Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T11:21:21.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Multiple Meanings of Familialism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Abstract

The notion that families should care for their own seems straightforward in its meaning. I suggest that it may not be. Building on the argument advanced in Sandra Levitsky's Caring for Our Own, and especially its focus on the discursive shaping of rights consciousness, I draw attention to three discourses that may be responsible for how the caregivers quoted in the book understand family responsibility. One is an American discourse about the limits of government; one is a therapeutic discourse that is enacted in the support groups from which the book's respondents mainly come; and one is a nativist discourse that pits the American-born against newcomers. I argue that these discourses inflect the meaning of family responsibility in distinctive ways.

Type
Review Essay
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Esping‐Andersen, G⊘sta. Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Leitner, Sigrid.Varieties of Familialism: The Caring Function of the Family in Comparative Perspective.” European Societies 5, no. 4 (2003): 353–75.Google Scholar
Silbey, Susan S.After Legal Consciousness.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 1 (2005): 323–68.Google Scholar