Modern Family

Chappel, James

doi:10.1353/dss.2017.0082

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cooper acknowledges that a generation of welfare-rights activists in the 1960s and 1970s fought, with some success, to create more equitable forms of welfare, and ones that were more available to non-traditional families such as unmarried women with children. But as historian Chappel (2017) summarizes: "The expansion of the welfare state, coupled with attacks on the nuclear family by feminists, gay rights activists, and other countercultural forces, generated a backlash." He goes on to explain what this backlash in the 1970s meant: entitlement .…”

Section: The Political Backdrop To Privatized Parentingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[T]hey forged a powerful alliance, heralding a sweeping transformation of American political economy from the Reagan years to the present. (Chappel 2017) This "powerful alliance" is possible even if neoliberals and traditional conservatives see the family differently. Neoliberals see parents as rational actors making choices to maximize benefits and minimize costs.…”

Section: The Political Backdrop To Privatized Parentingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

America's Parenting Economy: How the Ideal of Parental Investment Scaffolds Family‐Hostile Policy

Bandelj

2023

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The American parenting economy is built around the notion that raising children is a matter of private parental investment. This essay outlines briefly the features of what is best characterized as, not family‐friendly, but rather family‐hostile policy in the United States, before it proposes two reasons for why the ideal of parental investment holds its grip. The first is the historical political entanglement of neoliberalism with neoconservatism that continues to entrench the focus on traditional family values. The second is the more recent cultural backdrop of building knowledge infrastructure around “the economic way of looking at parents” to repurpose economist Gary Becker's Nobel Laureate lecture title, which has permeated public discourse and reframed “childrearing” as “parental investment.” Therefore, the possibility of policy change is not simply a matter of political struggle. A potent obstacle to family‐friendly policy is cultural. Parents and nonparents will not demand, nor will politicians embrace, radical institutional transformation of the American family policy if we do not shift our thinking. We need less economic reasoning and more sociological imagination, recognizing that parenting, no matter how intimate and personal it seems, is inextricably and thoroughly bound up with social structures and culture. And that raising children—all children in the manner they deserve—is not a matter of private investment but a common responsibility.

show abstract

Section: The Political Backdrop To Privatized Parentingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Political Backdrop To Privatized Parentingmentioning

confidence: 99%