User:Violadoles

Nuclear family, feminism, and the women's movement
Participants of the women's movements and feminist thinkers have demonstrated that family forms are socially and historically constructed, not monolithic universals that exist across time and space. Nor are family arrangements a normal result of biological differences between women and men. Feminist writers, activists and thinkers challenge current forms of the nuclear family as in a family's interest. According to Shulamith Firestone, the nuclear family is just one variation of the biological family, which she defines as an inherently unequal power distribution within the basic reproductive unit of male/female/infant that results from the mother and child being dependent on the adult male figure, especially during the woman's pregnancy and the infant's first few years. The National Women's Conference During the National Women's Conference of 1977, the women of the conference presented numerous policy changes, including the Equal_Rights_Amendment (ERA) and the National Plan of Action. If these two proposals had been passed, there would have been changes to the American family structures. The Equal Rights Amendment The Equal_Rights_Amendment (ERA) in particular was greatly combated during the 1970s primarily because of the changes it may introduce to the form of the American family. If ratified, rights would no longer be able to be denied by either the federal or state governments on the basis of sex, this would make discrimination against women in the workplace, as well as in regards to housing, health care, and other public sectors illegal. By making sex discrimination illegal, the form of the American family would change, since it would open up opportunities for women to not only take on the breadwinner position of the family, but also be more capable of creating a single parent household.  Anti-ERA activists wearing STOP ERA buttons Opponents included Anti-ERA activists who believed that the ERA would destroy the family and morality. One of the most visible and vocal opponents of the ERA was Phyllis_Schlafly, who started the STOP ERA campaign. Schlafly argued that the ERA would take away gender specific privileges currently enjoyed by women, including "dependent wife" benefits under Social Security and the exemption from Selective Service registration. In response to Schlafly and other anti-ERA activists, the women of the National Women's Conference argued that "the ERA will not change or weaken family structure... ERA will strengthen families by implicitly giving value to each spouse's contribution to and support of the other." Schlafly and her supporters succeeded in preventing the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment during the 1970s by convincing 14 states to vote against the ratification and since then the ERA has yet to be ratified by the necessary minimum of 39 states. The National Plan Of Action The National Plan of Action's Plank 5: Childcare and Plank 13: Homemakers, would have also changed the dynamic of the American family structure if they had been brought into legislation. Plank 5 focused on childcare and Plank 13 focused on homemakers. Plank 5: childcare Plank 5 focused on issues of childcare and supported the installation of a comprehensive federal childcare program that would make family structures that differ from the nuclear family more feasible for Americans. "The Federal Government should assume a major role in directing and providing comprehensive, voluntary, flexible-hour, bias-free, non-sexist, quality child care and developmental programs, including child care facilities for Federal employees, and should request and support adequate legislation and funding for these programs." This plank highlighted the large number of families with working mothers who did not have guaranteed access to affordable childcare. In 1976, more than 28 million children had mothers working outside of the home, and 4.5 million children lived in households where single mothers were the head of the household. As of January 2015, there is still no comprehensive federal childcare program, but President Obama did outline a plan for more inclusive childcare services in his State of Union Address on January 20, 2015. Obama said, "In today's economy, when having both parents in the workforce is an economic necessity for many families, we need affordable, high-quality childcare more than ever. It's not a nice-to-have – it's a must-have. So it's time we stop treating childcare as a side issue, or as a women's issue, and treat it like the national economic priority that it is for all of us." Plank 13: homemakers Plank 13 focused on increasing the social and economic value of homemakers in American society. In this plank it was argued that the contributions made by both spouses should be considered of equal worth regardless of whether or not both spouses worked outside the home. "The low value that our society places on the homemaker's role is reflected in support laws, property laws, divorce laws, and inheritance laws. If our children, sons as well as daughters, cannot expect that work in the home will be recognized as of equal value and as deserving equal dignity with work done outside the home, the institution of the family and society itself will suffer. When a man and a woman enter into a marriage, they often believe that they are entering a cooperative partnership, but the legal realities of a marriage contract degrade and demean the wife's role." If the National Plan of Action was incorporated into American law, the dynamic of the nuclear family would have very likely been redefined. With the installment of policies that worked to achieve the goals of Plank 13 the economic dependency a wife and child had on the husband/father figure would be altered assuming that by making the roles of homemakers of equal status to spouses who work outside the home, that homemakers would be financially compensated for their work.