Traditionalism in the Family: A Comparison between Asian and British Cultures and between Generations

Traditionalism in the Family: A Comparison between Asian and British Cultures and betweenGenerationsAuthor(s): MARY STOPES-ROE and RAYMOND COCHRANESource: Journal of Comparative Family Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2 (SUMMER 1989), pp. 141-158Published by: Dr. George KurianStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41602010 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 09:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Dr. George Kurian is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofComparative Family Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:39:01 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=kurian

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41602010?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Traditionalism in the Family: A Comparison between Asian and

British Cultures and between Generations*

MARY STOPES-ROE**

and

RAYMOND COCHRANE**

The family is a basic social unit but the definitions and parameters given to this unit vary considerably between cultures and according to the context in which it is being discussed. Two main family types are generally distinguished: the elementary or nuclear family consisting of parents and their children, usually living together and without others permanently sharing the family life, and the joint or extended family. This is defined in various ways, for example by Shah (1974) as a "multi-functional group of three or more generations with all its members living under one roof, eating food cooked at one hearth, holding property in common, pooling incomes in a common fund, incurring expenses from the same fund"; but these aspects are not all agreed on by others, and different ones can be added (Ross, 1961). The joint or extended family is more typically found in rural and pre-industrial cultures; it is currently characteristic of such communities in India and Pakistan, and was historically so in Europe, although its extent and structure is the subject of dispute (e.g. Laslett, 1972; Stone, 1979). However, there is no doubt that the industrial urban conditions of contemporary Western cultures favour the existence of the nuclear family.

The structure of the family is dependent to a large extent on social and economic circumstances. Where mobility is low, agriculture and business are family based, and wage labour is not the basic economic form, the traditional joint family provides a secure labour force and an independent unit of production, and a mechanism for tenure and inheritance that protects these two attributes (Suda, 1978). It is also the chief provider of welfare aid and support where state funded resources for these are insufficient or do not exist.

* This project was funded by the Leverhulme Trust, whose help the authors gratefully acknowledge. ** Department of Psychology, The University of Birmingham, P.O. Box 363, Birmingham, B15 2TT England

Vol. XX, No. 2 (Summer 1989)



142 Journal of Comparative Family Studies

To ensure the continuous smooth running of a unit including several adults, a hierarchical and authoritarian structure often evolves, and this in turn requires certain goals and emphasises in child-rearing and family interaction patterns (Olsen, 1985). Moreover, self-definition tends to be in terms of social roles and relationships (Khan, 1976; McDermott, 1980; Wakil, et al, 1981) and esteem is largely dependent on the fulfillment of these. Decisions are made by, and in the interests of, the group rather than the individual (Khan, 1976; Brah, 1978; Parekh, 1978). Obedience, proper respect for elders and those in authority, and for the family reputation, are superordinate requirements (Ballard and Ballard, 1977).

The nuclear family is currently the prevalent model in British society. The process of migrating into British industrial urban conditions may involve a transfer from joint to nuclear family living patterns, although the immigrant family may include other family members following the move to the new country or city, or family members for whom the individuals still feel responsible (Anwar, 1981). The focuses and aims of a family thus shifted will alter since the range and pattern of relationships, social contracts, ambitions and possibilities change considerably even when people move within their own country, and this has been the experience of families in the Indian sub-continent who have moved from rural to urban conditions ini India and Pakistan (Ross, 1961). For Indians and Pakistanis who come to Britain, the family also moves into a different cultural environment and the changes it faces are even greater. In the indigenous cultural tradition which Asians find in Britain, 'the individual constitutes the most important unit, and self-sufficiency, personal autonomy and independence are highly valued' (Lau, 1984, p. 101). This contrasts with the more group-oriented practices inherent in the attitudes of Asian families, whether they be Muslim, Hindu or Sikh. Lau did not distinguish between males and females but was pointing to the different experiences of the ethnic groups in a comparison which would hold whatever the differences, if any, between the two sexes within each ethnic group.

Education and social class can be important factors in some family interactions and practices. But in so far as a cultural or religious ethos informs these interactions and practices, families sharing the underlying ethos are likely to share other distin- guishing features also, in spite of class or educational status. Moreover, from the empirical and practical point of view, ethnic minorities in urban Britain tend to live, for reasons that are well rehearsed, in clusters that are relatively homogeneous socio-economically as well as culturally; only the relatively few professional or financially successful families can afford to move out into 'white' areas and only the relatively independent and assimilated will want to do so (Jackson and Smith, 1981). Thus investigations sampling in certain areas are likely to find no great spread of these variables.

It may seem to young Asians in all three groups that native British youngsters have personal freedom to choose life styles and courses of action; his or her own family background regulated by parents brought up in, and still in touch with, tne traditional family life style might seem personally restrictive by comparison. It is generally supposed that there will be much conflict betwen generations within families which have crossed cultural boundaries of this sort (Ballard, 1978; Parekh,



Traditionalism in the Family 143

1978; Anwar, 1981; Price, 1982). But intergenerational misunderstandings may be predicted for British families also; it has been pointed out that in a time of rapid social and economic change their young people must learn to establish themselves as adults in circumstances different from those which their parents experienced when growing up (Cropley, 1983). Further, in British family life 'breaks are expected between the generations and adolescents will differ from parents and grandparents' (Lau, 1984, p. 95); to some extent such expectations may precipitate disagreement. In families which are in principle hierarchical, conflict between the generations is not seen as an integral part of growing up, although older generations may well fear it happening particularly with the additional strains of migration and the contact with other life styles which this brings.

The type of family which flourished in pre-industrial societies may be called 'traditional'. It is still to a large extent characteristic of the Indian sub-continent, despite the increasing industrialisation of parts of India and Pakistan. Members of such families may expect to give obedience and respect to those above them in the hierarchy; since the family is the primary support system, they may expect to give support when needed to family members particularly siblings and parents; and since it is the essential economic and social unit, they also expect to consider its welfare above their own. Such expectations and obligations are clearly not pre- cluded in a modern British family, but they may well be affected by the greater emphasis on personal independence and the substitution of other forms of support.

In their attitudes towards structures, rules and obligations, are the generations in Asian families in Britain in fact united since family members may feel that they all face an alien culture together? Or, as it is often suggested, are the Asian younger generation being absorbed into the British way of life, leaving the older generation behind? Are the differences that may exist between the generations in Asian families of a kind or extent which varies from those which may exist in British families? These are the basic questions addressed here.

Hypotheses

Four hypotheses were constructed around these questions:

1. Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs will not differ from each other in the extent of their family traditionalism, since, as many authors agree, similar traditional family structures have developed for all three in response to similar economic, social and cultural pressures.

2. Asian respondents will exhibit more traditional opinions on styles of family living, based on obedience to, and respect for authority, and the importance of the family's interest and obligations to family members, than will British families.

3. The younger generation will be less traditional in outlook than their parents, but that within their own cultural framework, Asian young people will not differ more from their parents than British young people do from theirs.

4. That within generations and cultures, males and females will not differ in the




extent of their traditionalism. The family offers support as well as restrictions for both males and females. Women may regard being home-based as restrict- ing, but it can also be seen as protective. The larger and more dependent the family, the greater are the man's responsibilities; but the more traditional it is, the less he has to do in the home. Families of the two types offer quite different emotional and social support, but both types offer these supports to males and females in different ways.

THE PRESENT SURVEY

1. The Sample The survey used a sample drawn from the Asian population of the West

Midlands. Forty families of Hindu, forty of Muslim and forty of Sikh background were interviewed together with a comparison group of 40 white British families from the same areas. A parent and a son or daughter (20 of each from each ethnic group) in each family were interviewed. The parents had to have been born in the country of origin. The young people were all aged between 18 and 21 years, and had to have been resident in Britain for at least 10 years. In fact many were born here, but in any case all had completed the whole of their secondary education here. The Careers Service of Sandwell and Birmingham allowed us access to their complete lists of school leavers over the last five years, and from these we sampled at random. Our response rate was 85% for the Asians and 67% for the British. Taking into account that two responents had to be available at the same time for a lengthy interview, this was very satisfactory.

2. The Interview

The interview, lasting between two and three hours, covered many aspects of the attitudes and experiences of respondents concerning their life in Britain. Par- ents and young people were interviewed simultaneously but in different rooms in their own homes, the parent in his or her own language1 and the young person in English. Both were asked the same questions throughout; a combination of stan- dardised questions with pre-arranged prompts was used, providing open-ended answers which were thus directed towards certain aspects of the relevant issues. The responses elicited by the standardized questions were categorised and coded on rating scales, providing a quantitative analysis. The open-ended comments elicited by the prompts were taken down verbatim and provide a qualitative analysis.

3. The Traditionalism Index and its Component Parts

Responses to five questions were added together to form an Index of Traditionalism in the Family as derived from each respondent. The wording of the five questions is given in Table 1 together with the scoring scheme devised for dealing with the answers provided. The range of possible scores on the Index is from 5 to 20 with a higher score indicating a lower degree of traditionalism. The index proved to be reliable and consistent in use (standardized Alpha = 0.69). 1 We gratefully acknowledge here the work of Dr. Sham im Mahmud




Table 1 INDEX OF TRADITIONALISM ITEMS*

Item Question Responses Score

1. Obedience Do you have to obey your parents Complete obedience 1 without question, or can you act on Obedience with some latitude 2 your own decisions, or is it a matter of Discuss and compromise 3 discussion between you? Own decisions 4

2. Respect Do you have to show great respect Yes, required 1 for your parents? Yes, from the heart 2

Qualified yes 3 Not in the oldfashioned way 4

3. Decisions When making important decisions in Family only 1 life, do you think a young person Family precedence 2 should consider his/her family's Compromise 3 interests before his/her own Individual precedence 4 interests and wishes? Individual only 5

4. Help Do you feel obliged to help your Yes, certainly 1 Sibling brothers and sisters when Depends 2

they need it? Probably not 3

5. Extended Do you think that parents and their Yes, firmly 1 family married children should live Yes, conditional 2

together if it is possible? Not if avoidable 3 No firmly 4

# Wording given is in the form of the question to the young person: for the parents, the wording related to the young person concerned: "Does X have to..." * Details on the way the Index of Traditionalism was constructed are available from the authors.

RESULTS

a) Demographic Data

Table 2 gives a demographic outline of the four ethnic groups. Eighty-five percent of British parents were born in England and over three-quarters of these in the West Midlands area. Two were originally from Scotland and four from Ireland. Seventy- three percent of British parents and 65% of young people said they were Church of England, 25% of parents and 23% of young people had no belief and the remaining few were other Christians, but on the respondents' own statements, religious affiliation was generally not an important category.

Table 3 gives socio-economic status of Asian and British families by the current or last occupation of the head of household. There was no significant difference between the three Asian groups on this point. The mean size and type of households are given in Table 4. The categorisation used was derived from a description of the family structure given by the parent in each family, and concerns the parental household.




Table 2 DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS OF FOUR ETHNIC GROUP

Ethnic Group

Generation Hindu Muslim Sikh British M F M FM F MF

PARENTS N 21 19 17 23 16 24 21 19

Mean age 51.1 45.3 54.6 44.5 53.0 46.0 50.5 49.0 Mean Yrs G.B. 20.9 17.6 23.6 16.2 25.3 22.5 Married % 95.0 90.0 100.0 65.0 100.0 85.0 100.0 68.0 Employed % 57.0 42.0 24.0 4.0 49.0 63.0 52.0 63.0 Over secondary ed % 14.3 0 11.8 4.3 25.0 0 23.8 5.3 Settled Urban % 0 15.8 11.8 30.4 6.3 0 81.0 84.2 childhood

Moved about % 23.8 10.5 17.6 0 0 0 9.5 5.3 childhood

YOUNG PEOPLE N 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Mean age 19.9 19.3 20.2 20.0 19.7 19.6 19.2 19.0 BornG.B.% 55.0 45.0 35.0 20.0 100.0 85.0 100.0 100.0 ♦Married % 20.0- 20.0 60.0 60.0 25.0 55.0 10.0 45.0 Emp/Educ. % 65.0 75.0 50.0 30.0 85,0 75.0 80.0 80.0 Over secondary ed % 45.0 60.0 45.0 20.0 55.0 30.0 35.0 35.0 Settled Urban % 70.0 65.0 50.0 35.0 100.0 90.0 90.0 100.0

childhood Moved about % 30.0 20.0 45.0 55.0 0 10.0 5.0 0

childhood

♦Includes those engaged to be married.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FAMILIES Table 3 BY OCCUPATION OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD

Ethnic Group

Asian % British % N 120.0 40.0

I and II 16.0 25.0 III Non-manual 4.0 13.0 III Manual 33.0 25.0 IV and V 44.0 37.0 No information 3.0 0



Traditionalism in the Family I47 HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS:

MEAN SIZE AND TYPE OF HOUSEHOLD: Table 4 PARENT'S DESCRIPTION FOR EACH FAMILY

Type of Household Ethnic Number of Mean Extended/ Nuclear Group families Family joint

size

Hindu 40 6.6 13 27 Muslim 40 7.7 27 13 Sikh 40 6.8 17 23 British 40 4.5 5 35

Families were categorised as "Extended/Joint" if three generations were permanently present, or if two or more related married couples were included. This category also included 'non-residential extended families' (Wong, 1985) where relevant family members had to live in adjacent houses but still shared at least

Table 5 INDEX OF TRADITIONALISM: A. Means MEANS AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

Ethnic Young Group Sex N Parents N People N Total

M 21 8.5 20 11.3 41 9.9 Hindu F 19 8.5 20 12.0 39 10.3

Total 40 8.5 40 11.6 80 10.1 M 17 8.9 20 10.1 37 9.5

Muslim F 23 8.9 20 12.1 43 10.4 Total 40 8.9 40 11.1 80 10.0 M 16 8.1 20 10.1 36 9.2

Sikh F 24 8.0 20 11.2 44 9.5 Total 40 8.0 40 10.6 80 9.3 M 21 15.0 20 13.9 41 14.5

British F 19 14.3 20 15.6 39 15.0 Total 40 14.7 40 14.7 80 14.7

TOTAL M 75 10.3 80 11.4 155 10.9 TOTAL F 85 9.8 80 12.7 165 11.2

Generation Total 160 10.0 160. 12.0 320 11.0

B. Analysis of Variance Summary Table

Source D.F. M.S. F P Generation (G) 1 2968.50 68.06 .000 Sex (S) 1 243.95 5.59 .019 Ethnic Group (E) 3 4665.83 106.97 .000 G*S 1 498.53 11.43 .000 GxE 3 339.79 7.79 .001 SxE 3 13.79 0.32 .814



148 Journal of Comparative Family Studies some meals and communal life and were to all intents and purposes still in the family. "Nuclear" families were defined as those which included only parents and their own children.

b) Index of Traditionalism

Table 5 gives means and an analysis of variance summary table for the Index of Traditionalism for all groups of respondents.

Ethnic group had a highly significant effect on Traditionalism; the British being the least traditional (highest score) and the Sikhs the most traditional.

Generation of the respondents also had a highly significant effect, but its interaction with Ethnic Group showed that it was only in the three Asian groups that parents were more traditional than young people. British parents and young people did not differ.

Sex affected Traditionalism significantly, males being more traditional than females; but the significant interaction between Sex and Generation showed that the effect was present only for young people: Asian fathers and mothers did not differ, and British mothers were traditional than fathers.

c) The Analysis of Individual Items on the Index of Traditionalism

There were no significant differences between Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs within either generation in the frequencies of responses to the items measuring Obedience and Respect. Asian and British parents differed on both items (x2 values: Item 1 = 13.3, Item 2 = '60.6, p < .001 for both); the Asians stated significantly more frequently than the British that their family's interaction was traditional or that they aimed to keep it so as far as possible in spite of external pressures. This

Table 6 RESPONSES TO INDIVIDUAL ITEMS ON THE INDEX OF TRADITIONALISM

Item Ethnic Group Generation

Parents % Young People %

Traditional Not Traditional Not N Traditional Traditional

Asian 120 69 31 20 80 1. Obedience ВгШ$ь ^ 35 65 10 90

Asian 120 94 6 58 42 2. Respect Brjtish 40 35 65 28 72

Asian 120 56 44 31 69 3. Decisions Britjsh 40 0 100 2 98

Asian 120 93 7 89 11 4. Help siblings gjjjjjj, 40 45 55 65 35

5. Extended Asian 120 87 13 68 32

family British 40 5 95 10 90



Traditionalism in the Family 149 is particularly clear for Respect. Most young people in both cultures stated thai traditional Obedience did not prevail in their families for themselves in the way that it had done for their parents, nor did they want it to. They differed on Respect, however, more than half the Asian young people still giving and preferring to give traditional respect, while three-quarters of the British young people did not (x2 values: Item 2 = 10.2, p < .01). On neither of these issues is there a difference between the British generations in the frequencies of their responses; Asian parents and young people differ significantly on both (x2 values: Item 1 = 56.7, Item 2 = 40.6, p < .001 for both).

British parents and young people did not differ on the other three items either: both generations were much more frequently against married young people living with parents ( extended family), strongly in favour of the young person's individual interests in decision-making, but more uncertain on the issue of helping siblings. Both generations differed significantly from their Asian peers on all these items. More Asians than British in both generations felt obliged to help siblings; very few in either Asian generation rejected young marrieds living with parents but significantly more young people felt it should only happen when necessary; and significantly more Asian young people than parents put the individual young person's interest first in making decision, where their parents would go no further than advocating compromise.

d) Within Dyads: Relationship of parent's and young person's responses The extent to which the parent and the young person held the same opinion

is examined in Table 7.

The pattern of dyad responses for items 1, 2 and 5 is similar: between a third and a half of. Asian dyads were in agreement, while half to two thirds of British dyads were so. In more Asian than British dyads the parent was the more traditional partner (x2 values: Item = 9.5, Item 2 = 5.0, Item 5 = 6.8; p< .05 for all three). On items 3 and 4 the difference was greater between ethnic groups (x2 values: Item 3 = 17.3; Item 4 = 34.6, p< .001 for both). Over three-quarters of Asian dyads agreed about helping siblings, while the British were divided between dyads in agreement and dyads in which the parent was less traditional than the young person; on the question of the primacy of family or young person in decision making, over three-quarters of British dyads agreed, and in no British dyads was the parent more inclined towards the family (i.e. more traditional) than the young person, while for a quarter of the Asian dyads this was the position.

DISCUSSION

Comments on the experiences and situations of Asian ethnic minorities frequently make no distinctions between the major religious groups and this is not always correct. In their scores on the Traditionalism Index, there was a difference between Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs in both generations, but reaching significance only for parents (Asian parents: F = 2.40, p< .009; Asian young people F = 1.43, N.S.; Total group F = 2.99, p < .05). On none of the five separate items did the three groups of parents or the three groups of young people differ significantly in response frequencies: subsequent analyses of these points therefore refer simply



150 Journal of Comparative Family Studies to 'Asians'. But when the five items are added into the Index, a tendency towards increased traditionalism among the Sikhs became apparent.

The main thrust of this finding is rather more an enhancement of generalised and qualitative statements throughout the literature than a quantification of clearly conceptualised and described experiences or attitudes. However, there are some- points which bear on it and which could be of value in further work. The size of Sikh families in our sample and the frequency with which they lived in extended family structures was intermediate between that of the Hindus and the Muslims (Table 4), so that their greater traditionalism did not manifest itself in particular living arrangements. However, the Sikh parents had been in Britain longer, their mean length of stay beifog 24 years compared with 19 years for both Muslims and Hindus; and 93% of their young people were born in Britain compared with 50% of Hindu and 30% of Muslim young people.

The fact that Sikh families had been longer established in Britain would, at first sight, suggest that they might have experienced more, rather than less, change in customary attitudes and practices, but there is some evidence with which our findings accord. Ballard and Ballard (1977) described Sikh families in Leeds as having consolidated their family and community groups in the 1960s; they go on to describe a resulting resurgence and reassertion of Sikhism and its traditions in that community. Families in a more extensive and well established cultural community may be both in a better position and under more pressure to rear their young in traditional patterns. Being under less economic stress can be a relevant factor here, since this can leave women free to fill established traditional roles; however, more Sikh than Hindu or Muslim wives in our sample were working (Table 2). A relevant point is put forward by Kovacs and Cropley (1975): they suggest that young people born in a new country may have more, not less, difficulty in that they have only hearsay experience of the background to much of their important early socialisation. They are in a position of uncertainty, and they may be more likely to shelter within tradition since they still remain by and large outside the host society. Cropley (1983) reports relevant findings from Scandinavia, where it was shown that Finnish children born in Sweden had more difficulties with language and schooling than did those who had moved there in early childhood. This is an area of minority group experience which needs more investigation.

As predicted, Asians in both generations were significantly more traditional in their attitudes to the family than their British counterparts. But there was a

greater difference between Asian young people and their parents in traditionalism of attitude than there was between the two British generations. Indeed, combining sexes, British Parents and young people score the same on the Index (Table 5) and do not differ significantly on any of the individual items (Table 6). The Asian families were displaying a difference in attitudes across generations while the British, in general, were not. The time-separation of the socialization experiences of British parents and young people does not seem to have been critical. Parents

grew up in families that were perhaps only superficially different from those they had formed for their children. As Cropley (1983) says: 'it is true that the parents




acquired their own norms in the British society as it existed 20 or 30 years ago, but at least the parents have had the opportunity in the meantime of living in the local society and adapting to it as it changed around them'.

It would be simplistic to put Asian inter-generational differences down to migration as such, since families in alien surroundings, could well adhere strongly to customary social structures and attitudes. More important may be the extent to which the younger generation, compared with their parents, have had contact with the indigenous society. Brah (1978) suggests that intergenerational undertanding breaks down when the 'locus of early socialisation of the two generations is sepa- rated not only in time but also by countries with differing social and cultural systems'. But early socialisation for preschoolers and primary school children takes place, particularly in Asian families, within the immediate cultural group; thus it seems that, apart from exposure to TV, all young Asians might be well socialised into their own group's structures, roles and values.

Lau makes a different point which may be more relevant. She compares the British view that young people may well differ and break away from parents with the Asian situation in which 'breaks are not expected between the generations and continuity in the group depends on the presence of three generations. The old are necessary in order to provide a complete model of life and are central authority figures' (Lau, 1984, p. 101). Holm (1984) makes the same observation. By contrast, the prevailing model for members of the British cultural group consists of the behaviour of contemporaries. The Asian families have experienced a change of structure which was an outcome of, although not an integral part of, migration itself. For the span of a generation they had become largely two-generation families, even if they were not strictly nuclear families. This situation could correct itself as the third generation appears, although by then the customary family structure might have altered irretrievably. But for the present, the parents have had to try to bring up children in a hierarchial system where the upper levels of the hierarchy were absent, and the support even of collaterals was frequently missing in the early stages at any rate. This, rather than the effect of British models or peer group influence on the young people, may be the critical factor. The continuity is broken; the model of parents relating to their parents is not present and further, the parents themselves may be under economic and emotional pressures which could reduce the resources that they can put into establishing and confirming customary patterns. To quote a Hindu father: "I couldn't bring the children up the way I wanted - I didn't give them the love and the time that I should have, consequently they are more independent'.

The effect of the respondent's sex is interesting ; fathers and mothers did not differ in their attitudes, but there was a significant difference between sons and daughters in all ethnic groups. Daughters, whether from Asian or from British families, were less traditional in their attitudes to family life than were sons. The source of this difference in traditionalism of sons and daughters lies perhaps in the extension of the range of opportunities and possibilites currently opening up for




women in comparison with those available for previous generations. These possibilites are present for both Asian and British young women, although in the two cultures they start from very different levels of independence. The comparison between current possibilities and previous restrictions is what is important, not so much the final position achieved. Many daughters in both cultures may now feel themselves to be disadvantaged as a class; the position of sons has not changed greatly, so they may make fewer comparisons with the experiences of the previous generations. Sons in both cultures have less to fear under traditional styles of living; indeed it might be said that they gain since in such systems they are far less involved in the day to day work of the household. Opportunity for male dominance may in fact be increased in the new country where the checks and counter-balances inherent in the traditional family and social system are reduced.

The dyad structure of the sample and the analysis enabled the extent of the agreement between parent and young person within the family to be assessed. As Table 7 shows, a larger proportion of British dyads than Asian dyads agreed in their opinions on all items except on the obligation to help siblings and, again with the exception of this item, in the majority of the non-agreeing Asian dyads the parent was the more traditional partner. Thus, if Asian parents and young people did not agree in their views, it was generally because the parent was more traditional in outlook ; this is also the pattern for British dyads when Obedience and Respect interactions are considered but not on the other items (Table7).

Table7 DYAD AGREEMENT ON 5 ITEMS FROM INDEX OF TRADITIONALISM

Item Ethnic N Percent Percent disagreeing group agreeing Parents opinion

More traditional Less traditional than Young Person than Young Person

Asian 120 35 55 10 1. Obedience British 40 62 30 8

Asian 120 47 42 11 2. Respect British 40 60 22 18

Asian 120 36 23 3 3. Decisions* British 40 78 0 3

Asian 120 84 10 6 4. Help siblings British 40 3g 22 40

5. Extended Asian 120 39 40 21

Family British 40 55 18 27

* Omits any dyad in which one partner would make a compromise between the interests of family and individual.




The greater percentage of British dyads in agreement may be further explained by looking at the way in which they agreed. On all items except helping siblings over 80% agreed in being non-traditional in outlook: the cultural emphasis on the importance of individuality and personal responsibility and the entitlement to personal fulfilment may account for this. As an Asian parent said 4 the ways of this country are different - the influence of the white society is that they emphasize their own individuality. In India the family all work together, here they have separate jobs, they have their own money, they're more independent, not so obe- dient'. The British of couse were not all of one mind, and some parents favoured stricter ways but felt they could not enforce them. For example, one said: 'the good old-fashioned way was better, but it wouldn't work now'. Another put the problem down to public attitudes: 'now I get older I see it (the old way) was better. The law now stops us disciplining, but they (children) want disciplining'. A third felt it was a personal failing: 'It is better to be stricter, I regret not being stricter now. The older way is better but I can't do it, it's not in my makeup', but personal competence in this sort of area is overwhelmingly influenced by perceived social standards.

Of the parents, only the British put forward better parent-child relationships as a reason for preferring more liberal interactions. 'I've brought them up as friends'; 'I have more fun with my children'; 'any sort of discussion including name-calling, is better than none at all'; 'I made a friend of him, always gave reasons why'; 'a closer relationship - more friendship with the children' are typical of the sorts of comments we received. This sort of equality of relationship was never mentioned by Asian parents at all.

Both Asian and British parents referred, in their respective ways, to changing times and experiences as a reason for altering their family interactions. 'The new way is better for the conditions of to-day; Its better to change as that is the way to avoid social problems'; 'We should change with the times, we don't feel bad about it', said Asian parents. 'The different ways are equally good for different generations, we have changed to suit the times therfore it's better'; 'In some respects it's better now, it's a different environment', said British parents.

Asian parents referred to the increased education and capabilities of their children as a reason for accepting a less authoritarian position, which British parents did not do: 'There is more literacy and experience, we listen to them, the children, and find out what they want'; 'Children these days are educated and bright, you have to take their decisions and opinions into account' were typical Asian parents' comments. But some parents also felt that increased education and new experiences among the young involved more explanation from the parent in order to justify and maintain the traditional family ways: 'you have to adopt a different attitude here, explain to the children why they have to follow a particular way, it wasn't like that for us'.

Young people in both cultures had their parents' experiences as children described to them: 'They give the impression that it was very strict when they were young - "when I was a lad" - gets my back up' said a British son; 'It was more



154 Journal of Comparative Family Studies than strict for them but there's no word for it - more like robots', said a Sikh daughter. However, some young people were in favour of stricter routines than they had experienced themselves: a Hindu daughter said 'it would be better the old way - now we're simply walking through it'; and a British son said 'the old way is better, parents should know when to set limits, it's better than being slack'. Parents were agreed with because of their inherent Tightness: as a British daughter said, 'it's not a point of obeying, what they think is right I do as well', echoing a Hindu son who said 'I have to do what they say because when it comes down to it they're right'.

When they were in favour of more modern and liberal ways, as the majority were, although somewhat cautiously, the young people had more wide-ranging reasons than their parents. The benefit of increased closeness and communications was often mentioned by Asian young people as well as British young people: 'Dad is free with us' said Muslim son 'we can talk to him as a friend'; and 'The new way is better, you don't have to fear your parents, you treat them as friend' said a British son.

As expected, both groups of young people also referred to the values of independence and freedom. A Muslim son preferred the 'new way because I have freedom which I want, and they're happy with what they ask me to do, which I do. It gets easier down the generations'. A British daughter also preferrd the less traditional arrangements because she thought 'you should be treated as a person, not subject to parents' whims. People have got more freedom, and the best of both - respect (the old way), and freedom, if it's done properly'.

The influence of British culture on their own ideas of family relationships was quoted by many young Asians, as illustrated by two comments; 'It's not completely changed but it is changing. We're living in a different world from what they were. We're living with English friends, therfore, we're bound to be influenced by them'; 'In Pakistan if parents were strict it would be an everyday thing. Because I'm here I know two different ways of life, so I question'.

A last and rather unexpected point put to us by some young people from both groups was that too much strictness is counter-productive and 'strict upbringing leads to rebellion between the two generations' as a British son explained. Com- ments from an Asian daughter and son were very similar: 'If they were very strict you would do things just to spite them and they understand that'; 'If they're too stirct you tend to rebel',

The third question concerned the priority of the individual's or the family's interests in the young person's decision-making. Here also as expected a larger proportion of British dyads agreed (78% and of these 97% agreed that the individual should come first). By contrast, only a third of the Asian dyads were in agreement (Table 7) and of these dyads, the majority (63%) felt that the family should come first. Asian dyads were more likely to have one partner who did not hold a firm opinion but who would compromise: (38% compared with 19% of British dyads). The Asian position on priority of interests is thus not so clearly agreed on between. parents and young people.



Traditionalism in the Family 155 Comments made by Asian young people who had begun to move towards an

individualistic attitude were very similar to those made by their British peers. Typical British comments were: The young person - they've got to make a life for themselves, they're not going to keep depending on the family', and 'it's up to the individual, if the family disapproves it makes no difference'. Young Asians said 'Her own interest first, it should be yourself because you're the one who's going to live that life, not parents or family', and 'after 16 he should make decisions for himself. Decisions for the rest of your life should be your own like marriage, I wouldn't let them decide that'. However, in contrast to this last quotation there were some young Asians who, while maintaining the individual's right to decision- making in other matters, quite explicitly did not extend it to marriage.

The young Asians, when they justified their claim to personal decision making, sometimes did so in terms of the different situation in which they lived compared with that to which their parents were accustomed. But these were in a minority; most who put the individual before the family did so without feeling any need for explanation. Most of the young Asians who put the family first needed no explanations either, but some did give reasons, for example: 'Family first - you've got to make the family happy'; 'It's up to father, that's how we do it. Father grows you up so it's up to him'; 'If I did something I wanted to do the family didn't want, I'd be making a lot of people unhappy and only myself happy. I would rather it was the other way'.

When the Asian parents explained why family interests should come before individual interests, it was in terms of the strength of the social unit; British parents explaining why the individual should come first referred to the particularity and privacy of each person's life. Asian parents who said compromise should be aimed for often based the compromise on a division of situations - in some the young person's views had priority and in others the parents'. The cost to the individual of independence was sometimes evaluated; 'It's better to compromise, because sometimes it (family influence) brings too much pain to the individual. The cost is too high if the family interest is always given prioirity' was one point of view but the other side was also evident. 'Compromise between their own and the family interest. Blood ties are good, and strong. If you only consider yourself, there's no sense of connectedness. You're all alone'.

The other two questions referred to the components and the closeness of family structure. The close-knit and supportive aspects of Asian family life were clearly still present in the rising generation in respect of the obligation to help siblings - a large majority of young people as well as parents maintained their Traditional duty to do so (Table 6). What Asians regarded as British self-centred- ness was demonstrated by the fact that nearly half the British said they felt little or no actual obligation here, though a quarter of these commented that they would help if they had to. Reciprocal benefit and family unity were not part of the British attitude as expressed by our respondents, but only what might be called Emergency First Aid. Interestingly, British parents were moré likely to be non-Traditional in the sense of feeling no obligation towards their siblings than were their young people (Table 6).



156 Journal of Comparative Family Studies Very few British respondents favoured the inclusion of three generations in

one extended family (Table 6) although many of them said would be involved and would give help if it were necessary (again, Firs Aid). In more than half the British dyads, parents and young people agreed (Table 7) and most of these thought such a way of living undesirable. The young people quoted privacy and independence, including the parents' independence after years of child-rearing. Some stated that they would not get married until they had a house of their own, and others would only live with parents temporarily until they got a house.

Asian young people, and their parents, had a lot more to say about this. Of the 39% of dyad,s in agreement, nearly half were traditional, but among those disagreeing, parents were more inclined to favour the extended family than young people were. However, many parents who were in favour of this way of living added comments which indicated that they realised it was not inevitable or indeed always advisable. 'That was true of the old times, not now. Children have been brought up in a new way - they prefer to live separately. Parents love their children and want their happiness. If it is to be separate it's alright, thought I would prefer to live with my family around me', said an Asian parent.

Some who wanted to live this way realised that the housing available in Britain made a successful outcome less likely, and they favoured a 'non-residential extended family' (Wong, 1985) with the family extending over nearby but separate accommodation: 'I would like married children to live with us if possible - that is if the house is big enough. Otherwise live close by, or next door' demonstrates this sort of solution. Some Asian parents, however, accepted the changed situtation in which their families lived: 'It would be better to live separately - times are different from our parents' generation'; 'there would be too many conflicts - old values, new values, they want independence. It's better to avoid conflict and therfore live separately'.

SUMMARY

British parents and young people agreed in their ratings of the desirability of certain types of family structures and forms of interaction more than Asian parents and young people did. But when qualitative explanations or reasons were added, a similarity appeared in the ways in which the young people expressed themselves, while this was not so for the older generation. The only point on which Asian and British parents made comparable comments was the desirability of a stricter routine of obedience and respect within the family, and the realisation that this was unlikely or inadvisable in the present climate of opinion. In both groups, some young people were made aware of what their parents had experienced, for good or ill. Some valued the increased equality of contact with parents and the chance to make their own mistakes; and some were critical of the effects of extreme strictness. The importance of freedom of activity and independence of decision were clear to many in both groups; but equally, mention was made by both of the value of compromise, advice and guidance. The British young people did not entirely discount the benefit of family support nor did the Asian young people wish to remain entirely contained within it. They tended thus to express similar feelings I




about the spirit of family living, its personal interactions and relationships in terms of the give-and-take of decisions and pressures to conform. But they differed more in their views on family structure; the Asian young people, while wanting elbow room, as it were, still preferred to be closely and continuously involved in the parental family unit. While British family members were often willing to help if they have to, they did not see close family living as desirable.

A further point that is of importance for the future, is the extent to which Asian parents qualified their own opinions and wishes with comments of great understanding and tolerance. They made it clear that they preferred, and would maintain if they could, the old spirit and structure of the family. But very many also made it clear that they realised they could not do so, or would be unwise to attempt it. Indeed many went further; if not actually welcoming the different ways of living that surrounded them, at least they accepted them as part of the processes of change that inevitably happen now and then. This kind of parental acceptance or resignation is, in the nature of things, not likely to be communicated clearly to young people, since parents are generally in business to socialize their children into accepted patterns of behaviour, and to put a brake on social changes that are of unproven value. But the attitude is there, as spoken by the parents themselves, and seems to indicate that the fate of such families moving into new cultures may not necessarily be so conflict-ridden as is sometimes supposed by the majority in the receiving society. A more objective assessment of this situation must be of benefit not only to the newcomers but also to those who have to plan and execute social policies.

Of course, attitudes do not necessarily get put into practice. It is relatively simple to answer questions, although the terms in which they are answered may vary between cultures; but to check the relationship of statements made in such circumstances with everyday activities would require observational techniques which were not available to this study.

REFERENCES

Anderson, M. 1981 Approaches to the History of the Western Family 1500-1914. London: Macmillan.

Anwar, M. 1981 Between Two Cultures , 3rd Edn. London: Commission for Racial Equality.

Ballard, С 1978 Arranged marriages in the British contex. New Community, Vol. 6, No. 3.

Ballard, R. & Ballard, С 1977 The Sikhs : The development of South Asian Settlements in Britain. In: J.L. Watson, (ed.)

Between Two Cultures. Oxford: Blackwell.




Brah, A. 1978 South Asian Teenagers in Southall: Their perceptions of marriage, family and ethnic iden-

tity . New Community, Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 197. Cropley, A. J.

1983 The Education of Immigrant Children. London: Croom Helm. Holm, J.

1984 Growing up in Hinduism. British Journal of Religious Education. Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 117 Jackson, P. & Smith, S.J. (Eds.).

1981 Social Interaction and Ethnic Segregation. Institute of British Geographers Special Public- ation, No. 12. London: Academic press.

Kakar, S. 1979 Childhood in India. International Social Science Journal, vol. 31 , pp. 444-456.

Khan, V.S. 1976 Pakistani Women in Britain. New Community. Vo. 5, No. 1-2, p. 100.

Kovacs, M.L. & Cropley, A.J. 1975 Alienation and the Assimilation of Immigrants. Australian Journal of Social Issues. Vol.

10, pp. 221-229. Laslett, P.

1972 Household and family in past time. London: Cambridge University Press. Lau, A.

1984 Transcultural Issues in Family Therapy. Journal of Family Therapy. Vol. 6, pp. 91-112. McDermott, M.Y.

1980 The Muslim Guide. Leicester: The Islamic Foundation. Oakley,

1976 Women's Work. New York: Vintage Books. Olsen, N.J.

1975 Social Class and Rural-Urban Patterning of Socialization in Taiwan. Journal of Asian Studies. Vol. 34, pp. 659-674.

Parekh, B. 1978 Asians in Britain: Problem or Opportunity ? In: Five views of multi-racial Britain. London:

Commission for Racial Equality. Price, C.

1982 The Study of Assimilation. In: Migration. J. A. Jackson (ed.). Cambridge University press. Ross, A.

1961 The Hindu Family in its Urban Setting. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Šhah, A.M.

1974 The Household Dimension of the Family in India . Berkeley: University of California Press. Stotte, L.

1979 Marriage, sex and the family in England 1500-1800. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Suda, J.D.

1978 Religions in India. New Delhi: Sterling. Wakil, S.P., Siddique, C.M. & Wakil, F.A.

1981 Between Two Cultures: a study in socialization of child&n of immigrants. Journal of Marr- iage and the fämily. Vol. 43, pp. 929-940. ] г

Wong, B. 1985 Family , kinship and ethnic identity of the Chinese in New York City , with comparative

remarks on the Chinese in Lima , Peru <& Manila , Philippines. Journal of Comparative Family Studies. Vol. XVI, No. 2, pp. 231-254.



Documents

Traditionalism in the Family: A Comparison between Asian and British Cultures and between Generations