toptermpaper.com

The question of whether ‘class’ is still a relevant concept in the understanding of social divisions in contemporary Britain has two components to be analysed, firstly is class still and do social divisions exist in Britain? The results of this research indicate yes to both questions, that although class and the nature of its existence have changed since Marx, Weber and Durkheim’s eras, it is very difficult to get past the important and definite existence of class and social divisions within Britain today. Neo-Marxists, neo-Weberians as well as functionalists and other theorists analysing it from a post-modern, post industrialisation perspective support this opinion.

Class itself is a concept that has been traditionally hard to define and continues to be so. As Bradley states in Fractured Identities (1996, p. 45), ‘class is everywhere and nowhere’. Social class refers to the hierarchical distinctions between individuals or groups in societies or cultures. It has a shifting identity with few definite physical signs or markers to monitor. Part of the difficulty to define it categorically is that it involves many terms and viewpoints: class awareness; class consciousness; class imagery; class interest; class position; contradictory class location; false consciousness; middle class; petite bourgeoisie; proletariat; status; stratification; underclass; working class, the list is extensive. As Bilton et al (1987, p. 36) states:

‘Structures where economic relationships are primarily called class societies, and in these cases we refer to the different unequal groups as classes. There is considerable despite over the precise definition of this term, but we shall use class to refer to a group sharing a similar position in a structure of objective material inequalities, produced by a particular system of economic relations characteristic of a particular mode of production.’

(Bilton T, et al 1987, p. 36; Bradley 1996, pp. 45-6).

Analysing class has historically formed a set of debates, emanating from the initial positions taken by theorists such as Marx and Weber, this debate has continued with neo-Marxists and neo-Weberians. In Class and Stratification. An Introduction to Current Debates, Rosemary Crompton (1998) suggests there is now a movement that involves a split between those who study class structure and mobility using statistical research and those who focus on class formation and consciousness by using historical or ethnographical approaches. This conflict has resulted in a stalemate of sorts where some sociologists have lost interest in the importance of social class. While anthropologists, historians and sociologists identify class as a social structure emerging from pre-history, the idea of social class entered the English dictionary approximately in the 1770s. It is valuable for this reason that any changes that may have been made since its induction should be evaluated. (Bradley 1996, pp. 45-6; Taylor, 1999, pp. 97-8).

Marx saw class categories as relating to the ownership of property, and production relationship. He founded a revolutionary concept in social order – communism, in a communist state there would be no stratification. The two groups were the bourgeoisie – who owned the means of production, and the proletariat – the workers. He believed this relationship was based upon exploitation and conflict. Marx predicted a revolution in which the proletariat would defeat the bourgeoisie and share ownership of the factories equally between themselves. Although this did not occur in Britain, it did in Russia, in 1917. The proletariat revolted and all means of production fell into public ownership, forming a socialist state. This was close to Marx’s ideological dream of communism. However, ownership – despite being equal still existed and there was divisions still existed, some people had better, more highly respected, jobs than others. There was still inequality and competition. (Albrow, 1999, pp 155-9; Bilton T, et al 1987, pp 27-8).

Weber was influenced by Marx’s work but disagreed with his theory, he thought it was too deterministic. Being a structuralist, he believed people were shaped by the society in which they lived and capable of social action. He also disagreed with Marx’s theory on stratification. Marx based his view of class structure on ownership of the means of production whilst Weber believed it was dependant on “life chances”. Life chances depended on wealth and skills; the upper class had the most advantageous life chances, and the poor (e.g. the unemployed, elderly and homeless), the least; economic situation, market situation, status and political party could determine class. Whist Marx split society into two distinct classes; Weber saw that social structure was more complex. The four main strata he identified were the upper class, the middle class, the working class and the poor/underclass. However, within these groups, were other, more subtle divisions, which depended on a number of variables including differences in income, opportunities for upwards mobility, security of employment, language, life-style and social estimation of others. However, Weber perceived class as somewhat different, he believed that class consciousness was essentially conditional –that consciousness could occur depending upon circumstances. He acknowledged, as Marx believed, that classes and social groups were likely to experience conflict in attempts to gain status honour or class movement. (Taylor, 1999, pp. 99).

Neo-Marxists come in many varying forms, but they share a common acknowledgement of the importance of gender/sex divisions. Nevertheless, it was still placed less important than class divisions under a capitalist society. Consequently, they thought the primary basis of exploitation in society was class, not gender. This implies that capitalists have more power over workers than men have over women, not an uncontroversial view. Issues of race and ethnicity were also viewed as less important than class. Functionalists take the view that social stratification is both essential to the running of society and inevitable. They believe that all social phenomena exist because they have a positive function to fulfil. Durkheim, a functionalist, described society as a living organism in which different organs with specific functions such as education, work, and government are inter-related. According to Bilton et al (1987), ‘the education system is a vehicle for developing the human resources of an industrial nation.’ (Bilton T, et al 1987, p. 308; Swingewood 2000, pp 137-140).

In Class and Stratification, Crompton challenges the claim that ‘class is dead’ and is in fact very much alive. In the vein of this belief, Goldthorpe and Wright critically examine ‘post-modern’ theories of ‘post-class’ societies, as well as the most recent contributions of quantitative sociological approaches. It is argued that despite their theoretical differences, the work of these two authors has been undergoing a process of convergence in recent years. Crompton analyses how the ‘death’ of class is the contemporary increase in the event of social and material inequality. Definitional difficulties of class are only one aspect of the decision by many sociologists to question its relevance. Cromption explores social inequalities including gender and the feminisation of the middle classes, the significance of recent changes in work and employment, consumption and citizenship. (Bradley 1996, pp. 59-62; Crompton 1998, pp. 113-5)

In most modern industrial societies, including Britain, the system of social stratification is fluid – through generations or perhaps in their own lifetime, people can move up or down the social scale. A number of modern thinkers have tried to define what makes a particular ‘social class’. Is it accent, surroundings, occupation, income, wealth? If we simply spoke only about class as it was first defined and existed since Marx/Weber times we would not taking into account societal changes such as the increase in unemployment, health care crises, resulting in a concept of society that has always existed yet, become more prevent and occupied: the underclass. It seems that any social divisions that may exist stem from the pretext of social class and its restraints and the difficulty to move from one class to another is problematic. (Bilton T, et al 1987, 308).

Thatcher’s Conservative Party did not believe in the concept of society, rather than society had no existence outside of individuals. Her party’s main aim was to reduce the role of the state in the economy, through various means such as the privatisation of British Rail, council houses and the introduction of poll tax in 1989. She advocated strong welfare reforms and created an adult Employment Training system that included full-time work done for the dole plus small top-up, based upon the a US workfare model, called the ‘Social Fund’ system. It placed one-off welfare payments for emergency needs under a local budgetary limit, and where possible changed them into loans, and rules for assessing jobseeking effort by the week, were breaches of social consensus unprecedented since the 1920s. All very strong and harsh steps only seeming to increase the already obvious class inequalities and difficulties in British society. By 1990, opposition to Thatcher’s policies on local government taxation, her Government’s perceived mishandling of the economy -especially the high interest rates which were undermining her core voting base within the home-owning, entrepreneurial and business sectors, as well as other factors finally made her and her party seem increasingly politically vulnerable. Her rein was over, yet her affect on British society remains strong and well-felt by general society. So it seems given all the variants and backgrounds that we have discussed that class divisions still exist and thus are still very relevant. The old saying the rich gets richer and the poor get poorer certainly was true of Thatcher’s era (Taylor, 1999, pp. 111-3; Albrow, 1999, pp 56-7; Margaret Thatcher: 2006).

The Rowntree Report in 1995 exposed that unemployment rates in Britain were rising high and more rapidly than in any other industrial country – a very worrying finding, that unemployment, insecurity and deprivation were still very much prevalent in the working classes. Examining the existence of the underclass leads us to the question of whether it is a convenient label, and a powerful rhetorical label, as Marxists argue, or is it a post-industrial phenomenon? Considering that we are analysing British society post-industrialisation, this is an interesting question to ponder. Some theorists believe that it is a term that victimises and blames people and keeps them in their socio-economic spot without the opportunity or resources to move. (Fincher, R & Saunders, P, 2001, p. 21; Bradley 1996, p 46; Taylor, 1999, pp. 113-5).

To answer our original question of whether class can still be used as applicable concept in the understanding of social divisions in contemporary Britain, the answer is most definitely yes, but it has changed from the days of Marx and Weber and initial sociological conceptualisation. It seems that to analyse this process highlights the parts of society that may be disadvantaged through their social class or class immobility. Awareness is an important part of the process of changing and at the very least, compassion and societal responsibility.

Bibliography
Albrow, M, 1999, Sociology: The Basics. Roultedge, London
Bilton T, Bennett, K, Jones, P, Stanworth, M, Sheard, K & Webster, A 1987. Introductory Sociology. Macmillan Education Ltd, Hampshire.
Bradley, H, 1996. Fractured Identities. Changing Patterns of Inequality. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.
Crompton, R, 1998. Class and Stratification. An Introduction to Current Debates, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.
Erikson, K, 1997, Sociological Visions, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, USA.
Fincher, R & Saunders, P, 2001, Creating Unequal Futures? Rethinking Poverty, Inequality and Disadvantage. Allen and Unwin, Australia.
Giddens, A 1993. Sociology, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.
Taylor, S, 1999, Sociology: Issues and Debates, Macmillan, Great Britain.
Swingewood, A 2000. A Short History of Sociological Thought, 3rd Ed, St Martin’s Press, New York.
Psychological/Sociological Paradigms, retrieved 7th April 2006, from: http://webpages.marshall.edu/~carter12/eda705a5.htm.
Wikipedia, April 2006, Margreat Thatcher, retrieved 11th April 2006, from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher

Class inequality refers to the inequality of incomes between individuals, families, or between different groups, areas, or countries (Black, 2002). These inequalities occur as a result of differences in the ability to earn incomes as well as differences in property ownership. Some individuals usually have lower incomes than others, especially those who are economically inactive. This is usually as a result of age, poor health, or inability to find employment.

Class inequality is a major social problem in the US and other parts of the world. For example, several studies have demonstrated that a child’s future may be determined by the social status. One study found that although children may have similarities in their ability, differences in the circumstances to which they were born could make the difference on who will be successful in future, and who will not. By considering two children Bobby (the son of a lawyer) and Jimmy (son of a custodial assistant) who both do well in class, the study found that it makes it 27 times more likely that Bobby will get a high profile job, while Jimmy had one chance in eight of earning a median income. It is projected that currently, social inequality is greater in the US than in any other industrialized nation (Wolff, 1995). In 2007, a study conducted by the Congressional Office Bureau revealed that the wealth held by the richest 1 percent of the total American population totaled US$16.8 trillion, which makes up USD$2 trillion more than the combined wealth of the lower 90 percent of the American population. Another study conducted by the Center for American Progress (2007) showed that between 1979 and 2007, the average income of the bottom 50 percent of American households grew by only 6%, while the top 1% incomes increased by a massive 229 percent. This reveals that the gap between the rich and the poor in the US is widening, and may affect the future of children who come from economically disadvantaged families. This may lead to accelerated rates of crime, violence and drug abuse amongst poor communities.

High advances in technology have led to the globalization phenomenon, whereby people in different parts of the world can interact faster and less expensively than before. Some activists consider globalization a social problem. For example, Stiglitz (2002) argues that globalization forced developing nations to liberalize their economies before they were ready, which pushed their citizens to poverty, a major social problem. Further, religious groups, especially Muslims and Christians, are opposed to globalization because it may erode some of their values. With globalization come cultural clashes, which are leading to erosion of cultures. These conflicts may not be easy to resolve because with globalization, there are difficulties in the issues related to justice, identity and equity. For example, previously, when disputes arose between people, they could be resolved by the government or the local council. The process of conflict resolution was faster. However, with globalization, social disputes go beyond local, regional and international boundaries. The process of conflict resolution is slower, and this makes people feel victimized, angry and powerless. As a result, there is a tendency for people to turn to violence when they feel they have no alternative.

According to Stiglitz, globalization has its advantages, but also disadvantages. He states that it has a high potential to bring benefits to the world. So far, globalization has not brought comparable benefits in many parts of the world, and it is viewed by many as a disaster. However, since globalization is now a reality which affects everyone, it is essential that we strategize on how to benefit from it, and how to mitigate its negative impacts. In order to reap the benefits of globalization, the world will have to make rational decisions for people on both sides of the divide.

A number of Sociological Theories attempt to explain why people commit crimes. These include the Strain Theory, the Social Learning Theory, the Control Theory, the Labeling Theory and the social Disorganization Theory. According to Agnew (1992), all crime theories attempt to explain crime as a component of the social environment. Social environment includes the family, school, peer group, workplace, community as well as the society. The structural strain theory, for example, states that social structures in a society could encourage its citizens to commit crimes. The structural strain theory was advanced by several sociologists. These were Merton (1938), Cohen (1955), Cloward and Ohlin (1960), Agnew (1992), as well as Messner and Rosenfeld (1994). According to the authors, strain can either be structural, which depicts the processes at the societal level which filter down and affect how an individual perceives his or her needs. That is, if particular social structures are inherently inadequate, the individual’s perceptions may change to view them as opportunities. On the other hand, strain can be at the individual level, where it refers to the pain experienced by an individual when he seeks ways to satisfy his needs. At this level, if the goals of a society become significant to an individual, actually achieving them may become more important than the means adopted.

The labeling theory, also known as social reaction theory, was developed by Howard Becker (1963), a sociologist. This theory states that deviance is not a quality of the act, since results from personality factors associated with committing deviance. Its main focus is on the linguistic tendency of majorities to negatively label minorities, mainly those perceived as deviant from the norms. According to this theory, self-identity and behavior of individuals can be influenced by the terms used to describe them. This theory is sometimes used to explain why people take drugs. An individual, for example, may escape to drugs due to low self esteem resulting from being constantly stereotyped.

Introduction

The three classical thinkers of Sociology, Marx, Weber and Durkheim have one thing in common regarding the Sociology of Law; their theories were part and parcel of a more fundamental sociological perspective and theory of society. Marx will be the odd one among the three because, the work of Marx is on theoretical ground not evidently connected to the aspirations of sociology, but historically Marx’s writings have informed a considerable body of sociological writings until this day. Marx made a contribution to social science by suggesting the instrumentalist theory of law in contributing to and justifying social inequality. Durkheim’s work orients around the key dimensions of social issues as involving both factual and normative dimensions of society. Whereas Weber is considered as the founding father par excellence of the modern sociology of law. When Weber observed that social life in the modern era had become more and more rationalized in a purposive-rational sense, he no only contemplated the central role of economy, stat, and bureaucracy, but along with it also discussed the role of law as the basis of modern political authority. Weber specifically outlined the characteristics of a formally rationalized legal system that is primarily guided by the application of procedure.

Sociology of Law

The sociology of law is often described as a sub-discipline of sociology or an interdisciplinary approach within legal studies. While some socio-legal scholars see the sociology of law as “necessarily” belonging to the discipline of sociology, others see it as a field of research caught up in the disciplinary tensions and competitions between the two established disciplines of law and sociology. Yet, others regard it neither as a sub-discipline of sociology nor as a branch of legal studies and, instead, present it as a field of research on its own right within a broader social science tradition. For example, Roger Cotterrell describes the sociology of law without reference to mainstream sociology as “the systematic, theoretically grounded, empirical study of law as a set of social practices or as an aspect or field of social experience”.

Irrespective of whether the sociology of law is defined as a sub-discipline of sociology, an approach within legal studies, or a field of research in its own right, it remains intellectually dependent mainly on mainstream sociology, and to lesser extent on other social sciences such as social anthropology, political science, social policy, criminology and psychology, i.e. it draws on social theories and employs social scientific methods to study law, legal institutions and legal behaviour.

More specifically, the sociology of law consists of various sociological approaches to the study of law in society, which empirically examines and theorizes the interaction between law and legal institutions, on the one hand, and other (non-legal) social institutions and social factors, on the other. Areas of socio-legal inquiry include the social development of legal institutions, forms of social control, legal regulation, the interaction between legal cultures, the social construction of legal issues, legal profession, and the relation between law and social change.

The sociology of law also benefits from and occasionally draws on research conducted within other fields such as comparative law, critical legal studies, jurisprudence, legal theory, law and economics and law and literature.

The Classical Thinkers

The roots of the sociology of law can be traced back to the works of sociologists and jurists of the turn of the previous century. The relationship between law and society was sociologically explored in the seminal works of both Max Weber and Emile Durkheim. The works of Karl Marx was not immediately influential in the development of the sociology of law as no direct historical path led from his thought to subsequent sociological schools of thought. Marx’s work was later appropriated by critical sociologists who sought to break with the consensual thinking that they felt characterized much of mainstream sociology in the years after World War II. The writings on law by these classical sociologists are foundational to the entire sociology of law today. A number of other scholars, mainly jurists, also employed social scientific theories and methods in an attempt to develop sociological theories of law. Notably among these were Leon Petrazycki, Eugen Ehrlich and Georges Gurvitch.

Marx’s theory is not to be understood merely as a theory of the economy, for his analysis of capitalism is meant to provide the basis for an analysis of society. The economic organization of society is its material core from which all other social developments in matters of politics, culture, and law can be explained. This is summarized in Marx’s famous dictum that the infrastructure of a society determines it superstructure. Thus, the division between the economic classes of owners and non-owners appears at the societal level as a class antagonism between the relatively small but powerful bourgeoisie and the relatively large but powerless proletariat. The bourgeoisie can articulate its economic power also at the political, cultural, and legal level because of its control over all important institutions of society, such as government, the legal system, art science, and education. The economic, according to Marx, only the destruction of capitalism in favor of a communist mode of production, whereby the workers collectively own and control the means of production, world ensure a successful revolution of society in to a more just social order.

Marx did not develop a comprehensive perspective on law and his ideas on law are scattered throughout his writings. Marx’s theory of the state provides the most useful entry into his perspective on law. Congruent with his materialist perspective, Marx asserts that the economic conditions of society determine what type of state will develop, which in a capitalist society implies that the state will be controlled by the bourgeoisie as an instrument to secure economic rights and to moderate class conflict. For him the capitalist state represents and secures the power of the dominant economic class which now also becomes the politically dominant class. Interestingly, Marx argues that the democratic republic, rather than being a more egalitarian form of the capitalistic state, for it totally disregards the property distinction that have arisen under capitalism.

Marx’s notion on law is instrumentalist, similar to that of his notion of state. He views the legal system in function of its role as an instrument of control serving bourgeois interests. Rather than abiding by a principle of the rule of law that holds that it is just for the law to be applied equally and fairly to all, Marx maintains that capitalist law actually enhances the conditions of inequality that mark capitalist society. Marx contends that the capitalist legal system contributes to inequality because capitalist law establishes and applies individualized rights of freedom, which benefit those who own while disfavoring those who are without property. The formal equality that is granted in law by treating the various parties that are in contract with one another or with the state as equal contributes to sustain and develop the economic inequalities that exist among legal subjects. Legal doctrine justifies the practices of capitalist law on the basis of a notion of justice claimed to be universally valid but which in actuality serves the interests of only the dominant economic class. The ideology of capitalist law is ultimately accepted widely even among those members of society who are economically disadvantaged and thus additionally subject to the inequalities brought about by the legal system.

For Max Weber, a so-called “legal rational form” as a type of domination within society, is not attributable to people but to abstract norms. He understood the body of coherent and calculable law in terms of a rational-legal authority. Such coherent and calculable law formed a precondition for modern political developments and the modern bureaucratic state and developed in parallel with the growth of capitalism. Central to the development of modern law is the formal rationalisation of law on the basis of general procedures that are applied equally and fairly to all. Weber specifically outlined the characteristics of a formally rationalized legal system that is primarily guided by the application of procedures. His analysis of law is an intrinsic part of his sociology, in terms of both its perspective of the study of society and its theoretical propositions on the conditions of modern society. Modern rationalised law is also codified and impersonal in its application to specific cases. In general, Weber’s standpoint can be described as an external approach to law that studies the empirical characteristics of law, as opposed to the internal perspective of the legal sciences and the moral approach of the philosophy of law.

Weber developed his perspective on law as part of a more general sociology. In the systematic nature and comprehensive scope of its contribution, Weber’s analysis is rivaled only by that of Emile Durkheim, whose sociology of law was likewise part and parcel of a more fundamental sociological perspective and theory of society.

Emile Durkheim wrote in The Division of Labour in Society, that as society becomes more complex, the body of civil law concerned primarily with restitution and compensation grows at the expense of criminal laws and penal sanctions. Over time, law has undergone a transformation from repressive law to restitutive law. Restitutive law operates in societies in which there is a high degree of individual variation and emphasis on personal rights and responsibilities. For Durkheim, law is an indicator of the mode of integration of a society, which can be mechanical, among identical parts, or organic, among differentiated parts such as in industrialized societies. Durkheim also argued that a sociology of law should be developed alongside, and in close connection with, a sociology of morals, studying the development of value systems reflected in law.

At sociology’s heart is a concern for morality. For Durkheim, society cannot exist without moral bonds, whether these are bonds of shared belief or of mutual commitment reflecting the interdependence of individuals or social groups. Moral ideas are neither innate in the individual nor to be deduced from abstract first principles. They are inspired by the empirical conditions of social lie in particular times and places. To understand those conditions and the forces that shape social development is rationally to appreciate morality’s demands. Morality provides the normative framework of stable social relationships. In modern society these relationships are primarily domestic, economic and occupational and political relationship of citizenship. Morality expresses the requirements of living together in particular environments; ‘the domain of the moral begins where the domain of the social begins’ (Durkheim, 1961:60). For Durkheim, “Moral ideas are the soul (l’ame) of the law”(1909:150). Law expresses what is fundamental in any society’s morality. So the study of law like that of morality is central to sociology.

Conclusion

Among the three classic thinkers Marx did not focus on law to any degree of intellectual satisfaction, while the sociological contributions of Weber and Durkheim are not only influential but foundational to the sociology of law.

This essay aims to understand why there are health inequalities between both genders and the social classes. This will be achieved by analysing the findings of sociological research, whilst discussing the main problems with how health inequalities are measured. The cultural and structural explanations on why health inequalities occur will also be evaluated.

In 2009, The House of Commons Health Committee published a report, which found that even though people’s health was improving in all social groups, the gap between the health of the social classes had widened. The reason stated for this, was that the health of those in higher social classes was improving far quicker than the health of those in the lower social classes. The figures within in the report showed that if you are in a higher social group you are more likely to live longer than someone in the lower social classes. The report also stated that not only do poorer people die younger; they also suffer more years of ill health. Access to health care for the lower classes is also uneven and those who are poor, elderly and disabled are less likely to receive proper treatment than those who are young and able-bodied. A report done by the Learning Disabilities Observatory alleged that this was because the elderly and disabled were unable to access health care due to reduced mobility, being unable to communicate health problems to professionals and their carers failing to identify health problems. (Eric Emerson, 2010)

The Health Committee report also illustrates the interrelations of gender inequalities and socioeconomic status. On a geographical level females who were born in the more affluent areas of London, such as Kensington and Chelsea had a significantly higher life expectancy (87.8 years) than females who were born in Glasgow (77.1 years), which has the lowest life expectancy figure in the UK. Subsequently, even though the life expectancy for males and females in social class l (professional) and social class V (unskilled manual) has improved compared to previous years, the disparity between them, is still widening. (House of Commons, Health Committee, 2009)

A cultural explanation was also given for why men’s life expectancy is more severely affected than women’s life expectancy. It was suggested by the Men’s Health Forum that men are more likely to take risks with their health due to them trying to cope with stress and conforming to role models in society. Men, compared to women also make poor use of primary care services such as pharmacies and GP surgeries. This is thought to be because men find it culturally unacceptable to discuss their health problems. Men are also more likely to die of health problems relating to their weight, as they are less able than women to identify when they are overweight, as weight is seen as a ‘women’s issue’. (Memorandum by the mens health forum, 2008)

However, even though the data found within the Health Committee’s report looks convincing the majority of the data is based on morbidity rates, which are not always reliable, as not everyone who gets ill may report their illness. Even human error and illness not being recorded accurately can mean that data based evidence of health inequalities can be unreliable.

A previous report done in 2004 by Hilary Graham, featured evidence that suggested that if your parents were poor or in poverty then you were already predisposed to having poor health and having a higher mortality and morbidity rate. This was due to mothers who are poor not being able to afford nutritious food and not being able to access health care. This in turn can lead to babies being born with a lower birth weight, and poor cognitive and physical development. This can influence further problems in health as an adult and therefore, further inequalities in health than someone who was born to parents with a higher income. The findings of the report done by Graham also showed that those living with illness or an impairment were less likely to avoid economic hardships due to their persisting health difficulties and the discrimination they faced, meaning they were less likely to maintain long term employment. In turn, those who did belong to a higher socioeconomic group had a far better chance of staying in employment even when faced with ill health. It was also suggested within the report that socioeconomic position affects an individual’s health indirectly by influencing ‘intermediary factors’ such as their home and environment (e.g. poor living and working conditions) and psychosocial factors such as their stress levels and relationships within their family. (Graham, 2004)

On analysing Grahams’ report, there are certain criticisms that can be made on the reliability of her findings. For instance, all the data that featured in her report is secondary; none of it is her own. Therefore, the validity and reliability of the findings featured in her report is only as good as the people she collected it from. However, the research she did use was up -to – date and from credible resources.

There are cultural and structural explanations that also help us understand why there are inequalities in health between the genders and social classes. In relations to gender inequalities in health the cultural/ behavioural explanation suggests that men are far more likely to suffer ill health and die younger than women due to role models in society and the need for them to feel masculine. Because of this, young men in particular are more likely to smoke, drink alcohol and take drugs. A higher consumption of alcohol and drug taking in particular is thought to be a prime reason why young men are more likely to commit suicide. Women, on the other hand have been socialised to pay greater attention to their health and body as it is seen as a way to define their femininity. However, more women suffer from eating disorders than men do. (Waugh,C. et al 2008) Many feminists believe that women no longer have control over the health care they receive, and any health care they are given is suited to doctors and hospital hours. They also argue that women are left to suffer at the hands of male doctors, who are more likely to diagnose female patient’s symptoms as that of a mental illness. (Browne, 2008)

The structural/ materialistic explanation for inequalities in health has suggested that women are more likely to get ill because of their role in society as caregivers because they are more likely to suffer from stress and mental illness. Women who do part-time work are also more likely to suffer from ill health as they are less well paid and have fewer perks than women who are able to do full time work. Men on the other hand often do jobs that are dangerous, stressful and physically demanding (e.g. warehouse work, armed forces jobs etc.) The structural explanation also suggests that those who are in the lower social classes are more likely to suffer from ill health because they are less able to engage in healthy lifestyle choices due to lack of income. They are also more likely to do manual jobs and have less money to buy good quality foods. Lack of transport may make it harder to access medical care and stress of not having enough money can lead to further health problems, which may eventually lead to unemployment. Marxist’s claim capitalist society causes people to become ill as it aims to serve only the higher classes. Being unable to work is seen as the definition of sickness, whilst Doctors are seen as agents of social control with the power to sign people off work. Yet not working can equally make people ill by increasing the risk of ill health, depression and suicide. (Kirby,M. et al 1997)

Both explanations are equally valid; however, the structural explanation looks at the wider picture of why people in lower classes or certain genders are more likely to suffer from high morbidity and mortality rates, as they cannot afford healthy lifestyles like the higher classes. The cultural explanation gives insight into why one gender more than the other seeks health care and why data for morbidity if higher for women than men yet mortality levels are higher than men than in women. (Martin Holborn, 2004)

In conclusion, the findings in both the reports from the Health Committee and by Hilary Graham both show that the lower your social class, the higher your risk of suffering from poor health and lower life expectancy. Furthermore, the cultural explanation gives reason to why men are less likely to visit the doctor due to wanting to conform to masculine stereotypes, whereas women are encouraged to look after their health. Alternatively, the structural explanation gives greater insight into how your social class can affect your health by limiting your access to healthcare and the means to living a healthier lifestyle.

The concept of civic education had its origin in the ancient Greek city-states. ‘Citizen’ is the agent who react the ‘state’ politically. In Plato’s ideal state, there are three classes of citizens: rulers, soldiers, and the people. ‘Citizen’ of the different levels should accept different civic education. Duties of good citizen are depend on their abilities and role in life. They should do what their best suited to do, and they should create value for society. For example, ruler must have the virtue of wisdom; soldiers should have the virtue of courage. And the rest of the people, such as merchants and farmers must exhibit the virtue of moderation. In my opinion, the organization of Plato’s ideal city, every class’s responsibility is clearly stated; it makes them know their place and cultivates their civic patriotism.

After World War II, some countries are aware that such a narrow view of the civic education leads a lot of contradictions. Therefore, patriotism begins to fade. It is not just talk about rights and obligations, but more emphasis on universal values, such as equality, freedom, justice, and aims to train students to become citizens of the world.

In the contemporary scholarship on civic education J. Mark Halstead believe that civic education should be analyzed according to three aspect, namely the ‘about citizenship’, the ‘good citizenship’ and the ‘active citizenship’.

In ‘about citizenship’, civic education cultivate well-informed citizens. The ‘good citizenship’ emphasis students socialize in society, such as obedience, commitment, patriotism and authority of citizenship. In ‘active citizenship’, children should have active participation in the political, civil and social life of the community.

Davison and Arthur (2006) further stated that citizenship can be divided into passive citizenship and active citizenship.

In passive citizenship, as the member of society, citizen performs one’s obligations, such as obey laws, be polite. Also, citizen develops the ability to participate in society individually. The development of the critical thinking, and enable an individual to participate in society are necessary for ‘active citizenship’.

In Hong Kong, according to Leung, civic education cultivates the sense of belonging to China and the sense of pride of being a Chinese in ‘One Country, Two Systems’ policy.

According to the Basic Education Curriculum Guide of Moral and Civic Education, there are five priority values and attitudes that are essential to students’ personal and social development, such as ‘Perseverance, Respect for Others, Responsibility, National Identity and Commitment’.

The aim of civic education in Hong Kong is to help students to become knowledgeable and responsible citizens and committed to the well-being of their fellow humans.

In other hand, national education can be divided into five forms: ‘cosmopolitan nationalism’, ‘civic nationalism’, ‘cultural nationalism’, ‘anti-colonial nationalism’ and ‘totalitarian nationalism'(Leung, 2002).

First, ‘cosmopolitan nationalism’ is the all human ethnic groups are who on his mind believe that people are equal and show respect, deep concern and love, in disregard of race, gender, nationality, religion, class and believe that the improvement of mankind is the responsibility of individuals.

Second, ‘civic nationalism’ defines the nation as an association of people with equal and shared political rights, in disregard of race, color, creed, gender, language of ethnicity. Citizen’s participation in governing and policy of the nation is not limited.

Third, ‘cultural nationalism’ is a form of nationalism in which the high cohesion of nation by a shared culture. Cultural nationalism builds up a national identity by the same cultural traditions, historic territory, and the unity and national consciousness of the nation.

Fourth, ‘Anti-colonial nationalism’ defines the nation stand against oppressive, imperialist and colonial regimes. Citizen has strong desire to fight against foreign rulers of political and economic independence and racial equality.

Parmenter (2005) had proposed that national unity and national identity can be developed through national education. National education systems inevitably co-exist with nationalism. A nation can be unified by the administrative systems of national education systems. And become a sense of the ‘imagined community’ of the nation (Anderson, 1991).

The aim of National education feels they are take part in the national sense of belonging. Through National education, citizens are ‘educated’ to see themselves as part of the nation, and ‘educated’ into ways of behaving and thinking appropriately as a member of the nation (Reicher and Hopkins, 2001).

The Minister of Education in the People’s Republic of China, Yuan Guiren claims that all nationals should receive national education. And the former deputy director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, Chen Zuoer said that national education is essential in every nation, so Hong Kong people should have responsibility to contribute to the country. But some scholars refute the argument that why Hong Kong people have to accept to receive national education as a citizen. It showed the problem that there is a contradictory relationship between ‘civic education’ and ‘national education’.

Parmenter (2005) holds that National unity and national identity thrive on difference with outsiders, and this is where national education can come into conflict with cosmopolitan identity and citizenship, which is based on the premise that all people are equal and similar citizens of the world.

First, ‘National education’ is too much emphasis on increasing sense of belonging. If national education emphasize on increasing sense of belonging in a large part, national education fosters patriotism. According to Leung, identity is a two-edged sword, it can build up national patriotism of citizens, but it can also lead to serious consequences. ‘Totalitarian nationalism’ represents the term ‘patriotism’. It emphasizes the loyalty and absolute obedience to the state and the ideology of the party and its leaders. The love for the country is equivalent to the love for the ruling political party and its ideologies, and the citizen firmly believed that the ruling political party is the savior of the nation. Hong Kong people definitely reject education for totalitarian nationalism, because all related concepts communism, communist party, socialism and the politics in Mainland China. It very alien to people and political culture of Hong Kong people and they were afraid of the politics of Mainland China.

Also, Leung criticizes the education bureau discarded ‘civic education’ and change into “national education”. ‘National education’ excludes the universal value of ‘civic education’. Leung criticizes national education only focuses on emotional recognition, establish sense of identity through glory of nation. It will cover up all the faults of the party of nation, lack of criticism of the party, and ignore the civil and human rights. It not helps thinking about the discussion of human rights of the nation.

The core values of Hong Kong is freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law etc., is also known as the universal values of human rights, democracy, freedom. It is not expedient that Democracy and human rights is the value of belonging to the world of the country. Leung points out that the National domain of national education does not mention national issues from the point of view of the world. It may limit the horizons of the students, and narrow space of interpretation, lead the universal values change into the ‘Chinese characteristic values’

‘National education’ emphases on patriotic rituals like flag raising ceremonies. The flag-raising ceremony of national flag and SAR flag is raised every morning once a month. According to Fairbrother, patriotic rituals such as the flag-raising ceremony are formalities that have no educational purpose but indoctrination.

Leung believes that national education emphasize the Emotion and national identity, it ignore the critical thinking. According to Cheng, positive teaching materials of national education cannot nurture a critical thinking attitude on the part of students. Worries about the essential areas of civic education, such as human rights, democratic education were neglected because the national education is in high priority between national education and civic education.

Choi Po King pointed out that if the national education emphasized instill identify with the political consciousness of the country, it violate the principle of civic education, such as independent and critical thinking, emotional and irrational (Choi Po King, as cited in Leung, 1995).

The model of national education in China is outdated. Morley claims that a nation’s shrinking national boundaries are shirked and blurred through travel, media and electronic networks. The concept of territorial identity and citizenship is not necessary. Also, the concepts of ‘place’, and specific ‘place’ of their location, are changing (Morley, 2000).

Parmenter (2005) holds that there is no theoretical reason why there are conflict between national education and civic citizenship because the coexistence of state and world citizenship are accepted in the ancient Greek.

Individuals should realize that they have of multiple identities and they are in various territorial spheres of life. The concept of multiple identities is based on the notion of as a composite of multiple, often contradictory, self-understandings and identities.They think that they are “the I fluctuate among different and even opposed positions” (Hermans, Kempem & van Loon, 1992).

There is no contradiction between national identity and citizenship on the one hand, and cosmopolitan identity and citizenship. The co-existence of the two identities and citizenships is recognized to some extent in reality as well as theory.

‘Cosmopolitanism is a way of viewing the world that among other things dispenses with national exclusivity, dichotomous forms of gendered and racial thinking and rigid separations between culture and nature. Such a sensibility would be open to the new spaces of political and ethical engagement that seeks to appreciate the ways in which humanity is mixed into intercultural ways of life.’ (Stevenson, 2003)

The aim of such national education would be cosmopolitanism. It is because a critical and balanced national identity and sense of national citizenship can be achieved by the stimulation of the right of cosmopolitan identity and citizenship. People’s horizons can widen through national education. People’s identities not only focus on the nation, they can take a board view of the world.

The development of National education in Hong Kong is special, the identity of Hong Kong changes from a British colony into a Chinese Special Administrative Region. As early as in 1985, the Education Department ‘Guidelines on Civic Education in Schools’ require students to understanding China Affairs, patriotic and proud of being Chinese. Due to the political Environment, Hong Kong people’s understanding of ‘national identity’ is not clear, national education commenced in the absence of clear national concept. Although schools teach Chinese language and Chinese history, but only focus on knowledge of subjects. Civic education focused on understanding of the society, and the practice of the citizens in the world, not stressed explicitly to develop students’ sense of national identity.

The Guidelines on Civic Education in School (DCC, 1996) published in 1996 also emphasized education for human rights, democracy, education for the rule of law, and national education, global education of critical thinking (Leung, Chai & Ng, 2000). But this guideline is just policy documents, it avoids the contradiction between national education and Civic Education, national education should not simply bring into Civic Education. The guidelines stressed democracy, the rule of law, human rights education and critical thinking. But in other side, it emphasizes students’ positive values and attitudes and identity-building, and builds up a sense of closeness and belonging with the motherland. In my opinion, the aim of Civic Education, national education is different; it makes contradiction and confusion of identity.

The promotion of national education has become a central element in curriculum development since 1997. Soon after 1997, government circulars were issued to remind schools to raise the national flag on significant occasions and to use national symbols (Lee, 2008). Tung Chee-hwa , the first Chief Executive, highlighted national education and patriotism to develop a nation identity and called on the community to work together to foster patriotic Chinese citizens. In 2001 report on curriculum development, students should ‘know their national identity; do their utmost to contribute to the country and to society’. But still labeled as ‘civic education’ and was promoted gradually through practice participation.

A National Education Center was also established under the management of a pro-China education body, the Federation of Education Workers, in 2004. I participated in a tour in A National Education Center about celebration of the sixtieth anniversary of the victory in the Second Sino-Japanese War. One of the aims of the tour is ‘strengthen the national identity of motherland’. I visited lots of historical sights about the Second Sino-Japanese War and attend the seminar that titled ‘three years and eight months’, the period of the Japanese occupation of Hong Kong. I listen seriously the history of Second Sino-Japanese War and her personal experiences. I am impressed with what she said about the difficulties in war and she thinks what she does in the war or giving seminars to primary and secondary school or public is a blessing for her, because she can do for the country. It makes me understand the truth of loving country, just pay, without asking for anything in return.

In 2007 Policy Address, The HKSAR Government promotes “grow to love our motherland and Hong Kong, aspire to win honor and make contributions for our country.” The SAR government starts to promote National education from schools to communities. Nurturing awareness of national identity and national self-Sense of pride and a sense of responsibility there is interest in the implementation of “one country, two systems”, to maintain Hong Kong and the country held continued development and prosperity.

In school, Teachers and students are sponsored to visit the mainland through exchange programmes in order to gain a better understanding of the current development of China and to develop a sense of national identity through personal experience. In 2004, the Education and Manpower Bureau (EMB, later renamed EDB, the Education Bureau) launched a national education programme as part of the youth leadership award scheme, arranging for one hundred and seventy student leaders to enroll in an 11-day programme in Beijing (Lee, 2008).

Teachers, school middle managers and principals have also been invited to subsidized training programmes co-organized by local universities and mainland universities every year in the last decade (Lee, 2008).

According to the Policy Address 2008, the government has injected additional resources to provide more extensive mainland exchange opportunities for pupils, including upper primary and junior secondary students. The ‘Tonggen Tongxin’ (same root, same heart) programme, first introduced in 2008-9 by the EDB, is specially organized for upper primary and junior secondary students. In the school year of 2010-2011, the said programme provides 16 itineraries with designated themes accommodating 27,000 places for participating local teachers and students.

In addition, a consultation paper on the Moral and National Education Curriculum (EDB, 2011) was released early this year suggesting Hong Kong students to receive further political socialization in the primary and secondary school, with national education as an independent subject.

The guidelines on patriotic rituals from the EDB put great amount of resources into schools, communities and media to promote nationalistic education, the elements of citizenship education become unbalanced and not included in the mainstream curriculum, such as human rights, democracy and social justice(Tse, 2007).

In my school, my music teachers teach students singing the national anthem in music lessons and school assemblies. The British national anthem ‘God save the Queen’ was regarded as the anthem for Hong Kong before reverting to China in 1997. After 1997, ‘March of the Volunteers’, the anthem of the People’s Republic of China became Hong Kong’s anthem, it boosts teenagers’ sense of belonging to their country. Although I don’t have Liberal Studies lesson, my History teacher likes to tell us the current news and analyze the pros and cons of opinions. Also, my school invited some scholars for seminar, such as Allen Lee Peng Fei.

In communities, the international competition and events can foster Hong Kong people’s sense of belonging of China. The HKSAR government invited some famous national sportsmen, who succeeded winning in the Beijing Olympics attend the reunification celebration events in Hong Kong Stadium. The first spacewalk by a Chinese astronaut also heightened the sense of belonging of being Chinese, because Hong Kong people take pride in the athletes. It tightened links between Hong Kong and China.

Television announcements in public, an anthem plays in ‘Our Home Our Country’ before 6:30 news report; it shows the pictures of different classes of Chinese people, it means the Chinese people should stay together. The TV broadcasting programs ‘A Bite of China’ is a Chinese documentary television series about the traditional Chinese cuisine all around China in 2012. But it just show the positive way of China, such as Chinese culture. If Hong Kong people ignore the negative site of China, it limits the thinking and become political indoctrination because the ultimate goal of civic education is to cultivate rational, independent, critical thinking and active participation of citizens.

National Education cultivates students agree with the identity of the Chinese and enhance the students’ awareness of Chinese identity by participation and contribution of local, national and world affairs. There are the things that can enhance citizens’ identity and a sense of belonging. In my opinion, I don’t think that patriotism can be taught just like you cannot teach someone how to love somebody or something. I think every Hong Kong people should have a right to choose whether he or she love his or her country and agree or not with the culture of China, and a feeling that they are part of China. To make these decisions, Hong Kong people should understand more about their country China in three different ways. If most of the Hong Kong people have high standard of critical thinking, a mature civic society can be appear.

In conclusion, citizenship education could contribute to the development of open-minded national education for cosmopolitan and liberal cities like Hong Kong.

Every choice a person makes has consequences, whether they are positive or negative. Many times before a person makes a choice, he/she mentally calculates the cost and benefits of his/her choice. Other times some of the consequences may have not been intended or thought through. The feminist movement is an example of that. While the feminist movement accomplished great things for women, it also hindered women in other areas. Some of the problems related to the ironies of the feminist movement and the mixed message women were receiving. It began to change the way women made choices. Even though the feminist movement affected women’s choices, many women have chosen to quit their job in order to raise a family.

Because women were able to have jobs during the war, they realized they were no longer content to be housewives. In the 1960s most of the feminist movement was led by radical feminists. They began to fight for reproductive and employment rights. The Equal Pay Act was enacted in 1963. This meant that employers had to give employees the same amount of money for the same job. During this time abortion was made legal in all fifty states (“Feminsm”).

The third round of feminism began in the 1990s. This was led by many types of feminism. It dealt with more than just prejudices against women but also races and economic standing (“Feminsm”).

Feminism has many ironies that can be explored. It helps determine how the feminists made their choices and what they meant by them. Dr. Wendy Walsh, who is a clinical psychologist, has an interesting view on feminism. Even though she is a feminist herself, she believes that it did have negative consequences. She writes, “aˆ¦feminism didn’t liberate femininity. Feminism liberated masculine energy in women. It was a masculinist movementaˆ¦It pushed femininity in the closet.” (Walsh) That statement seems pretty accurate. Feminism did not encourage women to be more feminine. It encouraged women to be like men. Women were supposed to have the same jobs as men and achieve the same success. To many women, this was a good thing, but to others it was not. Walsh comments that women who liked their traditional role were hurt by that. They were then told that their job was not as important as a woman who works outside the home (Walsh).

The feminist movement seemed to start because women said they were unsatisfied being housewives. If that is true, then women should be happier now because they are pursuing careers. However, according to a poll done by ClubMom, a free national membership organization for moms, the results are the exact opposite. Working moms and stay-at-home moms were asked to rate various aspects of their life and to grade their overall satisfaction with life. Working moms rated “A” thirty three percent of the time while stay-at-home moms rated “A” fifty two percent of the time. They also rated their job as a mom. Stay-at-home moms gave themselves an “A” fifty one percent of the time while working moms only did forty five percent of the time. Interestingly just eight percent of moms would continue to work full time if they did not have to worry about finances (“New Poll”).

F. Carolyn Graglia, author of Domestic Tranquility: A Brief Against Feminism, also writes about the many ironies of feminism. Betty Friedan, Kate Millett, Germaine Greer and Gloria Steinem were some of the leading women’s rights movement leaders in the 1960s. They did not support women’s roles as a wife and mother, but Betty Friedan was the only one who had been a wife and mother (Graglia 13-14). It seems that the women should not speak against something they have never experienced. Maybe they wanted others to choose what they had chosen to make their choices more acceptable. Friedan did decide to divorce because she believed that she could not tell women to not get married while she herself was still in the awful institution. She claims that marriage “destroyed [her] self-respect.” (Graglia 13)

Some women still believe that women can be more satisfied caring for their children opposed to having a successful career. Suzanne Venker writes in Feminsm:Opposing Viewpoint about why she believed a woman should choose to stay home. She was an English teacher and then a full time mom. Venker argues that women seem to be unhappy in the workplace. She cites that people have spent over five hundred million dollars on self-help books in 1999 (Finsanisk). Another source says that women count for ninety percent of self-help (Smith). So the vast majority of the self-help books were sold to women. Venker believes that if careers were truly fulfilling women like they are supposedly supposed to do, then people would not need to buy so many self-help books (Finsanick).

Obviously, feminism had a tremendous impact on society. Women achieved the right to vote, have equal jobs, and own property. Many countries had women political leaders, and there were more females than males in many higher institutions. In the U.S., a woman ran for president and another almost became vice president. Husbands and wives also began to split the work more evenly in earning money, taking care of children, and maintaining the house (“Feminism”). Television changed from June Cleaver vacuuming in high heeled shoes to Clair Huxtable managing a house and her career as a lawyer. It gave women the opportunity to pursue a good career if that is what they wanted, or if they needed to due to finances. With all the changes that many believed to be positive, there were negative as well. Whether feminists intended for it to happen or not, the feminist movement, especially the radical one, brought about some negative consequences. The early feminist’s choices affected everyone.

The feminist movement affected women’s choices. The feminist seemed to focus on equality and women getting to have a choice. They wanted women to be able to choose to be a doctor or architect if that is what she wanted. But when women were given the right to a successful career, it almost became expected of them. Rebecca Scarlett said it like this, “Suddenly, women were no longer allowed to choose. Suddenly women had to be everything they had always been, and be everything men had always been, as well, or they would have to feel inadequate and ashamed!” (Scarlett) Now women who choose to stay home and take care of her children and house, are viewed as being “lazy.” People might think she is not smart enough hold or pursue another job (Scarlett). Feminists’ choices hurt women’s right to choose.

Sometimes people experience consequences as the result of their choices, and other times one must make a choice based on the consequences of choices made by the people around them. That is what many women have to do now. Radical feminists’ choose to devalue a woman’s role with her children and household. The consequences were that women are expected to pursue a career and now many women must make a choice: do they follow the feminist way or choose to take a different path. After she makes the choice she must see if her choices were worth the consequences. Other times women are forced to make choices whether they want to or not. Some mothers must work due to economic status or single parent homes. But many things are affected by the woman’s choice whether it was voluntary or necessary.

In the article in the book Feminsm, Venker cites Dr. Phil by saying “Life is about tough choices. I never encountered a successful person who didn’t have to sacrifice in one area of her life to be successful in another. If you put more into your career, kids and family suffer; if you put more into family, career suffers. That’s the bottom line.” (Finsanick)

In spite of the feminist encouraging women to seek employment outside the home many women are still choosing to stay home. In fact, in 2005 there were about 5.6 million stay-at-home moms (“The U.S. Census Bureau”) So, why would a woman choose to go to PTA meetings and change diapers when she could be a doctor or lawyer? It seems that women are realizing that it is hard to do it all. They are deciding to put their careers on hold for a few years while they focus on their family.

Iris Krasnow is an example of a woman who quit her job to stay home with her children. Krasnow has written a book about her journey entitled Surrendering to Motherhood about her journey. Glenn T. Stanton sums up her book in his article “Two Women Tell All.” Iris Krasnow grew up in the radical feminist period. She was an extremely successful journalist for UPI interviewing some of the most famous and interesting people in the world. Krasnow achieved the feminist goal but she was still empty. She began seeking different things to bring her fulfillment. She later married and they decided to have children. Krasnow and her husband wanted to have “four [children] by forty” and they did (Stanton). She then tried to have it all by pursuing her career and taking care of her family. Krasnow did this because she believed that her career gave her value and she could not imagine life without it (Stanton). One day when she was feeding her fours boy and surrounded by a mess, she realized something:

There are no shackles in their house, this is no jail. These kids are your ticket to freedom like nothing you have ever tasted, the kind that is not hinged on TV appearances or writing for Life magazine or being a size 6 again. It’s the liberation that comes from the sheer act of living itself. When you stop to be where you are, then your life can really begin… I realized for the first time in my life I was exactly where I was supposed to be. (Krasnow 157)

Iris Krasnow thought that she could have it all, but she realized that the choices she was making were not the best for her family and children. Her choices were based on what she believed was best for her family and what brought her personal fulfillment. She believes that “surrendering to motherhood was the most liberating and powerful thing she had ever done in her life.” (Krasnow 2-3)

In F. Carolyn Graglia’s book she explores how feminism has hurt women and families and why she chose to stay home. Glenn Stanton also summarizes the book. Graglia grew up with a single mother and was poor. She decided the ticket out of poverty was to become a lawyer. After college Graglia obtained a job at a Wall Street law firm in the 1950s. At that time it was not common for a woman to have a career like that. She had a successful career until she chose to stay at home when her first child was born. Graglia was not forced to do it; she did it because she wanted to. Like others she chose the choice that wasn’t popular. She chose to be a stay-at-home mom in the 1960s and 1970s. Graglia says that people were much more accepting of her choice to be a lawyer in the 1950s than they were of her choice to be a stay-at-home mom (Stanton). She believes that feminism “robbed women of their surest source of fulfillment.” (Graglia inside cover) She also believes that feminism tried to tell women that their job as a mother and wife were not valuable.

Candace Cameron Bure is another example of a woman who quit her job to stay home with her children. She is best known for her role as D.J. Tanner on Full House. She has also appeared on other T.V. shows, T.V. movies, and feature films. In 1996 she married Valeri Bure, who is now a retired hockey player. After she got married she decided to postpone her career to raise a family (“Career”) When doors were not opening for her in acting she believed it was God telling her to stay home. Bure considers it a great “privilege” to stay home (Rice). She counter argues what society tells women, “Our society says, ‘Work! Make more money! The career is great! But stay-at-home moms, you’re so not cool. Get going.’ But they’re wrong. I thank God, who alone is able to keep our hearts in the right place.” (Rice) After taking a break from her acting career she has returned to acting. Bure has been in several movies and plays Summer Van Horn on ABC Family’s “Make It Or Break It.” (“Career”)

People still vary greatly on the opinion if moms should work outside the home. People seem to judge others choices strongly. Parents and mothers, in particular are judged for every choice they make. They are judged from what they feed their children to where they send them to school. A woman’s choice to stay at home or pursue a career is not judged any less. No matter what the woman chooses, she will be judged for it. Some may agree with her choice and others may tell her that she made the wrong choice. Some people believe that people are becoming more accepting of whatever choice a woman decides to make. Women on either side of the issue know that each family must decide what choice is best for them. In the article “Mothers Who Chose to Stay Home” Elizabeth Drew School who made the choice to stay home does not judge the choices of other women. Her choice to stay home was best for her family (Gardner).

The choices that a person makes also depend on the culture and expectations that a person was raised with. According to Jolene Ivey in the black culture staying home is not readily accepted. Since the civil rights movement gave them more rights to jobs and education, people did not think it was wise for them to reverse that. When Jolene Ivey decided to stay home with her children she felt like she was alone among her black friends. She then decided to start a support group called Mocha Moms to support black women wanting to stay home (Gardner). When a person has support and encouragement around them it makes his or her choices much easier.

Some mothers choose to stay home because they realize their job will not accommodate their new lifestyle. Elizabeth Scholl is an example of that. She had a master’s degree and was very career focused. She even planned having a baby around a project. When she learned that her employer was only going to grant her six weeks of maternity leave she knew that she would not be ready to leave her baby at that time. Scholl said that babies don’t even hold their head up by six weeks. She requested to work part time, but her job would not allow it. Then she decided to quit. Scholl says that it “was truly the hardest decision I’ve ever made. But I came to the realization that these jobs are going to be there when I go back to work.” (Gardner) Adjusting to being at home was “very difficult” for her in the beginning (Gardner).

Many jobs are not very accommodating for mothers. Some careers do not allow women to work part time or to work from home. Also many times when families calculate child care expenses and taxes women are not making enough to justify working (Gardner).

Women have many reasons as to why they choose to stay home in spite of the feminist movement telling women to pursue a career. Part of it is a cycle. Women decided that they wanted to alter their lifestyle. They chose to pursue careers and devalue being a housewife. That also resulted with women being unhappy. Because of that some women still decided to choose to stay home. Many women sacrifice their career in order to stay at home with their child. Whether they are quitting their job as a desk clerk, actress, or lawyer, many women are realizing how difficult it is to balance a career with family. Women are being set free by realizing they do not have to do it all. They can be fulfilled by being a wife and mother. Many women believe their choice to stay home is well worth it.

“Conflict is a normal discord resulting from individuals or groups that vary in attitudes, beliefs, values or needs. “According to conflict theory, disparity exists inasmuch as those who control the vast majority of resources in a society and those who do not. Who ever controls the property and resources will also concentrate wealth to influence economics, media and the legal system to benefit them and to protect their interests. Conflict theory holds that social order is maintained by domination and power, rather than consent and agreement. “Child support has become a multi-billion dollar industry in this country. The States have major economic incentives in collections which is the driving force behind the destruction of the American family. Child Support Enforcement actually began more than 100 years ago with legislation known as the Uniform Desertion and Non-Support Act http://test.washburnlaw.edu/profiles/faculty/activity/_fulltext/elrod-linda-1990-6journalofthemericanacademymatrimoniallawyers103.pdf The system then evolved as a federal child support and paternity legislation was enacted in January 1975” http://adrr.com/law1/csp11.htm . Among other things, child support enforcement services were required for families receiving assistance under AFDC, FC, and Medicaid programs. Prior to the enactment of the federalized policies for child support enforcement, the US had the hisghest compliance of child support in the world. At stake are many questions as to the policies and procedures implemented to justify the means to an end. Unfortunately what is thought to be done in the “best interest of the child” could be further from the truth. The legal definition for “in the best interest of the child” is financial support.

” Under former subsection (4) of this section, parental earning capacity is a factor to be considered with the best interests of a child in determining the amount of child support. A determination of the best interests of a child or children includes a judicial decision based on evidence, not exclusively on a parental stipulation for disposition of a question concerning the parties’ child or children. Schulze v. Schulze, 238 Neb. 81, 469 N.W.2d 139 (1991).” http://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=42-364

If not the children then, who would benefits the most from the shift in government policy as it pertained to child support enfoecement and collections?

“The current US form of child support enforcement was derived out of Soviet Family Law (n/k/a Russian Family Law), Article 81. It was adopted in 1976 in the USA under what is known as the “Wisconsin Child Support Enforcement Model” or “Wisconsin Model” and was promoted in the United States by Irwin Garfinkel” http://adrr.com/law1/csp11.htm . It involves the income shares approach–how much each parent makes determines how much child support is paid; rather than the true cost of raising children. As the Communist Manifesto says: “Each according to ability; each according to his needs”. Our child support system was conceived and implemented as part of the former Communist way of doing things. . From then on, the corporate government set up a massive, taxpayer funded industry that has been an abject failure. Other than terrorizing people, destroying families, and harming children, the child support enforcement industry is nothing more than a debt collection agency with KGB power.

“Robert Williams’ involvement in child support issues coincides with the formation of his company, Policy Studies Inc. in 1984. We find no record of his involvement in family questions, no history of academic achievement in the field or even evidence that he’s qualified to deal with complicated policy / design issues. He came from nowhere in the mid-1980s as the Office of Child Support Enforcement’s choice to provide technical assistance to the states in developing child support guidelines and was able to provide nothing except extreme policy views. Without having any legal authority, or a logical or scientific basis for his recommendations, he has to a very great extent dictated child support policy in all states ever since. Most disturbing of all is that his business operations include a collection company that takes a percentage of the amount of child support paid. Mr. Williams therefore has a direct financial interest in increasing award amounts. By the time the Child Support Enforcement Amendments were proposed in 1984, which began a dramatic expansion in the office’s size, budget, and powers, most politicians were talking as if “deadbeat dads” were the nation’s most serious problem” http://adrr.com/law1/csp11.htm .

Marx viewed the ruling class attempt at defining what constituted a family as a way of controlling the masses. The ideal type by definition was really only obtainable by their standards which the masses sought to emulate. The pacification of the working class has been acheieved by way of “emotionally charged issues”. These issues are perpetuated by a mass media campaigns created to aid in the implementation of policies which cause the masses to act against their own self interest. As long as “class consciousness” is not realized, explotation of the family with current child support enforcement polices will continue to aileinate the working poor family structure.

Marxist theory contends that for continued success of capitalism to occur, there must be a large group of underpaid, uninsured, uneducated workers. Capitalism has always relied on free, or nearly free, labor, and it cannot continue without it. Alienation from the process of parenting occurs as fathers are marginalized . Prior to the Soviet form of child Support, parents could settle their alimony and support obligations through agreement or court. However admittedly during this period men had more power and women where seen as caretakers which left them at the mercy of the fathers. It is important to note however that the support system was geared mainly towards middle class and upper class families. Family is no longer autonomous but is now an object of exploitation as a vehicle to produce more revenue for the state. The more money a state collects on child support the more matching dollars they receive from the feds. It is important to understand the “ economic incentive” of the states . It is in the best interest of the states to have a judicicial system that sets the initial payments of support ( arrears ) so high there is no way for a the lower class or the poor to pay. From the beginning of the process the NCP has accumulated thousands of dollars of debt with no legal representation or rebuttal of the exorbanat amout. Capitalism buys labor only, and it rewards labor with only money. For Marx, this is a form of prostitution. A win win for the system because now they have a guaranteed pool of laboureres willing to sell the only thing they have, labor. The state then provides the labor to which the laborer looses through sanctions and wage garnishments before he / she even sees a dime of their pay.

Karl Marx saw society as fragmented into groups that contend for social and economic resources. ”“Marx maintained society is in a state of continuous conflict due to competition for limited resources” . Marx viewed society as stratified which comprise 3 clasess. . The bourgeoisie own the modes of production and their income is derived from profit. They produce nothing but it is this class where over 90 percent of the wealth of a society ids concentrated. The landowners derive their income from rent. The proletariat own their labor and sell their labor to the highest bidder. The very nature of capitalism ensures the last group will become consumers of the very goods they produce as workers. The products and services the workers spend their money on are returned as profit to the burgoise or wealthy. Wealth is ownership of property, not status or income. It is this dynamic groups and individuals advance their own interests and conflict ensues over control of the socio-economic resources. Social order is maintained by the majority who control the bulk of the social, political and economic resources. Those with little to no investment or influence are basically coerced to “go along to get along” or face the wrath of those who control the wealth and resources. This is not a symbiotic relationship of shared values or beleifs between classes but one of power and domination. The political and economic will of the wealthy upper class influences all aspects of that society’s structure. There is more deference to class, race, and gender in this view for as much as they are seen as the grounds of the most relevant and lasting characteristics of conflict in social structure. What is strikingly similar with the issue of child support enforcement is that it’s coercive nature has been legitimaze by law that states may profit from it. Marx theorized how “ailienation of workers” is a by product of capitalism:

“In what, then, consists the alienation of labor? First, in the fact that labor is external to the worker, i.e., that it does not belong to his nature, that therefore he does not realize himself in his work, that he denies himself in it, that he does not feel at ease in it, but rather unhappy, that he does not develop any free physical or mental energy, but rather mortifies his flesh and ruins his spirit. The worker, therefore, is only himself when he does not work, and in his work he feels outside himself. He feels at home when he is not working, and when he is working he does not feel at home. His labor, therefore, is not voluntary, but forced–forced labor. It is not the gratification of a need, but only a means to gratify needs outside itself. Its alien nature shows itself clearly by the fact that work is shunned like the plague as soon as no physical or other kind of coercion exists.” http://faculty.frostburg.edu/phil/forum/Marx.htm

Child support enforcement policies have also ailienated parents from their children. The way the Child support system has evolved naturally produces conflict of all parties envolved. Parents are placed in advasarial roles by the state and children are objects used to justify a means to an end. What is disguised as a moral imperative is nothing more than greed which has ushered in another form of indentured servitude. Many parents who do not have custody of their children are ordered by the legal system to pay by any means necessary or, face revocation of their civil liberties, including jail. What was once considered a civil family matter has now been criminalized by federal and state government. . “The alienation of the worker from his product does not only mean that his labor becomes an object, an external entity, but also that it exists outside him, independently, as something alien, that it turns into a power on its own confronting him, that the life which he has given to his product stands against him as something strange and hostile.” Now the worker is not only ailienated from his labor but, from the child as well. The entire dynamic is fueld by conflict as the workers’ paycheck and his/her children become the resource objects where policies are legislated to coerce payment to reimburse the state for resources paid to AFDC, TANF recipients.

In summary, Marxist Conflict Theory maintains that the basic financial inequities between the owners of production and the workers results in two different value systems existing in the same society. Because of disparities in the reward structure, working class people naturally (and most righteously) will feel that the society has used them up. Religion, family values, the work ethic are all devices used by the ruling class to blind working people to the reality of their situation. Working people become alienated from each other and their families. Until they realize, as a group, the truth and rise up, class counciousnees will not occur.

Conflict in a system is intensified in three ways. First, when there is intensification of deprivation, or the perception of deprivation, between subsystems (i.e., “His is bigger than mine!”, “You can’t cut funding in my district!”, and so on) relations between system units (people) are strained. Second, when legitimacy of existing distribution of power and wealth is withdrawn or changed, as in a divorce, remarriage, a new governmental administration, system units tend to grab as much of the available wealth as possible. The third way is a mediator–increased conflict is dependent on the degree of emotional involvement of the system units. If emotional involvement is low, conflict will not escalate.

Functionalists are critical of the conflict theory. Functionalists posit that it’s not always about money and people are not always acting out of their own self interest for monetary gain. Functionalist believe in the legitamcy of institutions because they serve an important function to society. They believe you can really succeed with the current institutionalized system by just working hard to acheive economic success In families.

A child soldier is an individual categorized as a youth that is recruited by government military and rebel forces to fight, kill, loot, destroy property, lay mines, act as messengers and sometimes used as a sexual slave (Kimmel and Roby, 2007). Children lose their sense of identity, otherwise called “lost children”, and are found wielding small weapons and taking the lives of others (Druba, 2002). Child Soldiering is evident in European, African, Asian and South American countries, although the focus of this essay will be on child soldiers in Uganda and Sierra Leone, where the issue has been prevalent for many years. These countries have been in a state of war for a prolonged period of time. This causes Uganda and Sierra Leone to be affected in numerous ways such as heavy drains on resources like land, labour and capital. In a war-torn country, these problems are likely to allow for a lowered respect of people’s human worth in respect to military service, making children “an easy prey” (Hoiskar, 2001).

According to The United Nations Children’s Fund (commonly known as UNICEF), there is an estimated 300, 000 youth that are involved in the practice of child soldiering today. Due to the harsh conditions that these children are faced with and the effects that they have on these children, a gruelling reality is unfolded. Child soldiering has been coined “one of the worst forms of child abuse and labour” (Kimmel and Roby, 2007). Many would believe that children are forcibly recruited into rebel forces. They would be correct, although many also join voluntarily. Some reasons for voluntary entry of youth into military roles are for fear of their lives, to protect their families, and for opportunities like access to food and clothing for those who are impoverished. Sadly many of these children that join out of their own free will, never see their families again and are typically estranged from their family members purposely by rebel forces in order to gain control and authority over the youths. It benefits the rebel groups if the children gain a sense of inclusion and belonging within the military setting to ensure they will not seek better opportunities outside of their services and also try to re-establish ties with their families. Doing such things would likely stop these children from re-entering the forces voluntarily (Hoiskar, 2001).

To consider a circumstance in which children were forcibly recruited into the military in Uganda is the Lord’s Resistance Army. War has devastated Northern Uganda since 1986 (Sverker 2006). There is a popular rebel group called the LRA or Lord’s Resistance Army. They overthrew the Ugandan government and were known for abducting children. The forcible recruitment of child soldiers is common not only to the LRA but other rebel groups in the third world because child labour is widely known to be cheap and therefore poses many benefits. Many of the youth abducted by this group were taken during night raids on rural homes, counting anywhere from 60, 000 – 80, 000 children. These abductions were known to last from one day to ten years, averaging eight months approximately. The children were given only a few months of training and not long after this were they given guns (Annan and Blattman, 2010).

The Lord’s Resistance Army also affected Sierra Leone. Since the beginning of the civil war in 1991, one million children have been displaced and some of these children on more than one occasion. Fifteen to twenty thousand have become members of this armed group, most of them being under the age of ten years old. Sierra Leone is greatly concerned with the reintegration of these children abducted by the LRA (MacMullin and Loughry, 2004).

Although child soldiering is not a recent phenomenon it has substantially increased since the end of the Cold War. Not only are numbers increasing but there is also great difficulty in implementing international legal standards due to reasons such as failed states, internal conflicts, organized crime, minorities and vulnerable groups and mobile or displaced populations. When looking at modern societies that underwent transformations with the establishment of the minimum age for service in national armed forces, populations began to be controlled by mandatory public schooling and general conscription, examples being the scout movement and physical education. In attempts to better Uganda and Sierra Leone’s standing on the issue of child soldiering, one of the main problems seems to be declining educational background and poor reintegration of the child soldiers (Vautravers, 2008).

Problems such as educational decline and poor reintegration of these war-torn children into these African societies have a devastation impact on the economy. With little attention to integration programs in the third world and great difficulty with implementing international policies on child labour such as military service, earnings and occupational opportunities for these children drop. These factors affect labour market success greatly (Annan and Blattman, 2010). Child soldiering in the third world is a topic of importance to me. In high school I took part in a fundraising charity for which I and many other students raised enough money to restore seven child soldiers in Africa. This event opened my eyes to the issue of child soldiering, particularly in Uganda and Sierra Leone, where statistics show it is most prevalent. In this essay I will be arguing that Uganda and Sierra Leone’s tendency to replace adult soldiers with youths is due to as well as contributing to their destitute economy.

Theoretical Backing:

Taking a look at Modernization theory, child soldiering is deemed “backward” or immoral in comparison to Westernized ideals. The history of child labour in Western societies is related to the history of how children were partners in a family economy. For example, in the eighteenth century, industrialization led to the employment of very small children. Transitioning into the nineteenth century, children played an important role in key industries like coal mining and textiles. The use of children as labourers was normal in these time periods for it was a necessity for the family income. Every member of a family was needed to contribute to the family’s wealth in order to live comfortable and in many circumstances just scrape by. As the end of the nineteenth century was nearing, the essential role of children’s labour began to decline (Schrumpf, 2008). The shift of social roles and responsibilities brought about by war is greatly linked to the breakdown of societal structures and long-standing morals. Children’s involvement in war defies the established and generally accepted norms and values in regard to those responsibilities of children and adults (Honwana, 2006).

When it comes to combating the prevalence of child soldiers in third world countries, it is important to consider the definitions of both a soldier and a child. Any common dictionary will define a soldier as a person who serves in an army or is engaged in any military service for a particular cause. A child on the other hand is an individual between birth and full growth, a son or a daughter with words such as foolish, petty and immature being tacked to it to portray the Westernized concept of behaviour akin to children (Collins, 2008). Therefore placing children in a position of authority over adults during war is contradictory of Westernized conceptualizations of what children are typically supposed to represent in a society.

Likewise, the prevalence of child soldiers in Uganda and Sierra Leone develops a sense of patriarchy (Murphy, 2003). Modernization theory suggests that the third world should adopt the first world’s strategies for economic and societal success. This can be seen as patriarchy. In other words, this demonstrates a father-child type of relationship between the first and third world in which the first world attempts to better the third world through coercion and assimilation while not attempting to necessarily cater to cultural differences and perspectives. This is exactly what the military did to child soldiers when not considering the deleterious effects on the children which caused their failure to be reintegrated into society in turn causing economic hardship for both nations.

As previously stated, Modernization theory is based solely on Eurocentric ideas of progress. This theory’s goal was to create economically advanced societies with populations living according to appropriate moral codes. Firstly, child soldering can be seen as an act against Western morality. Secondly, economic modernity is seen a positive achievement. Modernization theory attempted to create a strong image of the third world to developed regions of the world and attract positive foreign investment which in turn would contribute to the poverty-stricken economies. The notion of Uganda and Sierra Leone as being incapable war-torn societies comprised of lost children unable to be reintegrated may not be as desirable for foreign investors.

Research and Analysis:

Child soldiering is directly related to a country’s current economical stance. The effect of war on Uganda and Sierra Leone is devastating, as the nation’s economy declines as capital and land are destroyed and people displaced. A high level of economic development is an important factor in establishing domestic peace. To prove this, of the ten states involved in armed conflicts from 1994-1998, no use of child combatants was evident. These places being: Cameroon, Comoros, Egypt, Guinea-Bissau, Lesotho, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria and Senegal. One of the dominant shared characteristic of these ten places is that all of them had a medium rate of economic development (Hoiskar, 2001).

Child soldiering has a very large impact on the economy as well as education.

“Injuries to human capitol could hinder a nation’s productivity and growth for decades” (Annan and Blattman, 2010). Youth’s earnings noticeably drop by a third, their skilled employment halves, and schooling drops by a year. These cause consequences for lifetime labour market performance. A survey was conducted in Northern Uganda where an unpopular rebel group has forcibly recruited youth – tens of thousands – for twenty years. This abduction is what creates the impact on education and earnings. It is the educational deficit that largely impedes labour market success in Uganda. A widely known example is the Lord’s Resistance Army which was known for abducting children because child labour is widely known to be cheap and therefore benefitting of the present, already poor economy. Many of the youths were taken during night raids on rural homes, counting anywhere from 60, 000 to 80, 000 children. Abductions ranged from one day to ten years, averaging eight months approximately. Only a few months after training, the children received guns. Now, no more than one thousand youth are thought to remain with the LRA at this time, the remainder being those that had perished during combat or from unsatisfactory living conditions (Annan and Blattman, 2010).

This causes the interruption of education. These youth often complain of difficulty when re-entering into the school system, which creates a wide gap in education limiting their options in the labour market. Labour market performance suffers in the quality of work of child soldiers, not the quantity. This abduction appears to interrupt the ability to accumulate skills and capital and thus “stalls productive employment” (Annan and Blattman, 2010). Additionally, abductees are twice as likely to be illiterate than non-abductees (Annan and Blattman, 2010).

Child soldiers are a known threat to national security and the stability of post-war political order, paying close attention to the lack of educated populations and increasing aggression among the nation’s members. This aggression is known as the “gun mentality” which is an adopted attitude from the military. War becomes a source of “personal enrichment and empowerment”. Keep in mind that many of these children are born into war and accept that war is a normal way of life. These children become motivated by patriotism and ethnic power domination which is much like brainwashing. It is unfortunate that not much commitment and sustained effort is put into reintegration of these suffering children. In Uganda and Sierra Leone, child soldiers are treated as a lost generation (Francis, 2007). Despite many opinions about child soldiers being useless, there is evidence in former-war torn and post-conflict societies that suggests ex-child soldiers can in fact be reintegrated into normal society. The challenges of protecting these children are important to address. Although it is difficult for international laws to be instilled in the third world due to contrasting ideals and varying definitions of what child soldiers and child labour are, what is known as “paper protection” is now helping to make international laws protecting children in conflict zones enforceable since 2006. It is important to remember that this is only an attempt and not a successful endeavour (Francis, 2007).

Conclusion:

“Tasks performed by child soldiers are the ‘new face’ of the traditional child labour practices across Africa”, armed conflict being just an extension of these traditional practices (Francis, 2007). Although Child Soldiering is commonly addressed as an issue harmful to the children partaking in the military actions alone, this essay thoroughly demonstrated that it can also effect a country’s entire economy international investment interests. The direct and indirect effects of child soldiering on Uganda and Sierra Leone’s economy is evident and explored through a Modernist perspective using Rostow’s Modernization theory as critical analytical support. Child soldiering makes difficult the reintegration of children into society and also disadvantages children in respect to their education. Education in the army for these children is not necessary. Not only is education discouraged but these children are taken from their families and homes at a pivotal point in their adolescent school years.

Children leaving the military forces in Africa face higher risk for psychological problems and alienation. They are rarely reintroduced with their family members, often because they are forced to kill them prior to entering the army. This generation of child soldiers is what the countries depend on for economic growth. If these children are already struggling with reintegration as well as obtaining their education, the country’s economical prospects seem bleak. It is for these reasons that this paper has addressed both how and why child soldiering in Uganda and Sierra Leone has lead to these nations’ economical and political downfalls.

Reference Page

Annan, Jeannie and Blattman, Christopher. (2010). The Consequences of Child

Soldiering. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(2) Retrieved

November 8, 2010, from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162

Blattman, Christopher. (2007). Causes of Child Soldiering: Theory and Evidence From

Northern Uganda. Annual Convention of International Studies, Retrieved

November 8, 2010, from http://www.prio.no/upload/3598/Blattman-ISA-2007

Collins Canadian English Dictionary. (2008). “Child” and “Soldier”. Harper Collins

Canada.

Druba, Volker. (2002). The Problem of Child Soldiering. International Review of

Education, 48(3) Retrieved November 8, 2010, from

http://www.springerlink.com/content

Finnstrom, Sverker. (2006). Wars of the Past and War in the Present: The Lord’s

Resistance Movement/Army in Uganda. The Journal of the International

African Institute, Retrieved February 20, 2011, from

http://resolver.scholarsportal.info.proxy.queensu.ca/resolve/17500184/v76i0002/

200_wotpawtlrmiu

Francis, David J. (2007). ‘Paper Protection’ mechanisms: Child Soldiers and the

International Protection of Children in Africa’s Conflict Zones. Journal of

Modern African Studies, 45(2) Retrieved February 20, 2011 from

http://resolver.scholarsportal.info.proxy.queensu.ca/resolve/0022278x/v45i0002/2

07_pmcsatociacz

Hoiskar. (2001). Underage and Under Fire: an Enquiry into the Use of Child Soldiers.

Childhood, 8(3) Retrieved November 10, 2010, from

http://journals2.scholarsportal.info.proxy.queensu.ca/details-sfx.xqy?uri=/

Honwana, Alcinda. (2006). Child Soldiers in Africa. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Retrieved November 8, 2010, from http://books.google.ca

Kimmel, Carrie and Roby, Jini. (2007). Institutionalized Child Abuse: the Use of Child

Soldiers. International Social Work, 50(6) Retrieved November 9, 2010, from

http://journals2.scholarsportal.info.proxy.queensu.ca/details-

Loughry, Maryanne and MacMullin, Colin. (2004). Investigating Psychosocial

Adjustment of Former Child Soldiers in Sierra Leone and Uganda. Journal

Of Refugee Studies, Retrieved February 10, 2011, from

http://journals1.scholarsportal.info/tmp/3974326444682001496.pdf

Murphy, William P. (2003). Military Patrimonialism and Child Soldier Clientalism in the

Liberian and Sierra Leonean Civil Wars. African Studies Review, 46(2) Retrieved

February 10, 2011, from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.queensu.ca/sici

Schrumpf, Ellen. (2008). Child Labour in the West. Encyclopedia of Children in

History and Society, Retrieved November 10, 2010 from

http://www.faqs.org/childhood/Bo-Ch/Child-Labor-in-the-West.html

Vautravers, Alexandre J. (2008). Why Child Soldiers are Such a Complex Issue. Refugee

Survey Quarterly, 27(4) Retrieved February 10, 2011, from

http://journals2.scholarsportal.info.proxy.queensu.ca/details-

sfx.xqy?uri=/10204067/v27i0004/96_wcsasaci.xml

Child Socialising SocietySocialisation

Every child comes into this world like wet clay, completely bereft of any vices, habits and behavioural patterns. Socialising is the process by which the child moulds itself and learns the process of interacting and surviving in society. There are various key factors that influence this process – the family, the peers, the school, society and religious beliefs. The first point of contact to the child and also the most important factor is always the family.

The ethics and behaviour that is followed at home is always imbibed unconsciously by the child. Parents are generally role models for children. Hence the socializing skills are passed on in most cases to the offspring. Elder siblings are also a source of influence. It is because of this reason that in the joint family system that existed previously in India, the children were always better adjusted to society. They had such a plethora of individuals to study and imbibe from that under any given circumstances in life, they would adjust and adapt freely.

But in the present nuclear family system, the parents play an even more important role in shaping a child’s behavioural patterns. And even in the same family no two children can be the same. This is where the nature versus nurture debate comes in. The genetically ingrained nature has to be nurtured to conform to the rules of society. The most absorptive years in one’s life is till the age of 10. An individual is always on the path of learning but the foundation of what a person becomes is laid during these formative years.

Various societies inculcate varied socializing skills amongst their members. It does not indicate that one culture is superior to the other. It just depends on the way that the civilization under study has progressed. A civilization which has cultivated its young generation with a common set of rules and a uniform educational system is more likely to be homogenous and more at harmony amongst themselves. But on the other hand it is also seen that heterogeneous communities, like the United States of America, benefit from the presence of various ethnic minority communities. Each minority community brings along with it, its culture, its ethnicity, their customs etc. Having so many socializing influences makes the parent society a more tolerant one. 1

There are also found to be two types of socializing, depending on the nature of factors that influence them. Positive socializing is one in which a person learns through good and happy experiences. Parents teaching their kids from their experiences, learning from books or from peers are some example of positive socializing. Positive socializing can take on the form of natural socializing and planned socializing.

Find out how our expert essay writers can help you with your work…

Natural socializing is when a child through his own inquisitiveness starts exploring and learning from the various situations around him/her. The way a child responds to such situations is generally genetically ingrained. Planned socializing is when various external factors like parents, teachers, school curriculum, religious doctrines and social dictates try to change the internal response system of the child to conform to more socially acceptable norms.

Negative socializing happens when a person understands or begins to comprehend after undergoing a bad experience or ‘learning the hard way’ as it is said. Learning the valuable lesson, that over speeding is dangerous, after meeting with an accident is an example of negative socializing. The victim of a rape too undergoes the trauma of negative socializing after which she shrinks into her own shell and abhors social contact.

Life is always a mixture of positive and negative experiences. The more positive experiences in socializing one has, the happier or more positive the person gets. More negative socializing in a person’s life gets him demoralised and unhappy. At any given point in time an individual is usually the sum total of his prior socialisation or past experiences. 2

A person does not have any hold over choosing ones parents and place of birth. Thus, effectively a person has no control over the initial socializing influences that one gets in the first 10 or 20 yrs of ones life. But it depends on a person as to how he uses his prior socializing skills and observation power to make a better tomorrow for himself. He should learn from his past and from the situations around himself to better himself. Thus self actualization will set in and a person can work towards his dream of a better tomorrow.

1. http://anthro.palomar.edu/social/soc_1.html

2. http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/faculty/baldwin/classes/soc142/scznDEF.html

3. http://www.delmar.edu/socsci/rlong/intro/social.html

4. Writers Own Analysis

Your life chances and opportunities depend on the social circumstances of the family you were born into. discuss drawing upon academic literature and research examples

The likelihood of a child succeeding in life is still largely determined by their family’s income and social position. This essay will begin by introducing the debates which centre around this topic. It will then go on to examine four key domains which affect a Childs future life chances: family income, education, class status and family background.

The concept of life chances was originally introduced by Max Weber who believed that factors such as low, economic position, status and power were interlinked and together presented the problem of poorer life chances in the future. In current literature life chances signifies the opportunities which are available for people to improve there quality of life in the future for example access to quality education. Some of these influences are likely to be affected by the social circumstances of the family to which they are born into. This could be directly: well educated parents, all things being equal, will probably provide a more intellectually stimulating home-life than those parents who left school early. Other influences will be indirect: better-educated parents may have higher than average incomes and hence be able to finance educational excursions, or in other ways to provide life enhancing experiences for their offspring. some of these additional opportunities will be cumulative, reinforcing other positive characteristics, while others may serve to compensate for some forms of disadvantage.

Some people believe that it is strictly genes that affect our opportunities in life. Research focusing on the causal relationship between genes and subsequent IQ, range from 0 to 80% this provides inconsistent results. Recent research, has suggested that genetic and environmental factors are not distinct determinants of intelligence and life chances. Instead it is the interaction between these two factors which gives rise to a child’s intelligence levels. The role that nurture has to play in developing intelligence is clearly demonstrated from data published by Inequality in the early cognitive development of British children. The data suggested that the social circumstances of the family influenced future educational attainment. Those children brought up in families with low Socio-economic Status (SES) with attainment levels ranked as low, at 22 months, were also prone to have low attainment at age ten. On the other hand those children from a high SES background were as likely to show high attainment at age ten, even if their attainment was ranked low at 22 months. This data suggests that it is nurture and the social circumstances of the family which influences the future chances of these children and not their initial genetic abilities.

Mayer notes that children who are born into low income parents also seem to have less success than those parents who have more money. Children from low income families also tend to score lower on measurers of cognitive ability, more likely to drop put of school, to have behavioural problems and essentially earn less in later life. This is drastically demonstrated in a 1970 British cohort survey showing that at age 26 young adults experience an earnings penalty of 9% if they were brought up in a household with an income below half the average (after controlling for educational attainment) therefore this suggests that young people from poor backgrounds are disproportionately observed at the lower end of the earnings distribution when they are in work. Further research in the US by Isaac (2007) which focused on the intergenerational aspect of income focusing on families economic position and how this is influenced by that of there parents: He found that 42 percent of children born to parents in the bottom fifth of the economic distribution remain in this section as adults with only 23 percent rising to the second fifth, meanwhile 39 percent of children born to parents at the top of the income distribution remain at the top, with only 23 percent moving downwards to the second fifth.

From this research alone it is clear to see that a parents income is influencing there children’s future income opportunities. One possible reason for this difference is that of social class. The role of SES is well-documented in the literature concerning life chances. Using the National Child Development Stufies and the British Cohort study, Carneiro et al (2007) and Blanden et al (2006) illustrated that there is clearly a strong relationship between a child’s social and cognitive abilities and their parents’ SES.

This has been demonstrated by Fienstein (2003) who found that those children who were originally brought up in low socio economic status background who scored poorly on cognitive tests at an early age were more likely to remain with low scores as they grew through the life course, however those children from a higher socio economic status with lowe scores were much more likely to catch up. These results from the NCDS and the BCS do allow for informative feedback However in order to test the validity of these findings it is very important that these relationships are tested throughout generations. This recent research has been carried out by Sylva et al (2007) who analysed data from a recent programme the Effective Pre-School and Primary Education (EPPE) programme which aimed to test children’s cognitive attainment (reading and mathematics) from that age of three to the end of Key Stage 2.