Individual and sociological explanations for select family issues
The was an article that ran on Monday, July 30th in the New York Times regarding the father in New York who unfortunately forgot his children in the car while he went to work. The article was not specifically about the story and all its details, it was about the wife’s response to the tragedy. She plead for her husbands to be spared for the awful event. Marissa A. Rodriguez stated, “I need him by my side to go through this together.” (Fitzsimmons and Hard 2019) The two have other children to raise and I think I understand her perspective.
The article was written individual explanations intended because it was providing information of how the mother felt. The author did relate some statistical data from the New York City’s Administration for Children’s Services on children and locked cars. I feel that there may be an underlying issue in the article if you look further, as a mother would you be able to forgive your husband for such a tragedy. Should he be charged with a crime even though, it implied that it was unintentional? I feel that this will be a tough situation for this family to get through, but the media will not make things any better.
2. Briefly describe a news story regarding a current family issue (provide link). Do they use individual explanations or sociological/historical explanations to explain the issue?
In an article by CNN reporter Brenna Williams, a brief accumulation of historical information on interracial marriage, the Racial Integrity Act, 14th Amendment, and Mildred and Richard Loving is provided. To start, the author writes of Mildred and Richard Loving’s Supreme Court case—which ruled that miscegenation laws are unconstitutional. In fact, the justices went as far as ruling that the purpose of such laws were rooted in racism. It is also noted that it wasn’t until the year 2000, that the final state, Alabama, banned its miscegenation laws. The author also wrote that as a result Mr. and Mrs. Loving’s marriage, they were to be sentenced to either a year in prison or face a 25-year banishment from Virginia. Brenna also noted that that the Racial Integrity Act defined anyone who wasn’t entirely white as “colored”, and was put in place to prevent any form of “interracial mixing”. Overall, the article touches on several historical explanations in discussing interracial marriage.
As we learned in our reading, acceptance of interracial marriage is increasing in the United States—but still represents only a small portion of total marriages (Desmond and Emirbayer, 2010, p. 462). The stress and obstacles interracial couples face continue today, and understanding the historical context is crucial in helping ensure they are no longer discriminated against.