Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess sociological explanations of changes in the status of childhood
The status of childhood has always been changing with time and in this day and age there are many views over the position of children, being confined, disciplined or controlled by the adult authority. Others say that they are growing up to fast and the distinction between the adults and children is overlapping.
Some sociologists believe that childhood is socially constructed, that childhood is dependent on society’s cultures, beliefs and laws etc. An example for this theory is Stephen Wagg’s (1992), who believes a single ‘universal’ childhood, which everyone goes through, does not exist. He says that childhood isn’t natural or defined by biology. By this he means that although all children go through life stages and physical development, it doesn’t create their position in society and instead the society and its differential culture, religion and laws decide this for them.
Earlier centuries like the middle ages didn’t regard childhood at all and adults and children were almost equal with each other, work, clothing and playing. As item A describes ‘little distinction was drawn between adults and children’. This is a view taken up by the historian Philippe Aries where the child entered the wider society on most the same terms as adults and taking the responsibility of work from a young age. Evidence of this is from Bruegel’s 16th century painting which shows children and men wearing the same clothing and working/playing together. A large change can be seen by comparing this painting to the ‘child centred society’ as item A describes, Aries argues that we have progressed from a world that was not as child centres as today’s child obsessed society. However some sociologists like Linda Pollock (1983) have criticized Aries by saying that it is more correct to say that ‘the Middle Ages just had a different notion of childhood rather than turning a blind eye to it’.
There are two ways to look at the childhood; the ‘march of progress view’ against the ‘conflict’ view. The march of progress sees society coming out of the dark age for children and into a child-caring society and that the state of childhood is the best it has ever been by progressing slowly in western societies. Lloyd De Mause (1974) is one sociologist who believes in this, he says that ‘the further back in history one goes, the lower the level of childcare, and the more likely children are to be killed, abandoned, beaten, terrorised and sexually abused’. This strongly agrees with the march of progress view of gradual childhood improvement towards recent societies where infant mortality has decreased, more government organisations for children and overall more cared for and valued. However the march of progress view is deeply argued by the ‘conflict view’ that sees society based on a conflict between different social groups such as social classes or genders. They criticise the march of progress in two ways, that there are inequalities among children in terms of the opportunities and risks they come across, it is believed that many children today remain unprotected and badly cared for and that children experience a lot more oppression and dependency; not more care and protection. The in-equalities are, according to Mayer Hillman (1993), gender-based for example in modern society ‘boys are more likely to be allowed to cross or cycle on the road; use buses and go out after dark unaccompanied’. This highlights how boys grow up with fewer restraints than girls and are given unfair social acceptance which may affect their development into adults, but on the other hand these restrains are for their own protection as girls are seen to be weaker than boys so could be seen as easier targets.
Item A describes the argument that the distinction between childhood and adulthood is once again becoming blurred. This reiterates the disappearance of childhood with no distinct separation of adults and children in the respect of rights and interests. Supporting this is Neil Postman (1994) arguing that childhood is indeed ‘disappearing at a dazzling speed’ with a growing similarity between the clothing of young boys/girls and adults; and the committing of adults crimes like murder dealt by childhood. This highlights the possibility of faults within modern societies and its socialisation of children e.g. unrestrained media viewing that displays violence, sex etc to the easy manipulated minds of children. However Postman can be seen to be focusing too much on specific factors like television at the expense of other important factors like the advancement of living standard and changes in law; all in which may well contribute to the ‘disappearance of childhood’. Also Iona Opie (1993) argues that the disappearance of childhood is not occurring, through the study of children’s games, rhymes and songs she argues there is a strong line present between adults and children and that Postman’s theory that children’s unsupervised games are dying out is not true through studies that conclude children’s ability to create their own independent culture, separate from adults.
To conclude, the status and position of children will forever be changing and probably follow the society and its rules, laws, cultures and norms, there is strong evidence that shows that society’s childhood has improved from the historic suffering of children to modern child acknowledgment and care. Sociologists will continue the study of the childhood state in years to come and identify any issues within society and its socialisation, which will benefit the children who belong to the society.