generative function by the family is influenced both by the quality of the health of the population and the level of development of health care in the country.

hedonic function , which is considered to be a function of healthy sex, is associated with the presence in a person of a general biological sexual need, the satisfaction of which is just as important and necessary as the need for food, housing, etc. Today, among literate people in democratic societies, it is generally recognized that non-satisfaction of sexual needs leads to severe personal experiences, to serious psychosomatic disorders. Normal sex life, regular sexual relations are recognized as one of the prerequisites for a healthy lifestyle. Today there are often neurotic reactions associated with the need to suppress their sexuality in marriage. "Double morality" does not forbid extramarital contacts in men, but condemns them in women. Divorced women find themselves in a more difficult position than divorced men.

At the same time, a superficial attitude towards physical intimacy, relatively greater than before, the ease of such connections, as a rule, does not make people happier. Irregular relationships with casual partners not only rob physical love of its psychological richness and depth, not only leave a feeling of anxiety and deceit, but entail sad criminal or medical consequences.

Communicative function is to satisfy the human need for two opposite phenomena - communication and solitude.

Thus, human existence is currently organized in the form of a family way of life. Each of the functions in some particular cases can be carried out with greater or lesser success outside the family, but their totality can be performed only in the family.

At different periods of a family's life, the hierarchy of family functions changes: first one, then the other takes a priority place. So, for a young family, the most important is the biological (reproductive) function, while for an elderly couple, the emotional one is more important.

In their unity, the listed functions represent a system of family relations, the occurrence of dysfunction in this system, i.e. mismatches in their interaction as a whole, leads the system to an abnormal state. Ignoring, and sometimes even a complete refusal of the family for one reason or another to perform any function, destabilizes the family way of life, there is a threat of its collapse. Families whose social functioning is difficult for subjective or objective reasons are characterized as families of social risk.

The causes of dysfunction in family relationships are very diverse.

Economic:

The subsistence level is below the poverty line due to the excessive dependency burden on one working family member (families with many children, families with adults or children with disabilities);

Low wages or non-payment;

Unemployment;

Families of pensioners (the latter, even with the maximum pension, remain below the poverty line).

Asocial :

Alcoholism in the family or one of its members;

Addiction;

Prostitution.

Psychological-ethical:

Cruelty;

Aggressiveness;

Coarseness;

conflict;

Jealousy;

Marital infidelity;

Character imbalance.

Medical :

Chronic infectious (for example, tuberculosis) and sexually transmitted diseases;

Mental and sexual deviations.

Thus, we examined the main functions of the modern family and determined the social significance of the family, which follows from the functions it performs.

Conclusion

The separation of the institution of the family from other institutions of society and its thorough study is not accidental. It is the family that is recognized by all researchers as the main carrier of cultural patterns inherited from generation to generation, as well as a necessary condition for the socialization of the individual. It is in the family that a person learns social roles, receives the basics of education, and behavior skills.

It is known that the rules, foundations, customs and traditions of family life are unique and specific to each society. Moreover, it seems to everyone that it is in his society that the structure of family life, family customs and foundations are the best and the only possible ones. Thus, family life is most often viewed in terms of ethnocentrism. But if the family is such an important part of society, why can't mankind develop uniform patterns of family life that would best suit human needs?

The presence of personal needs in the family and children, personal desires and attractions for marriage and the family is a very important circumstance showing that the existence of the family and society is possible only because millions of people feel the need for a family lifestyle and the need for children, and only because of this population is being reproduced. If we imagine, imagine other forms of social organization of population reproduction, based not on personal motives of people, but on coercion, then these forms can no longer be considered a family in the usual sociocultural sense, relevant to all types of families known from history.

Thus, we see that the family is the basis of all social institutions, and speaking of the development of the family, we mean the development of society as a whole.

List of sources used

1. Antonov A.I., Medkov V.M. "Sociology of the Family". M., 1996

2. Giddens Anthony. "Sociology". M., 1999

3. Gritsanov A.A. "Encyclopedia of Sociology". Mn., 2002

4. Elsukov A.N. "Sociology". Mn., 2000

5. Pavlyonok P.D. "Sociology". M., 2002

6. Kharchev A.G. Marriage and family in the USSR. M., 1979

7. Jan Shchepansky. "Elementary Concepts of Sociology". M., 1969

in the next issue)

At the turn of the 19th century

Family big and small

For centuries, the forms of traditional peasant family life were "tailored" to the economic and social conditions of the Russian agricultural economy. But in the second half of the 19th century, these conditions were rapidly fading into the past, and at the same time, family structures, forms and norms of family relations adapted to such conditions were also deprived of support. It was at this time that the always-existing latent contradiction of the “small” and “large” families came out.

In Russia, a large, undivided family lingered longer than in the countries of Western Europe - extended(i.e. consisting of one a married couple and other unmarried relatives of varying degrees of closeness - widowed parents and grandparents, unmarried children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, uncles, nephews, etc.) and composite(incorporating several married couples and, like the extended family, other relatives). However, not all members of such a large family are necessarily blood relatives, especially close ones. It may include more distant relatives (cousins ​​and second cousins, great-nephews, etc.), as well as persons related by property - sons-in-law, daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, brother-in-law, etc. - and even people who are not associated with her neither by kinship nor property, but living under the same roof and leading a household with other members of the family: adopted children, students, accustomers, workers, servants.

But along with large families, there has always been a small family, consisting of a married couple with children, and sometimes without children. It could exist in one of two forms: as an autonomous small family, or as "embedded" in a large family, as its integral part.

Historians and sociologists have long been arguing about what was the relationship between these two forms of existence of the "married family" in the past. There was a time when they unanimously believed that in all societies, without exception, where the small married family now dominates, the complex family, which was the main form of private community that preceded the modern small family, undoubtedly prevailed before. In recent decades, this unanimity of researchers has been greatly shaken: an analysis of historical sources has led many researchers to the conclusion that in reality in the past a small married family met much more often than previously believed.

The very fact of the eternal parallel existence of small and large families is hardly in doubt. It could not have been otherwise - the formation of this or that type of family was not a rigidly determined process, we can only talk about what was the probability of the appearance of each of them. It is necessary to clearly understand the demographic conditions in which the family was formed 100-200 years ago. Undivided families, as a rule, were "paternal", that is, they continued along the male line, with married sons remaining in the parental home, and married daughters leaving for the husband's family. In the Russian countryside, all married sons with their wives and children usually remained in the parental family. In order for a three-generation undivided "father's" family to develop and be recorded by statistics, it is necessary that in the family of the older generation there be at least one son who lived to the age when he can marry and have children, and that at least one of his parents be alive to this moment.

In the pre-industrial era, due to high early mortality, rather significant infertility, frequent miscarriages and other similar circumstances, the probability of fulfilling these conditions was low. Therefore, even if we assume that most people aspired to the creation and preservation of multigenerational, undivided large "father" families, a large number of failed or partially completed families of this type were completely inevitable. In the second case, for example, a “fraternal” family was formed - a complex, but two-generation one. In the first case, a small family arose, consisting of spouses with children, and sometimes without them. Such a family is interpreted by researchers as "marital" or "nuclear" (grouped around the "marital core"). But in the past it is forced nuclearity.

Such small families do not strive to reproduce themselves in their former form, but under the slightest favorable conditions they turn into large, complex ones. History knows a variety of ways to overcome forced nuclearity. In many countries, including Russia, adoption was widespread in the absence of direct male descendants, and not only a child, but also an adult man could be adopted. When there were conditions for this, “acquisition” was also practiced - contrary to custom, a married woman lived with her husband in the family of her parents.

A small married family is most likely the same age as a large, undivided, her constant companion. Coexisting for centuries, they were in a kind of symbiosis, they needed each other, they knew competition, confrontation, and mutual concessions.

The obvious economic and demographic advantages of the large family ruled out for a long time the mass desire of small families for an isolated existence. The small family, grouped around the marital core, never opposed the large family as a type; rather, it felt its inferiority, incompleteness in comparison with the large one and strove at the first opportunity to turn into such a large, complex, multi-generational family, in the bowels of which it felt more protected. A person here was less dependent on economic, demographic and other accidents that were so frequent in the past.

But for this relative security, the married family had to pay a heavy price. Such a family was the two-faced Janus. With one face, she was turned inward - to marriage, procreation, and the upbringing of children. The other face of the married family was turned outwards - towards the immediate environment, towards the large family, to which its small constituent parts, taking care of their own interests - those that were under the supervision of the first Janus face - ceded the lion's share of their sovereignty.

So it was everywhere, so it was in Russia. The peasant waged the hardest, but far from always successful struggle for existence, hunger constantly stood at the threshold of his hut. A large family better suited the conditions of agricultural labor, increased the chances of survival. Before this decisive consideration, all others receded into the background. Much was written about the economic advantages of large peasant families in the second half of the 19th century, and it is only necessary to add to some of the demographic reasons for the preference for large families. The probability for spouses to be widowed, for children to remain orphans, and for the elderly to be lonely at the end of life was still very high, and belonging to a large family still gave some additional “insurance” that protected a widowed mother of many children, orphans or helpless old people from hunger and complete poverty.

By the standards of its time, the patriarchal family in Russia was absolutely natural, “normal”. The consistency of the main features of such a family, as well as the peasant community in which it was a part, with the structure of economic life made this type of social organization strong and stable. He, in turn, gave stability to the economic and political system.

For centuries, the "father's" family was a building block from which social foundations were formed - this is how it was seen by the authors of the 19th century. On this foundation, indeed, a lot has grown in the culture and ideology of Russian society, its worldview, its ideas about good and evil, about the relationship between collectivist and individualist values.

However, the moment came when this whole building - together with the family foundation - began to lose its age-old stability. The countryside determined the face of the country's economy to a lesser extent, and in the countryside itself, subsistence farming was rapidly retreating under the onslaught of commodity-money relations. Then the usual family way of life began to burst at the seams. Growing out of the tight suit of natural-economic relations, faced with ever new tasks, acquiring ever more diverse and complex social experience, Russian people quickly changed and began to suffocate in the narrow confines of outdated institutions, among which the family, due to its ubiquitous presence, occupied one of first places.

Married family in search of sovereignty

Previously, early marriages were typical for Russia. Historians noted that in the 16th-17th centuries, “Russians got married very early. It happened that the groom had from 12 to 13 years ... It rarely happened that a Russian remained unmarried for a long time ... ". Gradually, the age of marriage increased. By a decree of 1714, Peter I forbade noblemen to marry before they were 20, and to marry before they were 17, and by decree of Catherine II (1775) it was forbidden for all classes to marry men under 15, women under 13; in case of violation of the decree, the marriage was dissolved, and the priest was deprived of his dignity. Later, the lower limit of marriageable age increased even more. In accordance with the imperial decree of 1830, the minimum age for marriage was raised to 16 for the bride and 18 for the groom. However, the peasants and the lower strata of the urban population often turned to the spiritual authorities for permission to marry off their daughter at an earlier age. The main motive was the need to have a worker or mistress in the house. Even by the beginning of the 20th century, marriage in Russia remained quite early. More than half of all brides and about a third of grooms in European Russia were under 20 years old.

Even at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, marriage in Russia was almost universal. According to the first general census of the population in 1897, at the end of the 19th century. by the age of 50, almost all men and women were married, the proportion of the population who had never been married in the age group of 45-49 years was significantly lower than in Western Europe.

Pre-revolutionary Russia almost did not know divorce, the marriage union was concluded for life and practically could not be terminated. Divorce was considered by the church as the gravest sin and was allowed in exceptional cases. The only grounds for divorce could be the "unknown absence" and "deprivation of all rights of state" of one of the spouses. Nevertheless, as social conditions changed, the gradual emancipation of women, already in pre-revolutionary times, views on the values ​​of matrimony and attitudes towards divorce changed. But these changes affected mainly the elite segments of the population, official divorces were very rare. In 1913, out of 98.5 million Orthodox in Russia, only 3,791 marriages were annulled.

Marriages did not last long, but not because of divorce. Due to high mortality, there has always been a high risk of marriage termination due to the widowhood of one of the spouses. At the very end of the 19th century, in 1897, the proportion of widows among all women of marriageable age was 13.4%. In men, the corresponding figure was significantly lower - 5.45%. At the same time, by the age of 31, among unmarried women, the proportion of widowed women was higher than the proportion of those who had never married: by the age of 50, 25% of women were widowed, by the age of 62 - half, by the age of 74 - over 75%.

Widowhood was largely compensated for by remarriages, almost obligatory in the conditions of peasant life. At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries (1896-1905), the share of remarriages in the total number of marriages was approximately 14% for men and 8% for women. As a result, every man and every woman who lived to marriageable age and got married (one or more times) lived in marriage for an average of a quarter of a century.

What was this quarter-century of marriage?

S. Solovyov in his “History of Russia from Ancient Times”, describing the ancient Russian family order, noted that “the relationship of a husband to his wife and parents to children in ancient Russian society was not particularly soft. A person who did not leave the tribal guardianship became a husband, that is, they united with him a being that was not familiar to him before, with whom he was not used to meeting before as a free being. The young man after the crown met for the first time with a weak, timid, silent being, who was given to him in full power, which he was obliged to teach i.e. to beat, even if politely according to the rule of Domostroy. Solovyov's words express the position of the enlightened 19th century. However, even at that time, the majority of Russians passed from childhood to adulthood without any intermediate steps, and marriage only formally marked the point of this transition: “small” became “man”. It is not surprising that many of the relationships that Solovyov so critically assessed survived into the 20th century.

Russia has long tried to somehow limit forced marriages. Solovyov cites a 17th-century patriarchal decree instructing priests to “strongly interrogate” grooms and brides, as well as their parents, “whether they marry each other out of love and consent, and not out of violence or bondage.” Lomonosov urged "crowning priests to firmly confirm that they, having heard somewhere about an involuntary combination, would not allow it." But in fact, even in the 19th century, young people very often entered into marriage at the choice of their parents. Moreover, although marriage has always been understood as an intimate union of a man and a woman, when concluding a marriage, economic and social considerations most often came to the fore.

In a patriarchal family, a woman was seen primarily as a family worker - the ability to work was often the main criterion when choosing a bride. There was no going back after the marriage, it remained to live according to the old formula: “be patient - fall in love”.

"Small", becoming a "man" at a very young age and continuing to live as part of the "paternal" family, remained a dependent person. And the position of a woman was even worse: she not only depended on her husband, but, having entered a large family, she also became dependent on her father-in-law, mother-in-law, other men in the family, their wives, etc. She immediately became one of the family workers , and this role of hers was in constant conflict with her own roles of wife and mother. But there were other aspects of her dependent position in the family, about which it was customary to remain silent, for example, daughter-in-law.

Own internal connections and relations of the married family, which did not have sufficient independence, remained undeveloped, did not play the special role in people's lives that they have acquired in our time. And therefore, each individual person felt himself, first of all, as a wheel of a complex mechanism of a large family, obliged to regularly fulfill his duty in relation to it, and only to a very small extent saw in the family an environment for revealing and realizing his individuality. Such a family was not the socializing environment in which an independent, individualized human personality could develop. Man for the family this is the principle on which patriarchal family relations have been based from time immemorial.

But something shifted in the second half of the 19th century. For the time being, the dissolution of a person in the family was justified by economic and demographic necessity, the interests of physical survival. But as soon as these two necessities weakened a little, the rigid predetermination of human fate lost its justification, habitual family relations ceased to satisfy people, family members began to “rebel”. It was then that the hidden conflict of a large and small family, "work" and "life" came to the surface. The patriarchal family is in crisis.

This crisis first of all affected the urban strata of Russian society, which had previously also built their family relations according to models close to those of the peasants. Russian literature of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries is filled with references to this crisis - from L. Tolstoy's "Anna Karenina" or A. Ostrovsky's "Thunderstorm" to articles by unknown or forgotten authors in scientific and journalistic publications.

The confrontation between the old and the new split Russia more and more, and the line of this split went through every family.

Riot on the family ship

Russia was not the first country to face the crisis of the traditional family. By the beginning of the 20th century, many Western countries had already passed through it, the traditional large family became the property of history, gave way to a highly mobile, small, “married” family. “During the voyage that was to bring the family into modernity ... she separated herself from the community around her, erecting - to protect herself - an insurmountable wall of privacy. She broke off her relations with distant relatives and weakened even those that she maintained with close relatives ... How did the family manage to quietly leave their parking lot at the pier of tradition? ... The ship's crew - mother, father and children - that's who happily broke the fetters that held him to go on his own voyage. These words refer to the Western European family, but the same thing - albeit later - happened to the Russian family.

Perhaps the main force that blew up the old family way of life from within and accelerated its crisis was the woman most crushed by this way of life.

Although certain steps towards changing the place of women in the family and society were made by Peter the Great's reforms (by freeing her from the tower), even in the 19th century the ideas of women's equality were not popular in Russia and were perceived as something alien to Russian tradition and Russian culture. I. Kireevsky found the first germ of the subsequently famous doctrine of the all-round emancipation of women in the "moral decay of the upper class" of European society. L. Tolstoy was also convinced of the uselessness, moreover, of the harm of emancipation, and wrote a lot about it. But, apparently, the reasons for the growing struggle in Russia for the expansion of women's rights were rooted not only in the European contagion and the "upper classes". Probably, one should not underestimate the contribution of enlightened and intelligent women to the struggle for women's equality. However, the decisive events did not take place in high-society salons. The main arena of change in the position of women was the village.

The “baby rebellion” in the countryside is only one, albeit a very vivid, manifestation of family changes that were brewing and beginning. Next to their “female” line, another one is visible - “children's”.

The notion of the unlimited rights of parents in relation to children and the equally unlimited duty of children in relation to their parents was deeply rooted in the popular consciousness. Even at the end of the nineteenth century, parental power was very great. The expression “father laid down his son” was still encountered (that is, he gave it to work for a certain period, and took the money in advance). Parents had the final word when it came to the marriage of their sons, and especially the marriage of their daughters. And yet, by the end of the 19th century, the old family orders in the relationship between parents and children were already cracking at the seams, both the former respect for parents and the former obedience to them had weakened, although outwardly much was still preserved.

To the extent that the power of the parents still remained, it was more and more based on the direct economic dependence of the children alone. Throughout the second half of the 19th century, changes in the economic conditions of family life and in intra-family relations shook the foundations of a large undivided family, and the number of family divisions increased. Every day it became clearer: the advantages of a large family no longer cover its shortcomings, living in such a family became more and more painful. Hidden from view, the internal antagonisms of the large patriarchal family came out. “All the peasants are aware that it is more profitable to live in large families, that division is the cause of impoverishment, but meanwhile they still divide. Is there any reason for this, then? It is obvious that there is something in family peasant life that a man who endures everything cannot endure, ”wrote Engelhardt, the author of the famous letters“ From the Village ”, a consistent opponent of family divisions.

The inevitability of change

By the beginning of the 20th century, Russian society was faced with the most acute economic and social problems, against which the demographic and family troubles might not look the most important. In any case, much less was said and written about them than, say, about economic backwardness, about the land question, about the poverty or lack of rights of the people, about the need for political changes, etc. But still it cannot be said that this side of people's life is completely did not attract attention. Huge mortality, more frequent attempts to evade the birth of children or the rejection of children already born, the "fall of family morals", the women's emancipation movement in the cities and the "women's rebellion" in the countryside, the disobedience of adult children and the weakening parental authority, the increasing number of peasant family divisions - all this spoke of the depreciation of the age-old commandments of family life, of its growing discord.

The discord was noticed by everyone and became the object of criticism, self-criticism of the Russian society, which was increasingly aware of the need for renewal. Changes in the family and in general private life of people were only one of the sides of the general changes experienced by Russia in the post-reform period, when its desire to become a modern industrial country was clearly outlined. In the four decades that followed the abolition of serfdom, all previous balances were broken, and new ones have not yet been created. Russian society has entered a period of severe, protracted crisis.

Could not avoid this crisis and the entire system of family and demographic relations. However, the very development that plunged the private life of people into a crisis created opportunities for a way out of it.

Economic necessity prescribed certain forms of organization of family production, division of labor in the family, etc., but the family and society were always compelled to reckon also with demographic necessity, which set a limit even to economic demands. Many of the most important norms and stereotypes of behavior were subordinated to it. Cultural and religious traditions placed a high value on the values ​​of motherhood and fatherhood, while at the same time placing strict prohibitions on marginal behaviors that could allow a woman or a couple to shirk their parental duties. No self-will was allowed, the principle "a man for the family" found here one of its most solid foundations. The decline in mortality and birth rates was a double shift that dramatically expanded the demographic freedom of the family and its members and caused irreparable damage to this principle.

Indeed, the less time, effort, energy biological reproduction requires from a woman and family, the more they can be spent (without prejudice to procreation) on social reproduction: self-development and self-realization of the individual, socialization of children, transfer and renewal of cultural patterns, production material goods, etc. The old family orders do not recognize any choice, family roles and family responsibilities are strictly fixed once and for all, which is justified by economic and demographic necessity, the interests of physical survival. As soon as these two necessities weaken even a little, the rigid predetermination of human fate loses its justification. Habitual forms of demographic and family behavior cease to satisfy people, new activity appears aimed at filling the expanded space of freedom, achieving a longer life for yourself and your children, defending the intimacy of your family life, discovering new social roles, fulfilling yourself more fully. .

Although in Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries all this was accessible only to a narrow layer of people and insufficiently realized by the whole society, nevertheless, the movement had already begun, much was foreseen, something was known from the example of more advanced European countries. The discord in the old family order, of course, disturbed contemporaries, but there was also an expectation of the desired positive changes.

It would be good if the replacement, which would make it possible to overcome the crisis of traditional demographic and family relations, occurred as a result of their smooth evolution, the gradual development of new forms and norms of demographic and family behavior that would meet new economic and social conditions, which would also develop gradually. But in the conditions of a rapidly changing Russia, there was little chance for this, it simply did not have time for gradual changes, from generation to generation. The country was rapidly approaching a social explosion, in which the old family was to burn out.

(Beginning. Continued in the next issue)

Strictly speaking, the word “family” is not fully applicable to such forms of hostel life, and in everyday, and even more so in scientific language, they are denoted by the terms “farm”, “household”, in Russia in the past the word “yard” was used in this case.
Kostomarov N. Home life and customs of the Great Russian people. - M., 1993, p. 209.
Shorter E. Naissance de la famfle moderne. XVIII-XX siecle. — Paris: Seuil, 1977.
Engelgardt A.N. From the countryside: 12 letters: 1872-1887. - M .: Thought, 1987.
Zvonkov A.P. Modern marriage and wedding among the peasants of the Tambov province ... - M., 1889. Issue. one.

The modern family is the result of a long historical development. For a deeper analysis of the historical forms of the family, let us turn to the classic work of Friedrich Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State.

In this work, the initial provisions of the science of the history of human society, including the history of the origin and development of the family, were outlined. This work appeared in 1884 and was a significant milestone in the history of science, since until that time the patriarchal theory formulated back in antiquity had been dominant. According to this theory, the patriarchal family, headed by an unlimited ruler - the father, embodied the principles of private property, power and monotheism.

With the advent of Engels' work, the patriarchal theory lost its monopoly, as new ideas appeared about the emergence and development of the clan, about two successive stages in the development of the clan system: matriarchy and patriarchy, the idea of ​​the collapse of the clan and the emergence of the state. Subsequently, these new ideas were widely recognized in science.

The study of the institution of the family will not be complete if we do not consider the ways of its development. In the course of the evolution of this institution, three stages can be conventionally distinguished. First of all, as a result of a spontaneous process, a stronger bond was established between the spouses. At the same time, a certain power arose within the family, which belonged to the husband as the main source of the family's livelihood. In relation to the wife, the husband played the role of patron, which before marriage belonged to her father or brother. As a result, the ever-expanding power of the father marked the development of the patriarchal family, which replaced the matriarchy. The climax of the development of paternal authority finds expression in the well-known formula of Roman jurists: "Pater est guem nuptiae demonstrant" ("The father is the one to whom marriage indicates").

The patriarchal period became the second period in the development of the institution of the family. Its study was begun by science on the example of ancient Germanic society. The most capacious state of the family of that era was summarized by the Swiss scientist Geisler: “The family of the ancient Germans was not an association of people connected exclusively by marriage and consanguinity, but was a union of people living under the same roof (Hausgenossenschaft). Therefore, not only people should be considered members of the family free, but also those who are more or less dependent on the head of the community.Thus, the family was a circle of persons living together and recognizing the authority of the same head of the house (ero munt)"

Thus, the patriarchal family looked like a community, consisted of people who were related to each other, as they were descendants of a common ancestor, lived under the same roof and owned common property. Nevertheless, the patriarchal family, which affirms, along with its characteristic experience of primitive communal relations, the beginning of private property and power, inevitably developed contradictions. Therefore, in religion, this family found protection for its integrity, and in the cult of ancestors, a purely economic idea of ​​the solidarity of family members, the continuity of the change of generations, was manifested.

The patriarchal system, which was formed in the conditions of polygamy, gradually formed the prerequisites for the transition to monogamy. For a long time, polygamy was even the rule, since it corresponded to the method of marriage that was common in the specified period by buying a bride. It is easy to understand the advantages of polygamy, as it was the easiest way for a householder to acquire a few female workers, and also to ensure the production of an extensive offspring. The need to solve these problems gave rise to a number of customs. For example, among many tribes, both Slavic and German, for a long time there was a custom to marry boys to adult girls, who, on the very next day after the wedding, naturally became constant assistants in their new family.

To these purely economic motives, there was also a social one: the need to establish friendly ties in order to replace the state of continuous armed conflicts characteristic of intertribal relations with a more or less lasting peace. And one of the most convenient ways for this was marriage, which established kinship relations between both families, made them cognate, as the Romans said, or, in the Russian expression, "in-laws." Therefore, it is not surprising that often when peace was concluded between tribes, a marriage union played an important role, which united the warring parties with the help of family ties.

Cases of polygamous marriages were also observed in China, although only the emperor and princes could have entire harems, while mere mortals were content with one wife. Judea was not alien to polygamy either: Jacob (Joseph's father), Elkan (Samuel's father), Gideon, David and others entered into a new marriage during the life of their first wife. The following text of Deuteronomy (ch. XXI, v. 15) is especially expressive in this respect: "If a man has two wives, one beloved, the other hated...".

More controversial is the question of the existence of polygamy among Aryan societies. In ancient Greece and ancient Rome, monogamy was preferred in the most remote times. The situation was different among the Celts and Germans. This is evidenced by Caesar and Tacitus. Caesar, speaking of the Gauls, noted that in the event of a person's death, his wives (and not his wife) were interrogated to determine whether death had occurred from poisoning. Tacitus limited himself to pointing out that the Germans were almost the only barbarians who were content with one wife, with the exception of leaders who entered into several marriages, "but not out of lust, but out of pride."

Hindus, Iranians and Slavs were no exception to the general rule. According to Herodotus, polygamy existed not only among the Persian kings, but also among their subjects. The Iranian deity Agura Mazda has always been depicted surrounded by several wives. As for the Hindus, the songs of the Rig-Veda repeatedly mention circumstances testifying to polygamy. The following passages from Manu, Yajna-valkiya and Vishnu testify to cases of polygamy: “All property given by the father to a woman of one of the three lower castes, whose husband has a Brahmin and other wives, passes, if she dies childless, to the daughter of a Brahmin or to her children ". According to the caste rules, a Brahmin, a Kshatriya and a Vaishya can have three wives, while a Shudra can have only one. Vishnu, on the other hand, recognizes the privilege of a Brahmin to have four wives, a Kshatriya should be content with three, a Vaishya with two, a Shudra with one.

There are certain facts indicating that polygamy existed among the ancient Slavs. Even in the annals of Nestor there is an indication that "Radimichi, Vyatichi and Northerners", that is, the tribes whose union with the Krivichi laid the foundation for the Russian state, "usually have two or three wives." Cosmas of Prague and the unknown compiler of the life of St. Voitekh mention the custom of the Czechs to have two or three wives. Adam of Bremen spoke of a similar custom among the Prussians, where only princes were in the habit of keeping an unlimited number of wives. Vladimir the Holy before the adoption of Christianity had twenty wives, except for the concubines, whose number reached eight hundred.

It can be concluded with certainty that polygamy was widespread mainly among the rich and noble.

The question arises as to what were the immediate causes of the slow development of monogamy, and what stages marriage had to go through before it reached the form of a union concluded between one man and one woman.

To do this, it is necessary to consider the provisions of Engels' work "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State", which relate to the history of the family. Prior to the release of this work, the following system of social relations was considered universal: family - clan - tribe - state. Engels was the first to prove that this formula is erroneous in many cases. Analysis of the history of the origin of the family Engels began from the most ancient stage. For her, according to Engels, relationships were characteristic when every woman could belong to every man, and every man to every woman. It was a period when society was divided into tribes, within which people's sexual relations were built without regard to degrees of kinship. There were no such concepts as family and marriage. And so it was, according to historians, for hundreds of thousands of years.

From this primitive state, the primary forms of marriage and the family subsequently developed, but not marriage in the sense we understand it, but the so-called group marriage. According to Lewis Morgan, group marriage has gone through two main stages: the consanguineous family and the punalua family.

The consanguineous family was the first step on which family relations began to be built. Or, to put it more simply, family legal relations, which imply certain rights and obligations of the persons entering into them. Marriage ties were built by generations. In practice, it looked like this. Each generation formed a certain marriage circle, within which connections between the sexes were allowed. For example, parents lived in one group marriage, and children in another. That is, it turned out that connections were allowed horizontally and forbidden vertically. In practice, this meant that, for example, marriages between brothers and sisters were possible. This position was not in conflict with the norms of morality. K. Marx also wrote that "in the primitive era, a sister was a wife, and this was moral"

The punalua family, compared to the consanguineous family, was a more progressive phenomenon both in form and content. The basis for building this family was the following rule: the circle of sexual (it is also marriage) relations was even more limited by excluding parents and children, as well as brothers and sisters from it. That is, marriage ties are limited both vertically and horizontally. In practice, it turned out that a certain group of sisters were wives of a certain group of husbands. Their blood brothers living with them in the same family were excluded from the number of husbands. Husbands who were married to a certain group of sisters called each other "punalua". So in ancient American Indian terminology, close comrades or partners in married life called each other. Blood brothers of wives and blood sisters of husbands were excluded from the Punalua family. Husbands came from another family for only one purpose, namely marriage. As for their permanent place of residence and work, it was the "maternal" family, so they had no claims to the property of the family (in which their wives lived).

Group marriage, with its certain advantages, also had significant disadvantages. And the most important of them was that in such a group marriage it was absolutely impossible to determine who, in fact, was the father of the born child. Only the woman who gave birth to this child was known. To alleviate this situation, the origin of the child began to be conducted along the maternal line. In the event that a woman who had one or more children died, then all her property, in the order of inheritance, went sequentially to her children, her mother, blood brothers and sisters. These persons eventually became known as the maternal clan, which was part of the tribe.

Engels, in the process of studying the history of the family, came to the following conclusion: “Directly from the punalu family, apparently, the institution of the clan arose in the vast majority of cases ... it becomes more and more durable, thanks to other general institutions of a social, as well as religious nature and acquires more and more distinctive features in comparison with other genera of the same tribe"

For tens of thousands of years, the Punalua family has been developing and at the same time, although slowly, it has undergone a transformation - after blood brothers and sisters, cousins ​​and then second cousins, uncles, nephews and other relatives began to be excluded from it. As a result of this evolution, group marriage became simply virtually impossible and pair marriage appeared.

The question arises: who owned the idea of ​​a pair marriage - a man or a woman? Engels answered this question best. From his point of view, it was the woman who first began to seek a pair marriage due to her biological characteristics - greater affection.

But couples also had their problems. Marriage could be easily dissolved by both husband and wife. Accordingly, the position of children did not change significantly: they still remained in the feminine gender. This circumstance was explained quite simply: the paired family did not have its own household on the grounds that all the property belonged to the clan.

Such was the system of primary forms of marriage inherent in the tribal system.

The merit of Engels was that he made a number of significant adjustments to the time-honored and refined scheme. On a number of positions, Engels enters into polemics with the leading specialist of that time on issues of social evolution, L.G. Morgan. The latter assumed the existence of a consanguineous family as a general stage in the development of marriage and family relations. Engels, on the other hand, came to the conclusion that in some societies there might not have been a consanguineous family. The first form of restriction of relations between the sexes was, from his point of view, exogamy, which meant the prohibition of marriages only within the genus. She, in turn, was preceded by promiscuity, that is, promiscuity.

In the course of his research, Engels came to another interesting conclusion: “When Morgan wrote his book, our information about group marriage was still limited ... The Punalu family provided, on the one hand, a complete explanation of the kinship system prevailing among the American Indians, which served as Morgan’s initial point of his research; on the one hand, she served as a ready starting point from which it was possible to derive a genus based on maternal law. An erroneous theory in Morgan's theory, in our opinion, was that he attributed to the punalu family the general distribution in ancient times "

The position of Engels, who considered polygamous marriage a "historical luxury item", was shared by Professor M.O. Kosven, who noted that polygamy was sometimes taken as a universal order and an obligatory stage in the development of marriage and family, although polygamy was available only to the few and the rich and was, thus, a relatively rare historical form

Unlike polygamy, monogamy is a strong, stable monogamy. Engels explained that at the time of the transformation of pair marriage into monogamy, the level of social division of labor and its productivity increase so much that an excess product appears. The coupled family undergoes changes in connection with this and begins to oppose itself to the clan, as it becomes independent due to the fact that it has its own property and property. Engels explained that property began to belong only to the head of the family, that is, the husband, and family members were transferred to the position of subordinates. The husband began to occupy a dominant position due to the further division of labor (cattle breeding, agriculture, handicraft), which was more productive. The position of the wife was more and more reduced to housekeeping. Tribe and clan gave way to the family.

In a monogamous family, property equality no longer existed, in contrast to a paired family. Engels pointed out that the individual family had become a force that began to oppose the clan. “Monogamy,” concludes Engels, “is that cell of a civilized society, according to which we can already study the nature of the opposites and contradictions that have fully developed within the latter. K. Marx, developing Engels’ thesis, noted that “the patriarchal family, once it has arisen, contains in miniature all those contradictions that later develop in society and the state"

Gradually, religion accepted the idea of ​​monogamy and came out in support of it. A man is perfect, it was said in the code of Manu, only when three beings unite in him - himself, his wife and his son. A family in which the husband is content with one wife will be happy. The Jewish Talmud expressly forbids a high priest to have more than one wife. A similar prohibition was in the Egyptian legislation of the period of the Old Kingdom. In Rome, judging by the text of one law of Diocletian, people who played a new wedding during the life of their wife were declared deprived of honor (infamia notati sunt in edicto praetoris). Christianity also declared itself a resolute opponent of polygamy in any form, even in the form of entering into a new marriage after a divorce from his first wife (Gospel of Matthew, XIX, v. 8; Gospel of Mark, X, v. 5).

On the basis of the foregoing, we can conclude that since the era of the emergence of the first states, religious doctrine and, as a result, ecclesiastical law most often acted as apologists for monogamy. The question may even arise: Is not religion the main factor in virtue of which monogamy was preferred? But if we examine a number of historical and legal documents that have come down to us relating to the period of patriarchy, we can see how natural this process was.

Already on the basis of Vishnu, Kitayana and other codes, the first wife, if she belongs to the highest caste, was considered dominant over other wives. Similar facts about the Slavs can be found in Cosmas of Prague.

Having established the negative attitude of religious legislation towards polygamy and the general trend towards monogamy, one can notice the close connection that exists between the cult of ancestors and the privileged position that the first wife occupied in a polygamous family. For example, the wife had the duty of continuously maintaining the fire in the hearth with fuel specially designed for this purpose, which was all the more important because its failure to do so inevitably led to sad consequences for the whole family. If this fire died out, then the cult of ancestors was interrupted, the dead were left without food and the family was deprived of their protection. And the care of the hearth lay with the wife who occupied the first place in the family, usually it was the oldest of the wives in age. The Bible calls her "the wife of youth," pointing directly to the significance that took place in a husband's choice of wife when he was young. As a rule, this was his most correct choice, because, as practice shows, it was to the first wife that the husband gave all his tenderness and love. Subsequent marriages no longer had that sharpness in relationships and freshness in feelings. The entry of a husband into a subsequent marriage did not generally bring about a change in the family cult, unless the first wife was of a lower caste than the second, and unless the law required, as in India, that the chief wife be of the same circle. , as the husband, that is, of the same social origin with him.

The fact that only the first wife was allowed to perform the most sacred duties had a profound effect on her fate. She became the main wife, whose union with her husband created a family, insofar as this family was, in the words of Roman jurists, "spiritual unity" (divini juris communicatio). And since this placed her above others, the first wife soon reached the point that she alone enjoyed the power of the mistress of the house. She becomes, according to the German expression, "Herrin" (Mistress), or, as it was customary to say among the Slavs, "empress". Her pre-eminent position can best be expressed by the formula used in Rome at marriage: "sit tu Gajus, ego Gaja" ("if you are Gaius, then I am Gaia"). These were the first words with which the newlywed addressed her husband. This meant a sign of goodwill, cooperation for life, constant participation in both the duties and privileges of the head of the family community.

When the first wife finally took the place that belonged to her by right, while subsequent wives sank to the level of concubines, then the period came when solemn wedding ceremonies began to take place only at the conclusion of a man's first marriage. Only the first wife was presented to the manna of the ancestors and their personification, the hearth. Similarly, only her children were considered legitimate. Similar relationships were noted, for example, among the Celts. Scandinavian laws are in many ways reminiscent of this transitional period between more or less tolerant polygamy and monogamy, which does not recognize children born of a free relationship. So, in Norway, in the era of Frostating and Gulatrug, the law recognized certain types of extramarital cohabitation, which, if it lasted more than 20 years, became legal due to prescription. In ancient Denmark, the proportion of illegitimate children was half that of legitimate ones.

As a result of the analysis of the legislation of the period under study, one can trace the development of the very idea of ​​the legality of birth. This legitimacy is recognized to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the position that the legislator assigns to women whose marriage was contracted after the marriage of a privileged spouse. Thus, the development of law took place precisely in this direction, under the influence of the increasingly severe intolerance that was characteristic of the family cult and the increasingly noticeable influence of this cult on the internal structure of the patriarchal family. Thus, the Athenian law forbade the father to bequeath to his illegitimate sons more than five axes of mines, but the father could recognize them as his own by inscribing them in his phratry. The situation was similar in Rome.

Old Russian legislation no less jealously guarded the principle of the legality of the origin of children. Starting with Pravda Yaroslav, it did not recognize the rights of inheritance for illegitimate children. According to the Code of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich of 1649, they were not legalized even if their parents got married. The law recognized the connection of side children with their mother, but they did not belong to the father's family

The importance of the social functions of the family and its great role in the life of society make the family an object of close attention and study of sociology, philosophy, demography, biology and law. This issue becomes especially relevant with the adoption of the new Family Code of the Russian Federation. family marriage sociological society

Due to the specifics of the research tasks, each science has its own view of the family and its own approach to defining the family. So, for demographers, the family is, first of all, a social organism through which society solves the issues of fertility and population. Biologists are interested in the problem of the influence of the family on the biological essence of a person, and vice versa. In the sociological understanding, the family is a union of persons based on marriage or only kinship, the adoption of children for upbringing, characterized by a common life, interests, mutual care.

From the point of view of law, the family is such a set of social relations between people that is amenable to legislative regulation.

The task of the science of family law is to find such forms and methods of legal regulation of family relations that would best contribute to the fulfillment by the family of its social functions.

Finally, from the point of view of its social content, the family represents three interrelated groups of social phenomena:

• 1) marriage as a basis;
• 2) marital relations as a result of marriage;
• 3) the relationship between parents and children as a result of marital relations.

In a legal sense, a family can be defined as a circle of persons bound by rights and obligations arising from marriage, kinship, adoption or other form of adoption of children (into a family) for upbringing and contributing to the strengthening and development of family relations.

This term is studied by a variety of sciences, and each gives its own interpretation.

In sociology, the concept refers to several people who are united by blood relationship or marriage.

In a legal sense, these are people who live together and are connected with each other by legal relations that have appeared after the official registration of marriage.

The law of the Russian Federation interprets the surname as an organized group of people connected by a common life and moral responsibility.

Psychologists base the concept on personal relationships, noting the important role of education, the continuity of traditions from older to younger.

The term "family" has many definitions and concepts, but in general it is a cell of society that connects two people with a common life and relationships formalized by law.

How the family arose: a digression into history

At the dawn of evolution, people lived in communities or loners. According to scientists, the first unions began to emerge when ancient women stopped choosing alpha males and switched their attention to male earners who were more faithful.

The change of priorities occurred for practical reasons - a reliable man could provide food for a woman and children throughout her life. It was calmer with him.

While the alpha males fought for women, the miners brought meat and skins to their chosen ones and arranged a home. Therefore, the representatives of the weaker sex quickly figured out with whom it is more profitable to live.

Historians interpret meaning a little differently than lawyers or sociologists. According to the opinion, a group of people who have a common ancestor can be safely called a cell of society.

Each cell has several components.

• The foundation. This role is played by marriage. The conclusion of a formal union provides both parties with the establishment of marital rights and obligations.
• relationship system. This includes not only relations between spouses, but also family ties - children, brothers, mothers-in-law, and so on. There are about 70% of them in Russia.
• Compound. Legislative legal acts list in detail the circle of persons forming one clan. In different types of codes - labor, civil or any other, the composition of this cell is different.

Features and functions

We were able to define the concept of a modern family, now let's talk about its features and functions:

Any unit of society is determined by the presence of the following features:

• officially registered marriage;
• housekeeping, cohabitation;
• acquisition of material assets;
• the presence of close, intimate relationships;
• having one or more children.

Functions:

• Procreation. The reproductive function is the most important, it is inherent in us by nature. And thanks to the traditions that have developed in society, the purpose of marriage is the birth and upbringing of children.
• Creation and accumulation of common material values, conducting a joint economy.
• Upbringing. The goal is to educate and educate your children, instill in them moral values, norms of behavior in society, and also adapt them to a normal life in it.
• Preservation of traditions and values. They contribute to the strengthening and preservation of ties, ensure the continuity of generations and form the history of the family. Unions that have their own tribal traditions are more tightly connected, because different generations of people interact more with each other.

Family structure

As a result of the development of society, scientists have identified several types of unions.

• By the number of partners - monogamous and polygamous. The former represent the union of one woman and one man, the latter allow living with several partners at the same time. Most families are monogamous. Religion often contributes to this. In the Orthodox tradition, the love of one man and one woman is sealed by marriage.
• According to the structure of family ties - simple and nuclear. In simple ones, parents and their children live together, and in nuclear ones, several generations lead a common household.
• By the number of children - childless, small children and large families.
• By type of residence. If the newlyweds live with the wife's parents, it is matrilocal, if with the husband's parents, it is patrilocal. Spouses living separately belong to the neolocal type.
• According to the form of government - matriarchy, patriarchy, democracy. The matriarchal is dominated by a woman. She takes a lot of responsibility and makes most of the decisions. In the patriarchal, all power is concentrated in the hands of a man. In a democratic marriage, both spouses have equal responsibility and make decisions jointly.
• By social status - young, adopted, established.
• According to the moral and psychological state - prosperous, dysfunctional.
• According to the material condition - wealthy or poor.

Family resources and their types

This term refers to all property, material values, sources of income of the husband and wife.

Resources can be divided into several categories.

• Material. These include real estate, cars, household appliances, valuables, jewelry. Each clan seeks to acquire certain resources, as they provide a comfortable stay for its members.
• Labor. All relatives do some housework: cooking, cleaning, repairing, etc. All this put together is called labor resources.
• Financial - cash, bank accounts, securities, stocks, deposits. Financial resources provide an opportunity to acquire material.
• Informational. They are also called technological, as they represent a technology for performing some kind of household chore. For example, a mother cooks food and teaches her daughter or son to cook in the same way. In different cells of society, technological processes take place in different ways, and therefore the resources are different. A feature of these processes is that they often develop into traditions.

Resources are an important component that allows you to solve various everyday problems, achieve the desired goals and satisfy the needs of people.

What is a family for?

The psychology of a person is such that he cannot be alone, he definitely needs close people who love him and whom he loves.

The family, as already mentioned above, is the cell of society, its structural unit. Its role is to satisfy human needs, not only in the material and physical planes, but also in the spiritual.

When forming a new couple, the spiritual component is in the first place, since two people are in love, they like to spend time with each other, share their thoughts and experiences. In such a union, a person receives love, understanding, support, without which it is difficult to live in society.

The emotional component of the cell of society consists of feelings. For some, love and mutual understanding prevail, for others, negative emotions predominate - reproaches, resentment, anger, and so on.

It is believed that all unions go through different stages of their existence - falling in love, grinding, the stage of tolerance. Mature couples who have lived together for many years and have gone through all the stages come to true love. Many fall apart during the grinding stages, when there is a lot of conflict.

What is the modern family and what is its significance

Unlike the times of the USSR, modern unions are autonomous and closed to society. Interference in their affairs occurs only in extreme cases, when this cell becomes destructive. In Soviet times, it was more open to the state. Supervisory authorities monitored the development of each formalized relationship between citizens. When conflicts and divorces arose, they intervened and tried to influence, took possible steps to resolve quarrels and save the marriage.

Distinctive features: the uniqueness of the unions of the new time

Today, the family cannot be unambiguously defined because of the different types - Swedish, adopted, open, and so on. The essence of the relationship between the sexes has long gone beyond the classical formula: one woman, one man and children. In the Russian Federation, same-sex and Swedish marriages are prohibited, but in some foreign countries they are recognized by law, and this phenomenon is considered the norm.

Let us note some features that characterize the unions of our country over the past 25 years:

• An increase in the number of legal marriages. Young couples increasingly prefer to formalize their relationship at the registry office, although the institution of civil marriage still exists.
• Increasing the age of marriage. The average age of the newlyweds is 22 years, while 30-40 years ago the newlyweds barely passed the age of majority, and 50 years ago our grandparents got married even earlier: at 15-16 years old. The maturation of the newlyweds is associated with the need to receive a higher education and the need to arrange everyday life. Modern youth in most cases thinks about a career and preparing the ground for marriage.
• Later birth of children after the formalization of the relationship. According to statistics, the appearance of the first child falls on 3-5 years of marriage.
• Desire to live separately from parents. From tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union, several generations lived in the same house. After the wedding, the newlyweds did not seek to separate and lived with the parents of the wife or husband, led a common life and even a budget. Modern couples tend to start living separately as soon as possible.
• Showing interest in tradition. Modern youth is increasingly thinking about their roots, origins and ancestors. Compilation of their family tree, pedigree has become popular. This surge of interest is normal. At a certain period in the life of the country, it was not customary to talk about origin, especially for those whose ancestors were not peasants, but princes, landowners and merchants. You can save your traditions and strengthen family ties by creating a family tree. The "House of Genealogy" will help with this. The company's specialists will find information about ancestors and relatives in the archives, draw up a genealogical book, which can become not only a good gift, but also a real relic.

The state in the 21st century pays more attention to the development of the institution of the family, improving its quality, and developing spiritual values. Today, marriage is a sign of a person's well-being, his support and support. Times change, but the basic principles of building relationships between a man and a woman remain unchanged: love, mutual respect, trust and care.

The role of the family in human life

It has a huge impact on the children who live in it. It helps to determine their moral guidelines. Despite the fact that in kindergartens, schools, sections and circles, teachers strive to convey to the little man basic knowledge, skills, moral truths, the experience of mom and dad, their attitude towards each other plays a major role in shaping the personality of the baby.

Parents, grandparents lay:

• the ability to love;
• understanding of their traditions;
• attitude towards people, including the opposite sex;
• the ability to appreciate help and provide it yourself;
• line of conduct in society and the ability to live harmoniously in it.

Only among relatives and friends does a person feel protected. He feels needed and this gives a person self-confidence. Helps him to overcome difficulties, cope with failures.

The family is the beginning of all beginnings, it is the connection between past generations and current ones. Each cell of society has characteristic features: the presence of marriage, children, the conduct of a common household. It forms a person, his views, skills, spiritual values. And our task is to do everything to preserve it.