I’m part of a nuclear family (on maternity leave with baby #2) and yet I completely agree! It doesn’t work for nuclear families and it doesn’t work for people not in nuclear families. A whole wave of new parents are “villageless” behind their own front doors and are cracking at the seams of the capitalist-induced care crisis. Children aren’t meant to be raised by just two parents! I’ve recently come across a book by Sophie Lewis called Abolish Family who explores the exact same concept :)
If there's a village, point me at it! I'd love for my kids to have other adults around besides their parents, and I know I could provide meaningful enrichment to the raising of other peoples' kids (and this would make me a better parent in turn to my kids). Children shouldn't have to rely 100% on their entirely human and fallible parents to shape their upbringing, and being raised among a bunch of kids of varying ages with varying degrees of blood ties is a healthy way for kids to get a sense of themselves within a community (as opposed to the competitive age-determined bands within a school). Not to mention the benefit of having old people around who aren't necessarily anybody's actual grandparents or parents, but are just members of the community with more life experience. All of this would be better than the little isolated alcoves we have now—and the long-running housing crisis is only making it all harder.
Love this post so much! I'm home with my 3 month old (first baby) and I keep coming back to "it takes a village to raise a child." Maybe it isn't procreation that's sustainable, maybe it's the capitalistic idea of a modern family that is!
This is so important. Not only is a non-nuclear family structure under-represented in media and culture, but it’s actively discouraged and penalized by social service organizations. Some social workers will even classify a multi-generational or multi-family home or as aberrant or unhealthy for children. I hope we can change the larger culture sufficiently that families are better supported at all levels.
Such an important subject. Thank you for shedding light and creating discourse. I see this work as part of the larger process of decolonization but also reimagining how we live, including assumptions about traditional family structures. My current research is on the ‘sound of modernity’ (conscient.ca). I will keep your research in mind in the coming months. For example, what do next generation families sound like? I also keep your Generation Dread book close at hand because it helps break isolation and lift spirits when things get tough. Thanks Britt. Continue ton bon travail.
I work with kids from immigrant communities, and when talking to one the other day who lives with his mother, aunt and cousin, who he calls his sister, he said he'd be moving to a nearby suburb soon. When I asked if his cousin/sister and aunt were going too, he said, "of course!" For this kid, his extended, non-nuclear family is a very functional, default way of living.
What a wonderful idea. I am 83 and became a solo mother 53 years ago. It was very hard but we got there and I am now a grandmother to three wonderful grandchildren. It would have been so much easier with this structure and I can see how this could also help with the problem of climate change. The only comment I would make is does not this structure make men superfluous to most requirements?
It's wonderful to see this topic openly and intelligently discussed. I've also been pushing in this direction. In my book "Youth Ecological Revolution" (at ecologicalsurvival.org) I speculate about a post-capitalist society and say this on p. 76:.
"To humanely reduce population, 'death with dignity' has been widely embraced, and social
experiments have begun on increasing the ratio of parents to children. China attempted to
control its population by reducing the ratio of children to parents (the one-child policy), but
this was strongly resisted by the populace. Legally permitting families to take forms such as
five adults and two children, or eight adults and three children, could satisfy the human
drives to procreate and nurture, allow for siblings, broaden the range of adult influences,
lighten the burdens of child-rearing, and reduce financial pressures on individual parents."
I’m part of a nuclear family (on maternity leave with baby #2) and yet I completely agree! It doesn’t work for nuclear families and it doesn’t work for people not in nuclear families. A whole wave of new parents are “villageless” behind their own front doors and are cracking at the seams of the capitalist-induced care crisis. Children aren’t meant to be raised by just two parents! I’ve recently come across a book by Sophie Lewis called Abolish Family who explores the exact same concept :)
If there's a village, point me at it! I'd love for my kids to have other adults around besides their parents, and I know I could provide meaningful enrichment to the raising of other peoples' kids (and this would make me a better parent in turn to my kids). Children shouldn't have to rely 100% on their entirely human and fallible parents to shape their upbringing, and being raised among a bunch of kids of varying ages with varying degrees of blood ties is a healthy way for kids to get a sense of themselves within a community (as opposed to the competitive age-determined bands within a school). Not to mention the benefit of having old people around who aren't necessarily anybody's actual grandparents or parents, but are just members of the community with more life experience. All of this would be better than the little isolated alcoves we have now—and the long-running housing crisis is only making it all harder.
Love this post so much! I'm home with my 3 month old (first baby) and I keep coming back to "it takes a village to raise a child." Maybe it isn't procreation that's sustainable, maybe it's the capitalistic idea of a modern family that is!
This is so important. Not only is a non-nuclear family structure under-represented in media and culture, but it’s actively discouraged and penalized by social service organizations. Some social workers will even classify a multi-generational or multi-family home or as aberrant or unhealthy for children. I hope we can change the larger culture sufficiently that families are better supported at all levels.
Such an important subject. Thank you for shedding light and creating discourse. I see this work as part of the larger process of decolonization but also reimagining how we live, including assumptions about traditional family structures. My current research is on the ‘sound of modernity’ (conscient.ca). I will keep your research in mind in the coming months. For example, what do next generation families sound like? I also keep your Generation Dread book close at hand because it helps break isolation and lift spirits when things get tough. Thanks Britt. Continue ton bon travail.
God Britt, what a FANTASTICALLY welcome message - thank you!!
I work with kids from immigrant communities, and when talking to one the other day who lives with his mother, aunt and cousin, who he calls his sister, he said he'd be moving to a nearby suburb soon. When I asked if his cousin/sister and aunt were going too, he said, "of course!" For this kid, his extended, non-nuclear family is a very functional, default way of living.
What a wonderful idea. I am 83 and became a solo mother 53 years ago. It was very hard but we got there and I am now a grandmother to three wonderful grandchildren. It would have been so much easier with this structure and I can see how this could also help with the problem of climate change. The only comment I would make is does not this structure make men superfluous to most requirements?
It's wonderful to see this topic openly and intelligently discussed. I've also been pushing in this direction. In my book "Youth Ecological Revolution" (at ecologicalsurvival.org) I speculate about a post-capitalist society and say this on p. 76:.
"To humanely reduce population, 'death with dignity' has been widely embraced, and social
experiments have begun on increasing the ratio of parents to children. China attempted to
control its population by reducing the ratio of children to parents (the one-child policy), but
this was strongly resisted by the populace. Legally permitting families to take forms such as
five adults and two children, or eight adults and three children, could satisfy the human
drives to procreate and nurture, allow for siblings, broaden the range of adult influences,
lighten the burdens of child-rearing, and reduce financial pressures on individual parents."