toptermpaper.com

Sociolinguistics is the study of aspects of societies, including cultural norms, the way language is used, and the effects of language use on society. Language is an important portion of identity and culture within many speech communities; also associated with member’s self-esteem; within these communities. Sociolinguists have structured a number of ways to categorize the languages within their status and social function domains such as vernacular. The specific concern of this paper is focusing on the significance and function evaluation of the vernacular (dialect, accent) and through the presentation used and by sociolinguistic-studies, it is intended to decide on the argument if the language change is lead by the implications, role models of media or not.

Touching upon the concepts of vernaculars, dialects and diglossia is a good place to begin. The term “vernacular” has various meanings; but mostly refers to a language not standardized and not officially confirmed; which is used by local people. Generally, vernaculars are spread among communities living in a multilingual atmosphere where they have a different mother-language than the official language of their residence. For example; Afro-American English is a vernacular created among the group of people living in places where the standard American English was officially used; but had African languages as their mother-tonque. Standard languages, like the American English or the Received Pronunciation in Britain are classified as highly prestigious languages associated with educated; as compared to the people talking vernacular languages.

Different from a vernacular; a dialect is a variety of a particular language characterized by specific regional features such as pronunciation; spoken by a specific group of people. Furthermore, according to Fergusson (1996), diglossia is a special language-situation where, in addition to the primary dialect of the language (categorized as (L)), there is a highly regulated and often more complex variety, which is used in official writings and formal speeches (categorized as (H)); but not exactly followed seen in daily conversations. “Diglossic situation exists if it has two distinct codes which show clear functional separation” (Wardhaugh, 1998: 87).

It has been observed that, in due course the standardized varieties of languages (like Standard American English) started becoming less dominant and local varieties (like African American English) became more prominen. Sociolinguists studied the origins of these changes trying to answer whether it was the social factors or impacts of the popular media that triggered these language changes.

Labov suggested certain principles to justify these changes within languages: He first said that “linguistic variation is transmitted to children as stylistic differentiation on the formal/informal dimension, rather than as social stratification. Formal speech variants are associated by children with instruction and punishment, informal speech with intimacy and fun”. ( Labov 2001: 516) Consequently; “linguistic changes from below develop first in spontaneous speech at the most informal level. They are unconsciously associated with nonconformity to sociolinguistic norms, and advanced most by youth who resist conformity to adult institutional practices” ( Labov 2001:516). In connection with these principles stated by Labov (2001), the positive attitude of youth generation on the growing prestige and spreading of the non-standard languages is quite acceptable. Aftwerwards, Labov also stated that these changes were symbols of nonconformity actions against the structured social norms of appropriate behavior, and were generated in the social settings that challenged those norms. Finally, the constructive nonconformity principle of Labov (2001) concluded that these changes were spread to wider communities by those who displayed the symbols of nonconformity in larger pattern of upward mobility. Apparently, the popular media and its figures also had an indirect impact on this by disseminating these changes to language communities, as explained in detail in the relevant section; below.

Likewise, Debra Spitulnik (1997) argues that mass media has a role in the construction of community, and the cultural continuity depends on a social circulation of discourse and public accessibility. The popular mass media has the “ability to enact local concerns on a global stage” and to merge “the ‘marginal with the ‘dominant,’ the ‘parochial’ with the ‘ cosmopolitan,’ and the ‘local’ with the ‘global’” (Johnson and Ensslin 2007: 14). This is said to be a form of re-scaling often associated with the globalization of the late-modernity.

In the light of these studies, the language used in songs of 50 Cent is presented with the main dialect, accent is used alongside the significance and functions of the vernacular speech. In this presented domain of popular media the vernacular is the African American English dialect with standard being the American English.

Appendix 1

The use of vernacular during rapping, affects the voice quality of the speaker within the psychological or emotional states. If the topic is exciting or joyful, voice rises and when it is time to be calm, the voice descends into a bass level.

One of the distinctive features of vernacular is usage of double added prepositions as in “up on it” (line 4). Besides, the use of double negative is common in this vernacular compared to Standard American English. Is is used to structure strong positives and emphasize meanings (line 8). Negatives are formed different from standard American English e.g. use of “ain’t” as a general negative indicator (line 11).

Appendix 2

Mostly a “v” substitution occurs in the vernacular unlike Standard English. When using profanity in combination with the “F” word, speakers pronounce “M.F.” correctly just like in Standard American English in order to emphasize the meaning (line 2). Unlike the standard, there are words in vernacular that indicate the possessive: e.g. in line 4 “them” is used for “they”. If in the context of the sentence a reference is made to “more than one”(plural), it is not necessary to add an “s” to the noun: e.g. “like” in line 5. Also it can be seen that “want to” is converted into “wanna” in line 3.

African American English speakers have a large repertoire of slang words uncommon to Standard American English. The “bread” in (line 6) refers to money in African American English. There is “th” dropping within the African American English as in (line 7) “with” is pronounced as “wif”. The phonetic feature of African American English is quite different from standard American English e.g.; “solve them” is converted to “solve’em” which is continuous sound in one word that can be considered as the compressed phonetic feature of the vernacular (line 9). There is also consonant reduction in African American English: consonant sounds in letters such as (T) are often not pronounced unlike Standard American English (line 11).

In the media images; low and middle class African Americans have a negative image: associated with marginal lifestyles; engaged in bad things. For example; (appendix 2, line 10) it is clearly implied that 50 Cent participated in gangster activities, as he raps in African American English. But the re-scaling process of media within semantic positioning, such as “In the hood they say there’s no b’ness like hoe b’ness ya know” which cross over into ridiculous representations of unsophisticated ideals and ambitions which, most likely, are unattested practices either in low or middle class black communities.

Vernacular has always had a impacted hip hop and rap genres by incorporating meanings (power, money, love, slang idioms) that are historically and contextually situated and relevant to experiences of African American communities. Here vernacular serves as a translator engine, a special tool to express these meanings. This is because, for the African American communities the dialect is not only a variety that one may hear or speak within the community but also a variety delivering local community knowledge, wisdom. For example; the slang idiom “I’m the love doctor” (in line 9 appendix 1), the nickname usually associated with the late Barry White, whose soulful voice is considered by many Americans to be the ultimate music for seduction, is also interpreted by African youth through vernacular.

The other speech communities can also access to vernacular; via popular media. That is how popular media spreads certain linguistic-traits around the world and influences the language of all communities; as opposed to having this communication confined to vernacular society. However, it should be noted that media is only spreading out what’s there but the creator of the change is not the media, it is someone different (in our case, somebody in vernacular).

Given that the standard American English is a political sign for the African Americans which also imply the rejection of their culture; 50 Cent sings especially in vernacular to empower himself within the social and cultural contexts of the African American communities. His vernacular speech also functions as a resistance language towards the white community. It can be assumed that he presents himself as the retainer of local New York, Queens as the low variety vernacular he has chosen to use, which incorporates loss of voiceless “y” and central off-glides as “her” becomes “/ho’/” in (appendix 1, line 13) which New York accent is famous for.

All in all, this ordinary performance involves no visuals but only audio and follows the authentic values which emphasize the potential meaning of the restricted language. 50 Cent seems to be following the guidelines of Clarke and Hiscock (2009) on how keeping it real in rap involves reflecting local realities as well as respecting the African American origins of the genre.

While it can be quite difficult to assess the precise role of the media and its figures in language change, perhaps this issue should be looked in two categories: The direct and the indirect influence of popular media and its figures. As to the direct influence of them over the language change, the answer should be parallel to that of Chambers: “at the deeper reaches of language change – sound changes and grammatical changes – the media have no significant effect at all” (Chambers 1998: 124). The re-scaling process on cultural norms and shaping the vernacular features of media domains is greatly exaggerated. Consequently, language change is the result of the growing prestige of a certain variety of language that is triggered by the social factors such as the non-conformity issues of communities with a vernacular alongside with the standard language. That being said, the media can be considered as having an indirect influence on language change. As also seen in the analyzed example, media plays a major role in raising the awareness to the change taking place; to this growing prestige of a variety within other speech communities as well. In short, it can be concluded that, language change is unlikely to be driven directly by media or its role models only; but they have an indirect impact on it.

There has long been patterns in the way societies operate; this revolves around the foundations of society. With the complexity and diversity found in societies; developing statues, roles, groups, and institutions ensure the survival of society. The social groups that we as individuals, belong to, give us a status and a role to fulfill. Individuals can belong to primary or secondary groups. Primary groups are where there is an intimate interaction between people and cooperation over a period of time, while a secondary group is where individuals do not interact. “Status is our relative social position in a group or institution; while a role is the part our society expects us to play in a given status.” [1] Individuals can be associated with an ascribed status or an achieved status. An ascribed status is status that is given to an individual involuntary, while an achieved status is a status that an individual obtains through their life. Involvement in groups and institutions give us a set of statuses and roles that allow people to know what to expect from each other. [2]

Sociologists believe that status is a position in society. Individuals are generally influenced by only one master status when they interact with another person. With every status there is a role, this becomes the prescribed role or the expectations of what individuals should do in accordance with their particular status. The expectation of individuals having to play two conflicting roles of two different statuses at the same time causes role conflict. When people interact in accordance with their statuses and roles, a social group is formed, a collection of people who interact with one another and have a certain feeling of unity. Within these groups they act either formally or informally towards each other. [3] “Society cannot survive without social institutions, a set of widely shared beliefs, norms, and procedures necessary for meeting the basic need of society.” [4] Family, education, religion, economy, and politics are the most important institutions. [5] Institutions make life easier for individuals. The diverse nature of society determines what type of status or role individuals’ receive, and what the individuals do with the status and role determines how they interact in a group or institution.

Most of our social interactions occur in patterns. Individuals are defined through society when they have a role, status, group, or institution. There can be struggles found when individuals lack the four foundations of society. “Interactions that form the 4 foundations have guidelines on how interactions are to be shaped and what the expectations become.” [6] In order to survive society, societies have to be able to fulfill certain basic social and human needs. These needs are considered basic because if a society is not able to meet them, it runs a risk of collapsing. [7]

A distinguishing characteristic of societies is the existence of a set of institutions. Social institutions are ways in dealing with such universal needs and are much broader in scope. The institutions consist of family, government, economy, education, and religion. Institutions all found in human groups exist and are used everywhere. “The universality indicates that they are deeply rooted in human nature and that they are essential in the development and maintenance of orders.” [8] Institutions are social orders that control behavior in the important areas of social life. Each institution is connected to norms, values, and role expectations that people who make up society have provided to generations as a permanent solution to society’s unfinished business. [9] “There is provided procedures through which human conduct is patterned by making the grooves deemed desirable by society, these grooves appear to the individual as the only possible ones.” Society instills in members predetermined channels for marriage. The US society expects marriage to be within a man and a woman living in a home together. [10] Social institutions are adapt to changes and broken down into smaller components including status, roles, and groups.

Members’ of society according to their positions tend to act according to what is expected of them involving their status and role. A status is the part people are expected to play, whereas a role is the actual script expected to follow. This status defines part of an identity and how individuals interact with others. [11] A daughter or son would be considered as a status. Statuses define relationships with the individuals people interact with. Members of society can be titled with many statuses such as ascribed status, achieved status, or master status. The status of a daughter is an ascribed status. If a person decides to get married or become a programmer, they will be taking on an achieved status. Master status has special importance for social identity, shaping a person’s entire life. When an individual gets a job, a lot can be determined about the person from that job. That job becomes their master status. Social expectations attached to any given status define a role in society. Our roles determine how individuals are expected to behave and interact based on the status we occupy. [12] “Statuses and roles are not isolated entities, but rather related to other statuses and roles.” [13] A student, for example, takes on the roles of attending classes and completing assignments. Many statuses involved many roles, which lead to many obligations to fulfill, causing role conflict. [14] This can be found in the life of a working mother who takes on responsibilities through the home, while taking on a job outside of the home. It becomes important for individuals to have a status and a role because these guide our behaviors in society. [15]

Most interactions take place in groups. Groups whether primary or secondary, have distributions of statuses and roles, which shape the behavior and interactions of their members within specific institutional contexts. [16] Primary groups are formed within families, friends, or peers where the relationships have strong emotional ties, whereas in secondary groups the members are less personal and emotional. Communication becomes very formal. There is only a relation over particular roles and for practical reasons, like the relationship between a stockbroker and his clients. [17] Sociologists have found that the size of a group can determine how members behave and relate to one another. Within these groups there is group behavior through leadership and conformity. The pressure to conform within small groups is powerful. [18]

There are many ways to define a role, a status, a group, or an institution, but each can make an individual successful and feel like they are apart of something greater. Generally, an individual’s drive is to become somebody in society. Institutions arise from the clumsy actions of many individuals; these rules evolve into a set of expectations. The consequences of the expectations provide solutions to maintaining society. Individuals must not forget that institutions can be changed although they exist to serve and be accountable to man. Without institutions, individuals are left without guide to channel their behavior through important areas of social life. [19] Without institutions, individuals are left without a set of expectations to follow. Individuals lacking a status are not defined through relationships with the people they associate with. Master statuses are an individual’s identity; they shape their entire life. Without the goal in having a master status, individuals would not strive to succeed. Many people left without having a status or a role become very repulsive and have a continuous state of jealousy. They begin to think the world is a dangerous and scary place, pushing away those of high status and low status out of their life. Those of low status are not socially confident and lack sharp social skills. This lack of social skills causes a lack of job opportunities and group relationships. When individuals are not involved in groups, they are left without close relationships to other individuals and left without someone to relate to. They will most likely find themselves in secondary groups, where relationships often result in loneliness and isolation. [20] Being involved in the foundations of society shapes an individual’s attitudes, actions, and opportunities. Further proving that individuals who obtain the foundations of society find success, but left without them lack the opportunities to succeed.

Introduction

From an early age and through the course of our lives we learn and develop our personality to which predominantly determines our role in society. During this process there are many internal and external factors and influences such as family, friends, education, , gender, class, environment race etc that determine our pathway and outcomes in life. This assignment will assess the view that primary socialization is more significant than secondary socialization in developing patterns of deviance and criminality.

The way which we learn to become members of society is through socialization, adopting the norms and values of society and by our actions and behaviour carrying our social roles. (Oxford University Press 2009).Primarily there are two distinct agents of socialization to which young people learn to integrate into society. These being Primary socialization and Secondary socialization.

Primary socialization, this stage of development occurs in the early stages of a young person’s life and is period of development of intellectual and emotional and social self. The main agent in this period is socialization within the family and immediate community. The young person’s experience at this stage can differ in contemporary society from differing types of child rearing and differing and kinds of family and community circumstances.(Huddersfield university lecture notes 2009). For a young person to thrive in society, parents /carers must teach the child from an early age what they need to know about what is normal expectations, how to behave, what are societies values and language used.. If children do not receive adequate primary socialization, they tend not to fare well as adults”. As (James. A and jenks Jeminating from Rousseau) SUGGESTS THAT CHILDREN ARE BORN FREE FROM CORRUPTION AND INNOCENT FROM ALL THAT IS WRONG. ITS IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SOCIETY THAT THROUGH TIME WILL DAMAGES THEM. YELLOW READER.

The way the family functions and also the environmental factors may have a great impact on the child and his development. The capacity and style of parenting received is instrumental in achieving best outcomes for the young person. (Kendra Van Wagner 2009online) suggest that “During the early 1960s, psychologist Diana Baumrind conducted a study on more than 100 preschool-age children and identified four important dimensions of parenting”:

* Disciplinary strategies

* Warmth and nurturance

* Communication styles

* Expectations of maturity and control

Alongside this (Vincent Iannelli, M.D. 2004, online) suggests physiologists have identified 3 types of child rearing.

Authoritarian

This type of parenting always wants to be in control and exercise their control on their children. They set strict authoritative rules and expectations to keep order and discipline without involving children in the process and are very critical to non conformity.

Permissive

Permissive parents are relaxed about boundaries and control of their children. They make few rules, if at all and the rules that are made are not always imposed on their children. Parents can give too many choices and accept a child’s behaviour which might be good or bad and respond in the same way.They tend give up on the child behaviour and don’t get involved with changing it.

Democratic /authorative parents

Parents guide children’s behaviour by teaching, not punishing them; they teach children to be responsible for themselves and to think about the consequences of their actions. Parents do this by giving out clear expectations and follow this through, catching the child been good and praising their behaviour rather than focusing on the bad behaviour. They establish goals that are achievable and give choices that are age appropriate.

Authoritarian parenting styles generally lead to children who are obedient and proficient, but they rank lower in happiness, social competence and self-esteem.

* Authoritive parenting styles tend to result in children who are happy, capable and successful (Maccoby, 1992).

* Permissive parenting often results in children who rank low in happiness and self-regulation. These children are more likely to experience problems with authority and tend to perform poorly in school.

From this we can conclude that the pemissive parenting styles is the one that leads to non conformity. Identifying that children need clear boundaries to keep them safe ,when following upon consequences these should be done in a learning method rather than a punishment and should be conducted in a loving caring manner.allow them in making choices and decisions that effect them are lifes which are understanble and age appropriate. When setting goals to achieve these should be achievable so should help build confidence and raise self esteem. We need to coomunicate with them control.

Other family and community factors

In large families young people may receive less one to one support from their parents corers which could reflect in behaviours not been addressed lack of emotional support

Gender
Social control witin the family
Broken homes

(Williams K.S, 2001p.38o) Points out there’s some evidence to suggest that a child with absent parents possibly through death, divorce or who have left the family home are seen to be a risk factor to criminality. (Haskell and Yablonsky 1982 cited in Williams k.s 2001p.38o) examined research of the relationship between crime and broken homes and found “between 23.9 and 61.5 per cent of delinquents came from broken homes compared to 12.9 to 36.1per cent of non delinquents came from broken homes”. As Charles Murray suggested criminality is linked to young people from single parent families who he describes as the underclass. (Williams K.S, 2001p.38o).

Relationship

A child usually in British society as a mother and father one or two siblings in other cultures the extended family may live within the house hold and help bring up their children. Within the British society in other families some children are reared in single parent homes others are looked after by step parents, divorced parents. (Giddens 2006 p.166.) Within families the focus here is on the parent /child relationship. Delinquency can arise as a result of insufficient levels of supervision by family members, little affection is shown towards them, operate minimal interaction, a small amount of family harmony, and how discipline is carried out. (Williams K.S, 2001p.382). This lack of supervision is highlighted as to be a cause of criminality by the “Youth Lifestyle Survey, (Flood and Page 2000, cited in Williams K.S, 2001p.382) conducted in 1998-9, that those boys who were poorly supervised were three times as likely to offend as those who were better supervised” other facts that effects a relationship which is highlights above is whether the family members have to work long hours due to low pay or other social circumstances which also impacts on the bonding between parents and child and lead to criminality. insome families the size of the family might mean less one to one time with individual mebers there for regulation of supervision can be minimal. A point on relationship is that even if the parent teaches all the law abiding behaviors they will only learn from them if the child regards them.

Attachment

From the birth an “infant engages in behaviours that complement and synchronized with actions of the parents” (Gormly,1997, Reissland,1998 cited in Digiulio 2001, p.40) i.e. a child will communicate its needs and the parent /carer will respond. This could be when the child wants care, comfort, and pleasure, its nappy changing, holding smiling talking etc. This interaction more often than not with the birth mother fosters affection and builds a relationship known as (Attachment). Attachment could also be formed with someone close to the child who he sees often enough to form the secure attachment.

According to Bowlby Attachment helps to keep the infant and mother relationship a close one which thus acts as a tool for survival and offers sense of security and protection. The child knows that the attached person is reliable and gives them a firmly fixed foundation for social development. (Wagner. K 2009 ONLINE)

Problems can arise from attachment which is displayed in Young people’s behaviour as (Wagner .K 2009) suggests that through Research that “failure to form secure attachments early in life can have a negative impact on behaviour in later childhood and throughout the life”.

. What people see in theer community its surroundings its peoples and activities can influence through there observations if there family parents carers don’t explain its rights and wrongs the ypoung person can copy this behavior as normal perceived behavior in socisty for instances graffit inappropriate language used fighting littering values o others also the community influence could come from the environmental its structure unemployed parents housing conditions.

What values are expressed by the family and those closely around them i.e. education employment manners,children learn from and develop aspirations,reinforce operant conditioning.a sense of identity and belonging. The passing on of appropriate love, care and affection from family and community members creates warmth from an early age, forms an attachment and or bonding. Imitative learning, Children observe (observational learning) their parents, families and or careers characteristics from an early age and start to copy their types of behavior and actions. They learn from their community environment its strengths, weaknesses and differences, its surroundings and resources, its members acts and behaviours, from this they learn to adapt their behavior respect and understand others values social settings(social learning). Families tend to treat girls with difference allowing them to take less risks and this primary socialization is an first important step in preparation for life. Within families set roles are

Secondary socialization actions learned largely from outside the family and community who are often institutional such as schools, college also leant from peer groups outside the family and media.

Within school pupils learn more about official and unofficial things i.e a formal set curriculum of subjects set out by the education authority. In school there are also hidden curriculums which are around conforming dress codes, respecting rules and unquestioning authority, time management state rules and discipline and often involves the separation of children based on abilities. Pupils can also be managed and looked upon form there class background and past family histories known to school. Institutions like school can be seen to strip away young people’s individuality by its apparent strict codes of conduct, regulations, rules and authoritarianism. (Social control) School socialization seems to indicate a preparation set out by authority to reflect conforming to state rules and improve employment prospects. Vincent Iannelli, M.D.,

Peer group we can learn from our peers and imitate their behaviours they tend to be a aid a resource to turn to a breakaway or an alternative support mechanism such as when family is dysfunctional. From peers we can gain a sense of warmth emotional bonding. Peers can be instrumental in our acts behaviours, beliefs

Causes of crime relating to family

Through our experiences of socialization if they are not positive experiences or certain needs are missing such as those highlighted in every child matters are healthy, safe, enjoy and active make a positive contribution economic well being hen problems with our self and our role in society can become problematic, acting out in a deviant or criminal behaviour.

Deviance /crime

Deviance arises from acts that are disapproved of, imposing of social judgements from members of a community, or society and political concerns on the behaviour or acts of others. These judgements can be based on norms and values and can change in differing cultures, gender, class, race, age or other social difference. (Oxford University Press 2002)

The deviant committing the act is applied with a stigmatizing label and is sanctioned accordingly i.e. sent to Coventry, looked upon as delinquent. The label applied instead of deterring (social control) the individual from other deviant acts can lead the individual to act out further their newfound delinquent identity and conduct in many cases promoting their initial act to other forms of criminal activity. (Munchie.J, 2009) Primary Deviance to Secondary deviance). Or the deviant can go on to develop there life’s which is acceptable to society. Acts of deviance can be seen to be exaggerated by the media and tends to create a moral panic where society becomes feared by young people that are portrayed as delinquent and again can amplify further deviances by many. Deviance can be as an illustration of an individual’s difficulties to manage their poverty through economic explotation. (Muncie. J 2009 p.130).

crime

(Oxford University Press 2002) Describes crime as the violation of laws, or more precisely those social norms that have become subject to state control and legal sanctions reliant on punishment. An e.g. of crime can be the Theft act which s a statute law passed by parliament and defines what a theft is this could be i.e. dishonesty by abstracting of electricity from such as fiddling a meter, using mobile phones at work. In order for act to be defined as a crime the law says it needs to have two elements. The Acteus-Reus a roundabout way of describing a defendants conduct, the act. And the Mens-Reus a blameworthy or culpable state of mind when you commiteed the act or that you were reckless you didn’t pay regard to the consequences of your action. (Huddersfield University 2009). However some acts carried out that the law states are criminal may seem quite normal to some people such as borrowing copies of DVDs or purchasing goods from other sources.

Crime and the way its dealt with can be seen to play a major part in communities and can determine the setting of social boundaries,behaviours and gain a sense of unity from its values and beliefs.(Munchie.J 2009 p.101) 2009these can change through different cultures, localities and throughout history. Definitions of Crime can also be socially constructured to reflect power and gain control over society. The power, the law, authority and courts when sentencing using guidelines can deal with crime in different ways depending on their judgements on the young persons class, age, reasoning of responsibilities of act committed, and gender.

The argument of how an individuals work/life interfaces can affect their social life and standing within a community has long been a sociological concern. Sociologists have been concern with the ways in which an individual’s participation in work can shape other institutions, such as social relationships, community participation, identities along with the influence in can have on values and beliefs. How society’s individuals manage a work/life balance has also been a sociological concern. Clark (2000) defines balance as “satisfaction and good functioning at work and at home with a minimum of role conflict”. This report shall attempt to explore how the connections amongst work activity and ‘community’ participation and how the links between domestic divisions of labour and the labour market can transform how an individual balances their participation in work and their social self.

To avoid social isolation, individuals need to have the feeling of belonging and included in some kind of institution, be it a family group or to form a community link through work (flum, 2001). Finding the balance of combining such important institutions can prove difficult for some and this report shall examine the impact this can have on an individual’s social self, with the wider community and within their personal relationships.

The way we work is changing fast, and can be seen to be the result of advancements in new technologies, changes in employment legislation and an increasingly competitive and connected global world. Not only has there been a change in work and working life, a change in life outside of work can also be seen to have changed within contemporary society. A change in family units and structures, reduced leisure time and community participation and a change in the way individuals spend their leisure time. An increase in ’24’ hour activities has also both affected the way work can affect an individual, both for the good and for the bad.

There have been great changes in the British economy, with a move from major manufacturing into a growth of service sector employment and the expansion of part-time employment. Such expansion can be seen to attribute to the rise in opportunities for married women, with children, who comprise almost 45% of the British labour market, taking low-paid and part-time employment. Despite equal pay and anti-discrimination legislation, a gap between earning and discriminatory practices can still exist within the workplace and individuals within it. Middle-class white men are arguably the most common social group to be over represented in high level jobs, such as management and business owners, while women, ethnic minorities, elderly and youth and individuals from lower classes are more likely to perform low skilled and low paid jobs, such as in the service industry, retail or care (Castells,2000). Although they experience difference in terms of job role, some similarity can be seen. This similarity often comes in the structure or demands a job may come with, and the way that these impacts on the way individuals can manage their work/life balance.

Factors such as the advancement in technology have increased the expectation and need for fast responses and increase in constant availability from workers and lead to increase pressure on employees. It can be seen that the UK has the longest working hours compared to the rest of Europe, and the average number of hours worked per day has remained steady, but the number of employees working more than 48 hours has increased in the past ten years. A rise in the number of hours being work, it can be argued that the demands of work begin to dominate life and a sense of work-life imbalance follows (Guest 2001).

Work in this instance is being defined as paid employment, but it is also important to remember that many individuals also take part in unpaid work. These can include extra unpaid hours, travelling to and from work (commuting) or in fact the roles and responsibilities of some work require constant communication, via email, phone calls and other technological communication tools via the development of the internet, , is said to have profound implications for the organization of economic activity and for increasing productivity (Castells, 2001) which can be seen as a reason as to why the home and work boundary can see to have become very vague. Much interest into the definitions of work has come from the rise in occupations that allow individuals to complete their work in none ‘traditional’ forms. For example rather than travelling into a communal office or destination, many roles and tasks can be completed independently and as a result there had been a rise in employees working from home. This essay shall attempt to uncover the impact that such a shift in definitions and positions of work has had on the both completing jobs roles successfully as well as maintaining a personal and social identity within the wider community.

Richard Sennett (1998) stated that new forms of work can become destroyed. New working systems and types of occupation can in fact lead to an imbalance between the tools and value that social individuals hold to create a successful working life, and those that are required to maintain a stable family and social life have also changed, Sennett noted this as the ‘Corrosion of character’. The new working patterns that have been created have changed the rhythms of working life and the concept of the fixed working day have declined for many individuals, and as hours have become more varied and flexible, so must the availability and commitment of the individuals who hold these positions. This change in schedules and lifestyle with ultimately have an effect on how well workers can participate in wider society or maintain that work/life balance.

Focus on patterns of work life balance are often seen to focus on the imbalance that members of society face trying to maintain both a work life and social life. Attempting to maintain healthy relationships, both at home and in the workplace and a pressure to decide between attempting to progress within an individual’s chosen career and maintain a positive life outside of work.

Throughout his work Sennett attempts to look at how the act of capitalism had changed. Throughout his work he draws on the work of past writers such as Weber and argues that although the new flexible, competitive workplace gave workers a new sense of mobility, choice and freedom to ‘control’ their work schedule, it ultimately has not delivered such promises. Instead it has replaced the existing work life culture with a new society with workplaces that are without stability, routine and an environment that encourages self-determination and risk but also provides disorientation and produces uncertainty for employees. Sennett recognises that this ‘chaos’ denies workers a sense of self or ‘frame of reference’ by which to conduct their social life and social self.

Family units and communities can be seen as the initial institutions for social integration. In times of social change, for example from agricultural to industrial/industrial to post-industrial/national to global, families and communities have remained a constant institution that has helped with promoting and maintaining a sense of social cohesion. Along with providing a basis for its members, families can also be seen as an important tool for teaching the next generation how to cope with such social change and the adult world of work. As the family provide this foundation, it can be argued when such ‘work’ changes in the family unit and wider community they are a part of can be put under stress. Staines and Pleck (1983) state those working late nights, weekends, every changing shift patterns or any other ‘disruptive’ work patterns can make managing and scheduling sufficient family time and leisure activities difficult. Working shift patterns that unsettle family life activities can have a long standing and somewhat negative effect on the level of marital happiness and also the overall satisfaction of family life.

Arguments surrounding the work-life interface have primarily been concerned with how family members are able to balance work and home life activities, primarily with how working mothers are able to balance their work and childcare responsibilities. Contemporary arguments concerning the work life balance can be seen to have shifted from such a view to how society has changed and developed and how such changes have influenced a work life balance. A change in society has led to a change in how companies and organisations have adapted employees working arrangements to be compatible with such social change and new responsibilities and lifestyles.

Workers, who have chosen flexible working hours or have chosen non-permanent agency work, are seen to have more control over maintaining a successful working and private life balance. This is achievable by having more control and to ability to create a work schedule structure that allows them to work around childcare or other domestic responsibilities that they have. Such agency work or self-arranged tasks do come at a price. Giving up company benefits, socialising with other employees, having employees’ rights or job security are sacrifices that working from home or agency workers have to make (Lambert 1999).

Flexible hours and the rise in individuals working from home are seen to be practiced to organise time around working time or domestic responsibilities. Flexible and working from home can be seen to be practiced to help to balance domestic responsibilities or to complete an ever increasing volume of work. Those who participate in part time work, or maintain a low status within the workplace are seen to avoid high levels of stress commonly associated with full time occupation, and as a result are able to care and maintain their family household and associated workload without any burden or stress (Ginn and Sandall 1997: 415). As mentioned previously the members of a family unit who participate in such forms of work are women. By allowing women to participate in work as well as maintain a successful family lifestyle, can in fact make up for the heavy or unsociable workload of the male member of a family.

Longer working hours for many organisations can be seen to a rise in ‘new’ forms of occupations. As individuals can be seen to be living and working a ’24’ hour lifestyle, there has been a rise in the expansion of jobs that can be seen as personal care and consumer services to cater for such employees (Perrons, 2002). ’24’ hours supermarkets and the rise in request for out of hour’s doctors’ surgeries can all be attributed to the rise in new and flexible working hours as well as creating new and expanding job roles.

It can also be seen that a change in the work life balance can also be of benefit to organisations and companies, as a shift into new policies or procedure of work could lead to a rise in productivity and profits and can help companies to respond to any new and developing consumer needs more effectively. The Employment Act was updated in 2003 to include more benefits to assist employees and employers alike with managing the demands of a successful work life balance. Reforming polices such as increased maternity and paternity leave helps to encourage and support employees maintain a healthy relationship with their working life and family life. (REFERNECE)

Research by the Institute of Employment Studies (DATE) looked into workplace policies that are in place to allow employees to create a successful work life balance. Throughout research, there was a noticeable trend in the resistance of taking up such polices, there were a number of reasons why workers felt unable to take advantage of organisational work-life policies. A main reason for such resistance may be due to the fact the employees may feel that accepting flexibility may affect their career progression or may result in a change in wages. Also as a result of flexibility, an employee’s workload could increase and their wages could reduce, which in fact would negatively impact their personal time, instead of helping it. Even though many organisational polices are put into place in the workplace, many workers could be left feeling that they would not be supported if they did take advantage of them (REFERENCE)

Throughout this paper we have examined that factors that can negatively affect the work life balance of those in work. It has examined how changes in work have also changed how an individual balances their family and personal leisure commitments. Many of these changes reference how intense involvement or over commitment to either work or family life can result in a damaging balance, but that is not always the case. Studying the work life balance, Greenhaus, Collins and Shaw (2002) found that individuals who invested more time and involvement in family and personal leisure activities, rather than work, experienced a more equal work life balance then those who concentrated on work and working patterns outside of work (Greenhaus, Collins and Shaw 2002:pp.526).

What we have explored as the term work life balance can be seen to supposedly communicate the needs all of all employees, throughout this essay it has become apparent that not all employees struggle with maintaining, or accessing such a balance. When reference to a work life balance, most research categorises such ‘life’ as maintain a successful family unit and work life, but does not take into account those without such caring responsibilities and the access they have to a happy and successful work life balance.

(Jump to)

Introduction

Discussion

Americans’ Contacts with Homosexuals

LGBT Americans Opinions

Social Acceptance by American Society

Religious Belief

References

INTRODUCTION

Being a bisexual means getting attracted to both people of their own gender and another gender also. Women who get attracted to the female gender are known as lesbians and similarly the men who get attracted to the male gender are known as gay. The bisexual women and men get attracted to both the male and the female gender. Getting attracted to the same gender is also known as homosexuality.

The attitudes towards the homosexuality differ in different cultures, because all the cultures have their own values regarding sexuality. Some countries approve the homosexual behavior whereas some disapproves it. The research has been done and it is found that the certain populations have accepted the homosexuality more than others.

Homosexuality may be illegal in some countries, but where it is legal, there a age has been defined and that age differs from country to country. Homosexuality is neither a mental illness not a matter of an individual’s choice. It does not threaten the healthy and secure homosexuals. Therefore, there is no need to oppress the homosexuality.

But in our society, discrimination occurs daily against gays, lesbians and bisexual people which greatly affect them (Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues). Due to which the gay, lesbian and the bisexual people feel depression and the relationship problems same as the heterosexual people feel.

DISCUSSION

I agree with your statement, as in my opinion also, being a lesbian or bisexual woman is more accepted than being a gay or bisexual man by the current American society. A research has been done and it has been found out that the most Americans don’t bother while getting surrounded by the homosexuals. Various studies has been done and results into various factors, such as:

82% of the Americans don’t bother when around homosexuals (Views of Gay Man and Lesbians, Roots of Homosexuality, Personal Contacts with Gays, 2013).
Whereas, 14% of the Americans say that, it bothers them while surrounded by homosexuals.

In 2003, about 76% of the Americans do not bother to be around homosexuals. Few years ago, the balance between the gay and the lesbians was not favorable. As:

Gay men were viewed favorable only by the 37 % of the Americans, whereas 51% of the Americans viewed them as unfavorably.
Lesbian women were viewed favorable only by the 39 % of the Americans, whereas 48% of the Americans viewed them as unfavorably.

By a 2 % margin, the American people are more favorable to lesbian women than gay men.

But today,

58% of the American people view the lesbian women favorably while only 29% of the Americans view them as unfavorably.
And, 55% to 32% margins (Views of Gay Man and Lesbians, Roots of Homosexuality, Personal Contacts with Gays, 2013) have favorable views towards gay men than unfavorable views.

Still, the percentages of Americans who have the favorable views towards lesbian women are more than the ones who have favorable views towards the gay men.

The study has found out that the Americans’ views are rapidly changes to acceptance of gay men and lesbian women with time (Harms, 2011). Americans now approve the same-sex relations and moreover, they provide the lesbians and gays the freedom of expression.

Moreover, public have different views about the fact that why people are lesbian and gay? And, about 42% of the public thinks that the people choose themselves to live as gay or lesbian. About 8% thinks that it’s a result of upbringing, due to which the people are gay or lesbian, and Others think that they are born as lesbian or gay. In American society, about 66% of the Americans think that the people choose themselves to live as gay or lesbian. About 20% of the Americans think that they are born as lesbian or gay. But overall, 58% of the people thinks that the homosexuality should be accepted as they thinks that its by birth, and 63% of the people think that it should not be accepted as they thinks that it’s just a choice of people of being gay or lesbian.

Americans’ Contacts with Homosexuals

In Americans Society, different people have different views to share about their contacts with the homosexuals. And, 87% of the Americans are somehow in contacts with ones who are lesbian or gay. 23% of the Americans say that they know personally some people who are gay or lesbian. 61% of the Americans had gay or lesbian contacts (Views of Gay Man and Lesbians, Roots of Homosexuality, Personal Contacts with Gays, 2013).

The contacts with gays and lesbians also differ in different religions. As 30 % of the religions say that they know some gays and lesbians, and Only 8 % says that they don’t know any.

LGBT Americans Opinions

Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgender (LGBT) adults are asked the question and it has been found out that the society is accepting them as compared to past decades and more will accept it in upcoming decades (A Survey of LGBT Americans, 2013). And, 39% of the LGBT Americans say that they are not accepted by their families. 30% of the LGBT Americans say that they are attacked physically. 29% of the LGBT Americans say that they are not allowed to go at worship places. 21% of the LGBT Americans say that they are not treated fairly by their employees. 21% of the LGBT Americans say that they are the targets of jokes. Moreover, At the age of 17, the people gets the feel that they are homosexual, and at the age of 20, they share this information with their families.

LGBT adults say that their acceptance is increasing as the time passes. But some of LGBT adults say that they still feels discrimination in the society. They said that they need more acceptance in mostly all the societies. Thus, their views needs to be focused on.

Social Acceptance by American Society

Most of the LGBT adults have said that they have got social acceptance and moreover, there is significant progress towards the social acceptance of LGBT adults. The study has been done to see the criteria of social acceptance. And 19% says that there is progress towards social acceptance of LGBT adults. 59% says that there is some (A Survey of LGBT Americans, 2013), and 21% says that there is no progress in socially accepting the LGBT adults.

Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgender (LGBT) adults are more accepted by the American society as compared to past and others socities. But, still a more acceptance is needed, so that they don’t feel any discrimination. According to some LGBT adults, they are accepted by most of the American society whereas some LGBT adults said that they need more acceptance in the American Society as they feel discriminants. The views of different LGBT adults are needs to kept in perspective. In compared to all other socities, Americans are found to be ore tolerant towards the lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgender (LGBT) adults than they al were in past decades. Only 2 out of 10 said they are not socially accepted as they are treated unfairly by the public, they are not either accepted by their own families, they are physically attacked, and moreover, they are the target of jokes.

Religious Belief

In opposition to the social acceptance of LGBT adults, Religious belief is an important factor (Religious Belief and Views of Homosexuality, 2013). Over the past decades, 47% to 60% of the Americans belief that the homosexuality should be accepted. While only 45% to 31 % of the Americans think that it should not be accepted.

When the Americans who think that the homosexuality should not be accepted are asked why they feel so? Then 52% of them said that, homosexuality is against their religion. As Religion is a big factor, due to which some Americans are against the homosexuality. Moreover, they belief that the homosexuality is traditionally wrong. But, there is only small percentage of Americans who think that the homosexuality is against their religion.

58% of the Americans say that the homosexuality should br accepted by the alw and should be legal according to the laws. They said, it should be supported same as the traditional relations are supported.

Thus, It has been notices that the lesbians are more accepted than gays in American Society, But overall, their acceptance in this society has been progressed.

REFERENCES

A Survey of LGBT Americans. (2013, June 13). Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/06/13/a-survey-of-lgbt-americans/#

Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://cms.bsu.edu: http://cms.bsu.edu/campuslife/counselingcenter/newsfooteritems/diversityresources/diversityinformationandlinks/glbt

Harms, W. (2011, October 5). US VIEWS ON GAYS, LESBIANS SHIFT SHARPLY. Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.futurity.org: http://www.futurity.org/us-views-on-gays-lesbians-shift-sharply/

Religious Belief and Views of Homosexuality. (2013, June 6). Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.people-press.org: http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/06/section-3-religious-belief-and-views-of-homosexuality/

Views of Gay Man and Lesbians, Roots of Homosexuality, Personal Contacts with Gays. (2013, June 6). Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.people-press.org: http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/06/section-2-views-of-gay-men-and-lesbians-roots-of-homosexuality-personal-contact-with-gays/

Sexuality is believed to be shaped by social and cultural norms; however, it is also recognized that sexuality is shaped by other social differences such as gender, race/ethnicity and class. In general, norms are identified as social rules and expectations which guide individual or group behavior. Many cultures reflect their social norms on sexuality by identifying what is considered as ‘normal’ and ‘acceptable’ sexual behavior within society. According to Costa and Wood (2005, p9) “sexuality is an integral part of the human experience with physical, emotional, intellectual, social and spiritual dimensions. While deeply personal, sexuality occurs within specific social, economic, cultural, political and religious contexts”. These contexts, in turn, strongly shape an individual’s sexual experience through possibilities and limitations, as well as structuring their social outcome. In order to understand sexuality and how it is shaped, we must identify other forms of social and cultural contexts in which it is constituted. This essay will illustrate sexuality through social and cultural norms. I will discuss the impact of socially constructed sexuality, which is ultimately shaped by certain forms of social differences. In saying so, the endeavour over sexuality is deeply significant, as it not only demonstrates how societies behave towards one another, but how societies are able to maintain acceptance to coexist.

The function of norms is to coordinate the expectations in individual interactions; as norms impose consistency of behavior within a given social group, but often vary substantially among groups (Durlauf & Bloom 2008). In saying so, all human sexuality is socially constructed though a wider spectrum; shaped by social differences in gender, class structure and specific historical stipulations. Most cultures contain social norms with regard to sexuality. Particular guidelines are put forward to be followed and obeyed in order to be socially accepted. Abiding by social norms, maintains an individual’s acceptance within a group; alternatively, ignoring the social norm puts an individual at risk by becoming unaccepted or in extreme situations even becoming a social outcast. For instance, it is suggested that sexual acts are ranked hierarchically. The positive social norm is identified as a heterosexual marriage, which ultimately ranks at number one on the top of the hierarchy. Consequently, masturbation, homosexuality, adultery and other sexualities that deviate from societal norms are ranked closer to the bottom, with very little or no tolerance at all.

One approach that focuses primarily on the sociology of sexuality is sexual scripts. Flood (2010) states that sexual scripts are guidelines that help define who, where, when and why individuals have sex. They are social rules, regulations and roles which guide appropriate and acceptable sexual behaviour. Sexual scripts come from various sources such as; family, peers, media and institutions. Kornblum (2008, p203) suggests that the concept of sexual script is a metaphor that helps explain differences between sexual expectations and actual sexual conduct. Research has indicated that most people have not memorized actual ‘scripts’ to guide their sexual activity, but they do have definite ideas about sexual conduct that influence the way they sexually behave. The concept of sexual scripts emphasizes the social and cultural influences on sexual behaviour and this is seen more influential as opposed to the biological and natural framework of sexuality.

Another form of representation shaped by society is gendered constructions of sexuality. The development of sexuality is reflected by gender. Gender differences in sexual behaviour are often included in gender identities and roles, sexual orientation, eroticism, pleasure and intimacy. Sexuality is generally constructed through, fantasies, and desires, beliefs, attitudes, values, behaviours, practices, roles and relationships. The modern ideology of sexuality is that lust is the province of men and purity that of a woman. Flood (2010) illustrates several examples regarding gendered scripts for sexual relations as; male sexuality is seen as uncontrollable, sex is organized around men’s pleasure, women are objects rather than subjects of sexuality, women as the gatekeeper’s and the guardians of sexual safety and health, and sexual double standard and the policing of female sexual reputation. Parker and Aggleton (p,170) express the socially constructed assumption that even pornography and pervasions have been considered part of a male domain.

It is apparent that gender differences and inequalities exist; ideologies have claimed that women as opposed to men should be pure prior to marriage. Ilkkaracan and Jolly (2007) argue the norms around sexuality and what is considered acceptable according to context. They suggest that in many cultures there is a huge pressure to be married and sometimes forced to an early marriage. Other kinds of sexual behavior such as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender are discouraged by social stigma with legal penalties made apparent. A commonly shared ideology is to be a ‘proper man’ or ‘proper woman’ and to conform to gender stereotypes and express desires for or have relations only with people of the ‘opposite’ sex. In the early eighteenth century distinctive minorities emerged and were labeled as homosexuals. However, society emerged and opposed their sexuality, and drew the line with social norms. This was perceived as a taboo to traditional masculine behaviour.

Men are generally assumed to have greater access than women to the pleasures of sexuality. This is socially constructed though ideological perspectives that men; are risk takers, insensitive, sexually sinful, have a high sex drive and sexually experienced. On the other hand, the gendered constructions of women’s sexuality represent them as innocent, sensitive, slut or frigid, responsible with regard to pregnancy and STIs, passive in sex, seduced and ignorant (Flood 2010). Although apparent social and cultural norms create gender differences in sexual behavior, it is believed that women’s sexual experience is coming closer to men’s. This is due to the sexual revolution and women’s movements (Flood 2010). However the gender inequalities continue to be present, with men in contrast to women having more pleasurable sex. Further closely related to this concept is the theory of the sexual double standard. Although it is recognized that the primary principle is that all people, regardless of their gender, class, age, religion, marital status and race/ethnicity have the right to decide on their sexuality.

The term double standard is a set of principles or provisions, generally situated to social norms and is perceived as either acceptable or unacceptable. Kornblum (p,406) describes sexual double standard as the belief that women must adhere to a different more restrictive social or moral code than that applied to men. The sociological view on double standards is shown to suggest that sexuality is divides women in to ‘good’ if they are wives and virgins, ‘and bad’ if they are sexually active and prostitutes (Randall & Waylen p,86).However men’s sexual behavior is free of social constraint. Flood (2010) describes two standards of sexual behaviour, one for men and one for women, associated with having sex and various sexual partners. Additionally, women’s sexual behavior is socially policed and highly controlled in comparison to men’s. Further, women who are sexually active are believed to be ‘sluts’ as opposed to men who are known as ‘studs’. Consequently, sexual reputations are socially controlled; this can be to an individual’s advantage or disadvantage, depending on the gratification of the social norms.

Introduction

Social work brings about social change. It addresses complex relationships between humans and the environment. Social work involves analyzing human problems and addresses issues to resolve injustice, discrimination, and dysfunction. Thus, according to International Federation of Social Workers (2000 qt. Ramsay 2003), the social work profession can be defined as a profession that “promotes social change, problem solving in human relationships, and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well-being. Using theories of human behavior and social systems, social work intervenes at the points where people interact with their environments. Principles of human rights and social justice are fundamental to social work.” Social work profession is based on the fundamental interrelation of a system of values, theory and practice. Although over the years, the definition of social work has undergone tremendous transformation. Nevertheless, the essence of its humanitarian and democratic ideals of social work through the centuries has remained the same. Today, social work has a global context and professionals follow national and international code of ethics that make the scope of their work more complex and challenging. Moreover, social work professionals also draw their experiences from accepted methods developed through systematic evidence-based knowledge from extensive research designed for both specific and general practices (Ramsay 2003). Theoretical frameworks form the basis of their evaluation of human behaviors, development and social systems and enable them to resolve the problems inherent therein.

Social Work Theories

Social work theories have their roots from the need to develop a disciplined approach to social work. By adopting common principles, social professionals were able to focus on the social goals. Charles Loch developed this conceptual framework during the early 20th century. Later social work scholars took up his seminal work. During the 21st century, renowned Harriet Bartlett (Bartlett 1970) had taken up and continued to develop professional frameworks for social work to “articulate words, terms, concepts to represent the important facets and components of the profession’s practices as a whole.” As more and more formalized ideas, theories and disciplines formed, social work has come to be acknowledged as an independent discipline with subset knowledge and systems for dealing with problems of the society. Bartlett (1970) also further reiterated the three key concepts – person, interaction and environment – as the basis for social work practices. Any theory developed with the view to examine, evaluate and resolve social issues must be based on these three key concepts.

Given the above background on the development of social work theories, the researcher now shall discuss theories of particular interests, which are the theories of problem solving and psychoanalytic. In the following discussion, the researcher shall trace the theories in its historical context, values, concepts and fitness with the strengths approach. The strengths approach basically involves challenging the traditional problems-oriented way of working through training, expectations and work experience of professionals. The problems are then resolved through developing a collaborative framework based on examination of the professional’s strengths and resources for positive growth and development (Morgan 2006; Wormer and Boes 1998).

Problem-Solving Theory & Social Work Treatment
According to Duncker (1945):

“A problem arises when a living creature has a goal but does not know how this goal is to be reached. Whenever one cannot go from the given situation to the desired situation simply by action, then there is recourse to thinking… Such thinking has the task of devising some action which may mediate between the existing and the desired situations.”

According to this definition, a problem arises when it is not clear to the individual what action(s) are to be taken to achieve some desired goals. The action to rectify this problem is known as problem-solving. Problem solving starts from a given situation where the problem or state of the situation requires additional knowledge to work towards its solution (Anderson 1980).

Problem-solving theory has its developmental origin to Herbert Simon, Alan Newell and colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University during the 1980s (Patel 1991; Newell and Simon 1972). The general theoretical approach is that problem-solving theory is based on a given problem-solving situation. The second premise is that knowledge is a set of rules that specify actions to be performed in specific situations. The third premise is the distinction between weak and strong methods for resolving problems. Thus, an expert is expected to utilize the set of rules to find the solution for the given problem situation by using forward reasoning or observations. Alternatively, problem solving can involve using exhaustive knowledge base for deductive reasoning and assessing the validity of the hypothesis or goals against the facts given. This is a backward reasoning approach (Patel 1991). Newell-Simon theory of problem solving describes processes for developing expert systems in cognitive psychology, which forms the basis for other experiments in specific fields.

Social work field

In social work field, problem solving has its origin in the concept of social change developed by Helen Harris Perlman of the University Chicago (1957). In her work ‘Social Casework: A problem-solving process’, the author views casework and problem solving synonymous which are based on constant elements, forces and processes. The constants form the reasoning framework for analyzing problems just as humans solve their daily problems. Learning is developed when individuals are involved in organizing, synthesizing and imagining the solutions of the problems (Perlman 1957). Perlman’s theoretical framework is limited to the casework components such as the individual, problem, place, process, expert relationship and the resolution to the problem. The emphasis is more on the components rather than on the problem solutions itself and the scope of the solution is limited by the casework situation.

Alternatively, Compton and Galaway (1979) also developed a problem-solving model for social work practice, which emphasizes on intervention and beyond processes. According to their theoretical framework, problem solving is connected with human relationships in a dynamic manner, which may involve partners, family members, friends or co-workers or group relationships such as race, ethnicity, gender or religion. Social works can resolve problems depending on the micro, mezzo or macro level practice they are involved in. Compton and Galaway’s (1979) problem-solving theory is based on two phases – first the definition of the problem must be established for identification of intervention methods. The second phase involves intervention methods based on the problem context defined by human, societal and physical environment. Thus, Compton and Galaway’s (1979) problem-solving theory is based on human relationships with the environment and other individuals. The focus is on intervention rather than on the problem itself.

These investigations and conceptualization leads to the unified theory of problem-solving, which holds that experts process new information and integrate it into their existing knowledge base which helps them to recall and deal with situations rapidly through forward reasoning within limited time span and scope. There is little account for differences in complexities in domains and situations. For this reason, the problem-solving theory is only valid for responding to domains that are apparent through explicit patterns of results.

From the social work practice, context problem-solving theory presents social worker as the expert and the source for intervention, and the individual with the problem as the client of the environment. The worker encounters problem situations within the work environment. To resolve, he/she refers to activities that co-workers or peers have undertaken on behalf of clients. Working with the client, the social worker analyzes, and identifies problem commonality to resolve it through group relations. Hence, problem solving in the social work practice means participation and direct involvement of the client with the worker (Sheppard 1991).

Intervention method

Another underlying element of the problem-solving theory is the intervention method. Unlike early perception of social workers, the value of work is not gauged by the duration of its intervention. Instead, it is gauged by the significance of the knowledge base used to analyze the problems to develop solutions. Therefore, intervention is further defined by the relationships of interaction among individuals involved in the problem. The social worker is the support element who is responsible for mediating between the environment and the person (Sheppard 1991).

As an intervention method, problem-solving method is dynamic in the sense that it mediates problems by resolving on a case-by-case basis. Each individual problem in this theory is unique and is defined by the individual, relationship and context of the environment which makes it versatile in addressing numerous problem solutions. Furthermore, the option of forward and backward reasoning helps social workers to analyze and determine problem solutions from different perspectives depending on the nature of the problem. In the social work context, this is a valuable tool as it allows individuals to work on a case from the grassroots level, without having to eliminate vital facts and situations to achieve desired social goals.

Furthermore, the researcher is of the view that problem-solving theory, though limited by the expertise and knowledge base developed by peers and colleagues, is flexible in allowing new avenues to be included in the problem-solving process. As workers work their way through resolving the problem, they discover new facts, and perhaps new solutions, which might be different from the initial premise that they have set for its solution. From a strengths perspective this implies that problem-solving methods add new resources; they enrich the experiences of the social workers by allowing them to explore new perspectives; and add value in developing new approaches for solving similar albeit unique problems.

Psychoanalytic Theory

The study of the unconscious was relatively schematic and meager before the advent of Sigmund Freud. For this reason, it could be said that Freud was the pioneer in psychoanalytic theory. Freud held that the human mind takes into account of transactions within the limits of the body. Unlike traditional belief that the human mind is shaped by culture, Freud believed that the depth and endurance of human personality is dependent on the social context in which an individual is born. A psychosomatic process is the traditional method by which physicians analyze symptoms of mental disorders within the pathological discourse. However, Freud holds that psychosomatic processes are limited, as he believes that individuals are influenced by elements that are outside the body – that is the environment. To exemplify that, he writes of the influences of human association and its impact on the unconsciousness. It is only through observational procedures that the expert would extricate subtle and multiple ties of the personality with the other individuals and environmental elements. Observations of body language, as well as human acts in relation to sequences of interaction form the study of individuals within the context of the society (Ruitenbeek 1962). Freud’s conceptual framework was based on the observation of the human consciousness and unconsciousness, and its relation with the basic nature of man. It lacked the social work context. His theory implies that man is exceedingly indulgent or deprived by his/her surroundings which give rise to a certain psychiatric state of mind.

The Theory of Psychoanalytic Technique

Menninger (1958), in his work ‘The Theory of Psychoanalytic Technique’ counteracts the practice of external influence by suggesting that individual behavior is a reflection of behaviors that occur during and after the events they are involved in. Menninger and Holzman (1973) differed from Freud’s theory for psychoanalysis in the sense that they were of the view many individuals may demonstrate similar behavior without having any psychiatric problems. Therefore, psychoanalysis is not essentially about the physiological influence but rather associated with stimulus from interactions. The authors emphasize on new methods for observing and interpreting behavior in the context of culture and personality through structured research instruments. They believe that the psychoanalytic approach has particular associations with socialization sequences that lead to individual relationships with the environment, culture and personality. This implies that psychoanalysis approaches emphasize on the role of the professional engaged in the observation of individual behaviors and interpretation of the same. The skills used to deduce valuable information about the personality is derived from daily life processes. Likewise, an intervention is inherent in the behaviors and actions of the individual under study.

Alternatively, works by Roy Schafer (1976) and Irwin Hoffman (1983) have entirely altered the conceptual framework of psychoanalysis theory and practice. They emphasize on the reality of social construct and its impact on both the individual and the professional. They present the view that solutions for problems in psychoanalytic are dependent on the cultural life at large. It is based on objective knowledge derived from social agreements and human actions are the narrative of the acts. Therefore, psychoanalysis is the study of the language of the human acts and interpretation of the same to represent possible accounts of the past or present life of the individual. Transactions between the analyst and the patient are constructed by subject experience, human agency, and fragments of individuation/separation etc. Thus, “For Schafer, (1) psychoanalysis is concerned in a primary fashion with language and its equivalents; (2) subjective experience, objective reality, and selves are all constructions brought to life in language; (3) these present-day tellings could be told in other terms and do not represent real world events; (4) unitary selves are displaced by the notion that we tell useful stories about “multiple selves” in order to conduct our affairs; and (5) cure accompanies changes in discourse.” qt. Leary 1994). Similarly, Hoffman believes that human beings, whether professional or individuals, requiring intervention live worlds within worlds to make social interaction highly ambiguous. Observation of individual behaviors cannot construct individual social environment alone. Individual experiences must be taken into account to understand the influences of elements surrounding them. Intervention follows the paradigm of change and analysis of the participants because he believes individuals are incapable of understanding their own dilemma.

These later conceptual frameworks of the psychoanalytic theory not only pose challenges for social work practices but also offer new dimensions for analyzing complex individual social problems. The role of the social worker in the psychoanalytic context is separate from the individual and the environment, as he/she has to observe objectively to interpret individual behaviors in the psychiatric context as well as in the context of the environment in which the individual inhabit. Thus, the professional is segregated and does not really participate in the problems faced by the individuals. This tends to dissociate the analyst from the individual, which at times hinders problem resolution. However, objective observations in psychoanalysis enable the social work professional to emphasize on interventions methods. Since interventions are not set in paradigms or experiments or processes from knowledge base, the social worker has more leeway in developing creative interventions that meet desired social goals at the individual and from the broader societal contexts.

At the same time, there are certain limitations to the theory of psychoanalytic. There is too much emphasis of the individual and less focus of intervention for the broad social context. As individuals live in the society – interact, transact and have relationships with other entities within the environment – it is natural to assume that any problems or issues that they face should be resolved in the context of the community they live in. It is not natural to assume that the problem is inherent within the environment and the intervention method should be for the individual only. From this perspective, the psychoanalytic theory is limited.

Therefore, the psychoanalytic approach does not really fit the strengths approach, which basically emphasizes on resource development. Although psychoanalysis emphasizes on problem resolutions, this is limited to the issues faced by individuals – not from a communal or global context. There is little scope for adding value to interventions in the social work practice as it represents the realities of the individuals. Therefore, world events, social change and communal issues become secondary to the analyst who adopts this approach.

Compare and Contrast

At the beginning of the discussion, the researcher emphasizes on the importance of the key components in social work i.e. person, interaction and the environment. These key components, as one observes over the course of the evaluation of the theories of problem-solving and psychoanalytic, play integral roles in synergizing the conceptual framework for social work and professional practices. In this context, if any one component were missing from the theoretical framework, it would destabilize its validity and usefulness to the profession.

Theoretical fit with the social work professional focus

From the discussion, the researcher observes that the problem-solving theory, as compared to the psychoanalytic theory, has more dimensions to the mission of social work. The nature of forward and backward reasoning enables social work professionals to trace the problem from multiple layers of contexts such as culture, race, gender, ethnicity and religion, to extricate the inherent issues prevalent within the individual, a community or a society. In doing so, it encompasses broader social perspectives and addresses problems such as poverty, cultural diversity, discrimination, gender bias or social injustice. Thus, the problem-solving theory serves the purpose of problem identification and eventually leads to its intervention as well, even though the problem-solving theorists have not emphasized as such. Interventions, according to the theory, stem from set rules and the knowledge base that professionals can acquire through experience and expertise.

On the other hand, the psychoanalytic approach adopts similar processes for problem identification within the individual and in the social context but does not really view the problem as a social problem. The components of person, interaction and environment are not synergistic but rather segregated from each other. This makes finding interventions difficult as the social work professional would have to differentiate the person, relationship and the environment, before individual resolutions can be devised. This is because the psychoanalytic approach mandates objective observations and following set processes, which does not allow social workers to view the problem from different dimensions which are inherent in the social work mission. Therefore, psychoanalytic theory mostly identifies problems within the society from micro perspectives, thereby, limiting the scope of intervention. Unlike the problem-solving theory, the psychoanalytic theory integrates social problems like poverty, cultural diversity, discrimination, gender biases and social injustice into the social environment and explains its influence on the individual. Sometimes, these factors may or may not be the culprit for individual problems but, in fact, the problem stems from within the unconscious. Thus, the abstract nature of the psychoanalytic theory makes it difficult to devise interventions realistically that are practical in the social work field.

Progress on the part of the client and ethical concerns

As a social work professional, one is responsible for the progress of the client. The problems or issues my client faces may be from the micro, mezzo and macro environment and therefore require different approaches towards interventions. Therefore, I would reserve the psychoanalytic approach for micro interventions so that I would be able to analyze the psychological as well as physiological dilemmas, and ultimately devise interventions that address the root problem. On the other hand, if the nature of the problem that my client is experiencing stems from the outset and requires a broad perspective in evaluation, then I would adopt the problem-solving approach to address the problem, first from the macro level then narrow it down to the micro level and resolve it accordingly. The approaches differ because, as a social work practitioner, I need to have flexible tools to evaluate the progress of my client. This can only be possible if I use a combination of theories and approaches to offer me flexibility as well as dynamism in my work.

The only ethical concern I have regarding the application of these theories would perhaps be the scope and limitations each poses for social work practice. The problem-solving theory, as discussed earlier, emphasizes too much on the processes, which at times may result in compromised interventions. On the other hand, the psychoanalytic approach is too narrow and limited in its scope in addressing individual perspectives and tends to neglect the broader scenario. In resolving individual problems, perhaps I would neglect to incorporate the bigger picture and, thereby, inadvertently harm the society instead of benefiting it as a whole through my social work practice.

Conclusion

Despite the above reservations, the researcher is of the view that each of the theories has its own merit and application in intended practice. It is difficult to choose one over the other, as social work professionals realize no social issues or problem congruent with the other. Each problem is unique and requires unique resolutions. Since human beings are dynamic, their problems are dynamic too, requiring diversity in resolutions and intervention methods. Yet, from a broader perspective, the researcher would prefer the problem-solving approach over the psychoanalytic as it would more commonly be used in every day practice for the interventions of common problems. Such problems require a knowledge base to be developed from set rules and experiments, and require less time for interventions. On the other hand, for complex problems the researcher would prefer to use the psychoanalytic approach for individual objective observation and interventions.

References

“Definition of Social Work Profession” International Federation of Social Workers general meeting in Montreal, Canada, July 2000, and endorsed by the International

Association of Schools of Social Work in 2001 in Ramsay, R. F. (2003). Transforming the Working Definition of Social Work Into the 21st Century. Research on Social Work Practice, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 324-338

Bartlett, H. M. (1970). The Common Base of Social Work. New York: National Association of Social Workers.

Compton B. & Galaway, B. (1979). Social Casework’ A Problem-Solving Process. revised edn. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.

Fine, R. (1979). The History of Psychoanalysis. Columbia University Press.

Leary, K. (1994). Psychoanalytic “Problems” And Postmodern “Solutions”. Psychoanalytic Quarterly. Volume: 63. Issue: 3. pp. 447.

Menninger, K and Holzman, P. S. (1973). Theory of Psychoanalytic Technique. Basic Books.

Menninger, K.S. (1958). The Theory of Psychoanalytic Technique. New York: Basic Books.

Morgan, S. (Accessed 15-10-2006). “A Strengths Approach” Practicebasedevidence.com, Online accessed from: http://www.practicebasedevidence.com/strengths.htm

Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:PrenticeHall.

Patel, V. (1991). “A view from medicine.” In Toward a Unified Theory of Problem Solving: Views from the Content Domains. by Mike U. Smith (ed). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ. pp. 35.

Perlman, H. (1957). Social Work Process Social Casework: A Problem-Solving Process. The University of Chicago Press.

Ruitenbeek, H. M. (1962). Psychoanalysis and Social Science. Dutton, New York. pp. 16.

Sheafor, B. W., Horejsi, C.R. & Horejsi, G.A. (2005). Techniques & Guidelines for Social Work Practice. Allyn & Bacon.

Sheppard, M. (1991). Mental Health Work in the Community: Theory and Practice in Social Work and Community Psychiatric Nursing. Falmer Press pp. 32.

Wormer, K. and Boes, M. (1998). Social Work, Corrections, and the Strengths Approach. Paper presented at the Canadian Association of Social Workers National Social Work Conference, June 20 – 24, 1998 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Welfare is “all collective interventions to meet certain needs of the individual and/or to serve the wider interests of society may now be broadly grouped intoaˆ¦ categories of welfare” (Titmuss, 1959). The development in the social values of welfare has always been changing throughout the centuries, particularly the 20th century. In traditional Chinese society, people used to believed that social welfare, or “fuk lei”, was given by kind-hearted philanthropists in society (N. Chow, 1994, p.325). In the early 20th century, the concept of social welfare was still very weak among Hong Kong people. Majority of welfare services were provided by non-government organizations before 1965 (W. S. Chow, 1993, p. 41). The situation changed after the publication of the white paper of the social welfare in 1965. Together with the rise of social worker, more people consider social welfare is part of their civil rights in the following decades. In 1997, the change in sovereignty of Hong Kong and the Asian financial crisis brought a significant impact on the social values of welfare. In the following paragraphs, I will briefly discuss the development of social welfare in Hong Kong and the corresponding social values of welfare, particularly the changes before and after 1997. As will be argued, there are both long term and short term factors that led the changes. The former would be the increasing consideration of civil rights and the latter would be the Asian financial crisis in 1997, the change in sovereignty of Hong Kong and the publication of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) Review.

In the early 20th century, majority of people considered welfare was given by kind-hearted philanthropists in society. As Hong Kong was a colony of Britain at that time, the colonial government put their focuses on protecting the British’s interest, particularly the British merchants. Hence, the living environment and welfare of local Chinese were not concerned by the colonial government unless it interfere the interest of British. With this colonial background, local Chinese rationalized the concept of “welfare would not be given by the colonial government”. The Chinese merchants “used their wealth to establish and maintain their reputations and leadership roles through acts of charity” (Leung, 1996, p.3). They set up organizations and gave welfare to the locals. Among these organizations, Tung Wah Hospital was the most noteworthy charitable organization which catered the medical services and welfare needs to the locals. Apart from these organizations, churches and clans’ man association would also give welfare to the locals too.

In the post World War II period, the situation had a slightly change. In the post war period, a large number of non-government or voluntary welfare organizations were set up in Hong Kong. It is important to note that most of these welfare organizations had their parent-bodies overseas. A typical example of these organizations would be the Hong Kong Red Cross. “During this emergency period, the internationally-linked welfare organization had probably done much more than the government in meeting the welfare needs of people” (N. Chow, 1994, p.324). Although the concept of “welfare is given by kind-hearted philanthropists” was weaken, “the majority of the Chinese in Hong Kong are still unable to wipe away the traditional notions of welfare and accept the modern idea that it should be the responsibility of the state to provide the necessary social welfare services” (N. Chow, 1994, p. 325). Meanwhile, a large proportion of population was refugee from mainland China (Due to the civil war in China). Part of them considered Hong Kong is there temporary shelter but not their home. Hence, welfare development would not be their consideration as they expected to leave Hong Kong soon. These factors made there were only little pressure groups would fight for the rights for the locals in that period.

The situation further changed after 1965. In 1965, the colonial government published the White Paper on social welfare. N.Y. Chow (1993) suggests that “to be exact, the beginning of social welfare policy of Hong Kong was after the publication of the first White Paper on social welfare in 1965” (p.41). The White paper was the first government document that discusses social welfare policy in Hong Kong. It explained the welfare development and integrated the experiences from the development. Also, it gives the stands of colonial government toward social welfare policy and reasons that made the government cannot implement comprehensive social policy in Hong Kong. Although the White Paper has been blamed for lacking in-depth discussion on the blueprint of social welfare development and the foreseeable challenges, but this White paper gives a foundation for the further development of social welfare system (W. S. Chow, 1993). The concept of “social welfare” and “government” were no longer dissevering like the past. More people started to integrate “social welfare” into the role of government.

The most rapid change was found in the 70s. There were two major factors that led the change, the “Big Bang” of social policy and the rise of social worker. The “Big Bang” of social policy was initiated by the 25th governor of Hong Kong, Murray MacLehose. “After MacLehose take office the governor in 1972, he had a strong sense of responsibility towards social welfare, under his influence, amendment of social welfare policy was necessary” (W. S. Chow, 1993, p. 52). Apart from it, the increasing social problems (i.e. the riot in 1966 and 1967, Corruption) led the demand for government’s involvement in social welfare further increased. These factors urged the publication of the second White Paper of social welfare in 1973. The aim of the White Paper was giving a five year plan of social welfare development and dividing the responsibility in providing social welfare between government and voluntary organizations. The aspects of social welfare in the five year plan included education, housing, medical service, social allowance, youth services etc. The comprehensive expansion of welfare services increased the involvement of people in social welfare system. The value of “welfare would not be given by the colonial government” was further weakening in this period.

Apart from the “Big Bang” of social policy, the rise of social worker also led to the significant change in social value of welfare. The rise of social worker could be traced back to the professionalization of social work and the implement of professional training at the University of Hong Kong and the Chinese University of Hong Kong in the mid-1960s. In the 1960s, “Fabian Socialism was the most fashionable approach taught in the social work schools of the two universities” (N. Chow, 1994, p.327). Equality, freedom and fellowship are the central values of Fabian Socialism. The social work students in 60s and 70s were strongly influenced by these values. They had a strong sense of “working towards a more equal and justice society”. Hence, when the students became social workers in society, they would try to advocate policies that achieve to these two ideals. More people would consider welfare as a means to achieve an equal society. Meanwhile, the young social workers at that time also stressed on civil rights. They believed that social welfare is one the important parts of civil rights. When they graduated, they would educate and advocate the public to uphold their civil rights through different social actions. As a result, under this influence, it led to the rise of the awareness of welfare system as rights enjoyed by citizen.

Another significant change of social values of welfare could be found in 1997. The major factor that led to the change is the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. Before the crisis, the economy in Hong Kong was at boom. Majority of people were actively investing in property market and stock market. At that time, people emphasized on material values and short-term time horizon. “Material values are the major criterion used to evaluate the worth of things and people” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.68). Meanwhile, majority of Chinese investor were looking for the maximum benefit in the shortest period of time.

Topley states that many Chinese still prefer to invest in non-industrial property and trade because of the relatively quicker return of capital and profits.

When investing in industry, the overwhelming desire of investors is to look for quick profits by whatever means present themselves as attractive in the short run rather than to look for opportunity for starting long-term investment. (as cited in Lau, 1982, p.70)

As both of the property market and stock market were so flourished, the economic environment enabled people to achieve the above goals simultaneously. This in turn led Hong Kong became one of the wealthiest cities in Asia. The living standard in Hong Kong was one of the highest in Hong Kong history in the early mid 1990s. As most people could sustain their life in the market, they put less consideration on the welfare system. At that time, people would consider social welfare system was only for those who were in need in society, like elderly and disabled people. In other words, despite the underprivileged and the corresponding pressure group, majority in society would not care about the welfare system as they believed they could achieve self-sustentions in market. In general, social welfare development was overwhelmed by economic development at that period.

But a significant change was provoked by the 1997 financial crisis. A great depression in both stock market and property market was provoked by the crisis. Lots of people were bankrupted because of the suddenly fall in the property market. Also, a massive unemployment was accompanied with the economic downturn, particularly in the financial sector. The decline in consumption led to further depression in other non-financial sector. The financial crisis brought two major impacts on the welfare system. First, it led to a significant fall in the tax income of the government. Second, more people fall into the safety net of the welfare system. In other words, it led an increase in demand for welfare services. Simultaneously, it would increase the welfare expenditure of the government. As these two factors happened at the same time, this brought heavy pressure on the financial budget of the government.

At the same period, the sovereignty of Hong Kong changed back to China. One of the problems that foresee by the government is the increase in immigrants from China. In the review report of CSSA that published by the Social Welfare Department, it suggests that the increase in mainland immigrants would lead to an increase application for CSSA. It implies that the government believes that a number of mainland immigrants would rely on the welfare system for livelihood. Before the publication of the report, the government already spread this ideology through news and government press. At that time, the government disclosed different abusive cases of CSSA by the new immigrants. This made the public also be believed the new immigrants would bring pressure to Hong Kong welfare system.

The economic downturn, mainland immigrants, together with the foreseeable aging population, these made the government believed a review for welfare system is necessary. As the government wanted to tighten the budget for social welfare expenditure, the publication of the review report was a means of government to the public support. This report brought a momentous impact on the social value of welfare. In particular, there were more people believed that abusive cases are common in the welfare system after the publication of the report. For example, the report suggested the level of benefits for four-person household is high. The average monthly payment for a four-person household increased in 120% from 1980s to 1990s. But the median wage of workers only increased 41%. The government suggested that this would create disincentive to work and lead to long term dependency on welfare system. According to a survey, 36.4% of respondents believed that “the increasing number of CSSA cases because the criteria for application is too lenient” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.5).

Although the way and method that government used to interpret and present the statistics had bias and hidden agenda, majority still believed that CSSA was breeding lazy people. Since CSSA has a strict income test and asset test, statistics of Suspected Fraud and Abuse was minimal. But the mass media created a negative image of CSSA recipients as they only reporting fraud and abusive cases. This, in turn, created a strong labeling effect on CSSA recipients. In a survey, 40.8% of respondents agreed that “CSSA recipients are not deserved to be help” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.9). This reflected the fact that CSSA recipients were stigmatized.

Apart from stigmatization of CSSA recipients, the role of welfare that interpreted by the public is also worth to discuss. Compare with giving direct welfare, people considered that self-reliance would be more appropriate. In a survey, 70.3% of respondents believed that “people should satisfy their needs through self-reliance”. On the other hand, only 8.6% respondents believed that “people should satisfy their needs through social welfare” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.30). The development of the concept “self-reliance” could be explained by the Utilitarianistic Familism. Utilitarianistic Familism is social values of the Chinese people in Hong Kong (Lau, 1982). Chinese people would put the interest of family member in a higher priority over others. The bonding of the family members was strong. In addition to the extended family structure in the early mid 20th century, people would not look for help from government; rather, they would look for help from family members. As most problems could be solved without the help of government, it contributed to the development a sense of “self-reliance”. This concept is particularly prevailing value hold by the older generation (i.e. Those who born in the Post War Baby Boom).

From the above discussion, we can see two sets of contradictory social values of welfare have developed in Hong Kong. On one hand, more people consider social welfare as their civil rights. On the other hand, people stigmatize some welfare recipients. It makes the rights of accessing welfare become alienated from the civil rights. These two contradictory values lead to different conflicts in society. Social workers, pressure groups and non-government organizations are striving for destigmatization of the welfare recipients. Lots of social actions like social demonstration and public forum are used to promote this civil rights. But at the same time, the government is attempting to marginalize the welfare recipients in order to reduce the welfare expenditure. From time to time, the government would publish the fraud and abusive case in CSSA. It seems that it wants to remind people that “abusive cases are still common in welfare system”. These, in turn, led to never-ending debates between the two interest groups.

As seen in above discussion, it is hard to find a consensus towards the value of welfare in Hong Kong. The historical background, personal experiences and education would have a strong influence on the development of our value. But it seems that government would spread concepts and ideas that deviated from the principles of social welfare – equality and equity, because it’s political agenda. Whether the ultimate goal of government is bring a stable and harmonious society in Hong Kong is questionable.

The Concept of Social Stratification

Stratification is the geological concept of strata – rock layers in natural processes. While in sociology, the concept of stratification turns to refer to the different strata of social groups and their arrangements. Social stratification is a particular form of social inequality which involves power, prestige and wealth.

We can find in our lives that one group may own and enjoy more economic resources than another, or it may be held in high esteem, or it may be in a position to order other groups around. The study of social stratification is to explore how is the hierarchy formed within the society, how are social resources unequally distributed and how these different groups relate to one another.

Obviously, the arrangement of different social groups within a society is not really like the arrangements of rock in the earth’s crust as there are frequent and various interactions between the higher and lower social groups. Moreover, contrary to solid rock layers, “rises” and “falls” take place both by group and by individuals in social system. One group may rise in power and status while another group may fall. Individuals also move up and down to change their group belongings. So when we study social stratification, we should pay attention to its characteristic of interaction and mobility. Any neglect would lead to a false conclusion.

Theories of Social Stratification

Social stratification is not a new born concept. Long ago in ancient China, “Li” was considered a special subject on institutions and manners which gave a strict division and rules of social classes. In “Han Shu-Monograph on Food and Currency “, people were stratified in a descending order of scholars, peasants, workers and businessmen.

In the west, the earliest discussion on social stratification can be dated back to ancient Greece. Plato illustrated an ideal state in “Republic” with three stable classes of freemen—-Rulers or Philosopher Kings, Warriors or Guardians, and Workers, while Aristotle argued with an idea of the rich, the poor and the middle.

When talking about social stratification, we can always find these two names: Karl Marx and Max Weber. The classic statements on both social class and stratification provide the foundation from which we can fully appreciate current social dynamics and new directions in the study of social inequality.

The Marxist Perspective

Karl Marx was born in the aftermath of the European Revolution. By witnessing the end of the old era and the emergence of a new age, he found a similarity in all societies—-the ever existence of two social classes. He inherited Hegel’s account of the conflict between master and slave, then took the idea of two opposed forces to analyze the form of the conflict.

Marx was the first to develop a systematic theory on social class. A class is a social group whose members share the same relationship to the means of production. Individuals in a class not only act in much the same way but also tend to think in much the same way. There are two major social groups in all societies, a ruling one and a subject one. The relationship between the two major classes is conflict—-exploiter and exploited, oppressor and oppressed. Marx conceived the society as a system of production based on the existence of these two opposite social classes. The ruling class (the bourgeoisie) own the means of production (land, capital, labour power, buildings and machinery) while subject class (the proletariat) has no choice but to work for the capitalists. Wage labourers produce goods and services but get only subsisted rewards. Employers take the products away to sell them at a value greater than their cost of production. By accumulating this surplus value, capitalists get more wealth and means of production to sustain the system.

Capital is a social power. Political power comes from economic power, from the control of means of production. The ruling class build up the superstructure of society—-the major institutions, values and belief systems, according to the common interests of the group. They seek protection for their ownership of means of production through laws and mechanisms which are favorable to them. In addition, a distorted picture of reality (ideology) was invented to justify and legitimate the domination of the ruling class and to inculcate the mass oppressed working class a false consciousness of the nature of relationship between social classes.

Marx pointed out that there is a polarization of the classes through which the society would more and more split into the two great hostile camps. Although he did not deny the individual mobility between the social groups, the possibility is little because each group is relatively closed. Individual movement up and down does nothing to change the system. Only by thorough revolutions can social orders be reconstructed, can means of production be used by everyone and can social equality be achieved.

Despite the great contribution to the study of social stratification, people raised problems in Marxist approach as listed below:

Not all societies are class societies

Class may not be the most basic social division

The rise of the middle class and the fragmentary class structure

Working class consciousness and intellectual wishful thinking

To solve these problems, Neo Marxist scholars have made many efforts. Succeeding Marx’s basic view of social stratification, the primary concern of modern Marxian theorists has been to apply this Marxian view of society to industrial societies that have experienced change since Marx’s time, while also using new methods of social science research to validate some of the principal Marxian concepts. For instance, Gramsci accused dehumanizing aspects of modern capitalism and advocated more education on working class to develop intellectuals among them. Poulantzas thought the fragmentation of class structure was a defining characteristic of late capitalism, so any analysis must tackle the new constellation of interests and power. Structural Marxist, Wright, did some empirical research on social stratification. Inspired by other’s works, he borrowed the concept of skills and defined class in relation to the productive system: Capitalists, managers, workers and the petty bourgeoisie.

The Weberian Alternative

Max Weber contributed the most to development of stratification theory since Marx. He was said to have had a dialogue with Marx but got different conclusions. Marx saw classes in economic terms, while man does not strive for power only in order to enrich himself economically. He expanded Marx’s standard of class division to a multidimensional view.

People forming the same class roughly share common life chances which are reflected into class situation. In Weber’s point of view, ownership of property will directly give an individual more life chances in market, however, the skills and education the individual has had is also playing an important role in defining social classes. Under this assumption, Weber was able to explain the emergence of middle class while Marxism failed to do so. He identified as “social class” according to the economic rewards in labour market—- the working class as a whole, the petty bourgeoisie, technicians, specialists and lower-level management and the classes privileged through property and education.

Moreover, social stratification is not only decided by class(economic rewards), status is another significant perspective. Whereas class refers to the unequal distribution of economic rewards, status refers to the unequal distribution of social honor, which refers to how a person or a group is regarded by others. Individuals from a similar status group are likely to share similar status situation including lifestyle, sense of belonging and restriction on interaction with outsiders etc. This dimension managed to solve the doubt about the role of gender, ethnicity and religion in stratification theory.

The last dimension in Weber’s three-component theory of stratification is party or power. To achieve whatever goals, people form organizations in rational orders to influence and dominate others. The most typical organizations of this kind are political parties and bureaucratic institutions. Where is one stand and how is one placed within the organization decide one’s position in this dimension of stratification.

Weber concluded that the three dimensions of hierarchies lead to the ranking of individual and group in human society. Nevertheless, the importance of each dimension differs in different societies.

Weber’s theory of social stratification has relativity and mobility, which enlightened his successors like Anthony Giddens, Frank Parkin and John Goldthorpe, etc., to continue promoting the development of multidimensional theory of stratification.

The Former Study on Hong Kong ‘s Social Stratification

Boggs, C. (1984). The two revolutions : Antonio Gramsci and the dilemmas of western Marxism (1st ed.). Boston, MA: South End Press.

Crompton, R. (1993). Class and stratification : an introduction to current debates. Cambridge, UK ; Cambridge, MA, USA: Polity Press.

Haralambos, M., & Holborn, M. (2008). Sociology : themes and perspectives (7 ed.). London: HarperCollins Publishers.

Hess, A. (2001). Concepts of social stratification : European and American models. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire ; New York: Palgrave.

Kerbo, H. R. (1996). Social stratification and inequality : class conflict in historical and comparative perspective (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Levine, R. F. (1998). Social class and stratification : classic statements and theoretical debates. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Li, P. (2004). Social stratification in China’s today(Zhongguo she hui fen ceng) (1 ed.). Beijing: She hui ke xue wen xian chu ban she.

Li, X. (2008). Dream and reality : stratification and social mobility in Hong Kong(Meng Xiang Yu Xian SHI: Xiang Gang De She Hui Fen Ceng Yu She Hui Liu Dong) ( 1 ed.). Beijing: Publisher of Peking University.

Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1888). Manifesto of the Communist party ([5th ed.). London,: W. Reeves.

Poulantzas, N. A. (1982). Political power and social classes. London: Verso.

Saunders, P. (1990). Social class and stratification. London: Routledge.

Weber, M., Gerth, H. H., & Mills, C. W. (2009). From Max Weber : essays in sociology. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon ; New York: Routledge.

Wright, E. O. (1997). Class counts : comparative studies in class analysis. Cambridge ; New York

Paris: Cambridge University Press ;Maison des sciences de l’homme.

Introduction

Social stratification can be defined as a form of social inequity which involves the ranking of individuals into hierarchies according to their wealth and status and thus succeeding in the formation of distinct social groups (Haralambos & Holborn, 2004:1). Before 1994, this was a huge and worrying problem in South Africa as cases of gender inequality, inequality in education systems, racial inequality and many other forms of social prejudice were becoming more and more severe. However, after the introduction of a new democratic society, the South African government has been slowly reforming the inequalities of our past and attempting to prevent the occurrences of social stratification in general. This essay will discuss the various attempts made by the government to prevent social stratification. In particular, it will focus on the reasons why the government implemented these specific programmes, what they aimed to achieve when implementing them, and also the results of these programmes and the effects on the South African society.

Gender Inequality in South Africa

As the years have passed, the case of gender inequality has become much more severe in South Africa. In the past, a women’s place was known to be in the kitchen while the man’s duty was to hunt and fight battles in the fields. Each gender group had a specific role towards the success of their homes and societies. By today’s standards, these traditional African culture routines are seen as unfair, yet the issue of gender inequality has worsened since then (Bwakali, 2001).Women are known to be discriminated against, being frequently sexually harassed, and they generally receive a lower income than men because they are not seen as important elements in comparison to males in the business world. It is known that, in South Africa, a rape occurs every thirty-six seconds, one in every three women is in an abusive relationship, and a woman is killed by her partner every six days (Maharaj, 1999). Clearly, this is a serious issue that needs to be dealt with urgently and with immediate effect.

The Government’s Plan to Alleviate Gender Inequality

The South African government is bound to numerous national and global commitments and obligations which require it to uphold gender equality within the country and make certain that it is achieved within society as a whole. South Africa is lawfully compelled to follow the steps outlined in the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) to ensure that there is a process being followed in order to achieve gender equality in South Africa (Sadie & Loots, 1998). An example of some of the changes made to eradicate gender inequality in South Africa is the empowerment of women in the workplace, the access to greater education and training to increase the number of opportunities for women in society, and also the stressing of the importance of female health and well-being which includes greater forms of punishment for violence against women and also greater access to health facilities available.

Poverty in South Africa

Poverty levels in South Africa continue to be very high. No significant change has occurred since the inception of our country’s new democratic society, and the issue of poverty is becoming worse and worse as the years pass by. With only a 5.7 percent decrease in poverty over aˆ?the first twelve year period of South Africa’s new democracyaˆ?, nearly half of South Africa’s population live in extreme poverty. Due to the inequality regarding income levels, there is a wide gap between the rich and the poor of our country and the unemployment rates in South Africa are as high as 40 percent. This social stratification of the rich and the poor is causing great problems amongst our society and leading to higher crime rates and social violence issues (Luyt, 2008).

The Alleviation of Poverty in South Africa

In order for the high poverty levels in South Africa to be significantly decreased, the specific dimensions and causes of poverty have to be looked at first, since this would allow the government to take specific actions to alleviate the various forms of poverty. Without a good form of authority, poverty will never be successfully reduced. Thus far, our government has provided aˆ?housing, water, sanitation, electrification, health and educationaˆ? to some of our country’s disadvantaged communities and peoples. Also, to alleviate the issue of crime due to high unemployment levels, the government is aiding in job creation for the poor in governmental services and providing skills development training for the uneducated (Luyt, 2008).

Overall Changes in South Africa’s Society

All in all, the government is attempting to prevent the occurrence of social stratification within the South African society but this is not a very easy task. Although the government has provided certain disadvantaged communities with essential needs, there is still a lot of work to be done to completely break down the social hierarchies within our country regarding gender and poverty. There are many complaints that not enough has been done to improve South Africa’s social status since 1994, but even the poor citizens have more advantages than their families did a generation ago. The government has provided assistance to millions of South African citizens with the introduction of social programs, and also providing housing and electricity (Eisner, 2009).

Conclusion

Therefore, even though the occurrences of social stratification have not been completely eradicated from South Africa, the government has been hard at work and trying their utmost best to provide its citizens with basic and essential needs such as housing, electricity, health care. Etc. Many are cynical about the progress that South Africa has made since the end of the Apartheid era because they are either still living in poverty or have not enjoyed the benefits of living in a democratic society. However, change cannot be expected to occur instantaneously, and if given a few years South Africa can be transformed into a great and powerful democratic society with equality for all.