C 7“ .41 .0; , ""' iii-'21:: - ,. .. :1." F": ' ,.:.......‘:~L:. . pvxurrrIrI-A” ',...’.. I“, —. u "rm-"“0“ :L...;.....,. .. “a...- fflfivzm. 3,... m. m, ".3. .. .. r; " figfl ..;C-;...::.. ......... ~s-n ”Tun—l ‘r: w ...,, zzrwy-W nun ".m— ”0‘4:- .. '3; run. q... n-r. a? .r:,.:: ... w ..u.'.............. .- u ...... p“... rO-I- u . “'1‘ ' ,. m 1-5;!“ r n I 1-- {mz-‘S'rnk «u- 'm as W wafi m” , I n ‘glfjd. . W a... N” “"12““; m» M M‘ ”0......— WW wwwm « ..~.L»..:.~ 3—1 4 AND W.» ~ ‘2 433:“. wt” .4). .2512331. ... f4 I “Mr. ,.'....'J.¢‘A'M 1 11:11:“? ' “‘41 1111131113 rt“ .1: . v I ‘ ‘1 .34....1'111 4 “.15”. 1.1.!" M) LIE. H‘11'111! L1 .,1 fig." 3' 1 L gig; is HERA R? M; :Zzigan State .__Fnivefsity 2* W” , :1 .ISr-ai" .‘I- .4" This is to certify that the thesis entitled Differences and Similarities Between Two Parent and Mother-Child Black Families Residing in a Lower Socio—Economic-Status Census prelgg'al by Curtis Joseph Jones has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreein SociologL gmfl Wgéu Major professor 8/22/74 13 ABSTRACT DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TWO PARENT AND MOTHER-CHILD BLACK FAMILIES RESIDING IN A LOWER SOCIO-ECONOMIC-STATUS CENSUS TRACT By Curtis Joseph Jones The present study explores similarities and differences between two parent families and mother-child Black families. The examination of specific characteristics is undertaken within a framework which facilitates a comparative and exploratory analysis of the data focused upon. A specific effort is made to compare contrasting socio-economic-status populations. In this investigation a population residing in a lower socio-economic-status census tract is compared with a population of higher socio-economic-status examined by Scanzoni in his study entitled The Black Family in Modern Society. The data were collected by utilizing a multistage random sampling technique with built in quotas. This design was used to schedule and conduct home interviews with 99 mothers representing the two family types specified. The analysis of the collected data was undertaken in six areas of interest: (1) structural background factors; (2) parental functionality; (3) respondent identification patterns and relationships; (4) achievement and mobility attainment; (5) husband-wife ,-n Custis Joseph Jones relationships and interaction patterns; and (6) parent-child relationships. The analysis of data supports the conclusion that implications of related research, which seem to support the generalization that there are more differences than similar- ities between two parent families and mother-child families, might well be questioned and re-examined. Indeed this investigation suggests that many more similarities, in the areas explored, than differences exist when the two family types are studied. An extention of the findings extrapolated from this study also suggests that alleged differences between socio-economic-status levels might also be questioned. DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TWO PARENT AND MOTHER-CHILD BLACK FAMILIES RESIDING IN A LOWER SOCIO-ECONOMIC-STATUS CENSUS TRACT By Curtis Joseph Jones A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Sociology 1974 Copyright by Curtis Joseph Jones 1974 Dedicated To I. O. W. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The investigator wishes to eXpress his sincere appreciation to the many persons whose cooperation and assistance made this project possible. Special mention is due the writer's faculty advisors, Dr. Jay W. Artis, Dr. Ruth Hamilton, Dr. James B. McKee, and Dr. Harry Perlstadt for their guidance and patience. Special acknowledgement is also due Ms. Marcia E. Sherred for the generous contribution of her time, effort and facilities in the course of designing and writing this thesis. Also deserving special recognition is Ms. Janice Henry for her professional quality typing and Ms. Marilyn Lovall for relaying the details of thesis completion and University deadlines between East Lansing and Allendale, Michigan. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE Introduction The Problem Comparison of Models Concepts and Indicies Related Research and Literature CHAPTER TWO Scope and Method Locale Description and Population Characteristics Sampling Procedures Data Collection CHAPTER THREE Findings Analysis of Data Structural Background Factors Parental Functionality Identification Patterns Achievement and Mobility Attainment Husband-Wife Relationships Parent-Children Relationships CHAPTER FOUR Conclusions Implications BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX A Residential Segregation APPENDIX B Tables APPENDIX C Selected Characteristics of Census Tracts With At Least 300 Black Residents APPENDIX D Selection of Blocks APPENDIX E Selection of Interviewee APPENDIX F Tables iv 138 143 145 146 147 148 LIST OF TABLES Type of Community Lived in During Teenage Years by Family Type Region Lived in During Teenage Years by Family Type Region Born in by Family Type Educational Status of Fathers by Educational Status of Mothers by Family Type Family Type Family Type by Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Family Type by Absence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Father or Father Substitute in Household During Teenage Years by Family Type Educational Status of Fathers of by Presence of Both Natural Teenage Years Educational Status of Fathers of by Presence of Both Natural Teenage Years Educational Status of Mothers of by Presence of Both Natural Teenage Years Educational Status of Mothers of by Presence of Both Natural Teenage Years MFC Respondents Parents During MC Respondents Parents During MFC Respondents Parents During MC Respondents Parents During Type of Community Lived in During Teenage Years of MFC Respondents by Presence of Both Natural Parents Type of Community Lived in During Teenage Years of MC Respondents by Presence of Both Natural Parents V Page 39 41 41 43 43 44 44 46 48 48 49 49 51 vi Table Page 115 Occupational Status of Fathers of MFC Respondents 53 by Presence of Both Natural Parents I16 Occupational Status of Fathers of MC Respondents 53 by Presence of Both Natural Parents I Family Type of Number of Siblings in Respondents' 54 17 O O 0 Family of Orientation 118 Family Type by Number of Siblings in Spouse/Last 54 Ex-Spouse's Family of Orientation II1 Father Functionality in Educational Achievement by 60 Family Type II2 Mother Functionality in Educational Achievement by 60 Family Type II3 Type of Educational Assistance Provided by Father 61 by Family Type II4 Type of Educational Assistance Provided by Father 61 by Family Type II5 Type of Educational Assistance Provided by Mother 62 by Family Type II6 Type of Educational Assistance Provided by Mother 62 by Family Type II7 Employment Status of the Mothers of the Respondents 63 During Respondents Teenage Years by Family Type II8 How Mothers Assisted Respondents in Getting Ahead 65 in Life by Family Type II9 How Fathers Assisted Respondents in Getting Ahead 65 in Life by Family Type 1110 Helpfulness of Father in Marriage Preparation by 67 Family Type 1111 Helpfulness of Mother in Marriage Preparation by 67 Family Type I112 Type of Marital Preparation Provided by Fathers by 68 Family Type II13 Type of Marital Preparation Provided by Mothers by 68 Family Type II14 Type of Marital Preparation Provided by Fathers by 69 Family Type vii Table II15 Type of Marital Preparation Provided by Mothers by Family Type III Desire to be Like Father by Family Type III2 Desire to be Like Mother by Family Type III3 Desire to be Like Father by Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years for MFC Respondents III4 Desire to be Like Father by Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years for MC Respondents III5 Desire to be Like Mother by Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years For MFC Respondents III6 Desire to be Like Mother by Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years for MC Respondents III7 Identification With Non-Parental Adult During Teenage Years by Family Type III8 Church Attendance Frequency by Family Type III9 Church Attendance Frequency by Family Type III10 Denominational Affiliation by Family Type III11 Perception of Religion Helping Prepare for Marriage by Family Type IV1 Father's Occupational Status by Husbands - Occupa- tional Status for MFC Respondents IVZ Father's Occupational Status by Last Ex-Husbands - Occupational Status for MC Respondents 1V3 Father's Educational Status by Husband's Educational Status For MFC Respondents V1 Satisfaction With Conjugal Companionship by Family Type V2 Satisfaction With Conjugal Cathetic Affection by Family Type V3 Freedom in Conjugal Communication and Confiding by Family Type V4 Perception of Conjugal Understanding Process by Family Type Page 69 75 76 78 78 79 79 84 84 86 89 89 9O 9O viii Table V5 Satisfaction With Husband/Last Ex-Husband's Occupational Status by Family Type V6 Status Estrangement by Family Type V7 Satisfaction With Life-Style by Family Type V8 Perception of Chances For Future Success by Family Type V9 Evaluation of Degree of Care in Spending Money by Family Type V10 Authority Structure by Family Type V11 Authority Structure by Family Type V12 Income by Family Type V13 MFC Respondents' Educational Status by Number of Children in Family of Orientation V14 MC Respondents' Educational Status by Number of Children in Family of Orientation VI1 Preference Expressed For Son's Occupational Career by Family Type VIZ Evaluation of Children's Chances of Going to College by Family Type APPENDIX A Residential Segregation APPENDIX B Age Distribution of Respondents by Family Type Educational Level of Respondents by Family Type Employment Status of Respondents by Family Type Number of Children in Family of Procreation by Family Type Income Level of Respondents by Family Type APPENDIX C Selected Characteristics of Census Tracts With At Least 300 Black Residents Page 92 92 93 95 97 97 98 100 100 103 105 138 143 143 143 143 144 145 ix Table APPENDIX D Selection of Blocks APPENDIX E Selection of Interviewee APPENDIX F I1 Occupational Status of Fathers by Family Type I2 Type of Community Lived in During Teenage Years of MFC Respondents by Number of Siblings in Family of Orientation I3 Type of Community Lived in During Teenage Years of MC Respondents by Number of Siblings in Family of Orientation I4 Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years by Number of Siblings in.MFC Respondent's Family of Orientation I5 Presence of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years by Number of Siblings in MC Respondent's Family of Orientation I6 Occupational Status of Fathers of MFC Respondents by Number of Siblings in Family of Orientation I7 Occupational Status of Fathers of MC Respondents by Number of Siblings in Family of Orientation 18 Father's Church Attendance Frequency by Family Type I9 Mother's Church Attendance Frequency by Family Type I11 Father Stressed Education Because Of Race by Family Type II2 Mother Stressed Education Because Of Race by Family Type II3 Father Stressed The Importance of Getting Ahead in Life by Family Type II4 Mother Stressed The Importance of Getting Ahead in Life by Family Type III1 Reason For Wanting to be Like Father by Family Type Page 146 147 148 148 149 149 150 150 151 151 152 153 153 154 154 155 Table Page III2 Reason For Wanting to be Like Father by Family Type 155 i III3 Reason For Wanting to be Like Mother by Family Type 156 III4 Reason For Wanting to be Like Mother by Family Type 156 IIIS Reason For Wanting to be Different From Father by 157 Family Type III Reason For Wanting to be Different From Father by 157 6 Family Type III7 Reason For Wanting to be Different From Mother by 158 Family Type 1118 Reason For Wanting to be Different From Mother by 158 Family Type III9 Help Provided by Non-Parental Adult During Teenage 159 Years by Family Type III10 How Religion Helped in Marital Preparation by Family 159 Type III11 Perception of Religion Helping to Get Ahead in Life 160 by Family Type IIIlZ How Religion Helped to Get Ahead in Life by Family 160 Type III13 Perception of Why Religion Did Not Help to Get Ahead 161 in Life by Family Type 11114 Perception of Teachers View of Self as Student by 161 Family Type 11115 Perception of Friends View of Self as Student by 162 Family Type III16 Perception of Parents View of Self as Student by 162 Family Type III17 Best Aspect of School by Family Type 163 I1118 Worst Aspect of School by Family Type 163 III19 Perception of Self as Student by Family Type 164 IIIZO Relatives Living in Home During Teenage Years by 164 Family Type III21 Relatives Helped Get Ahead in Life by Family Type 165 III Relatives Hindered Getting Ahead in Life by Family 165 22 Type Table III23 III24 III25 III26 III27 VIS xi Form of Assistance From Relatives by Family Type One Man Admired Most as Teenager by Family Type Man Other Than Father Admired by Family Type One Woman Admired Most as Teenager by Family Type Woman Other Than Mother Admired by Family Type Father's Educational Status by Last EX-Husband's Educational Status for MC Respondents Father's Educational Status by MFC Respondent's Educational Status Father's Educational Status by MC Respondent's Educational Status Evaluation of Degree of Care in Spending Money by Family Type Income by Family Size for MFC Respondents Income by Family Size for MC Respondents Respondent's Educational Status by Family Type Employment Status of Respondents by Satisfaction With Husband/Last EX-Husband's Occupational Status Employment Status of MFC Respondents by Satisfaction With Husband's Occupational Status Employment Status of MC Respondents by Satisfaction With Last Ex-Husband's Occupational Status Type of Occupation Expressed For Sons by Family Type Evaluation of Son's Chances of Obtaining Preferred Job by Family Type Evaluation of Children's Chances of Getting Ahead in Life Compared to Respondent's Chances by Family Type Contacted Children's Teachers During Current School Year by Family Type Perception of School Quality by Family Type Page 166 166 167 167 168 169 169 170 171 171 172 172 173 173 174 175 175 176 176 177 Table Page V16 Basis For Evaluation of School Quality by Family 177 Type VI7 Involvement in Children's Choice of Peers by Family 178 Type V18 Religious Training of Children by Family Type 178 V19 Encouraged Children to Attend College by Family Type 179 VI10 Value Stressed in Child Socialization by Family Type 179 V111 Attainment of Black Rights by Family Type 180 V112 Perception of Similarity of Black-White Problems by 180 Family Type LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure I 3 xiii ‘ CHAPTER ONE Introduction The investigation of family systems has had a strong and consistent attraction for social researchers. One of the more enduring areas of family research interest is the area which specifically includes Black families. The importance of a research focused on Black family life is perhaps most clearly evident in the area of policy formation. It is precisely at this juncture that the issue of strengths and weaknesses becomes crucial. Until recently a major portion of the interest in Black family life has been given to the description and analysis of the so-called "disorganized, matricentric Negro family" pattern. These investigations have characteristically been limited to lower socio-economic—status respondents. Recently, however, the study of Black family life has been extended to include those strata above the "underclass."1 This more recent trend in the study of Black families also includes a focus on viable patterns of family organization. These patterns are frequently referred to as family strengths in contrast to the earlier focus of family weaknesses or patterns of disorganization. A needed area of research which is closely allied with the investigation of viable family patterns among more 1Scanzoni, John H., The Black Family in Modern Society, Boston, Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971, Pp. 6. 1 2 affluent Black Americans is a similar focus on less advantaged Black Americans. More specifically, there is a need to expand the search for viable family patterns to include Black families, identified as the underclass by Scanzoni.1 This is an investigation of the family life of Black mothers residing in a limited socio—cultural environment. This investigation is unique in the sense that the location of these families in a lower socio-economic-status environment is not assumed to be evidence of disorganized pathological family systems. The work of Scanzoni serves as a benchmark for testing the relationships proposed in this investigation. This investigation is an attempt at replicating and testing Scanzoni's ideas in a population characterized by their area of residence. In Figure I Scanzoni diagramatically illustrates his view of how the various elements of the family, as an ongoing (generational) social system (its structure and process), directly influences specified interrelated family organizational parts, always in the context of linkages to elements (especially the economic) of the larger social system.2 1Ibid. See also: Metzger, L. Paul, "American Sociology and Black Assimilation. Conflicting Perspectives." , 76 (January, 1971), Pp. 627 & 647; and Heiskanen, Veronica Stolts, "The Myth of the Middle- Class Family in American Family Sociology," The American Sociologist, 6 (February, 1971), Pp. 14 & 18. 2The concepts utilized by Scanzoni in Figure I are defined below. '1, i ,_ x n“ . u .mm .3 .KS :9: .898 was 823 .CODwom .kuwfloom Gumooz CH NHHEmm Mowam oEH ..m Snow .HGONGmom “mousom GOH HowhmuflH EEO- €83 ./ Coauamom mmouomm OHEOCOO®OHoomml.COHDMOHMHDC®UHAlnhuflawcoapocjmallpcsonwxomm pdouuflo ucoomeaoo< Hmucmumm Hmujuozhum kuflaflnmumAII GoauomuoucHx\\ Hmuflumz oMHBIUcmnmflm H MMDOHm The Problem The problem in this investigation is three fold: (1) to investigate and describe the characteristics of the mothers and their families; (2) to investigate and describe how specific characteristics are differentially associated with occurrences of mother-father—child (MFC) and mother— child (MC) family units; and (3) to posit a basic explanatory model of lower socio—economic-status Black family forms and compare it to Scanzoni's model of a higher socio—economic— status Black family form. Comparison 9f Models An explicit effort is exerted to juxtapose a composite model of the family types examined with the model posited by Scanzoni. Pursuant to this end, lower socio—economic— status families are compared with and contrasted to higher socio—economic—status families. In the course of this process distinguishing characteristics are viewed as being the foundation for construction of contrasting models of family forms. Concepts and Indicies Mother-father-child (MPG) and mother—child (MC) family systems are defined in the following manner: for the purpose of this investigation an MFC family is defined as one in which both husband and wife are currently living together in the same household. To stress process as well as 5 structure, it might also be called an ongoing or existing marriage. In the case of the households in this study, this description is further specified to mean couples married and living together for at least five years.1 MC families are defined as those characterized by respondents who are either divorced or separated because of marital discord. In this study a distinction is made between families of orientation and families of procreation. Families of orientation are those family units in which the respondents occupy the position of child. Families of procreation are those family units in which the respondents occupy the position of parent. Reference is made to characteristics of both of these family systems in this study. The family of orientation is the primary focal point in the discussion of structural background factors, parental functionality, and identification with functional groups. The concept of 1Scanzoni, loc. cit., 23. The work of Scanzoni serves as a benchmark for testing the relationships to be proposed in this investigation. This work is an attempt at replicating and testing his ideas in a Black population characterized by a lower socio—economic—status level as suggested by their area of residence. For further support of specifying the condition of the respondents being married and living together for at least five years see: Leslie, Gerald R., The Family Th Social Context, New York: Oxford University Press, 1967, Pp. 598; and Lantz, Herman R. and Snyder, Elsise C., Marriage, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1969, Pp. 408. Here it is re— ported that the first five years of marriage are the most hazardous in that the majority of divorces that occur do so during these years. 6 family of procreation is of particular utility in the study of conjugal expressive gratification and child socialization. The location of the respondents interviewed in this investigation is described as a low socio-economic-status census tract. The description of low socio-economic-status is based on the following characteristics: median rent; median value of owner occupied housing units; and percen— tages of year-round housing units lacking (1) some or all plumbing facilities and (2) complete kitchen facilities. This tract, census tract twenty-eight, is 87.1 percent Black. Many of the families in this area are migrants from the southern states, many from Mississippi, with low incomes. Also investigated in this research are structural background factors or variables, which are those elements which function to shape the current characteristics of the respondents. These include the following variables: regional (north, south, etc.,) residence patterns during the respondents teenage years (12-18); residence patterns (size of community, farm/non—farm) during the respondents teenage years; occupational status of respondents' fathers; years of formal education of respondents' fathers; years of formal education of respondents' mothers; patterns of respondents living in a husband—wife environment during their teenage years; patterns of parents' church attendance during respondents teenage years; state born in; number of 7 siblings in respondents' family of orientation; respondents length of residence in present house; and the lack of an employed person in the respondents present household. Occupational status is considered either high or low by dichotomizing the following ranks extrapolated from the Bureau of the Census: professional, technical, business managers, officials, proprietors, clerical, sales, craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers as opposed to operatives, kindred workers, unskilled, service, and domestic workers. Parental functionality or how parents functioned in preparing the respondents for their current socio-economic and conjugal roles is also investigated in this study. This task is undertaken through the use of the following variables as perceived by the respondents: value of education stressed by parents; tangible (material aid, helping with homework and lessons, and keeping clothes clean and neat) and in— tangible (encouragement, or goading, or continual reinforce— ment to go to school and to remain there as long as possible) functions provided by fathers of respondents; presence of parents who stressed that it was important to get ahead in life (to make something of oneself in terms of achieving status and material benefits); presence of parents who actually helped respondents to get ahead in life by function— ing to provide them with material help (money) and with counsel and example (behavior and communication of ideas 8 designed to move the respondents from a position of relative disadvantage in the total society to a position of greater advantage sometime in the future); and presence of parents who helped respondents prepare for the conjugal situation by communicating the general values (an emphasis on what one should expect to do and how one should conform in the conjugal situation) and specific role obligations (chiefly domestic duties) which function to enable them to cope with the inevitable greater stresses that face Black families. The variable labled identification with select functional groups and institutions includes the following dimensions: positive identification (desire to be like mothers) by respondents; respondents positive identifica— tion with extra-familial persons (during the respondents teenage years) who functioned as adult role models; per- ception of the church or religion functioning to prepare oneself for getting ahead in life (specifically aiding respondents in their mobility aspirations); respondents perception of evaluations of themselves as good or average students (as defined by themselves, teachers, friends, and parents); identification of fathers as hhe male reference individual (the one man whom respondents looked up to and admired more than any other while they were a teenager) in their life; identification of mothers as Lhe female refer- ence individual in their life; and respondents perception of the church or religion functioning to prepare themselves for marriage. . In i, i i 9 In this investigation status achievement and mobility is measured by comparing the occupations of the respon- dents' husbands or last ex-husbands to that of their fathers or father substitutes.1 The dimensions of this comparison is status and income. Status is measured by utilizing the same dichotomy of occupations extrapolated from the Bureau of the Census that is mentioned above. Income is measured by the amount of money reported earned during a single year. Husband-wife interaction patterns (companionship or shared leisure or non—work activities; physical affection or cathectic interaction; and empathy or communication and understanding) are investigated by utilizing the following variables: the respondents perception of occupying a higher social class;2 satisfaction with family of procreation's life-style (family's standard of living — the kind of house, clothing, car, opportunities for their children, etc.); confidence in chances of reaching success goals (future economic prospects); satisfaction with husband's job; 1Broom, Leonard and Selznick, Phillip, Sociology, New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1968, Pp. 178. 2Pettigrew, Thomas F., A Profile 9: the Negro American, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1964, Pp. 187; Jersey: Prentice—Hall, Inc., 1968, Pp. 170. 3Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 210-211. Clark, Kenneth B., "Sex, Status, and Underemployment of the Negro Male," located in Ross, Arthur M. and Hill, Herbert (Editors), Employment, Race ehe Poverty, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967, Pp. 138-148. 10 perception of spouse being careful in using money;1 the functional interaction of respondents with their children in terms of socializing their children to achieve within the structure of the dominant economic—opportunity structure; perception of self being careful in spending money; perception of being a success at present; and interaction of respondents with their spouses in terms of their perception of the marital environment. Perception of occupying a higher socio-economic— status or social class position is determined by asking respondents to report what social class they belong to and why they feel as they do concerning this variable. Perception of confidence in attaining success goals, satisfaction with husband's occupation, and care in using money is determined by asking respondents to indicate the degree of their optimism. This optimism or lack of optimism is determined by the respon- dents reaction to interview items which are designed to order their responses along the lines of a Likert-type scale, i.e., agree-disagree. The socialization of children to achieve within the structure of the dominant economic—opportunity structure is also studied. The functional interaction between respondents and their children includes the following dimensions: high occupational aspirations for sons; high expectations that 1Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 253—260, and Hiltz, S. Roxanne, "Black and White in the Consumer Financial System," American Journal QT Sociology, 76 (May, 1971), Pp. 987—998. 11 sons will attain the occupational status aspired to; positive evaluation of children's chances of Success (to make something of themselves in terms of achieving status and material benefits); positive evaluation of children's chances of going to college; frequent interaction with children's teachers (met and talked with their children's teacher during the current school year); positive evaluation of oldest child's educational milieu; frequent counseling of children regarding choice of peers; provision of frequent religious training for children; and autonomy reported as the most important thing for children to learn to prepare them for life. Related Research ehd Literature The literature focused upon Black family life may be dichotomized in the following manner. One segment of the literature represents a negative, pathological perspective of Black family life. A second segment of the literature represents a reassessment of the earlier pathological orien- tation. The pathological perspective cites slavery as the root cause of contemporary and historical shortcomings within Black communities. This view implicitly holds the mythical white middle class family stereotype up as the epitome of desirable family life. This segment of the literature also fails to stress the contemporary forms of racism and economic discrimination as root causes of what is referred to as dysfunctional family patterns within Black 12 communities. It must also be recognized that these same variables, racism and economic discrimination, were salient dimensions of the institution of slavery. This segment of the literature which focuses upon the slave heritage of Blacks in the United States also suggests that this heritage logically and naturally led to the matri- centric family form.1 Furthermore, the matricentric family form is reported to have developed among Blacks in the United States within the economic climate of the slavery and post-slavery eras. From the perspective of economic security, it was the Black woman, rather than the Black man, that occupied the more secure position. The matricentric family, as developed in the rural south,2 led to a particular type of extended family form. The extended family form is that which is headed by a woman rather than by a man. 'This family form is also located in the industrialized North.3 1Broom, Leonard and Blenn, Norval, Transformation p: phe Negro American, New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1965, Pp. l6; Drake, St. Clair and Cayton, Horance R., Black Metropolis, New York: Harper and Row, Publisher, 1962, Pp. 582-83; and Hill, Mozell C., "Research on the Negro Family," Journal pf Marriage and Family Living, IXX (February, 1957), Pp. 29. ZBurgess, Earnest W. and Locke, Harvey J., The Family from Institution pp Companionship, Chicago: American Book Company, 1945, Pp. 148-179; Frazier, E. Franklin, "Ethnic Family Patterns: The Negro Family in the United States," American Journal pf Sociolo , XLVII (1948), Pp. 435-483; and Frazier, E. Franklin, The Negro Family Th the United States, New York: The Dryden Press, 1951, Pp. 102-141. 3Drake and Cayton, op. cit., Pp. 564-657. 13 The literature which focuses on the slave heritage of many Blacks in the United States cites the variables of family disorganization, illegitimacy, and family instability as a few of the items associated with extended families headed by women.1 A pathological focus is not limited to Black families in the United States. This negative perspective appears to be the dominant theme in the literature concerning Black family life regardless of the country being analysed. Thus, it seems that wherever Black families are located, this pathological perspective pervades. The implication of this pathological perspective is that the "ills" of Black families are somehow inherent in that Black- ness and not in contemporary institutions supported by racism and economic discrimination. Otterbein and others report findings that are suggestive of the variety of pathological conditions that plague Black families wherever they are located. The variables of socio-economic-status, racism, 1For other examples of the "pathological" perspective of the quality of Black family life see: "The Moynihan Report", Office of Policy Planning and Research, United States Department of Labor, The Negro Famil , Washington, D. C., U. S. Government Printing Office, 1965, Pp. 1 & 78; Kenkel, William F., The Family l2 Perspective, New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1966, Pp. 219, 110, 316—17; Kephart, William M., The Family, Societ , and the Individual, Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961, Pp. 217—222; Leslie, Gerald R., op. cit., Chapter 10; Cavan, Ruth Shonle, The American Family, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1963, Pp. l & 41—43; Bell, Norman W. and Vogel, Ezra F. (Editors), A Modern Introduction pp the Famil , New York: The Free Press, 1968, Chapters 28 & 42; Broom and Blenn, op. cit.,; Drake and Cayton, op. cit., Pp. 564—657; Liebow, Elliot, Tally's Corner, Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1967, Pp. 212-15; Hill, op. cit., Pp. 25 and 30; and Duvall, Evelyn M., "Concepts of Parenthood," American Journal QT Sociolpgy, LII (November, 1946), Pp. 202. 14 and discrimination are seldom offered as a qualification except in a very superficial way. This results in the perpetuation of what is basically an overgeneralization concerning families of San Juan, Lagos, and Detroit that are made up of Black people.1 The second segment of the literature related to this investigation is essentially a reassessment of former assumptions and generalizations concerning the family life of Blacks in the United States. Recognition of the dynamic characteristics of American society serves to suggest that family research is of crucial importance since it is the family, as the primary unit of our society, which reflects and adjusts to the industrialization, urbanization, and secularization of life. This reassessment process does not 1Otterbein, Keith F., ”Carribbean Family Organization: A Comparative Analysis, " The American Anthropologist, 67 (February, 1965), Pp. 66— 79; Goode, William J., "Illegitimacy, Anomie, and Cultural Penetration," American Sociological Review, 25 (February, 1960), Pp. 21—30; Smith, M. G., West Indian Family Structure, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962, Pp. 12, 66— 97, 199, 260- 65; Fritzpatrick, Joseph P., "Intermarriage of Puerto Ricans in New York City," The American Journal p: Sociology, LXXI (January, 1966), Pp. 402 and 405; Hill, Ruben, Back, Kurt, and Stycos, J. Mayone, "Intra- -Family Communication and Fertility Planning in Puerto Rico," located in Heiss, Jerold (Editor), Family Roles and Inter— action, Chicago. Rand McNally & Company, 1968, Pp. 308- 27; Lowenthal, David, "Race and Color in the West Indies, Daedalus, 96 (Spring, 1967), Pp. 595—96; Hyman, Rodman, Nichols, F. R. and Voydanoff, Patricia, "Lower Class Attitudes Toward 'Deviant' Family Patterns: A Cross— Cultural Study,’ Journal pf Marriage ehe phe Family, 31, (May, 1969), Pp. 315- 21; and Gist, Noel P. and Fava, Sylvia Fleis, Urban Society, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1967, Pp. 367—81. An exception to this pattern is: Rodman, Hyman, Lower-Class Families: The Culture 9T Poverty Th Negro Trinidad, New York: Oxford University Press, 1971, Pp. v & 242. 15 stress the impact of a heritage grounded in slavery but instead focuses upon current patterns of discrimination.1 The patterns of discrimination associated with the economic opportunity system are viewed as being of special relevance in this reassessment process. This second segment of the literature explicitly recognizes racism and discrimination as the historical and contemporary precipitators of family life forms in Black communities. These evolved family forms are seen as adaptive and functional reactions to rather grim and difficult environments and not as dysfunctional and pathological family forms. It must be acknowledged that family forms which may appear to be diseased to the "white middle class" value system, may be a healthy adaptation to the Black residents of low socio-economic-status neighborhoods. Writers such as Whyte and Gans support the position that it would seem reasonable to expect social scientists to retreat from 1Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 5-17, 30. See also Billingsley, op. cit., Pp. 21-22; Geismar, Ludwig L. and Gerhart, Ursula, "Social Class, Ethnicity, and Family Functioning: Exploring Some Issues Raised by the Moynihan Report,” Journal QT Marriage ehe The Family, XXX (August, 1968), Pp. 487. Collections of Essays in this vein include the following: Willie, Charles V. (Editor), The Family Life QT Black People, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1970, Pp. v & 341; Staples, Robert (Editor), The Black Family, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1971, Pp. 3 & 393; and Bracey, John H. Jr., Meier, August, and Rudwick, Elliott (Editors), Black Matriarchy: Myth QT Reality?, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1971, Pp. 2 & 217. 16 the position of defining as deviant patterns of Black family life that do not follow the behavioral dictates of middle class norms. Both Whyte and Gans document the finding that family patterns formerly viewed as "disor— ganized" in segments of the white population actually exhibit a highly structured pattern of internal organization. The media outside the professional and scholarly literature also suggests that behavioral patterns formerly thought of as being "typical" Black traits are progressively becoming the traits of whites.1 Recognition of the adaptive processes involved in family survival explicitly recognizes the variable of change. This recognition of the element of social change in turn enhances the establishment of a viable position from which to investigate family life in an everchanging urban industrial setting. Scanzoni, Rainwater, and Cruse2 suggest that the move 1Whyte, William F., Street-corner Sociepy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1943; and Gans, Herbert, The Urban Villagers, New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962; both sources which document that areas formerly viewed as "disorganized" in segments of the white population actually exhibit a highly structured pattern of internal organization. See also: "Races Reverse Illegitimacy Trends," The Grand Rapids Press, (April 21, 1971), Pp. 6—F. 2Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 31—36; and Rainwater, Lee, "Crucible of Identity: The Negro Lower—Class Family," Daedalus, 95 (Winter, 1966), Pp. 179. Both Scanzoni and Rainwater in these sources suggest that the move on the part of Black Families to an urban environment is compli— cated by economic factors that result in part from discrim— ination within the structure of the economic-opportunity system of our society. This is pointed out as being the condition of Black migrants historically and it is recognized as a practice that continues to plague Black migrants even today. See also: Cruse, Harold, "Black and White: Outlines of the Next Stage," Black World, (May, 1971) Pp. 9-40. 17 on the part of Black families to an urban environment is complicated by economic factors that result in part from discrimination within the structure of the economic- opportunity system of the United States. This condition is pointed out as being the position occupied by Black migrants historically. It is also recognized that this pattern of discrimination is a practice that continues to plague Black migrants even today. These sources suggest that the more experience in an urban environment that families have, the more likely they are to be enduring mother-father—child families. Less experience in an urban milieu is associated with a greater likelihood of families being mother—child units as opposed to mother-father-child units. Scanzoni, Bernard, and Billingsley1 are among several scholars that document that the economic position and educational achievement level of parents is directly associated with the structure of families of procreation. Mother-father-child family of procreation units are more likely to have a family of orientation background character— ized by higher educated parents with higher status occupations 1Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 36—53; Bernard, Jessie, Marriage ehe Family Among Negroes, New Jersey; Prentice-Hall Inc., 1966, Pp. 43, 46-49, 140; Billingsley, op. cit., Pp. 167-77; Edwards, Harry, "Black Muslim and Negro Christian Family Relationships," Journal QT Marriage ehe The Family, 30 (November, 1968), Pp. 604-11; Geismar and Gerhart, op. cit., Pp. 480—87; Staples, Robert, "Toward a Sociology of the Black Family: A Theoretical and Methodological Assessment," Journal QT Marriage ehe The Family, 33 (February, 1971), Pp. 126; Rainwater, op. cit., Pp. 194; and Pettigrew, op. cit., Pp. 16. 18 than are mother—child family of procreation units. Mother— father-child (MFC as compared to MC or mother-child units) families are also characterized by the feature of having a history of intact homes or meaningful parental substitutes and small numbers of siblings. Regular religious activity is also positively associated with the occurences of MFC families and related economic and conjugal stability. McCord, Scanzoni, Billingsley, and Rainwater1 report that identification with influential institutions and persons is crucial in promoting positive patterns of conjugal relations and orientations to the economic-opportunity structure. These orientations and relations are functional in the sense that they are consistent with or at least complementary to norms and values attributed to the dominant society. Ross and Hill2 among others report that achievement and mobility within the confines of the economic-opportunity system is complicated by discrimination and deprivation for 1McCord, William, Howard, John, Friedberg, Bernard, and Harwood, Edwin, Life Styles Th The Black Ghetto, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1969, Pp. 166-170; Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 59-147; and Billingsley, op. cit., Pp. 98—99. For illustration of the economic variable as related to reciprocal conjugal role relations see: Rainwater, op. cit., Pp. 193-94, and for similar focus on the socialization of children see: Billingsley, op. cit., Pp. 28—31, and Liebow, op. cit., Pp. 84. 2Ross, Arthur M. and Hill, Herbert (Editors), Employment, Race and Poverty, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967, Pp. v & 598; and Tobin, James, "On Improving the Economic Status of the Negro," Daedalus, 94 (Fall, 1965) PP. 878-888. 19 all Blacks in the United States. Scanzoni1 emphasizes that the relationship between achievement mobility and the type of conjugal situation is dependent upon the husband's success in fulfilling the occupational role. This success is measurable in terms of income and status and is determined in part by educational achievement.2 Billingsley3 suggests that a prominent component of this success pattern is a MFC system of family life. It appears that the father's occupation, education of parents, parental functionality, identification with influential persons and institutions and spouses educationall operate to determine the socio— economic-status position of ones' family of procreation.4 Furthermore, these factors are collectively viewed as being positively associated with success in the economic- opportunity system and success in the conjugal sphere, i.e., family systems. Success in the economic-opportunity system and within confines of the conjugal situation is stressed as being positively associated with desirable patterns of child 1Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 153. ZScanzoni, loc. cit., Pp. 159-66; and Schulz, David A., Comin hp Black, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969, Pp. IS8~173. 3Billingsley, op. cit., Pp. 97—101; and McCord, it. al., op. cit., Pp. 167—69. 4Extrapolated from Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 175. L. 20 socialization.1 Desirable patterns of child socialization are those patterns which provide society with people oriented to the pursuit of dominant achievement norms and values. These achievement orientations and capabilities are instilled through parent-child interaction and assist in successful functioning within the opportunity and conjugal environments of future families of procreation. Bernard2 suggests that in the United States an inescap- able aspect of this socialization process is the preparation of Black children for survival in a hostile, racist environ- ment. The types of goals that parents hold for their children and the means that they anticipate relying upon to obtain those goals are important indicators of how parents view their own opportunity and conjugal environments.3 1Duvall, Evelyn Millis, Family Development, New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1962, Pp. vi & 532. See also: Hill, op. cit., Pp. 38; Farley, Reynolds and Hermalin, Albert 1., "Family Stability: A Comparison of Treands Between Blacks and Whites," American Sociological Review, 36 (February 1971) Pp. 1—17; Billingsley, op. cit., 79-121, and Scanzoni, op. cit., Pp. 176-191. 2Bernard, op. cit., Pp. 73-77. For alternative routes in the preparation of members for survival in this situation see: McCord, et. al., op. cit., Part II. 3Success as a goal orientation in the dimensions suggested appears to be in all segments of American society. See: Kandal, Densie B., "Race, Maternal Authority and Adolescent Aspiration," American Journal QT Sociology, 76 (May, 1971), Pp. 1017; King, Karl, "Adolescent Perception of Power Structure in the Negro Family," Journal QT Marriage ehe The Family, 31 (November 1969), Pp. 755; Edwards, op. cit., Pp. 604-611, and Kohn, Melvin L., Class ehe Conformity, Homewood: The Dorsey Press, 1969, Pp. 59— 60, 63—72. In addition it is suggested that when socio—economic status is controlled, Blacks are politically more active than whites. Olsen, Marvin B., "Social and Political Participation of Blacks," American Sociological Review, 35 (August, 1970), Pp. 682-97. 21 This socialization process, according to Kohn1 is affected by the work status of parents. McCord2 suggests that this same process is affected by the religious orientation of parents. lKohn, op. cit., Pp. 30-31. 2McCord, et. al., Pp. 88. CHAPTER TWO Scope and Method The purpose of this chapter is to present the study design used in this investigation. This chapter presents: a historical description of the study location which includes a description of the population or universe; a description of the sampling procedure employed; and a description of the data collection procedures. Locale Description ehe Population Characteristics The investigation was conducted in census tract 28, located in the city of Grand Rapids, Kent County, Michigan. Census tract 28 was selected as the research site because a profile of the indicators of socio-economic-conditions supports the observation that it is diametrically contrasted with similar types of conditions in Scanzoni's study. Scanzoni's study focuses on those families above the under- class and therefore ignores the population that this study seeks to investigate. Census tract 28 is the tract in Grand Rapids, Michigan that is: (1) predominately Black and (2) the most economically disadvantaged of tracts with large proportions of Black citizens in their population. The first recorded Black citizens arrived in Grand Rapids in 1840 when two men who had bought their freedom from their masters migrated to Grand Rapids with the belief that their status as free men would be recognized.1 1Lydens, A. A. (Editor), The Story QT Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1966, Pp. 547. 22 23 The next recorded migration of Black citizens to Grand Rapids 1 of Blacks arrived to work in occurred in 1860 when a "band" a local pail and tub factory. The growth of the Black population in Grand Rapids was slow and it was not until 1920 that the City's Black population numbered 1000.2 Accounts support the conclusion that the Black migrants to Grand Rapids were hard-working, tax-paying, citizens and active military personnel. These accounts also document the existence of overt discrimination in the areas of economic opportunities and social rights. These same accounts also report the occurrences of such specific indignities as barring Blacks from organizational membership and certain housing areas of the City.3 Many of the early Black residents of Grand Rapids arrived through the activities of the underground railroad, which in turn suggests that these citizens arrived from the rural south.4 The following comparisons between census tract 28, Kent County, and Grand Rapids City data indicate that census tract 28 ranks disproportionately high by indicators of undesirable or dysfunctional living conditions. The Black population in the city of Grand Rapids has increased to 22,296 Ibid. Ibid. Loc. cit., Pp. 547-551, 575. DUONH Loc. cit., Pp. 547. 24 residents located within a total City population of 197,649. The total population of Kent County is 411,044 residents. Within this total are 23,076 Black citizens. In Kent County, only 780 Black citizens live outside of the city of Grand Rapids. The total population of census tract 28, the source of data in this investigation, is 2,966 residents. This figure includes 2,582 Black citizens and indicates that over 87 percent of the population in census tract 28 is Black. With reference to age distribution, 11.1 percent of the population in census tract 28 is 65 or older. In Kent County 9.3 percent of the population is 65 or older and in the city of Grand Rapids, 12.1 percent of the population is in this age category. Over 38 percent of the population in census tract 28 are under 18 while 37.3 percent of the Kent County population and 33.9 percent of the city of Grand Rapids population fits this category. The median family income for census tract 28 is $6,161 while the figures for the County are $10,692 and for the City - $10,004. Computations based on heads of family only reveals that 30.8 percent of the families in census tract 28 are under the poverty level as defined by 1971 CEO guidelines which range from $1,900 for a single person to $5,600 for a non-farm family of seven. Similar computations result in findings for the County and City that contrast drastically with the 30.8 percent of census tract 28 family heads with incomes below the OED guidelines cited. The figure for the 25 County is 6.6 percent and for the city of Grand Rapids - 8.9 percent ~ well below the census tract 28 figure. The percent of unemployed males 16 years of age and older in the labor force is 13.8 for census tract 28, 5.4 for Kent County, and 6.5 for the city of Grand Rapids. Percentages for unemployed females 16 years of age and older are: 8.1 for census tract 28, 6.5 for Kent County, and 6.2 for Grand Rapids. The percent of the total families in the census tract on public assistance is 23.4 while similar percentages for the County are 4.4 and 6.3 for the City. Over 40 percent of the residents of census tract 28 are 25 years of age or older and have less than 8 years of schooling. When similar figures are compiled for the County, it is determined that 8.8 percent of the Kent County population is at least 25 years of age and have less than 8 years of formal education. A comparable figure for the population in the city of Grand Rapids is 11.3 percent. The percen— tages of housing units lacking plumbing are 4.5 for census tract 28, 2.2 for Kent County, and 2.3 for the city of Grand Rapids.1 Census tract 28 is one of the city's oldest residential sections. This area reached its population and physical 11970 Census QT Population and Housing Census Tracts Grand Rapids, Mich. Standard and Metropolitan Statistical Area (ehe adjacent area) PHC (T) - 89, Washington, D. 0.: Bureau of the Census a United States Department of Commerce Publication, U. 8. Government Printing Office, April, 1972, Table P-l, Page P-l. 26 saturation point between 1870 and 1930. Since that time only a limited number of housing units have been erected while shifting land-use patterns have pushed out portions of the original dwelling units. This segment of the City originally contained a broad spectrum of the housing types inhabited by a cross—section of socio-economic-status groups. The pattern of residential development which occurred in census tract 28 was common to city development in the 1800's. Included were the practices of building on small lots, building on alleys and substandard streets, lot splitting, small yard spaces, and the practice of developing mixed land-use patterns. In addition to the above pattern of residential development, a pattern of strip business emerged along Division Avenue, the primary north-south artery of the City which bisects census tract 28. This pattern began in the center of the city and spread south through census tract 28. These patterns of residential and commercial develop- ment reinforce the observation that one of the more objective and obvious indicators of racism in our country and in the city of Grand Rapids is within the area of housing and residential segregation. "An objective index shows that in every American city, Negroes live separately from whites. Of the three principal causes - choice, poverty and discrimination - the third is by far the strongest."1 1Taeuber, Karl E., "Residential Segregation, "Scientific American, CCXIII (August, 1965), Pp. 2. 27 "Discrimination is the principal cause of Negro residential segregation, and there is no basis for anticipating major changes in the segregated character of American cities until 1 "...the patterns of housing discrimination can be altered." average segregation index for 207 of the largest United States cities was 86.2 in 1960. This means that an average of over 86 percent of all Negroes would have to change blocks to create an unsegregated population distribution. Southern cities had a higher average index (90.0) than cities in the Northeast (70.2), the North Central (87.7), or the West (79.3). Only eight cities had index values below 70, whereas over 50 had values above 91.7."2 1 2U. S. Riot Commission, Report QT the National Advisory Commission Qh Civil Disorders, New York: Bantam Books, 1968, (hereafter referred to as the Kerner Report) Pp. 246-247. See also: U. S. Census of Housing: 1960 Series HC (3) City Blocks Grand Rapids, Michi an. Inspection of 1970 U. S. Census of Housing: Series HC %3) - 122 Block Statistics Grand Rapids, Michigan Urbanized Area, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1971 Pp. ii & 46; illuminates the lack of comparability of the 1960 and the 1970 block census data. The 1960 data is for the city of Grand Rapids and the 1970 data is for Grand Rapids Urbanized area, a much more inclusive area. See also: Taeuber, Karl E. and Taeuber, Alma F., Negroes Th Cities, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1965, Pp. V & 284. By using the 1960 block data the segregation index was computed for Grand Rapids (90.1). Computation was based on the following formula: Loc. cit., Pp. 9. Ni - Wi x 100 = Segregation N— w— Where N. is the sum of non-white occupied housing units in blocks containing a greater proportion of non-white units than the city as a whole, N is the total number of non-white housing units in the city. T. is the total number of owner and renter occupied housing units in the blocks having a disproportionate number of non-white units, i L 28 Data from the Kerner Report1 shows that the area including census tract 28 has: a higher proportion of Blacks than the city as a whole, a younger Black population than in the city as a whole, higher housing expenses than for the city as a whole for less desirable housing. This same report also documents low levels of educational achievement, high rates of unemployment, high rates of unSkilled and service workers among those working, and low levels of income for Blacks in the census tract 28 area of the city. As the pattern of blight and deterioration developed with their associated social pathologies in what is now census tract 28, low income families became part of the scene of transition. The accompanying social and economic problems grew concomitantly with continued physical deterioration and commerical development. A renewed influx of low income and unemployed minority families were attracted to Grand Rapids by an expanding war time economy. During the decade of 1950 to 1960, the number of minority citizens in the city more than doubled. Patterns of discrimination in the housing market led to a concentration of these new citizens in the geographic area under investigation. The pressure generated by these practices led to the division of homes into apartments charac- terized by overcrowding and high rental fees. During this same one. No iS To "' N- ]. l. l W is T —— N These computations are consistent with the Taeuber's findings and document that Grand Rapids is indeed a segregated city. See Appendix A. 1Kerner Report, op. cit., Pp. 137-154. 29 decade, census tract 28 became predominantly populated by Black and Latin American citizens. During the decade of 1950 to 1960, the businesses along the main arteries of census tract 28 began to decline as viable profit returning institutions. The completion in 1961 of the U.S. 131 Expressway aided the continued decline of businesses in this area. These conditions were coupled during this decade with a population migration and attendent movement of businesses to the suburbs. Under these depressed conditions census tract 28 became increasingly characterized by lower middle and low income families overburdened by maintenance of older housing units which, therefore, continue to deteriorate. The exodus of businesses and families of more moderate income left a vacuum which was filled with increased proportions of residents who were dependent on public assistance and who were unemployed. The geographic location of the population focused upon in this investigation may be described as that segment of the city of Grand Rapids having a high concentration of physical deterioration, under and unemployment, drug abuse, poverty, low educational achievement, crime, and health problems indicative of a socio-economically depressed urban area.1 1Jones, Curtis, Jeter, Calvin, and Coladi, Charles, Grand Rapids Michigan Model City Program Mid-Planning Report, Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids Model Neighborhood Citizens Commit- tee, Inc., December, 1969, Part I & II. Additional sources which support the conclusion that Blacks migrated to Grand Rapids and Michigan localities as part of an attempt to better life opportunities and were considered valuable contributors to their new communities are: Lydens, Z. Z. (Editor), op. cit.; Claspy, Everett, The Negro Th Southwestern Michigan, Ann Arbor: Braun Brumfield, Inc., 1967, Pp. iii & 112; and Green, John M., (Editor), Michigan Manual QT Freedmen's Progress, Detroit: Freedmen's Progress Commission, 1915, Pp. 3 & 371. 30 In terms of its Black-white relations and structure, Grand Rapids is similar to most of the larger cities in the United States today. Structurally, Grand Rapids is characterized by an ever growing Black ghetto. Geograph- ically, the ghetto area is the quarter of Grand Rapids which includes census tract 28. This area is a ghetto in the sense that it contains a population which has little choice in deciding where to live, it is that area of Grand Rapids in which Blacks are segregated. The census tract 28 area is also a ghetto from the perspective of quality of life. This area of Grand Rapids is characterized by a disproportionate concentration of undesirable social and economic conditions. Perhaps more than most cities, Grand Rapids is composed of groups of people who manifest a fervent ethnocentricity. This ethnocentricity is most readily exemplified by the physical, spiritual, and intellectual separateness of the city's several ethnic and racial groups. It must also be acknowledged that large numbers of people in the city are members of the conservative Reformed Christian and Fundamentalist churches which are not characterized by a propensity for rapid social change. The universe for this investigation is made up of the women in census tract 28. As previously mentioned, the popu- lation of this census tract is over 87 percent Black. There are 1,103 females 14 years of age and over in this tract. These residents are distributed in the following manner: single - 257, married - 530 (with 94 separated), 31 widowed - 186, and divorced - 130.1 After completion of the actual sampling process (described directly below) the following are salient characteristics of the 99 respon- dents examined. The dimensions examined are age, educa- tion, income, number of children, and employment status.2 These variables are looked at separately for MFC and MC families. Most MFC mothers are older than MC mothers, 40 or older as compared to the thirties. Both types of respondents tend to have attained from 9 through 12 years of formal education. It also appears that MFG representatives are more affluent than their MC counter-parts. Both types of family representatives have similar size families of procreation, four or more children. Finally, most represen- tatives of both family types are unemployed. Sampling Procedures The research design of this investigation includes the following stages: First, a multistage random sampling technique with built-in quotas is designed. This technique is utilized to locate and specify that segment of the universe located within census tract 28 to be studied. Multistage randomnization and the quota system were used to eliminate the necessity of compiling an accurate list of each potential 1U. 8. Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census QT Population and Housing, Grand Rapids, Mich. SMSA, Washington, D. C., 1971. 2See Appendix B. 32 respondent from which to draw a random sample. The economic cost of compiling such a list was prohibitive. The next stage of this research design involved the selection of the census tract to be used. Census information indicates that 12 census tracts contain approximately 95 per- cent of the Black population in the city of Grand Rapids. Census tract 28 was chosen because the census data indicated that it is the most economically depressed tract of the twelve.1 1U. S. Bureau of the Census, Census QT Housing: 1970 Block Statistics Final Report HC (3)-122, Grand Rapids, Mich., Urbanized Area, Washington D. C. 1971 and U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census QT Population and Housing, Grand Rapids, Mich., SMSA, Washington, D. C. 1971. Relevant infor- mation also received from Mrs. K. Miles, Housing Director, Grand Rapids Urban League and an windshield survey conducted during October, 1971. Data extrapolated from Table H-l of the tract booklet for 1970 provides evidence that tract 28 is the most economically depressed of tracts 11,13,21,25,26,28,29,30, 31,32,33, and 34 which contain 95% of the Black population of Grand Rapids. These data indicate that the lowest median rent and median value of owner occupied housing units are located within the confines of census tract number 28. Other indicators of economic depression mentioned earlier are the percentages of year-round housing units lacking (1) some or all plumbing facilities and (2) complete kitchen facilities. The highest percentage of year-round housing units lacking these amenities are located in census tract 21. However, the available census data suggests that the population of this tract is heterogenous in terms of economic variables and are widely distributed around the median figures reported in the census booklet for value of housing units and contract rent commanded (median value of owner occupied housing units-$14,000, as compared to $7,700 on tract 28 and median contract rent of renter occupied housing units of $85 as compared to $66 per month in tract 28. It appears that the presence of above mentioned indicators of economic depression coupled with the comparatively higher medians in the areas cited suggests a large spread in terms of dispersion around these medians; therefore, tract 28 is selected as the sample tract rather than tract 21. This decision is reinforced by recognition of the difference in concentration of Black residents in each of these census tracts (Tract 21 - 7.7%; Tract 28 - 87.1%). See Appendix C. 33 The next stage of the Sample selection process involves the selection of specific blocks from the total of 53 blocks contained in census tract 28. Four blocks were removed from the initial list of blocks in census tract 28 because at the time of the census enumeration, they contained no Black residents. Two additional blocks were deleted from the remaining list of 49 blocks because of the combined effect of small population size and the small percentage of Black residents contained therein. In this manner the original listing of 53 occupied blocks were reduced to 47. These remaining 47 blocks were then numbered from 1 to 47 and a table of random numbers was utilized to determine the order in which they were chosen as sample blocks. (See Appendix D.) The next stage in this process of sample selection involved the selection of specific residents. The ideal total sample size established was 100 respondents equally divided between representatives of MFC and MC family units. This specification represents the first quota. Included in this selection process is the specification that no more than two more representatives of MFC families than MC families will be drawn from each block used in this investigation. This specification represents the second quota of the multi- stage random sampling procedure specified for this investigation. The implementation of this quota system was achieved by providing for random corner starts for each specified 34 block and providing a selection mechanism for cases where more than one eligible respondent is encountered in a housing unit.1 The task of determining which corner to start inter- viewing from in each block was undertaken by utilizing a table of random numbers to specify the starting corner for locating housing units. The numbers 4, 9, 3, and 2 were selected. By continuing through the table of random numbers the first 47 appearances of these 4 numbers were utilized to indicate the corner start for locating each sample housing unit. A code was then constructed to represent block corners. In this investigation, 4 represented the northwest corner of any city block, 9 the southeast corner, 3 the southwest corner, and 2 the northeast. These procedures were continued until a total of 99 usable questionnaires were obtained.2 1During the course of this investigation, no housing units were encountered which contained more than one eligible respondent at the time of the interview. However, the following mechanism had been established to randomly specify which of several occupants in a housing unit was to be interviewed: (a) if there is one eligible respondent, she was interviewed, (b) if there had been two eligible respon- dents and both were representatives of MFC family units, the oldest would have been interviewed if an odd number was encountered first in a list of random numbers, the youngest if an even number was encountered first, (c) if one eligible resident had been a representative of a MFC family unit and the other a representative of the MC family, the MFC family representative was to be interviewed if an odd number was encountered first in a list of random numbers. The MC family representative was to be interviewed if an even number had been encountered first. This procedure was to have been continued for the remaining permutations of family types and number of mothers in each housing unit through the number of 4 mothers per housing unit. See also Appendix E. 2Fifty-three MFC representatives and 50 MC representa- tives were actually encountered. However, three questionnaires from the first group and one from the second were not adequately completed. 35 These data collection methods appear to be logical and viable within the time - cost resources available for this investigation. These methods allow for the utilization of existing knowledge and recognizes the shortcomings of a mailed questionnaire when the socio-economic-status level of the target population is considered. In addition, the consistant utilization of a table of random numbers to specify the order in which blocks appear in the sample and the corner from which to begin interviewing provides full control of respondent selection thereby avoiding what is recognized as a fundamental weakness of samples involving a quota.1 Data Collection Upon completion of the interview schedule, a pre-test was undertaken involving 39 respondents — 17 MFC representa- tives and 22 MC family representatives. The pre-test excercise was conducted in the Model Cities area of Grand Rapids (with census tract 28 excluded). The interviewers were 6 Black undergraduate sociology students (3 men and 3 women). The interviewers were carefully briefed in interviewing techniques and the meaning of each question prior to the administration of the interview schedule. The six pre-test interviewers were also thoroughly familarized with the mechanics of 1Stephan, Frederick P. and McCarthy, Philip J., Sampling 0 inions, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1967. Pp. 3c. 36 locating the appropriate starting points and respondents. Upon completion of the several briefing sessions and the pre-test itself, each interviewer assisted in the reorgan- ization of the interview schedule. After completion of the pre-test and preparation of the final instrument, this investigation was undertaken. The data were collected by 6 Black interviewers, 5 women and one man. Each interviewer was equipped with a clipboard, schedules, and a detailed map of census tract 28. Each interviewer was instructed each day on which blocks to conduct interviews in, the order of the blocks to be utilized, and the starting corner for each block. The schedules were administered in the homes of the appropriate respondents. An article was published in the Grand Rapids Model Neighborhood News which requested resi- dent cooperation with these research tasks. There was virtually no difficulty experienced in obtaining permission to enter the homes of respondents and conduct interviews. Only one interviewer encountered a respondent who refused to be a subject in this research undertaking and only one item evoked negative interviewee reaction. Names and addresses were explicitly excluded from the data collection process and ultimately these procedures yielded the total sample included in this investigation. Interviews were conducted during the month of May, 1972. Interviews were conducted between 10:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Fridays and between 12:00 noon and 5:00 P.M. on Saturdays. CHAPTER THREE Findings The objectives of this investigation were to: 91) investigate and describe structural characteristics of specific types of mothers and their families; (2) to inves- tigate and describe how specific characteristics are differentially associated with occurrances of MFC and MC family forms; and (3) to offer an explanatory framework with which to analyze and compare the data collected in this investigation to Scanzoni's study of a higher socio- economic-status Black family form. These tasks are under— taken within a structural-functional theoretical framework. In this investigation patterns of similarities and differences between MFC and MC family systems are explored and described. In Chapter Four, comparisons are also made between the MFC lower socio-economic-status families focused upon in this investigation and similarly structured families studied by Scanzoni. The major structural difference between the MFC family units studied in this investigation and in Scanzoni's investigation is this occupation of a higher-socio-economic-status position by Scanzoni's population. The exploration of similarities and differences between MFC and MC family systems is accomplished by exploring patterns and relationships in six major areas of interest. These areas are: (1) structural background factors; (2) par- ental functionality; (3) respondent identification patterns 37 38 and relationships; (4) achievement and mobility attainment; (5) husband-wife relationships and interaction patterns; and (6) parent-children relationships. Analysis QT Data Structural Background Factors: This first section explores some of the variables that constitute the structural backgrounds of the families studied. Within this opening section the first variable explored is the urban experience of the population studied. Data contained in Table 11 shows that respondents that spent their teenage years living in a city (defined as non—farm) environment are more likely to be representatives of MC family structural units. Ninety percent of the MC representatives spent their teenage years in a city as compared to seventy-seven percent of the MFC family representatives. In addition to the urban-rural dimension this investi- gation explores the association between type of family system (either MFC or MC) and the region of the country that the respondents were: (1) born in and (2) residents of during their teenage years. Findings related to the first of these regional concerns show that there is no statistically signifi- cant (P.?. .025) degree of association between family type and the region of the country that respondents were born in. The direction of the pattern visible between these variables suggests that, for this sample, the factor of being born in the South is positively associated with a slightly higher 39 Table I1 Type QT Community Lived Th During Teenage Years City Type of Community Farm 1 Family Type By Family Type Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1971, Pp. 49. Conventions for Describing Q values: Value of Q .70 or higher .50 to .69 .30 to .49 .10 to .29 .01 to .09 .00 2 Apperriate Phrase MFC MC 77% (37) 90% (44) 100% (48) 100% (49) Q value1 N.S.S. Davis, James A., Elementary Survey Analysis, New Jersey: very strong association substantial association low association negligible association A A A moderate association A A N o association N.S.S. is used in this chapter to report that Q values are not statistically significant (P_>_ .025). Totals for all tables vary because of the exclusion of. the no response or not applicable categories. 40 likelihood of respondents representing MFC family units than MC units. Data presented in Table I2 documents the finding that when the region in which respondents lived during their teenage years is the focal point, evidence suggests that there is no statistically significant (P2:.025) degree of association between the variables of family type and region. The pattern exhibited varies in direction from the pattern indicated by the information concerning the region that respondents were born in contained in Table I3. This inves- tigation also yields data that shows no appreciable difference between occurrances of MFC and MC family systems and the region of the country in which the respondents lived during their teenage years. The second area of background features examined is that containing indicators of status advantage. The majority of the fathers of both MFC and MC family representatives were classified as unskilled, service, or domestic workers (77 percent of the MFC family representatives and 85 percent of the MC family representatives reported this occupational status).1 The relationship represented by these data is not statistically significant (Pa:.025). These data support the observation that the occupational status of the respon- dents' fathers in this sample is not an accurate indicator for predicting whether respondents are representatives of MFC or MC family systems. 1See Table I1 (Appendix F) 41 Table I2 Region Lived Th Duripg Teenage Years hy Family Type Family Type North North East - Central MFC MC weSt 42/0 (21) 39/0 (19) Region SOUth SSA (29) 614 (30) 100%) (50) 1.00/0 (49) Q value N. S. S. Table I3 Region Born Th hy Family Type Family Type North North East - Central MFC MC w t a or es 26/0 (13) 31A) (15) Region South 74% (37) 69% (34) 1.00/0 (50) 100%) (49) Q value N. S. S. 42 It is also determined in this investigation that parental educational status is not related to family type in a statis- tically significant (P.>_.025) manner. Table I4 and I5 contain data that supports the observation that MFC and MC family representatives are similar with reference to parental educational achievement. Most of the parents of these respondents have 8 years or less of formal education. The third group of background variables examined focuses upon the household composition of the homes in which the respondents grew up. Household composition is explored from two perspectives, first, parental presence and second, number of siblings. Table I6 contains data which show that represen- tatives of MFC family systems and representatives of MC family systems are similar with reference to the presence of both natural parents during their teenage years. There is no statistically significant (P2:.025) relationship between the variables of family type and parental presence during the specified phase of the life-cycle. The pattern which is visible for this sample is in the direction of MFC family representatives to be slightly more likely than MC represen- tatives to have lived their teenage years in a family environment characterized by the presence of both natural parents. An inspection of the data contained in Table I7 supports the finding that of those respondents that spent their teenage years in households that did not include both of their natural parents, 30 percent of the respondents with 43 Table I4 Educational Status QT Fathers hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC 1‘8 Years 684 (19) 624 (18) Educational Status of Fathers / / 9 or more 32% 38% Years (9) (11) 1.00/0 (28) 1000/0 (29) Q value N.S.S. Table I5 Educational Status QT Mothers py Family Type Family Type MFC MC 1'8 Years 60% (21) 60% (24) Educational Status of Mothers 9 or more 40% 40% Years (14) (40) 100A (35) 100% (64) Q value N.S.S. 44 Table I6 Family Type hy Presence QT Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No MFC 54% (27) 47% (23) Family Type MC 46/0 (23) 53/0 (26) 100% (50) 1000/0 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table I7 Family Type hy Absence QT Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Natural Parent Present During Teenage Years Mother or Mother or Father Father Only and Step-Parent MFC 50% (15) 30% (3) Family Type MC 500/0 (15) 700/0 (7) 100% (30) 1000/0 (10) Q value .40 45 a mother or father and step-parent are MFC family represen- tatives and 70 percent of the families living in a husband- wife family environment are from MC families. The pattern visible in Table I7 concerning the difference between MFC and MC family representatives and the composition of their family of orientation is statistically significant (P 5.025). The strength of this relationship represents a moderate degree of association between the variables of composition of family of orientation and family type. Data in Tables I6 and I7 show that at least 60 of the 90 respondents lived in a husband-wife family environment during their teenage years. When respondents are asked if they can identify either a father or father substitute regularly present in their home during their teenage years, it is seen that similar proportions of MFC and MC family representatives reply in the affirmative. Seventy-five percent of the MFC family representatives and 81 percent of the MC family representa- tives are able to identify either a natural (consanguine or blood) or substitute father. Thus the majority of respondents are able to identify some male person that performed the role of father for them. Data in Table I8 show that there is no statistically significant (P£:.025) difference between MFC and MC families with reference to identification of a male that performed the role of father during their teenage years. 46 Table I8 Father QT Father Substitute Th Household During Teenage Years hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Father or Yes 75% 81% Father (36) (38) Substitute Identified NO 25/0 (12) 19A) (9) 100% (48) 100% (47) Q value N.S.S. 47 When parental presence is viewed within the context of parental education separately for MFC and MC families, the following observations may be made. First, in Tables I9, I10, 111’ and 112,1 data are present which document the finding that regardless of family type, the category containing the highest proportion of higher educated parents is that which indicates that the respondents had both natural parents in the household during their teenage years (Cell C). This finding was weakest in Table 112 which presents data for the mothers of MC respondents. Here Cells C and D are the same, 20 percent. These data support the finding that there is no statistically significant (Pa.025) degree of association between the variables of parents education and presence of both natural parents for these family represen- tatives. A second observation based on these four tables is that similar proportions of respondents are located in Cell C. This finding reaffirms the observation that there is little difference between family types when the variables of presence of both natural parents and parental education are studied. The possible exception to this generalization occurs in the relationship of the respondents' mothers education and the 1In these four Tables and in those following where family type is the control variable, percentages are computed on the total base for the entire table. This differs from the column base used in all other percentage computations. Comparisons are made between tables rather than between columns. Q values, however, are consistently computed within each table separately. 48 Table 19 QT Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 1-8 Years 50% 18% Educational (14) (5) Status of Fathers 9 / / or more 21% 11% Years (6) (3) 71/0 (20) 29/0 (8) 100A, (28) Q value N.S.S. Table I10 Educational Status QT Fathers QT M9 Respondents hy Presence QT Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 1‘8 Years 28/0 (8) 340 (10) Educational Status of Fathers a o 9 or more 28% 10% Years (8) (3) 56% (16) 44A (13) 138% Q value N.S.S. 49 Table I11 QT Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 1-8 Years 37% 23% Educational (13) (8) Status of Mothers / 1 / 9 or more 23% 7% Years (8) (6) 60% 21) 404 (14) Q value N.S.S. Table I12 QT Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 1‘8 Years 28/0 (11) 32/0 (13) Educational Status of Mothers a o 9 or more 20% 20% Years (8) (8) 48% (19) 52% (21) Q value N.S.S. 100% (35) 100% (40) 50 presence of both natural parents for MFC family representa- tives. This exception is not in terms of the pattern exhibited, but in terms of the strength of the relationship. It appears that, with the exception noted, parental educational achieve- ment in the families of orientation of these respondents is not a predictive indicator of the presence of both natural parents for either MFC or MC families. The variable of parental presence is also juxtaposed to that of the urban-non-urban teenage experience of the respon- dents. This dichotomy is made separately for MFC and MC family representatives. A similar pattern is evident for both family types. In both MFC and MC family systems respondents with non—farm backgrounds report more frequently than respon— dents with farm backgrounds that they had both natural parents in the home during their teenage years (Tables 113 and I14). MC representatives report that they are from non-farm back- grounds in the same proportion (45 percent) regardless of the presence or absence of both natural parents in the household in which they lived during their teenage years. These varia- bles show a consistent pattern. These patterns, however, are not statistically significant (P_>_.025). These findings indicate that MFC and MC families are similar with reference to the variables of urban experience and the presence of both natural parents during the respondents teenage years. Parental presence and the occupational status of MFC and MC family representative's fathers is the next set of Type QT Community Lived Respondents Type of Community py Presence City Farm 51 Table 113 In During Teenage Years QT MFC 0 Both Natural Parents Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 35% (17) 42% (20) 17% (8) 6% (3) 52% (25) 48% (23) Q value N.S.S. Table I14 Type QT Community Lived Th Respondents hy Presence Q_ Type of Community City Farm During Teenage Years QT MQ Both Natural Parents Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years 100% (48) Yes No 4570 (22) 45% (22) 2‘ <1) 8‘ <4) 47% (23) 53% (26) T28? Q value N.S.S. 52 variables investigated. The pattern of the relationship represented by these variables is the same for both types of family systems. Both MFC and MC family systems exhibited no statistically significant (PP. .025) relationship between the variables of the occupational status of the respondents' fathers and the presence of both natural parents during the teenage years of the respondents. The pattern among these variables is for MFC families to have a larger propor- tion of their total located in an environment which had both natural parents in the respondents' teenage household than do MC families. Furthermore, both types of families report that a similar proportion of their families which had both natural parents present during the teenage years also had fathers with higher status occupations. The direction of the relationship between the variables of fathers occupation and presence of both natural parents in the household in which the respondents lived during their teenage years when family type is the control variable is for respondents with fathers with higher status occupations to also have spent this period of their life-cycle in a home with both natural parents. This pattern is present for both family types and is visible by examing Cell A of Tables I15 and 116' The second dimension of household composition explored considered the number of siblings in the families of orien- tation of both the respondents and their spouse or last-ex- spouse. Examination of Tables I17 and I18 shows that 53 Table I15 Occupational Status QT Fathers QT MFC Respondents hy Presence QT Both Natural Parents Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No High 13% 10% Occupational (5) (4) Status of Fathers 0 0 LOW 54/0 (21) 23A (9) 67% (26) 33% (13) 100% (39) Q value N.S.S. Table I16 Occupational Status QT Fathers QT MQ Respondents py Presence QT Both Natural Parents Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No High 12% 3% Occupational (4) (1) Status of Fathers 0 a LOW 44‘ (15) 41‘ (14) 56% (19) 44% (15) 100% (34) Q value N.S.S. 54 bl Ta e I17 Family Type QT Number QT Siblings Th Respondents' Family QT Orientation Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or More MFC 37% (11) 56% (38) Family Type MC 63/0 (19) 44/0 (30) 100% (30) 100% (68) Q value N.S.S. Table I18 Family Type hy Number QT Siblings Th Spouse/Last Ex-Spouse's Family QT Orientation Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or more MFC 32% (8) 66% (42) Family Type MC 68% (17) 34% (32) 100% (25) 100% (74) Q value .47 55 representatives of MC type families are more likely to report that they and their last ex-spouses had three or fewer siblings than are most representatives of MFC family systems. The pattern evident in Table 118 concerning the difference between MFC and MC representatives and the number of siblings in the family of orientation of their spouses and last ex- spouses is statistically significant (P:E.025). The strength of this relationship represents a moderate degree of associa- tion between the variables of number of siblings and family type. Next, urban experience and number of siblings are considered in this investigation. Family type was controlled, for example, MFC and MC families are examined separately. The pattern present in this investigation supports the find- ing that both MFC and MC families have the largest segment of their representatives reporting both non-farm backgrounds and families of orientations with four or more siblings.1 When the focus shifts from urban experience to the presence of both natural parents in the household in which the respondents lived during their teenage years, the following observations may be made.2 First, in MFC families the largest proportion of the representatives report the presence of both natural parents with four or more siblings. 1See Tables I2 and I3 - Appendix F 2See Tables I4 and I5 - Appendix F 56 Second, in MC families the largest proportion of the repre- sentatives report a lack of the presence of both natural parents and four or more siblings. The category reported least frequently by both MFC and MC representatives is that in which both natural parents were present and the presence of three or less siblings. These data indicate that the majority of both MFC and MC families had four or more siblings. Also indicated is the finding that MFC family representatives are more likely than MC representatives to have had both natural parents present in the home in which they lived during their teenage years. In addition to urban experience and the presence of both natural parents, the variable of the status level of the occupation of the fathers of the respondents is inves- tigated. This variable, fathers' occupational status, and size of family of orientation is viewed separately for each family type.1 Findings concerning these variables support the observation that in both MFC and MC family systems the most frequently reported combination of variables is low occupational status for fathers and larger (four or more) numbers of siblings in the family of orientation of respon- dents. Household composition as indicated by parental presence and number of siblings as described above is not viewed as a useful predictor of family type. It is discovered in this 1See Tables I6 and I7 - Appendix F. 57 investigation that there are many more similarities than differences with reference to the variable of household composition in the sample studied. The exceptions vary in the strength of relationships more than in direction. The exception to this pattern occurs where the focus is on the variables of family type and the number of siblings in the spouse/last ex—spouse's family of orientation. The fourth set of background variables studied focus on parental patterns of church attendance.1 The major findings related to this variable are: (1) the majority of both mothers and fathers attend church at least once a month or more, (2) a higher percentage of mothers than fathers attend church at least once a month or more, and (3) a similar pattern of church attendance is evident for the parents of both MFC and MC families. This investiga- tion provides data which illustrates the finding that these respondents come from a background which included parents who were regular, defined as attending once a month or more, church attenders. These findings do not support the observation that parental religious practices, as indicated by patterns of church attendance, is either positively or negatively related to MFC or MC family forms. Parental Functionality: This second section examines some of the indicators of parental functionality which are viewed as aspects of 1 See Tables I8 and I9 - Appendix F. 58 the socialization process undergone by the respondents in this investigation. The first group of indicators related to parental functionality are referred to as educational values. The first indicator of parental influence in establishing educational values is the parental stressing of the need for education for Blacks. Three findings are supported by this investigation.1 First, representatives of MFC family systems report more frequently than MC family representatives that their parents encouraged educational achievement because they were Black. Second, mothers were more likely than fathers to stress the value of educational achievement. Third, the exception in this pattern of parents stressing educational achievement with a rationale based on race is in the case of fathers of MC families. MC respondents report that their fathers were just as likely to not stress as stress the value of education for Blacks in the United States. These three patterns do not indicate a statistically significant (P2 .025) association between the variables of parents stressing education for Blacks and family type. The observation may be made that in this sample most respondents report that their parents stressed the need for education during their teenage years regardless of the family type that they represent. Further analysis of data collected in this investigation documents the finding that most parents of both MFC and MC 1 See Tables I11 and IIZ - Appendix F. 59 family representatives helped them in their educational pursuits. Characteristics exhibited in Tables II1 and IIZ represent the finding that mothers are more likely than fathers to be viewed as assisting the respondents in their educational pursuits. Inspection of the following Tables II3, II4, IIS, and II6 reveals that MFC respondents are more likely than MC respondents to report that their parents provided them with educational assistance that was intangible. This type of assistance is defined as the pro— vision of encouragement to go to school and reinforcement to stay there as long as possible. The emphasis on intan- gible aid is supplemented by the recognition that tangible or material aid was also provided by the parents of these respon- dents. An indicator of this type of assistance is extrapolated from the data in Table II7. This table shows that a sizable segment of the mothers of both MFC and MC respondents worked outside the home during the respondents adolescent years. The second group of indicators associated with parental functionality are described as achievement values. This variable was explored by examining whether parents stressed the importance of getting ahead in life. Three observations may be made. First, the parents of MFC respondents more frequently than the parents of MC respondents are reported as stressing the importance of getting ahead in life. Second, although this pattern is similar for both MFC and MC respon- dents, the relationship exhibited is stronger for MFC methers than for MFC fathers. Third, the only category in which the 60 Table I11 Father Functionality Th Educational Achievement hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Father Helped 79% (31) 654 (26) Functional/Not Functional Did Not 21% 35% Help (8) (14) 100% (39) 100% (40) Q value N.S.S. Table 112 Mother Functionality Th Educational Achievement py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Helped 82% (36) 89% (41) Mother Functional/Not Functional Did Not 18% 11% Help (8) (5) 1000/0 (44) 1.00/0 (46) Q value N.S.S. 61 Table II3 Type QT Educational Assistance Provided py Father py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Type of Tangibles 39% 54% Assistance (15) (20) Provided by Father 1.00/0 (38) 100‘) (37) Q value N.S.S. Table II4 Type QT Educational Assistance Provided hy Father hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Type of Intangibles 32% 16% Assistance (12) (6) Provided by Father Other 68A (26) 84A (31) 100%) (38) 1.00/0 (37) Q value N.S.S. 62 Table IIS Type QT Educational Assistance Provided py Mother py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Type of Tangibles 40% 43% Assistance (18) (20) Provided by Mother Other 600/0 (27) 570/0 (26) 100% (45) 100% (46) Q value N.S.S. Table I16 Type QT Educational Assistance Provided hy Mother hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Type of Intangible 38% 30% Assistance (17) (14) Provided by Mothers Other 620/0 (28) 70% (32) 1000/0 (45) 1.00/0 (46) Q value N.S.S. 63 Table II7 IEmployment Status QT the Mothers QT the Respondents During Respondents Teenage Years hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC ‘Mother worked Yes 374 (17) 54% (25) During the Adolescent Years of a 0 Respondent No 63% (29) 46% (21) 100‘ (46) 100% (46) Q value N.S.S. 64 majority of respondents report that a parent did not stress the value of getting ahead (to make something of oneself) is that represented by the mothers of MC respondents. These findings indicate that parents are instrumental with refer- ence to stressing the importance of getting ahead in life and influencing the family of procreations structure for these respondents.1 The third set of variables which indicate parental functionality are those referred to as achievement aids. That is, how parents assisted the respondents in getting ahead in life. Data in Tables II8 and II9 indicate that for this sample parental counsel and example was more important than material aid in the determination of the type of family of procreation that they currently represent. These tables show that MFC family representatives report that similar proportions of their parents provided counsel and example (58 percent of the mothers and 57 percent of the fathers) that encouraged them to strive to get ahead in life. The fourth group of indicators associated with parental functionality are the variables which are indicative of direct preparation for the conjugal situation. This group of variables are focused on how parents of these respondents helped prepare them for marriage. Two areas are examined. First, did the parents of these respondents help prepare them for marriage and second, how did they help prepare 65 Table II8 How Mothers Assisted Respondents Th Getting Ahead T_ Life By Family Type Family Type MFC MC geghge: and 58% (23) 66% (23) Type of Assistance Other 4.2/0 (17) 340 (12) 100%) (40) 1.00/0 (35) Q value N.S.S. Table II9 How Fathers Assisted Respondents Th Getting Ahead Th Life hy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Counsel and 57% 50% Example (16) (12) Type of Assistance 0 c Other 4.3/0 (12) 50/0 (12) 1.00/0 (28) 1.00/0 (24) Q value N.S.S. 66 them for the conjugal environment. Examination of Tables 1110 and 1111 reveals that: (1) MFC respondents report that their parents were helpful in preparing them for marriage, and (2) perception of the father helping in this preparation is associated with MFC family status to a statistically significant (PS..025) degree. There is a substantial degree of association between the variables of helpfulness of the fathers of the respondents in preparing them for marriage and type of family of procreation that they are now in. The majority of both MFC and MC respondents report that their mothers were helpful in preparing them for marriage. There is no sizable difference in the proportion of MFC and MC family representatives reporting this pattern of maternal influence. When the focus of the investigation is on how parents helped prepare the respondents for marriage, the following findings are visible: first, inspection of Table 1112 and Table 1113 shows that perceived parental help in marriage preparation that emphasized general values is more closely associated with MFC family status than with MC family status. When the reference point is specified as the mother, the relationship is statistically significant (P5.025) and indicated a moderate degree of association. Second, inspec- tion of Table Ill4 and Table 1115 indicates that perceived parental aid in marriage preparation that stressed specific 67 Table 1110 Helpfulness 9: Father in Marriage Preparation by Family Type Helpfulness of Father Very Helpful/ Helpful Not at all Helpful/ Hindered Family Type MFC MC 744 (25) 38A (14) 26A (9) 624 (23) 1004 (34) 100% (37) Q value .64 Table II11 Helpfulness 9: Mother in Marriage Preparation by Family Type Helpfulness of Mother Very Helpful/ Helpful Not at all Helpful/ Hindered Family Type MFC MC 82% (37) 85% (39) 100% (45) 100% (46) Q value N.S.S. 68 Table 1112 Type pf Marital Preparation Provided py Fathers py Family Type Preparation Provided by Fathers General Values Other - Specific Norms or Role Expectations Family Type Q value N.S.S. Table 1113 MFC MC 824 (18) 38A (5) 18‘ (4) 62% (8) 100% (22) 100% (13) Type _£ Marital Preparation Provided py Mothers py Family Type Preparation Provided by Mothers General Values Other - Specific Norms or Role Expectations Family Type Q value .46 _MFC MC 464 (17) 24A (9) 54% (20) 76% (29) 100% (37) 100% (38) 69 Table 1114 Type pf Marital Preparation Provided py Fathers py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Specific 57 467 . Norms or role ° (1) ° (6) giggiggglon Expectations By Fathers Other - a a General 954 (21) 54A (7) Values 1000/0 (22) 1000/0 (13) Q value N.S.S. Table 1115 Type pf Marital Preparation Provided py Mothers py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Specific a 0 Preparation Norms or role 46‘ (17) 684 (26) Provided Expectations By Mothers Other - a a General 544 (20) 324 (12) Values 100% (37) 100% (38) Q value .44 7O norms and role expectations is more closely associated with MC family status than with MFC family status. As above, when the reference point is specified as the mother, the relationship is statistically significant (P.<...025) and indicates a moderate degree of association. These findings, which refer to the various dimensions of parental functionality, suggest that the stressing of general values and overall example necessary to cope with stressful family situations is behavior which is more closely associated with MFC parents. MC parents were more likely to emphasize specific norms and role expectations in preparing their daughters for the conjugal situation. Identification Patterns: The third section of this chapter examines patterns of identification exhibited by the respondents. Identification is viewed as the extended influence of either persons or institutions on the lives of these mothers. Identification patterns are studied in the following six areas: (1) identi- fication with parents; (2) with other adults: (3) with the church or religion: (4) with the school or educational identification; (5) with relatives; and (6) with reference to the one man and the one woman admired most. Examination of Tables IIIl and III2 shows that: (1) a minority of both MFC and MC respondents report that they want to be like their father or father substitute; (2) a majority of both MFC and MC respondents indicate that they 71 Table 1111 Desire 19 _§ Like Father Dy Family Type Like Like or Differ From Father Different/ Neither Family Type MFC MC 264 (9) 28A (11) 74% (25) 72% (29) 100% (34) 100% (40) Q value N.S.S. Table IIIZ Desire 19 fig Like Mother fiy Family Type Like Like or Differ From Mother Different/ Neither Family Type MFC MC 39% (18) 48% (23) 100% (46) 100% (48) Q value N.S.S. 72 want to be like their mother or mother substitute. When the MFC representatives were asked why they wanted to be like their father, they gave positive goal oriented behavior as the reason at the same rate, 44 percent of the time.1 MC respondents were more likely to indicate that they wanted to be like their father because of positive person oriented behavior as opposed to positive goal oriented behavior. Goal oriented behavior is viewed as being instrumental and person oriented behavior as being expressive. When the respondents were asked why they wanted to be like their mothers both MFC and MC family representatives indicated positive person oriented behavior more frequently than positive goal oriented behavior as the reason. When those respondents that indicate that they want to be different from their fathers are asked for the reason why, they report that negative goal oriented behavior is the reason for this pattern.3 When those respondents that indicate that they want to be different from their mothers are asked why, they give as their reason negative goal oriented and negative person oriented behavior in exactly the same proportion. These findings are the same for both MFC and MC family representatives.4 1See Tables III1 and III2 - Appendix F 2See Tables III3 and III4 - Appendix F 3See Tables III5 and III6 - Appendix F 4See Tables III7 and III8 - Appendix F 73 Inspection of Tables III3, III4, IIIS, and III6, support the finding that when the control variable of family type, MFC or MC, is introduced, the following generalizations may be tentatively suggested. First, larger proportions of MFC representatives that MC representatives lived in a house- hold with both natural parents during their teenage years and report that they want to be like their parents. Second, larger proportions of MC respondents than MFC respondents lived in a household with both natural parents during the teenage period of their life cycle and report that they did not want to be like their parents. Third, regardless of family type or presence of both natural parents during the teenage years, respondents more frequently report that they wanted to be like their mothers than their fathers. A patterned relationship exists between: (1) the desire to be like parents: (2) the presence of both natural parents during the teenage years; and (3) family type, MFC or MC. Identification with adults other than parents is the next area investigated. Table III7 contains data which shows that there is a statistically significant (P:5.025) relation- ship between the variable of an adult taking an interest in respondents while they were teenagers and the variable of family type. There is a moderate degree of association between these variables. These data indicate that MFC family representatives are more likely than MC representatives to acknowledge that an adult other than their parents took an 74 Table III3 Desire 19 fig Like Father gy Presence Of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years For MFC Respondents Like Like or Differ From Father Different/ Neither Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 18A) (6) 9/0 (3) 44% (15) 29% (10) 62% (21) 38% (13) Q value N.S.S. Table III4 100% (34) Desire 19 fig Like Father fiy Presence 9: Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years For M9 Respondents Like or lee Differ From Father Different/ Neither Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 10% (4) 17A (7) 48% (19) 25% (10) 58% (23) 42% (17) Q value N.S.S. 100% (40) 75 Table TITS Desire 19 fig Like Mother fly Presence Of Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years For MFC Respondents Like Like or Differ From ”Other Different/ Neither Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 39% (18) 22% (10) 15/0 (7) 24/0 (11) 54% (25) 46% (21) Q value N.S.S. Table III6 100% (46) Desire 19 fig Like Mother fly Presence 9: Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years For MC Resppndents Like Like or Differ From Mother Different/ Neither Both Natural Parents Present During Teenage Years Yes No 23% (11) 290/0 (14) 25% (12) 23% (11) 48% (23) 52% (25) Q value N.S.S. 100% (48) 76 Table III7 Identification With Non-Parental Adult During Teenage Years py Family Type Family Type MFC MC While Yes 67% 45% Teenager (32) (22) Adult Took An Interest In YOU 0 a No 33% (16) 55% (27) 100% (48) 1004 (49) Q value .42 77 interest in them and helped them when they were teenagers. This aid or help was more frequently in the form of expressive or person-oriented resources as opposed to instrumental or task-oriented help.1 Identification with the church or religion is the next area investigated. Tables III8, I119, and 11110 supply data which make the following generalizations possible. First, there is practically no difference between MFC and MC family representatives with reference to church attendance and denominational affiliation. Second, 82 percent of the MFC and 78 percent of the MC family representatives attend church at least once a week or more. Third, 100 percent of the MFC and 94 percent of the MC representatives attend church at least once a month. Fourth, 96 percent of the MFC and 94 percent of the MC family representatives are affiliated with a major protestant church. These family types do not differ to a statistically significant degree 92.025). Seventy percent of the MFC family representatives and 43 percent of the MC representatives report that the church or religion helped prepare them for marriage. Table IIII1 shows that the variables of perceiving the church as helping in the preparation for marriage and family type is related to a statistically significant (P:§.025) degree and represents a substantial association. This help most frequently took the form of the church providing a general orientation to 1See Table 1119 - Appendix F 78 Table III8 Church Attendance Frequency fiy Family Type Attendance Frequency Once a week or more Less than once a week Family Type MFC MC 82% (40) 78% (38) 100% (49) 100% (49) Q value N.S.S. Table 1119 Church Attendance Frequency py Family TYpe Attendance Frequency Once a Month or More Less than Once a Month Family Type MFC MC 100% (49) 94% (46) 0‘ (0) 6% (3) 1000/0 (49) 1000/0 (49) Q value N.S.S. 79 Table 11110 Denominational Affiliation By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Major 96% 94% Protestant (48) (46) Denomination Other 4% (2) 6% (3) 1004 (50) 100% (49) Q value N.S.S. Table III11 Perception pf Religion Helping Prepare For Marriage fly Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 704 (35) 43A (21) Religion Helped In Preparation For Marital a a Situation No 304 (15) 57A (28) 100% (40) 1004 (49) Q value .51 80 life rather than stressing specific role obligations.1 The majority of this sample also acknowledged that the church helped them get ahead in life (be a success in terms of mobility).2 This pattern is similar for both MFC and MC families. Of those that perceived the church as helping them get ahead in life, both family types stressed the factor of social adjustment as opposed to specific application of the Protestant Ethic. All of those few reporting that religion or the church did not help them get ahead in life offer as an explanation of why this is the situation, the observation that they did not attend enough. School or educational identification patterns are the fourth area investigated in this section. Inspection of the data3 related to this area of the investigation supports the following findings: First, the majority, 80 percent or more, of both MFC and MC family representatives report that they, their parents, their friends, and their teachers viewed themselves as good or at least average students. This is opposed to classifying the respondents as only fair or even poor students. Second, this perception of self and the perception of the evaluation of others with reference to the performance of the respondents as students is stronger for MFC family representatives when they are compared to 1See Table III10 - Appendix F 2 . See Tables IIIll’ IIIIZ’ and III13 - Appendix F 3 . See Tables 11114 - III19 - Appendix F 81 MC representatives. Third, when asked to identify both the best and worst thing about school, both MFC and MC respondents identified an academic subject. These data suggest that, regardless of MFC or MC family status, these families identified in a positive manner with their schools and educational experiences. The fifth area of this section focuses on the presence and influence of relatives during the teenage years of these respondents. These dimensions are utilized as indicators of identification patterns. A review of the appropriate data1 support the following observations: First, similar propor— tions of MFC and MC families report that; they did not have relatives living in their household while they were teenagers and that relatives neither helped nor hindered them in getting ahead in life. Relatives, as used here, refers to conjugal or consanguine kin other than parents or parent-substitutes. The idea of getting ahead in life is once again viewed in the context of social mobility. The pattern evident here is that most of this sample did not have relatives living in their teenage homes nor did most of them have relatives that either help or hinder them in getting ahead in life. Of those few that did report that relatives helped them get ahead in life the pattern was different for MFC and MC family representatives. MFC representatives were more likely to re- port financial assistance as the help that relatives provided 1See Tables III20 through III23 - Appendix F 82 in helping them get ahead in life. MC respondents were more likely than MFC respondents to cite advice, counsel, and example as the form that this type of assistance was dis- pensed in. This finding may be a result of MC families being less affluent than the MFC families in this sample. Current economic status may also be a reflection of the economic background of their family of orientation and of their relatives. The final area of this section explores identification patterns suggested by a focus on the most admired man and the most admired woman identified by these respondents. Examination of appropriate data1 support the following findings: First, parents are the most admired men and women for both family types. Second, this pattern is stronger for MFC families than for MC families. Third, when asked if a man other than their father or father-substitute was admired, most of the respondents responded that there was no one so admired. This pattern was similar for both family types. However, when a similar inquiry was made about there also being another woman admired, identical proportions and numbers of both MFC and MC family representatives report that there was such a woman. These findings suggest that parents were objects of identity for both family types. It may also be suggested that identification with auxiliary women rather than men is of importance for the women in this sample. 1See Tables IIIZ4 through III27 - Appendix F 83 These findings are also similar for both MFC and MC family representatives. This observation in turn suggests the limited usefulness of these variables for predicting family form or structure. Achievement and Mobility Attainment: The fourth section of this chapter focuses on achievement and mobility attainment as determined by comparing: (1) the fathers and husbands of the respondents and (2) the fathers of the respondents and the respondents themselves. In this study father includes father-substitute and husband includes last ex-husband. Mobility is examined by selecting the cate- gory most frequently reported in each area studied. The areas compared are occupational status and education. These areas are examined separately for MFC and MC family representatives. The first comparison made is between the fathers and husbands of MFC representatives in the area of occupational status. Here, Table IV1, it is discovered that the largest group is in Cell B where the husbands of the respondents have lower occupational status than did the fathers of the same respondents. This finding is indicative of downward vertical mobility for MFC mothers. Table IVZ’ the second comparison, indicates that MC mothers exhibit status stabil- ity with reference to the occupational status of their father and last ex-husband. This group reports fathers with low status occupations and last ex-husbands with low status occupations too, (Cell D). 84 Table IV1 Father's Occupational Status py Husbands - Occupational Status for MFC Respondents Fathers Occupational Status During Respondents' Teenage Years Husbands' Occupational Status High Low High 160/0 (7) 51% (23) LOW 4%. (2) 29% (13) 204 (9) 804 (36) 1004 (45) Q value N.S.S. Table IVZ Father's Occupational Status py Last Ex-Husbands - Occupational Status for MC Respondents Fathers Occupational Status During Respondents' Teenage Years Last Ex-Husband's Occupational Status High Low High 7% (3) 27% (12) LOW 2% (1) 64% (28) 9% (4) 91% (40) 100% (44) Q value N.S.S. 85 The third comparison is made between the fathers and husbands of MFC family representatives on the basis of their educational achievement (Table 1V3). These data suggest the finding that these respondents experienced upward mobility in terms of having husbands with higher educational status than their fathers. A fourth finding shows that this same pattern is evident for MC family representatives.1 A fifth comparison is made between the fathers and the respondents themselves with reference to educational achievement status. The finding is similar to that reported directly above for husbands and fathers on this variable. That is, both MFC and MC family representatives have experienced upward mobility with reference to having higher educational achievement status than that reported for their fathers.2 These findings indicate that for this sample, MFC representatives have experienced downward mobility with reference to generational occupational status while MC family representatives have remained stable. It is also seen that regardless of which of the dimensions of educational achieve- ment mobility is focused upon, both family types have experienced upward mobility. These findings exhibit a pattern which suggests that there are inequities in the economic 1See Table IV1 - Appendix F 2See Tables IVZ and IV3 - Appendix F 86 Table 1V3 Father's Educational Status py Husband's Educational Status For MFC Respondents Husband‘s Educational Status 1-8 9 Years Years or More 1'8 Years 294 (8) 390 (11) Father's Educational Status / / 9 Years 3% 29% or More (1) (8) 32/0 (9) 68/0 (19) 100/0 (28) Q value N.S.S. 87 opportunity structures of the United States. This is suggested by the observation that upward occupational mobility does not appear to coincide with upward educational mobility for this sample. Husband-Wife Relationships: The fifth section of this chapter is directed toward the study of indicators of the quality of husband-wife interaction patterns and their attendent consequences. This task is undertaken by exploring the following seven areas: (1) husband—wife primary relations which includes the dimensions of companionship, physical affection, and empathy. Empathy includes the dimensions of both communication and understanding: (2) satisfaction with husband's job, status estrangement, satisfaction with family life-style or standard of living, and chances for future success: (3) spending of money; (4) authority patterns; (5) family income; (6) educa- tion of respondents; and (7) occupational status of respon— dents. The major analytical focus in this section is to examine positive and negative types of responses in the seven areas specified and compare these responses on the basis of family type. These comparisons are necessary steps in the replication of Scanzoni's study. Therefore, some rather obvious relationships are presented below. It is evident in many instances that a consideration of values in specific areas would be of greater utility than the consid- erations undertaken of specific relationships. 88 Tables V1, V2, V3, and V4 all indicate that MFC and MC family representatives differ to a statistically significant (PS..025) degree on all of the dimensions related to husband- wife primary relations studied. Empathy, as indicated by the stressing of communication and understanding is the category that exhibits the strongest relationship between indicators of husband-wife primary relations and family type. This pattern supports the finding that the subjects that evaluate empathy positively tend to be MFC family representatives. This same pattern is continued when the variables being examined are: (1) cathetic or physical affection and (2) com- panionship. Both of these variables also tend to be evaluated positively by representatives of MFC families. As would be anticipated from a structural-functional perspective, these data support the observation that a very strong degree of association exists between these indicators of the quality of husband-wife primary relations and family type. Another related finding is that the importance of the observed indicators of primary-type relations in order of the strength of the relationships examined are as follows: (1) communica- tion and confiding is the more important dimension of empathy with understanding ranked close behind in terms of Q values; (2) on the basis of this same criteria, cathetic or physical affection is directly related to MFC family status: and (3) companionship is ranked next in terms of the strength of the relationship exhibited. 89 Table V1 Satisfaction With Conjugal Companionship py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Satisfied 86A (42) 48A (23) Companionship Not 14% 52% Satisfied (7) (25) 100% (49) 1006 (48) Q value .73 Table V2 Satisfaction With Conjugal Cathetic Affection py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Satisfied 96A (48) 66% (31) Cathetic Affection Not 4% 34% Satisfied (2) (16) 100% (50) 1004 (47) Q value .85 90 Table V3 Freedom 12 Conjugal Communication And Confiding py Family Type Family Type MFC MC V F % % FEE: ree/ 92 <45) 2/ (1) Communication/ Confiding 8% Not So (4) 98% Free (48) 100% (49) 100% (49) Q value .99 Table V4 Perception pf Conjugal Understanding Process py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Very Readily/ 84% 2% Readily (41) (1) Under- standing 167 987 Not So 0 o Readily (8) (48) 100% (49) 1004 (49) Q value .99 91 The second segment of this chapter section includes the variables of satisfaction with husband's job, status estrangement, satisfaction with family life-style, and chances for future success. These variables are used as indicators of economic and status alienation. It is antici- pated that these variables are differentially associated with MFC and MC family systems. Inspection of Tables V5, V6’ V7, and V8 indicates that these data follow a consistent pattern. The pattern extrapolated from these indicators is for subjects that positively evaluate the above indicators to tend to be MFC family representatives. These data also indicate that with the exception of evaluation of chances for future success the relationships represented by these patterns are statistically significant (P5 .025). The specific findings in this area are as follows: (1) there is a very strong degree of direct association between positive evaluation of the husband's job and MFC family status; (2) there is a moderate degree of direct association between placing oneself in a higher socio-economic-status position and MFC family status; (3) there is a substantial degree of direct association between satisfaction with ones' families life-style and MFC family status; and (4) a similar pattern exists for the relationship between reported chances for future success and family type. This latter relationship is not statistically significant (P2.025). 92 Table V5 Satisfaction With Husband/Last Eg-Husband's Occupational Status py Family Type Family Type MFC MC satleled 89/0 (41) 24> (1) Job Satisfaction Not 11% 98% Satisfied (5) (41) 100A (46) 100% (42) Q value .99 Table V6 Status Estrangement py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Socio- U er 69% 49% Economic- Mggdlé (33) (22) Status Level Respondents a , Identified Lower 31‘ (15) 51‘ (23) With 100% (48) 1000/0 (45) Q value .39 93 Table V7 Satisfaction With Life-Style py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Satisfied 704 (35) 434 (21) Satisfaction With Life- StYle a a Not 30% 57A Satisfied (15) (28) 100%) (50) 1.00/0 (49) Q value .51 Table V8 Perception pf Chances For Future Success fiy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Excellent/ 59% 45% Good (29) (21) Chances For Future 9 Success . o a Fair/ 41% 55% Poor (20) (26) 1004 (49) 100% (47) Q value N.S.S. 94 The third group of husband-wife interaction patterns studied are related to money spending practices. Inspection of the data related to money spending practices supports the following findings. First, similar proportions of MFC and MC family representatives report that they are either very careful or careful when it comes to spending money.1 Eighty- eight percent of the MFC representatives and 84 percent of the MC family representatives report this cautious pattern. Second, the finding is also made that similar proportions (43 percent of the MFC representatives and 49 percent of the MC representatives) of these respondents acknowledge that money is the object or topic that is disagreed about more often than any other single thing during their marital career. A third finding is dictated by a close inspection of Table V9. Data contained in this table show that the variables of the perception of the respondents concerning their husband or last ex-husbands money spending practices and family type are related to a statistically significant (Pf..025) degree. There is a very strong association between these two varia- bles. The pattern of this relationship is for 86 percent of the MFC representatives to report that their husbands were either very careful or careful in their money spending practices. This pattern is contrasted to that reported by MC family representatives. Sixty-one percent of these respon- dents, MC, report that their last ex-husband was either not so careful or actually careless in their money spending practices. 1 See Table V1 - Appendix F 95 Table V9 Evaluation pf Degree 9: Care 1p Spendipg Money py Family Type Spending Money - Husband/ Last Ex- Husband Very Careful/ Careful Not So Careful/ Careless Family Type MFC MC 86% (43) 39% (19) 14° (7) 61% (30) 1.00/0 (50) 1000/0 (49) Q value .81 96 A fourth area of husband-wife interaction patterns investigated is concerned with authority structure and practices. Findings related to the variables of authority and family type are statistically significant (P$.025). Data contained in Tables V10 and V11 support the observation that a moderate degree of association exists between these two variables. The pattern is for MFC representatives to report that they get their way or compromise during disagree- ments. MC representatives report that their last spouse got his way or a compromise was reached in the resolving of disagreements. Family income constitutes the fifth area of husband-wife interaction patterns studied. Table V12 contains information that supports the finding that there is a very strong degree of association between the variables of income and family type. The pattern demonstrated by these data is that MC families are more likely than MFC families to have family incomes of less than $7,000 per year. This finding is a statistically significant (P$.025) I one. A related finding is that MFC families with less than $7,000 in annual family income are more likely larger families than are more affluent MFC families. MC families with less than $7,000 income per year are also likely to have larger families than their more affluent counterparts. However, these lower income MC respondents are about equally divided in terms of the proportion with 3 or less children and 4 or more children. 97 Table V10 Authority Structure py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Who Wins/ Self 554 (26) 354 (17) Won Conjugal Disagreements Other 45% 65% Compromise (21) (31) 1004 (47) 100A (48) Q value .38 Table V11 Authority Structure py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Self or 72% 50% Compromise (34) (24) Who Wins/ Won Conjugal Disagreements , c Other 284 (13) SOA (24) 100% (47) 1004 (48) Q value .44 Income py Family Type Income $6,999 or Less $7,000 or More 98 Table V12 Family Type MFC MC 53% (23) 90% (33) 4.7/0 (20) 10/0 (5) 1000/0 (43) 100% (48) Q value .70 99 This pattern is different than that exhibited by MFC respondents. These findings are not statistically signifi— cant (P2.025) but they do suggest a relationship between the variables of income, number of children or family size, and family type (MFC or MC).1 The educational status of the respondents is the sixth area explored and related to husband-wife interaction. The findings supported by the data gathered show that there is no statistically significant (P:.025) degree of association between the variables of respondents' level of education and family type. This investigation shows that 76 percent of MFC family representatives and 65 percent of MC represen- tatives have 9 or more years of education.2 Based on this dimension these two family types are structurally similar indicating that the quality of husband-wife relationships as indicated by either MFC or MC family status is not pre- dicted by knowledge of educational achievement status. A closely related finding is supported by the data contained in Tables V13 and V14. There it is seen that the variables of education, family size or number of children, and family type (MFC or MC) are related. The pattern exhibited by these findings is for higher educated respon- dents to have fewer children than those respondents with less education. This pattern is statistically significant 1See Tables V2 and V3 - Appendix F 2See Table V4 - Appendix F 100 Table V13 MFC Respondents' Educational Status py Number pf Children Tp Family Of Orientation 8 Years or Less Educational Status 9 Years or more Number of Children 3 or Less 4 or More 44% (22) 32% (16) 48% (24) 52% (26) 100% (50) Q value .74 Table v14 MC Respondents' Educational Status py Number pf Children Tp Family Of Orientation 8 Years or Less Educational Status 9 Years or More Number of Children 3 or Less 4 or More 14A (7) 20% (10) 39% (19) 27% (13) 5370 (26) 47% (23) 100% Q value N.S.S. (49) 101 for MFC family representatives and suggests that a very strong degree of association exists between these variables. The seventh sphere of husband-wife interation investigated is indicated by the employment status of the respondents. Findings suggested by inspection of the relevent data1 are: (1) the most sizable group of respondents are not employed and not satisfied with their husband or last ex- husband's job (42 percent of all respondents); (2) when respondents that are satisifed with their spouses occupation are compared with those that are not satisfied, they are found to be similarly distributed with reference to occupa- tional status (either working or not working): and (3) the largest segment of the MFC family representatives are mothers that are not working and are satisfied with their husband's job while the largest segment of the MC represen- tatives are not working but are not satisfied with their husband's occupational status or job. These data then illustrate that the employment status of these respondents is not related to family status, as indicated by satisfaction with their spouses' job or occupational status, to a statis- tically significant (P2.025) degree. Parent-Children Relationships: The sixth and final section of this chapter examines the relationships between these mothers and their children 1See Tables V5, V6, and V7 - Appendix F 102 in three areas related to achievement and success in the economic-opportunity structure. These areas are: (1) goals for children: (2) means for goal attainment; and (3) actual and projected child attainment within the political and socio-economic structure of the United States. The major objective of this section is to explore the possibility that dominant values and goals are being instilled into both MFC and MC children by their mothers. The first area examined within this context includes occupational and educational goal aspirations. Table VI1 shows that there is a moderate degree of association between the variables of job choice for sons and family type. The statistically significant (P$.025) pattern between these two variables is that MC family representatives are more likely than MFC representatives to have a particular kind of job in mind for their sons. The mothers that acknow— ledged that they did have a particular job in mind for their sons most frequently reported that it was a high status occupation. Sixty-seven percent of the MFC representatives and 56 percent of the MC family representatives fit this pattern.1 The majority of the respondents that did not specify an occupational choice for their sons did indicate that they wanted their children to have desirable jobs. Of these mothers with sons, similar proportions of MFC and MC family representatives reported that their child's 1See Table VI1 - Appendix F 103 Table V11 Preference Expressed For Son's Occupational Career py FamiTy Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 334 (14) 584 (22) Preference Expressed For Son's Occupation No 67% (28) 42% (16) 1004 (42) 100‘ (38) Q value .46 104 chance of getting the job that they had in mind were excellent or good as opposed to fair or poor. Seventy-seven percent of the MFC family representatives and 76 percent of the MC mothers thought that their sons had either an excellent or good chance to achieve the occupational status that they wanted for them.1 In addition to the above occupational expectations these respondents, including those with no sons, report that they feel their children's chances for getting ahead in life was better than the chance had been for themselves. Eighty- five percent of the MFC and 82 percent of the MC respondents see their children as having a much better chance than they had for getting ahead in life.2 The idea of getting ahead in life is related to the economic-opportunity structure in the United States. A mechanism for gaining both entrance and mobility within this structure is through the utilization of higher education. Evidence of optimism concerning the chances of their children attending college is contained in Table VIZ' These data illustrate that there is a statistically significant (P$.025) relationship between the variables of perception by the respondents concerning the chance of their children attending college and family type. The pattern extrapolated from 1See Table VI2 - Appendix F 2See Table VI3 - Appendix F 105 Table VI2 Evaluation pf Children's Chances 9f Going Tp College fiy Family Type Family Type MFC MC Excellent/ 89% ( 74% 42) (34) Children's GOOd Chances of Going to College Poor 110/0 (5) 26% (12) 1004 (5) 1004 (46) Q value .50 106 these data supports the finding that MFC mothers are more likely than MC mothers to report that their children's chances of attending college are excellent or good as opposed to less optimistic expectations. The magnitude of the difference indicated by this pattern between the two types of family systems represents the finding that there is a moderate degree of association between perception of child- ren's chance for college attendance and family type. The second portion of this final chapter section focuses upon the means of goal attainment adhered or aspired to by these mothers. Included in this segment are data related to the current educational environment of the children of these respondents, where applicable; involvement in the choice of their children's friends or peers; religious train- ing, encouragement in the pursuit of higher educational achievement; and the stressing of autonomy as a basic value in child socialization. Findings related to these several arenas of goal attain- ment suggest that there is no statistically significant (Pz.025) difference between MFC and MC families with reference to the above mentioned areas. Although there is no statistically significant difference between the family types studied, patterns do emerge in these areas. First, when the focus is upon selected aspects of the educational milieu of those with school age children; upon peer choice; and upon religious training; the pattern 107 observed is for larger proportions of MFC than MC mothers to report positively either quantitatively or categorically. Thus, MFC mothers report that they had seen their children's teachers during the current school year more frequently in terms of proportions of respondents than did MC mothers (94 percent versus 82 percent).1 MFC and MC mothers were similar with reference to the proportions reporting that their oldest school-aged child's school was as good as or better than other city schools (70 percent compared to 69 percent).2 An exception to the direction of this pattern is observed when the respondents are asked why they feel as they do about the quality of their oldest school-aged child's school. Here 94 percent of the MC family representatives and 90 percent of the MFC family representatives reported in terms of teachers, buildings or curricula rather than fear or prejudice. With this exception noted, the pattern of MFC mothers to respond more positively than MC mothers continues with reference to the following two variables. First, parental involvement in their children's choice of peers. MFC mothers are more likely to engage in activity defined as involvement in the friendship choices of their children than are MC mothers (72 percent versus 57 percent).4 Second, MFC family 1See Table VI4 - Appendix F 2See Table V15 - Appendix F 3See Table VI6 - Appendix F 4See Table VI7 - Appendix F 108 representatives report more frequently than do MC represen— tatives that they give their children the same or more religious training than other families that they know (91 percent as opposed to 78 percent).1 A second pattern is for larger proportions of MC mothers than MFC mothers to encourage college attendance and autonomy for their children. Seventy-eight percent of the MC mothers as compared to 69 percent of the MFC mothers acknowledged that they specifically encouraged their children to go to college.2 Fifty-four percent of the MC parents as compared to 50 percent of the MFC parents stressed the value of thinking for oneself for their children (autonomy).3 The third segment of this last section of this chapter addresses the area of how parents view the actual and projected child-success goals and the means for the attain- ment of these goals. This task is undertaken by exploring what these mothers see as the best way for Blacks to gain their rights and their perception of Black-White differences in terms of marital problems. Similar proportions of MFC and MC mothers report that law, persuasion and non-violent protest are the best means of attaining equality in the United States for Blacks. Ninety-two percent of the MFC 1See Table VI8 - Appendix F 2See Table VI9 - Appendix F 3See Table VI10 - Appendix F 109 family representatives and 85 percent of the MC family representatives express this view.1 These respondents are also similarly distributed on the basis of MFC and MC family types in their perception of similarities and differences in the sphere of marital problems for Blacks and Whites. Forty—nine percent of the MFC respondents and 51 percent of the MC mothers report that marriage problems are the same regardless of the racial affiliation of people.2 Thus it appears that these women are not alienated from the larger social system and may be optimistic concerning the attainment of their children's success goals. Furthermore, these success goals are viewed as being attainable through traditional channels, not those predicated on violence and distinction. 1See Table VI11 - Appendix F 2See Table VI12 - Appendix F CHAPTER FOUR Conclusions The purpose of this chapter is to summarize the data collected in this study and to compare it with the data reported by Scanzoni. A review of the literature pertaining to the family systems of Black Americans reveals that at least two distinct orientations to this institution are exhibited by social scientists. The first orientation leads to the generalization that a slave heritage has pro- duced, for the larger segment of Blacks in the United States, a family system replete with evidence that indicates a myriad of pathological family characteristics. A few of the pathological conditions frequently cited include matricentrism, family disorganization, illegitimacy, and family instability. A modification of this perspective concerning the family systems of Blacks in the United States and other areas of the world has resulted in a more contem- porary body of literature which is representative of the second orientation of social scientists in this sphere of social life. Involved in this second and more contemporary orientation to the family systems of Blacks in the United States is a re-examination of former assumptions, perspectives, and generalizations concerning this segment of the population in this country. A focus on the contemporary patterns of discriminatory practices within the various institutional 110 111 sectors of the environment within which Black family systems must survive is beginning to replace the pathological focus of the earlier orientation referred to directly above. In this manner the emphasis on a slave heritage and an often implicit emphasis on Blackness being viewed as an automatic and infallible indicator of family pathologies is replaced by a more recent emphasis. This emphasis recognizes the historical and contemporary social reality of racism and discrimination in the arena of family life of Blacks in the United States. Also associated with the earlier orientation to the investigation of family phenomena within the segment of the Black population in the United States was the tendency to categorically attribute pathological family characteristics to all or most Blacks. This tendency appears to be exhibited by some researchers and seems to represent a pattern that may also be exhibited by the casual consumer of the liter— ature. This is a possibility since it appears that the pathological view of Black family life is widespread in contemporary America. This view, pathological in orienta- tion, is not limited to the non-professional segment of our society. The more recent orientation has specified as part of its focus those concerns that are identified as family strengths. The existing literature examines these strengths within the segment of the Black population that is located above the lowest socio-economic—status level of society in the United States. This focus represents a departure from 112 the earlier focus on the less affluent, and so—called culturally disadvantaged, segment of the Black population in the United States. This more recent approach emphasizes that institutional racism is the oppressive force which is operative through the political and economic mechanisms of our society. In this manner the various institutions or systems which con- stitute the social environment which in turn encompasses the family are all interrelated. With this observation recog~ nized it may be stated that a research effort focused on Black family life within a defined social environment might suggest viable research questions within other environmental spheres. The comparison of this investigation with existing research reports represents such an effort. Research efforts of this type might lend to more definative statements concern— ing family systems in general. This recognition of a continuum of Black family systems does not in any way deny the realities of life in a racist society. In no way does recognition of the fact that there exists within the United States Black families that are materially more advantaged than other Black families negate the parallel recognition of the fact that all Black families share certain social indignities and disadvantages on the basis of their Blackness. This condition is a fact of life in the contemporary United States of America. Grier and 113 Cobbs state:1 When slavery ended and large scale physical abuse was discontinued, it was supplanted by different but equally damaging abuse. The cruelty continued unabated in thoughts, feel- ings, intimidation and occasional lynchings. Black people were consigned to a place outside the human family and the whip of the plantation was replaced by the boundaries of the ghetto. These observations represent an indication of the state of knowledge concerning the family life of Blacks in the United States. The conclusions derived from this investi- gation emanate from the exploration of the following six areas: (1) background factors; (2) parental functionality; (3) identification with influential persons and institutions; (4) achievement and mobility patterns; (5) spouse or ex—spouse relationships; and (6) aspirations and expectations held by the respondents for their children. It is hoped that these research efforts will begin to illuminate the conditions associated with specified types of family organization in an ever changing social milieu. Based on the findings reported in chapter three of this study the following general observations concerning structural background factors and family type may be reported. The structural background factors studied include: (1) urban experience as indicated by a farm or non—farm living environ- ment, being born in the South, and living in the South during the teenage years; (2) status advantage with specific 1Grier, William H. and Cobbs, Pierce M., Black Rage, New York: Bantam, 1968, Pp. 20. 114 reference to the fathers of the respondents occupational status and parental educational achievement: (3) household composition of the homes which the respondents grew up in as indicated by parental presence and number of siblings; and (4) patterns of parental church attendance. The findings reported in the preceding chapter support the observation that, with the exception of the size of the family of orientation of the husbands or last ex-husbands of the respondents, the structural background factors studied are not accurate predictors of family type. Since Scanzoni only looks at enduring MFC families, it may be suggested that the patterns he reports for this family type, located above the lowest rung of a socio-economic-status system, may be similar to unexplored patterns exhibited by similarly situated MC families. This conclusion is drawn from the observation that in this study, with the noted exception, MFC and MC families are similar with reference to structural back- ground factors. The patterns evident from the findings reported in this research support three specific conclusions concerning the variables of urban experience and status advantage. First, perhaps separation or divorce is a realistic adjustment to marital discord in an urban environment. It may be that women from an urban or city background are more aware of and willing to utilize these techniques for coping with their marital situations. A comparison of data included in this investigation with the reported findings of Scanzoni suggest 115 that an urban background is more closely associated with MFC family forms at a higher socio-economic-status level than those located at a lower socio-economic-status level. Second, the background factors of being born in the South and living in the South during the teenage period of the life cycle are not accurate predictive indicators of MFC or MC family structures. Furthermore, this indicates that for this sample, being born in or living in the South while teenagers is not a handicap as implied by Scanzoni. Perhaps Scanzoni's observation concerning this handicap is limited to recent migrants. This observation may well apply to any recent rural immigrant to an urban environment and not to just Black migrants from the rural South. These data also bring into serious question whether a southern background is a disadvantage when functioning in an urban milieu. Third, in the area of status advantage as indicated by father's occupational status, father's educational achievement, and mother's educational achievement, there is no visible pattern that differentiates MFC from MC families. The pattern suggested by a review of Scanzoni's work is for MFC families to enjoy higher placed parents. This pattern is not demonstrated in this investigation except in the instance of father's occupation. Thus, it may be that even in Scanzoni's higher socio-economic-status sample similar proportions of MFC and MC families have similar status advantages as indicated by the occupational and educational criteria used in this study. 116 In the area of status advantage, Scanzoni compared his population to Blacks in the United States by utilizing census data. This method leads him to conclude that his sample had background status advantages (father's occupation and educa- tion of parents) which were greater than the Black population in general. Again, what is not explored is the background status of MC families in the socio-economic-status level upon which he focuses. There exists the possibility that within the status level which Scanzoni studied, MFC and MC families are similar with reference to indicators of back- ground status advantage. This position of advantage would be viewed in a comparative perspective by juxtaposing Scanzoni's socio-economic-status level population to the larger Black population of the United States. Scanzoni refers to a syndrome of advantage based upon urban experience and status advantages. Data collected in this investigation fail to support the extension of Scanzoni's findings to include lower socio-economic-status Black families. It is even questionable whether the implied differences exist, as suggested above, with reference to the variables of father's occupational status and parental educational achieve- ment and family type within the socio-economic-status group that Scanzoni studied. Thus, it is concluded from the find- ings of this research that contrary to the implications of Scanzoni's work, urban experience and background status advan- tages are not predictive indicators of MFC or MC family structure 3 o 117 The findings reported in Chapter Three of this investigation which are related to household composition leads to two conclusions. First, the presence or absence of both natural parents in the homes that these respondents lived in during their teenage years is not a factor in the determination of family type. This is consistent with the conclusion implied by Scanzoni. What appears to be of importance in the determination of family type is what func- tion a given household form provides, not the structure itself. The foundation for this conclusion is strengthened when the variable of family type is controlled for and the relationships between the variable of presence of both natural parents and the following variables are investigated: (1) the identification of a father substitute; (2) parental education; (3) urban experience: and (4) father's occupational status. In all of these relationships the pattern remains consistent. Parental presence is not an accurate indicator with reference to predicting family type. Second, the household composition of the respondents as indicated by the number of siblings in their family of orientation is not an accurate indicator of family type. This observation remains consistent when family type is controlled for and number of siblings is related to: (1) urban experience; (2) presence of both natural parents during the teenage years: and (3) the occupational status of the fathers of the respondents. An exception to this pattern is observed when the focus switches from the size of the family of Ada. 118 orientation of the respondents to that of their spouse or last ex-spouse. The pattern observed in this investigation is for MC respondents to have eX-husbands with fewer siblings than their MFC counterparts. This suggests that the struc- tural feature of smaller family of orientation size is not part of a syndrome of relative status advantage which enhances conjugal experiences as suggested by Scanzoni. MFC and MC families do not differ with reference to parental church attendance patterns. This investigation provides no clear indication that lower religious involve- ment is associated with lower marital stability as suggested by Scanzoni. Religion may provide a set of beliefs, norms, and values regarding conjugal behavior but it does not insure adherence to them. The second general area investigated in this research is parental functionality. The findings presented in the preceding chapter support the following four observations: First, in the arena of parental functionality and educational values, there is evidence from this research that shows that the value of education for Blacks was stressed by both the mothers and fathers of the respondents. This observation applies to both MFC and MC families with reference to the functionality of the parents of these respondents. Scanzoni implies that this pattern of stressing the value of educa- tion is a particular strength of more affluent families. It may be that if Scanzoni had studied MC families, he would have discovered a similar pattern. 119 Second, parental functionality, with reference to helping the respondents obtain their education is operative in both MFC and MC family structures. Scanzoni reports that this is not a lower-class pattern. This generalization needs to be either qualified or drastically modified. The need to undertake this task is suggested on the basis of this research which illustrates that both mothers and fathers in the family systems being investigated are por- trayed as helpers in the struggle for educational achieve- ment. There is also, as suggested by Scanzoni, a pattern for both MFC and MC family representatives to report that their parents in material or tangible fashion helped them in their educational pursuits. This functional pattern is further explicated by noting that a sizable proportion of both MFC and MC respondents report that their mother worked during their teenage years. Third, findings support the observation that the parents of both MFC and MC respondents were functional with reference to stressing and conveying the idea that they should get ahead in life and make something of themselves. This pattern is particularly pronounced for mothers of MFC respondents. Although both mothers and fathers of both family types are viewed as functioning positively in stimu— lating or encouraging getting ahead in life, it is the mother who is more influential in this area of socialization. 120 Thus, parental functioning in this area of life does not influence the structural form of current families of procreation. In both family types this pattern of parental functioning is in the form of counsel and example rather than material aid. These observations are consistent with those reported by Scanzoni. Fourth, in the area of specific functioning in the form of parental preparation for the conjugal environment, fathers were more helpful in the families of orientation of MFC respondents than those of MC respondents. In this manner fathers of MFC respondents were functional in the determina- tion of the current family of procreation structural form. This pattern was not exhibited by the mothers of these respon- dents. Mothers were not functional, with reference to conjugal preparation, to the extent that they measurably determined current family type or structural form. These patterns are not consistent with those reported by Scanzoni. It appears that Scanzoni's assumption of traditional intense mother-daughter ties representing a female alliance against lower class male family members is questionable. What is evident is that regardless of socio-economic—status level those fathers that are functionally active in preparing their daughters for marriage, mainly by stressing general values related to the married state, are also likely to have daughters with MFC family structures. The stressing of general values rather than specific norms or role expectations 121 is also related to MFC family structure regardless of which parent is being examined. The third area explored in this investigation focuses on identification patterns reported by the respondents. This research area represents an exploratory effort which includes an emphasis on both persons and institutions. Scanzoni reports that his MFC respondents identified with their parents to a considerable degree. The proportions that he reports for MFC families are similar to those reported in this research for both structural types of family organization. This observation suggests that identifi- cation with parents is not an indicator which allows the prediction of family structure. This observation is made for both types of family structure. These generalizations also apply to this sample when the presence of both natural parents is determined as well as to other family of orienta- tion structural forms. A point discovered to be consistent with the obser- vation made by Scanzoni is that identification may be functional regardless of their direction. That is, parents that are described as being the type that these respondents want to be different from are functioning as role models in much the same fashion as parents that are described as the type that the respondents want to be like. This appears to be the case regardless of the reason for or against identification with mothers or fathers. 122 Scanzoni reported that the majority of his respondents were able to identify a person outside the family circle that functioned as a role model. He reported that this was the situation irrespective of social class or family compo- sition. This observation is questionable. The current investigation reveals a significant difference between MFC and MC family structures with reference to this variable. MFC family systems are more likely than MC systems to contain mothers identifying extra-familial role models. Furthermore, these extra-familial figures provided expressive as opposed to instrumental support or help. Therefore, it may be observed that extra-familial resources in the form of adults, expressing an interest and concern in teenage women, functions to influence the structural form of their families of procreation. In the area of identification with institutions, the church or religion and the school are focused upon. In the first area, religion, Scanzoni's observation that large percentages of MFC family members are regular church attenders may be extended to this lower socio-economic-status group. The extension may also be expanded to include MC family structures. However, when attention is focused upon the question of whether the church or religion helped prepare the women in the current investigation for marriage, a signi— ficant difference is observed. Representatives of MFC family systems report that the church and religion functioned 123 to prepare them for marriage. Therefore, there appears to be a relationship between the perception of religion assisting in marriage preparation and structural family form. The assistance of the church is in the area of providing a general orientation to life rather than providing specific role obligations. The second institutional identification pattern investigated was that associated with the school. Scanzoni observes that the majority of his respondents report that their teachers, friends, and parents defined them as good or average students. The current investigation shows a similar pattern. This pattern is consistent for both MFC and MC family forms. Representatives of both MFC and MC family structures also defined themselves as good or average students. On the basis of these observations, it is concluded that identification with the school is not an indicator of MFC family structure. A review of Scanzoni's work also reveals that MFC family representatives cited a subject as the best or worst thing about school. The current research also exhibits this pattern. Furthermore, the pattern is the same for both structural family forms. There is no indication that either family form is characterized by members that have rejected the value of education. Additional attention is awarded identification patterns by examining adolescent experiences concerning relatives. Scanzoni refers to the common practice in lower-class 124 families for several generations to live together in a single household. Then he reports that this pattern is not exhibited by his higher status respondents which are also representatives of MFC family structures. The same pattern exists for both MFC and MC families in this investigation. Perhaps a similar pattern also exists for MC families of higher socio-economic-status. Scanzoni also reports that in his investigation evidence was uncovered that showed that as far as the great majority of his informants were concerned, their relatives had neither a positive nor negative impact on their social mobility. This same generalization applies to both struc- tural family systems focused upon in this investigation. On the basis of these observations, an extension of the observation made by Scanzoni concerning the MFC family structure above the under-class may be made. That obser- vation is that the extended family does not seem to exercise a substantial degree of influence, either positively or negatively, on the eventual economic and social destinies of particular related individuals. This observation is consistent with the findings related to both MFC and MC lower socio-economic-status family structures examined in this study. The final identification area studied is a broader look at parental involvement in the role of reference per- son. Scanzoni suggests that major proportions of his 125 respondents identify their parents as what he labels reference persons. Respondents in this investigation also identify their parents in this manner. This includes MFC and MC family representatives. Perhaps similar patterns are present in MC families above the under-class that Scanzoni scrutinized. The identification process which results in parental reference individuals being established is not functionally related to specific familial structural forms. The fourth general research area examined is the achievement and mobility attainment patterns reported by MFC and MC respondents. Scanzoni discovered that his respon- dents exhibited a consistent pattern which indicated upward mobility in terms of their spouse or last spouse's occupa- tional achievement when compared to their fathers' occupational status. A similar finding is reported when a comparison is made between his respondents' educational achievement level and that of their fathers. The current research shows that for MFC respondents the same pattern appears. In addition, the husbands of these women exhibit higher levels of educational achievement than do the fathers of the respondents. This dimension is not addressed by Scanzoni. These same patterns are also discovered to exist within the MC segment of this study with one exception. That is, the ex-husbands of MC respondents occupy lower status occupational slots than did the fathers of these women 0 126 On the basis of these observations it appears that downward mobility in the area of husband-father occupational status functions in the process of determining MC structural family form. Husband-wife relationships represent the fifth broad area studied in this investigation. The first segment of these relationships, husband-wife primary relations, are functionally related to family structural form. In terms of companionship, physical affection, and empathy, MFC families evaluate these dimensions of the conjugal environ- ment more positively than do MC family representatives. These observations suggest that the positive evaluation of the conjugal situation, as indicated by husband-wife primary relations, is functionally related to specific structural family forms. These observations are similar to those that Scanzoni reports. Similar conclusions are supported by the observation that in this investigation a feeling of being separated from the economic opportunity status system is related to MC family structural form. These are basically the same con- clusions reported by Scanzoni. It appears then that estrange- ment from the economic opportunity status system of the United States is functionally related to MC family struc- tural form. In the area of what Scanzoni calls consumption ration- ality, it appears that the perception of how careful one's spouse is in the spending of money is crucial in the _ 127 maintenance of specific family structures. It is not how respondents perceives the care with which they spend money, nor is the disagreement about money matters of prime conse- quence. Positive perception and evaluation of one's spouse in the area of expending money is functionally related to MFC family structure. An interesting observation supported by this research is that women that are not dominated by their husbands are more likely to maintain an ongoing marriage than are those that are so dominated. This pattern, in the area of the sharing of authority is consistent with the findings reported by Scanzoni. Women with more education are more likely to have smaller families of procreation. This observation is con- sistent with that of Scanzoni. It suggests that education, along with income, is related to fertility control. Income and educational achievement levels are functionally related to structural family forms. Higher income and higher educa— tional achievement levels are associated with smaller size families of procreation. Relationships between mothers and their children is the sixth general research area covered. Scanzoni reports that about a third of his respondents reported that they would like to see their sons in a particular job. The MFC families in the current research exhibit a similar response pattern. This is not the case with MC family representatives. The 128 majority of them report that they did not have a particular job in mind for their sons. The findings in this area support the observation that the holding of job aspirations for specific occupations for sons is directly related to occurances of MC family systems. Future research might well explore this area by examining similar aspirations held for daughters. With reference to their children's chances of going to college, most MFC family representatives report that they are excellent or good. Similar optimism is reported by Scanzoni in this area. This suggests that the maintenance of optimism concerning the possibility of higher education for children is related to MFC family structures and family income. The converse situation is for representatives of MC family systems to lack enough income to realistically anticipate providing higher educational opportunities for their offspring. It is seen that the dominant goals are shared across socio-economic-status lines. The goals referred to are occupational and educational. MFC families regardless of the two socio-economic-status levels observed in Scanzoni's and this research effort are similar in these dimensions. Scanzoni also suggests that the specific mechanisms of goal- attainment are the property of MFC family systems. This observation is questioned on the basis of this research. MFC and MC family structures are not differentiated on the basis of acceptance of dominant means for goal-attainment. 129 The same observation holds true in the area of actual and projected child-attainment of success goals. Both types of family structures are dominated by respondents who indicate a willingness to operate within the social, economic, and political system of the United States. This generalization represents an extension of Scanzoni's conclusions to include MC family structures. In general, the essential findings and conclusions presented above demonstrate that the two types of lower socio-economic-status Black families studied are very similar in the six areas investigated. This study, when compared to that of Scanzoni, reveals few distinctions between different socio-economic-status MFC families. It also appears that the differences discovered between MFC and MC family structures in this investigation may also be located in higher status family structures. This is an area that needs further investigation. That is, studies are needed that explore in a comparative manner MFC and MC family structures in the socio-economic-status population that Scanzoni inves- tigates. The general area of husband-wife relationships represents the location of the major differences between MFC and MC family structures. These differences are evident in all areas studied. These areas are: primary relations; estrangement from the economic and social structure of our society; family authority; fertility control, and consump- tion rationality. Of particular interest in this area is 130 the observation that the women who are dominated by their husbands do not share the same chances for a MFC family of procreation structure that their more assertive sisters have. A final general observation is that mothers regard- less of the structural composition of their family of pro- creation want the same basic amenities and necessities for their children. The major differences discovered in this investigation is in the area of occupational choice for sons and perception of chances that their children have of attend- ing college. Implications This investigation suggests that the model posited by Scanzoni for MFC families above the underclass is in most dimensions an accurate description of similar families from a lower socio-economic-status background. It appears that a modification of Scanzoni's model is appropriate when an attempt is made to apply it to families from a lower socio- economic-status level environment. The following variables extrapolated from Scanzoni's work appear to be useful pre- dictive mechanisms for distinguishing MFC families from MC families: (1) the functioning of fathers in preparing daughters for marriage; (2) the particular functional pattern of mothers in preparing daughters for marriage (general values as opposed to specific norms and role expectations); (3) size of husband's family of orientation (siblings); (4) extra familial role models or identification patterns; and 130 the observation that the women who are dominated by their husbands do not share the same chances for a MFC family of procreation structure that their more assertive sisters have. A final general observation is that mothers regard— less of the structural composition of their family of pro- creation want the same basic amenities and necessities for their children. The major differences discovered in this investigation is in the area of occupational choice for sons and perception of chances that their children have of attend- ing college. Implications This investigation suggests that the model posited by Scanzoni for MFC families above the underclass is in most dimensions an accurate description of similar families from a lower socio—economic—status background. It appears that a modification of Scanzoni's model is appropriate when an attempt is made to apply it to families from a lower socio- economic-status level environment. The following variables extrapolated from Scanzoni's work appear to be useful pre- dictive mechanisms for distinguishing MFC families from MC families: (1) the functioning of fathers in preparing daughters for marriage; (2) the particular functional pattern of mothers in preparing daughters for marriage (general values as opposed to specific norms and role expectations); (3) size of husband's family of orientation (siblings); (4) extra familial role models or identification patterns; and 131 (5) perception of religion functioning in the marriage preparation process. On the basis of this investigation it is concluded that MFC and MC family structures are both functional entities for survival in an urban environment. These family types are alike in many more dimensions than they are different. The differences that they do exhibit are those outlined above. They appear to be the attributes that are most definitive of a given family form. On this basis mothers representing MFC family structures are likely to exhibit the following characteristics which distinguish them from MC family representatives: (1) fathers that were seen as having helped them prepare for marriage; (2) mothers that stressed general marital values; (3) husbands with more than three brothers and/or sisters; (4) husbands that do not dominate them; (5) had identified with extra-familial individuals during the teenage years; and (6) view the church as function- ing to prepare them for marriage. Predicated on the observations generated by this inves- tigation the stereotype of lower socio—economic-status families being uniformly pathological and disorganized is questioned. This research supports the observation that MFC and MC families are similar in many more ways than they are different. Furthermore, it appears that despite socio-economic- status differences, MFC families above and below the under- class are similar in most dimensions explored. 132 Further research is needed in this area that: (1) explores MFC and MC family systems at different socio- economic-status levels; (2) studies these families in different environments (region, urban/rural); and (3) searches for characteristics, if any, that distinguishes Black families from the families of other racial groups. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Bell, Norman W. and Vogel, Ezra F. (Editors), A_Modern Introduction pp the Family, New York: The Free Press, 1968, Pp. vii & 758 Bernard, Jessie, Marriage and FamiTy Among Negroes, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966, Pp. vii & 160. Billingsley, Andrew, Black Families Tp White America, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968, Pp. 3 & 218. Blalock, Hubert M., Social Statistics, New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1960, Pp. vii & 465. Bracey, John H. Jr., Meier, August, and Rudwick, Elliott (Editors), Black Matriarchy: Myth or Reality, California, Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1971, Pp. 2 & 217. Broom, Leonard and Blenn, Norval, Transformation pf the Negro American, New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1965, Pp. ix & 207. Broom, Leonard and Selznick, Philip, Sociology, New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1968, Pp. v & 562. 1 Burgess, Earnest W. and Locke, Harvey J., The Family From Institution pp Companionship, Chicago: American Book Company, 1945, Pp. vii & 800. Cavan, Ruth Shonle, The American FamiTy, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1963, Pp. v & 548. Claspy, Everett, The Negro Tp Southwestern Michigan, Ann Arbor: Braun Brumfield, Inc., 1967, Pp. iii & 112. Cruse, Harold, "Black and White: Outline of the Next Stage," Black World, (May, 1971), Pp. 9-40. Davis, James A., Elementary_Survey Analysis, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1971, Pp. vii & 195. Drake, St. Clair and Cayton, Horance R., Black Metropolis, New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1962, Pp. vii & 811. 133 134 Duvall, Evelyn Millis, Family Development, New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1962, Pp. vi & 532. Edwards, Harry, "Black Muslim and Negro Christian Family Relationships," Journal pf Marriage and the Family, 30 (November, 1968), P . 604-11. Farley, Reynolds and Hermalin, Albert I., "Family Stability: A Comparison of Trends Between Blacks and Whites," American Sociological Review, 36 (February, 1971), Pp. 1-170 Frazier, E. Franklin, "Ethnic Family Patterns: The Negro Family in the United States," American Journal pf Sociology, XLVII (1948), Pp. 435-38. Frazier, E. Franklin, The Negro Family Tp The United States, New York: The Dryden Press, 1951, Pp. 3 & 372. Fritzpatrick, Joseph P., "Intermarriage of Puerto Ricans in New York City," The American Journal pf Sociology, LXXI (January, 1966), Pp. 395-407. Gans, Herbert, The Urban Villagers, New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962, Pp. xvi & 367. Geismar, Ludwig L. and Gerhart, Ursula, "Social Class, Ethnicity, and Family Functioning: Exploring Some Issues Raised by the Moynihan Report," Journal pf Marriage Q ppp Family, XXX (August, 1968), Pp. 480-87. Gist, Noel P. and Fava, Sylvia Fleis, Urban Society, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1967, Pp. v & 623. Goode, William J., "Illegitimacy, Anomie, and Cultural Penetration," American Sociological Review, 25 (February, 1960), Pp. 21-30. Green, John M., (Editor), Michigan Manual pf Freedmen's Progress, Detroit: Freedmen's Progress Commission, 1915, Pp. 3 & 371. Heiskanen, Veronica Stolts, "The Myth of the Middle-Class Family in American Family Sociology," The American Sociologist, 6 (February, 1971), Pp. 14-18. Heiss, Jerold (Editor), Family Roles and Interaction, Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1968, Pp. vii & 569. Hill, Mozell C., "Research on the Negro Family," Journal pf Marriage and Family Living, IXX (February, 1957), Pp. 25’310 135 Hill, Robert B., The Strengths pf Black Families, Washington, D. C., National Urban League, 1971, Pp. 2 & 38. Hiltz, S. Roxanne, "Black and White in the Consumer Financial System," American Journal pf Sociology. 76 (May, 1971) Pp. 987-998. Jones, Curtis, Jeter, Calvin, and Coladi, Charles, Grand Rapids Michigan Model City Program Mid-Planning Report, Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids Model Neighborhood Citizens Committee, Inc., December, 1969, Pp. 2 & Part II F-14. Kandal, Densie B., "Race, Maternal Authority and Adolescent Aspiration," American Journal pf Sociology, 76 (May, 1971) Pp. 999-1020. Kenkel, William F., The Family ip Perspective, New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, 1966, Pp. V & 500. Kephart, William M., The Family, Society, and the Individual, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961, Pp. vii & 690. King, Karl, "Adolescent Perception of Power Structure in the Negro Family," Journal pf Marriage and the Family, 31 (November, 1969), Pp. 751-55. Kohn, Melvin L., Class and Conformity, Homewood: The Dorsey Press, 1959, Pp. vii & 315. Lantz, Herman R. and Snyder, Eloise C., Marriage, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1969, Pp. 2 & 512. Leslie, Gerald R., The FamiTy ip Social Context, New York: Oxford University Press, 1967, Pp. viii & 709. Liebow, Elliot, Tally's Corner, Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1967, Pp. viii & 260. Lowenthal, David, "Race and Color in the West Indies," Daedalus, 96 (Spring, 1967), Pp. 580-626. Lydens, A. A. (Editor), The Stopy pf Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1966, Pp. xx & 682. McCord, William, Howard, Joh, Friedberg, Bernard, and Harwood, Edwin, Life Styles ip the Black Ghetto, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1969, Pp. 6 & 334. Metzger, L. Paul, "American Sociology and Black Assimilation: Conflicting Perspectives," American Journal pf Sociology, 76 (January, 1971) Pp. 627-647. 136 Office of Policy Planning and Research, United States Department of Labor, The Negro Family, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1965, Pp. 1 & 78. Olsen, Marvin E., "Social and Political Participation of Blacks," American Sociological Review, 35 (August, 1970) Pp. 682-97. Otterbein, Keith F., "Carribbean Family Organization: A Comparative Analysis," American Anthropologist, 67 (February, 1965), Pp. 66-79. Pettigrew, Thomas F., A Profile pf the Negro American, New Jersey: Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1964, Pp. vii & 250. Rainwater, Lee, And The Poor Get Children, Chicago: Quandrangle Books, 1967, Pp. vii & 202. Rainwater, Lee, "Crucible of Identity: The Negro Lower-Class Family," Daedalus, 95 (Winter, 1966), Pp. 172-216. Rodman, Hyman, Lower-Class Families: The Culture pf Poverty ip Negpo Trinidad, New York: Oxford University Press, 1971, Pp. xi & 242. Rodman, Hyman, Nichols, F. R. and Voydanoff, Patricia, "Lower-Class Attitudes Toward 'Deviant' Family Patterns: A Cross-Cultural Stud ," Journal pf Marriage and the Family, 31 (May, 1969 , Pp. 315-21. Ross, Arthur M. and Hill, Herbert (Editors), Employment, Race and Poverty, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967, Pp. v & 598. Scanzoni, John H., The Black Family Tp Modern Society, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971, Pp. v & 353. Schulz, David A., Coming up Black, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969, Pp. v & 209. Smith, M. C., West Indian Family Structure, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962, Pp. v & 311. Staples, Robert (Editor), The Black Family, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1971, Pp. 3 & 393. Staples, Robert, "Toward A Sociology of the Black Family: A Theoretical and Methodological Assessment," Journal pf Marriage and the Family, 33 (February, 1971 Pp. 119-280 Stephen, Frederick F. and McCarthy, Philip P., Sampling 0 inions, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1967, Pp. ix & 451. 137 Taeuber, Karl E., "Residential Segregation," Scientific American, CCXIII (August, 1965), Pp. 12-19. Taeuber, Karl E. and Taeuber, A. F., Negroes Tp Cities, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1965, Pp. v & 284. Tobin, James, "On Improving the Economic Status of the Negro," Daedalus, 94 (Fall, 1966), Pp. 878-898. Whyte, William F., Street-Corner Sociepy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1943, Pp. vii & 364. Willie, Charles V. (Editor), The FamiTy Life pf Black People, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1970, Pp. v & 341. U. S. Bureau of the Census, Census pf Housing, 1970 Block Statistics Final Report HQ (3)-122 Grand Rapids, Mich., Urbanized Area, Washington, D. C., 1971. U. 8. Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census pf Pepulation Alphabetical Index pf Industries and Occupations, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1971. U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census pf Pepulation Classified Index pf Industries and Occupations, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1971. U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census pf Population and Housing, Grand Rapids, Mich., SMSA, Washington, D. C., 1971. U. 8. Census of Housing: 1960 Series HC (3) City Blocks Grand Rapids, Michigan, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. U. S. Riot Commission, Report pf the National Advisory Commission pp Civil Disorders, New York: Bantam Books, 1968, Pp. v & 425. 1970 Census pf Population and Housing Census Tracts Grand Ra ids, Mich. Standard and Metropolitan Statistical Area (and adiacent area)—PHC (T) - 80, Washington, D. C.: Bureau of the Census, a United States Depart- ment Printing Office, April, 1972. APPEND IX A TRACT 7 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 20 21 BLOCK 48 1 33 38 3 10 11 24 35 36 41 45 57 5 6 15 16 Appendix A RESIDENTIAL SEGREGATION OWNER AND RENTER NON-WHITE OCCUPIED 5 13 28 49 12 34 12 19 9 8 14 46 5 8 16 32 27 4 38 1 .__: ._s ._L .__: OOUIH UlN-DWOUJ |—‘ \JLJOi—‘N OOH Nb.) -I—\U‘I i—‘O\\ll—'-l-\I\J|—'Ull—‘ 4.590?“ 138 OCCUPIED SUB-TOTAL 5-1 90-8 159-38 24-9 59-5 42-4 90-28 12-1 267-38 80-24 139 OWNER AND RENTER NON-WHITE TRACT BLOCK OCCUPIED OCCUPIED SUB - TOTAL 22 3 21 12 4 21 19 9 40 28 10 16 14 11 31 24 12 41 20 15 30 13 16 36 28 28 40 27 29 38 21 3o 23 12 31 29 13 36 24 10 37 25 6 41 55 5 480-252 23 14 5 5 16 11 10 17 4 3 18 13 13 23 18 17 24 32 39 27 32 32 28 19 19 29 1o 10 33 28 7 36 22 ‘20 39 20 18 40 11 1o 41 26 23 42 5 4 43 21 21 44 31 31 45 33 33 46 35 35 48 49 47 49 39 31 50 35 31 51 35 33 54 24 22 55 50 48 56 7 2 57 27 23 58 31 30 6O 36 18 61 34 33 62 34 21 63 40 32 64 23 19 65 26 24 66 48 46 914-800 140 OWNER AND RENTER NON-WHITE 'TRACT BLOCK OCCUPIED OCCUPIED SUB-TOTAL 24 1 41 17 2 20 17 3 45 18 4 68 11 5 24 3 6 25 17 7 46 32 8 31 19 9 52 31 10 39 27 11 42 26 12 42 32 13 37 30 14 35 30 15 44 39 16 11 11 18 20 16 19 12 9 20 10 10 21 17 12 22 8 8 23 13 12 24 46 38 25 37 32 26 38 27 27 36 30 28 29 21 29 32 23 30 31 26 31 26 21 32 53 33 33 6 4 34 69 48 35 37 26 36 37 28 37 37 27 38 30 18 39 54 35 4O 42 26 41 65 41 42 58 35 43 15 7 44 37 21 45 26 6 46 55 15 47 61 12 1639——1027 141 OWNER AND RENTER NON-WHITE TRACT BLOCK OCCUPIED OCCUPIED SUB-TOTAL 25 1 44 3O 2 6O 4 5 56 5 6 6O 16 7 78 47 8 78 19 9 38 4 10 51 4 11 61 17 12 66 37 13 34 18 14 21 11 15 34 19 16 34 11 17 42 29 18 39 25 19 19 7 20 3O 6 21 42 27 22 44 19 23 4O 22 24 46 11 26 21 6 27 61 28 35 56 17 36 63 39 37 49 11 1267—479 26 1 39 14 2 42 15 3 42 22 4 41 18 6 42 19 7 46 43 8 14 12 9 47 39 10 37 37 11 31 31 12 58 4O 13 26 24 14 46 30 15 28 26 16 52 29 17 57 31 18 42 31 19 47 25 20 41 23 21 46 21 22 48 7 TRACT 26 (Cont.) 28 30 142 OWNER AND RENTER BLOCK OCCUPIED 24 35 25 58 26 44 27 36 28 39 29 37 30 55 31 31 32 30 33 41 34 40 39 28 40 44 1 6 2 39 3 23 7 13 8 14 9 5 10 42 11 19 12 22 13 23 14 21 15 49 16 32 18 33 7 38 8 42 54 6 Ni x 100 = SEGREGATION w - 3361 x 100 = NON-WHITE OCCUPIED SUB-TOTAL 1421-762 NN N H-DON DWOU‘INNWODNDHHH 341-98 1...; 86-21 .965 — .064 X 100 = 90.1% APPENDIX B APPENDIX B Age Distribution 9: Respondents py Family Type MFC m AGE PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER 20-30 26% 13 0% 0 31-39 18% 9 57% 28 40 or Older 54% 27 43% 21 No Response 2% 1 0% 0 Educational Level 9: Respondents py Family Type MEQ M9 YEARS OF EDUCATION PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER 1-8 24% 12 35% 17 9-12 70% 35 55% 27 13 or More 6% 3 10% 5 No Response 0% 0 0% 0 Employment Status pi Respondents 2y Family Type MEQ M9 EMPLOYMENT STATUS PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER Employed 36% 18 29% 14 Unemployed 56% 28 71% 35 No Response 8% 4 0% 0 Number g: Children In Family 9: Procreation py Family Type MEQ M9 NUMBER OF CHILDREN PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER 1-2 36% 18 33% 16 3 12% 6 20% 10 4 or More 52% 26 47% 23 143 144 APPENDIX B (Cont.) Income Level pi Respondents py Family Type MEQ M9 ANNUAL INCOME PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER $0 - 3,999 18% 9 41% 20 $4 - 6,999 28% 14 4% 2 $7 - 9,999 30% 15 0% 0 $10,000 or More 14% 7 55% 27 APPEND IX C mUH on ooo.w 0mm OH.N oq.m woo m.m© ww.w Nwmfi om OOH oom.¢H NwHH mm.H om. NNNH n.6N mc.m HONH mm om 00¢.OH mmmH om.H mm.m moofi m.©m om.oH Honm mm on oom.m Humfi 0N.m do.H NmmH 0.8m om.wH UHNO Hm on oom.m Nflw Hm. m¢.H mum N.ww mm.m «Mam om cw ooq.HH NNm wo.H mH.H HHOH ©.mw q©.m «mam mm 00 ooh.n wmo mm.¢ mq.¢ oqmfi H.nw mm.HH Nmmm mm Hm 00¢.w OHHH mm.m mm.m meH ¢.Hm nm.m UUNH 0N ow 00¢.OH nmmm w¢.N 0N.N mmwm o.mH wm.m qmm mm mm ooo.¢H woqm mm.n «0.0 wfiam m.m mm.H mqm Hm mm 006.0 «HOH 06. oq.H oomfi m.m Hm.H mmm mH HHHw OOH.on NOUH On. No. nmqfi m.w qo.N mmq HH COHQDOQO poamsooo muHCD AOHOHQEOOV mmauflaaomm,uomuH CH pomHH CH GOHHOHD mxomam HODEDZ Roman -Oom Roman mo uomge Houdom HOCBO wchSQZ moauflaaomm wcflnezam muHsD ucmm ODHO>UOHQSOOO Gmflouam Ham Mo wGHmSOE owUMCOOHom mmfluflo monasz uomuucoo cmaomz HH< wcaxomq mEom CGSOm onu mo cmflpmz muHcD wcaxomq upmow owwucooumm wcflmsom muHED #69532 pcsom wcamsom Tumom wo Udfiom owwucOOHom unwmh mo wwmuGOOHmm mpcmuflmmm Romam oom Ommmq MU Cuwz mpomHH wmwcmu Md moaumaumuomumso oouooamm o XHszmm< APPEND IX D / 5;. L" P Appendix D Selection 9: Blocks Original Randomly Census Number Corresponding Order Selected Block Assigned Census Block Order Number Randomly Number 1 24 101 17 210 2 3 102 23 301 3 13 103 2 102 4 10 108 19 213 5 20 112 33 405 6 41 113 7 114 7 6 114 47 511 8 39 115 40 501 9 9 201 9 301 10 31 202 4 108 11 23 203 14 206 12 45 204 27 306 13 14 205 3 103 14 11 206 13 205 15 28 207 36 410 16 33 208 26 305 17 1 210 38 412 18 19 211 37 411 19 4 213 18 211 20 21 214 5 112 21 40 215 20 214 22 30 216 28 307 23 2 201 11 203 24 27 303 1 101 25 42 304 29 309 26 16 305 30 310 27 12 306 24 303 28 22 307 15 207 29 25 309 39 413 30 26 310 22 216 31 47 403 10 202 32 38 404 46 509 33 5 405 16 208 34 36 406 45 508 35 37 408 41 502 36 15 410 34 406 37 18 411 35 408 38 17 412 32 404 39 29 413 8 115 40 8 501 21 215 41 35 502 6 113 42 44 504 25 304 43 43 505 43 505 44 46 506 42 504 45 34 508 12 204 46 32 509 44 506 47 7 511 31 403 146 Appendix E m8H 8 N 8 m H 8 N m N H H m H 8 H N H m H H N 8 8 m m m H N H m m m H m H m H H 8 8 H N H H m H m 8 8 8 m 8 8 8 m 8 8 H 8 H m m N W m N N W m m 8 N H m m H m m 4 n HmHHNN8N8H Ommwmmmwum 28-: 62395 u : “mumnaflz Eocsmm OOH mo umHH manmum u m 8: 8:8 82w 8w 8% mmw moo no: mo whm mo 84m Nmz wa Npo No ucN No cCN Hmo Hmo Hm Ho Ho Maom m: may my my wa Nao N2 N2 Hmo Hm Ho Ho COUCH OHCD wcamsom GO>M .N GO>M m SON/W % CH 880 o 880 p 660 o 63H mOOEOoz MO mwww. mmww mum mm mm mww mum mm. mm 2N 2m mN OEEH 6C0 Omnasz “D 90 m was: wcamflom SH Monuoz mo mauwum 6636H>HOHGH Mm GoHuomem m XHszmm< Appendix F 148 Table 11 - Appendix F Occupational Status 9: Fathers py Family Type High Occupational Status of Fathers Low Type 9: Community Lived lg During Teenage Years of NF Family Type MFC MC 77% (30) 85% (29) 100% (39) 100% (34) Q value N.S.S. Table I2 - Appendix F 0 Respondents by Number 9; Siblings ip Family pi Orientation City Type of Community Farm Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or More 17% (8) 60% (29) 6% 17% (3) (8) 23% (11) 77% (37) 100% (48) 149 Table I3 - Appendix F Type 9: Community Lived lg during Teenage Years pi MC Respondents By Number 9: Siblings In Family 9: Orientation Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or More City 37% (18) 530/0 (26) Type Of Community Farm 2% (1) 8% (4) 39% (19) 61% (30) 100% Q value N.S.S. Table I4 - Appendix F (49) Presence e: Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years By Number 9: Siblings In MFC Respondent's Family 9: Orientation Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or More Both Natural Yes 104 (5) 44A (22) Parents Present During Teenage Years 7 a NO 120 (6) 340 (17) 22% (11) 78% (39) lggé Q value N.S.S. 150 Table I5 - Appendix F Presence QB Both Natural Parents During Teenage Years By Number 9: Siblings in MB Respondent's Family 9: Orientation Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or More Both Natural Yes 184 (9) 29‘ (14) Parents Present During Teenage Years 0 a NO 204 (10) 334 (16) 38/0 (19) 720 (30) 1.00/0 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table I6 - Appendix F Occupational Status 9; Fathers pi MFC Respondents By Number QB Siblings Lg Family 9: Orientation Number of Siblings 1—3 4 or More High 3% (1) 20% (8) Occupational Status of Fathers 0 0 LOW 1.8/0 (7) 59/0 (23) 21./o (8) 79/0 (31) £98? Q value N.S.S. Table I7 - Appendix F 151 Occupational Status BB Fathers 2i MB Respondents By Number 9: Siblings ip Family 2: Orientation Occupational Status of Fathers High Low Table I8 - Appendix F Number of Siblings 1-3 4 or More 9" <3) 6‘ <2) 38% (13) 620/0 (21) Q value N.S.S. Father's Church Attendance Fregueney By Family Type Father's Church Attendance Once a Month or More Less Than Once a month Family Type MFC MC 80% (32) 76% (29) 200 (8) 24%) (9) 100% (40) 100% (38) Q value N.S.S. 100% (34) Table 19 - Appendix F 152 Mother's Church Attendance Frequency By Family Type Once a Month or Mother's More Church Attendance Less than Once a Month Family Type MFC MC 6‘ (3) 6‘ (3) 100% (48) 100% (48) Q value N.S.S. 153 Table II1 - Appendix F Father Stressed Education Because BB Race By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Very Often/ 69% 50% Often (27) (20) Father Stressed Education 0 0 Once In A 31% 50% for Blacks While/Seldom (12) (20) Or Never 100A) (39) TOO/o (40) Q value N.S.S. Table II2 - Appendix F Mother Stressed Education Because 9: Race By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Very Often/ 77% 65% - (37) (30) Mother Often Stressed Education / / for Blacks Once in a 23% 35% While/Seldom (11) (16) or Never Q value N.S.S. 154 Table 113 - Appendix F Father Stressed the Importance B: Gettipg Ahead ip Life By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 714 (27) 54% (21) Father Stressed Getting Ahead NO 29% (11) 46% (18) 100% (38) 100% (39) Q value N.S.S. Table 114 - Appendix F Mother Stressed the Importance BB Getting Ahead ip Life By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 91% 87% Mother (42) (39) Stressed Getting Ahead NO 9% (4) 13% (6) 1.00/0 (46) 100% (45) Q value N.S.S. 155 Table III1 - Appendix F Reason For Wanting pp Be Like Father By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Positive Goal 44% 64% Oriented (4) (7) Why Behavior Be Like a a Father Other 564 (5) 36‘ (4) 1004 (9) 100° (11) Q value N.S.S. Table 1112 - Appendix F Reason For Wanting pp Be Like Father By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Positive 44% 64% Wh be Person Oriented (4) (7) L‘y Behavior 1ke Father Other 56% (5) 36% (4) 1.00/0 (9) 1.00/0 (11) Q value N.S.S. 156 Table 1113 - Appendix F Reason For Wanting pp Be Like Mother By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Positive Goal 29% 21% Oriented (8) (5) Why Be Behavior Like Mother 0 o Other 714 (20) 794) (19) 1.00/0 (28) 100/0 (24) Q value N.S.S. Table III4 - Appendix F Reason For Wanting £9 Be Like Mother By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Positive Person 68% 79% Oriented (19) (19) Why be Behavior Like Mother 0 o Other 32‘ (9) 21‘ (5) 1.00/0 (28) 100%) (24) Q value N.S.S. 157 Table 1115 - Appendix F Reason For Wanting pp Be Different From Father By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Negative Goal 45% 37% Why be Oriented (10) (10) Different Behavior From Father 0 o Other 55/0 (12) 63/0 (17) 100% (22) 100% (27) Q value N.S.S. Table III6 - Appendix F Reason For Wanting pp Be Different From Father By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Negative Goal 5% 33% Oriented (1) (9) Why be Behavior Different From Father 0 o 013th 95/0 (21) 67%) (18) 100% (22) 100% (27) Q value N.S.S. Why be Different From Mother Why be Different From Mother Table III7 - Appendix F 158 Negative Goal Oriented Behavior Other Table 1118 — Appendix F Family Type MFC MC 31% (5) 38% (8) 69% (11) 62% (21) 100% (16) 100% (21) Q value N.S.S. Negative Perso Oriented Behavior Other Family Type MFC MC 31% (5) 38% (8) 69% (11) 62% (13) 100% (16) 100% (21) Q value N.S.S. 159 Table 1119 - Appendix F Help Provided By Non-Parental Adult During Teenage Years By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Instrumental 21% (6) 32% (7) Type of Help Provided Expressive 79% (23) 68% (15) 1000/0 (29) 1000/0 (22) Q value N.S.S. Table IIIl0 - Appendix F How Religion Helped lp Marital Preparation By Family Type Family Type MFC MC General Orien- 82% 70% tation to Life (27) (14) How Religion Helped Specific Role 18% (6) 30% (6) Obligations or Both 100% (33) 100. (20) Q value N.S.S. 160 Table IIIl1 - Appendix F Perception pp Religion Helping pp Get Ahead ip Life By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 69% 56% Religion (34) (27) Helped in Getting Ahead 0 a NO 31/0 (15) 440 (21) 1004 (49) 100% (48) Q value N.S.S. Table III12 - Appendix F How Religion Helped pp Get Ahead lp Life By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Specific / / Application of 0% 19% Protestant (O) (4) How Ethic Religion Helped . o a 8001a1 1004 81% Adjustment (34) (17) 100% (34) 100A (21) Q value N.S.S. 161 Table III13 - Appendix F Perception pp Why Religion Did Not Help pp Get Ahead ip Life By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Not Purpose 0% 0% Why of Religion (0) (0) Religion Did Not Help Get . a o Ahead giguggt Attend 1004 (7) 1004 (11) 1000 (7) 1004 (11) Q value N.S.S. Table IIIl4 — Appendix F Perception pp Teachers View pp Self ee Student By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Good/Average 87% (42) 80% (39) Type of Student Fair/Poor 13% (6) 20% (10) 1004 (48) 100% (49) Q value N.S.S. Type of Student Type of Student 162 Table 11115 - Appendix F Family Type MFC MC Good/Average 88% (43) 83% (40) Fair/Poor 12% (6) 17% (8) ‘ 100% (49) 100% (48) Q value N.S.S. Table 11116 - Appendix F Family Type MFC MC Good/Average 90% (44) 87% (42) Fair/Poor 10% (5) 13% (6) 100% (49) 100% (48) Q value N.S.S. 163 Table 11117 - Appendix F Best Aspect pi School By Family Type Academic Best Subject Aspect of School Other Table 11118 - Appendix F Family Type MFC MC 77% (37) 78% (35) 230/0 (11) 22% (10) 100% (48) 100% (45) Q value N.S.S. Worst Aspect pp School By Family Type Academic Best Subject Aspect of School Other Family Type MFC MC 69% (29) 62% (25) 31% (13) 38% (15) 100% (42) 100% (40) Q value N.S.S. 164 Table 11119 — Appendix F Perception _p Self pp Student By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Good/Average 84% (41) 80% (39) Type of Student Fair/Poor 16% (8) 20% (10) 100%) (49) 1.00/0 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table III20 - Appendix F Relatives Living lp Home During Teenage Years By Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 26% (13) 29% (14) Relatives in Teenage Home a a NO 74A) (37) 71%) (34) 1.00/0 (50) 100%) (48) Q value N.S.S. 165 Table III21 - Appendix F Relatives Helped Get Ahead lg Life py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 274 (13) 224 (11) Relatives Helped Get a a Ahead NO 734 (36) 78A (38) 1004 (49) 1004 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table III22 — Appendix F Relatives Hindered Getting Ahead lg Life py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 7% 5% Relatives (3) (2) Hindered Getting Ahead 0 a NO 93A (41) 954 (39) 1004 (44) 1004 (41) 166 Table 11123 - Appendix F Form of Assistance From Relatives by Family Type Family Type MFC MC How gigancial 64% (7) 40% (4) Relatives Helped Get . AdVice o a Ahead Counsel and 36A (4) 604 (6) Example 1004 (11) 1004 (10) Q value N.S.S. Table IIIZ4 — Appendix F One Man Admired Most as Teenager py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Father/Father- 60% 56% Substitute (29) (27) Man Admired Most o o Other/ 404 444 No One (19) (21) 100% 1 1 (48) 100% (48) Q value N.S.S. 167 Table III25 - Appendix F Man Other Than Father Admired by Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 31% 35% Any (15) (17) Other Man Admired o a NO 69%: (34) 65/0 (32) 1004 (49) 1004 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table 11126 — Appendix F One Woman Admired Most as Teenager py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Mother/Mother- 83% 73% Substitute (38) (32) Woman Admired Most a o- Other/ 17/0 274 No One (8) (12) 100/° (46) 100% (44) Q value N.S.S. 168 Table III27 — Appendix F Family Type MFC MC Yes 53/0 (26) 53A (26) Any Other Woman Admired a a No 474 (23) 474 (23) 1004 (49) 1004 (49) Q value N.S.S. 169 Table IV1 - Appendix F Father's Educational Status py Last Ex-Husband's Educational Status For pp Respondents Last Ex—Husband's Educational Status 1—8 Years 9 Years of More 1‘8 Years 284: (8) 34%: (10) Father's Educational Status / 9Yans 1W0 2&4 or More (3) (8) 384 (11) 624 (18) 1004 (29) Q value N.S.S. Table IVZ - Appendix F Father's Educational Status py MFC Respondent's Educational Status Respondent's Educational Status 1-8 Years 9 Years or More 1-8 Years 224 (6) 464 (13) Father's Educational Status 9 0/ 32/ Years % % or More (0) (9) 224 (6) 784 (22) 1000 (28) 170 Table IV3 - Appendix F Father's Educational Status py _Q Respondent's Educational Status Respondent's Educational Status 1-8 Years 9 Years of More 1-8 Years 214 (6) 414 (12) Father's Educational Status / / 9 Years 7% 31% or More (2) (9) 284 (8) 724 (21) 1004 (29) Q value N.S.S. 171 Table V1 - Appendix F Evaluation pf Degree pf Care 13 Spending Money py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Very Careful/ 88% (44) 84% (41) Spending Careful Money - Self / / / Not So Careful 12% 16% Careless (6) (8) 1004 (50) 1004 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table V2 — Appendix F Income py Family Size for MFC Respondents Number of Children 3 or Less 4 or More $6,999 or Less 19%) (8) 354: (15) Income $7,000 or More 274 (12) 194 (8) 464 (20) 544 (23) 1004 (43) Q value N.S.S. 172 Table V3 - Appendix F Income py Family Size For MC Respondents $6,999 or Less Income $7,000 or More Number of 3 or Less Children 4 or More 450/0 (17) 420/0 (16) 557° (21) 45% (17) 100% Q value N.S.S. Table V4 - Appendix F (38) Respondent's Educational Status py Family Type 8 Years or Less Educational Status 9 Years or More Family Type MFC MC 24% (12) 35% (17) 764 (38) 654 (32) 100% (50) 100% (49) Q value N.S.S. Table V 5 Employment Status pf Respondents py Satisfaction With 173 — Appendix F Husband/Last Ex-Husband's Occupational Status Satisfaction With Husband/ Last Ex—Husband's Job Satisfied Not Satisfied Employed NO 61/: (23) 70%» (40) 100% (38) 100% (57) Table V6 - Appendix F Employment Status pf MFC Respondents py Satisfaction With Husband's Occupational Q value N.S.S. Status Satisfaction With Husband's Job Satisfied Not Satisfied Yes 33/0 (15) 7A (3) Employed NO 47A) (22) 13/0 (6) 804 (37) 204 (9) Q value N.S.S. 100% (46) 174 Table V7 - Appendix F Employment Status 9: MC Respondents py Satisfaction With Last Ex-Husband's Occupational Status Satisfaction With Last Ex—Husband's Job Satisfied Not Satisfied Yes 0/0 (0) 29/0 (14) Employed NC 2/0 (1) 69/0 (34) 24 (1) 984 (48) 1004 (49) Table VI1 - Appendix F 175 Type 9: Occupation Expressed For Sons py Family Type Highest Type of Professional Job Preferred For Other Sons Table VI2 - Appendix F Family Type MFC MC 67% (8) 56% (10) 33% (4) 44% (8) 100% (12) 100% (18) Q value N.S.S. Evaluation pf Son's Chances pf Obtaining_Preferred Job py Family Type Excellent/ Son's Good Chances of Getting Preferred . Job Fair/Poor Family Type MFC MC 77% (20) 76% (22) 234 (6) 244 (7) 1000/0 (26) 1000/0 (29) Q value N.S.S. 176 Table V13 - Appendix F Evaluation pf Children's Chances 9: Getting Ahead ip Life Compared pp Respondent's Chances py Family Type Family Type MFC MC . Much 85% 82% Children's (41) (40) Chances Better Compared to Respondent's Somewhat o o Chances Better/ 154 (7) 184 (9) About the Same 100%) (48) 1.00/0 (49) Q value N.S.S. Table VI4 - Appendix F Contacted Children's Teachers During Current School Year py Family TVDe Family Type MFC MC Yes 940/0 (29) 82% (32) Contacted Teacher NC 6/0 (2) 18/0 (7) 100% (31) 1000/0 (39) Q value N.S.S. 177 Table VI5 - Appendix F Perception pf School Quality py Family Type Family Type MFC MC School 3:53“ 70% (21) 697° (25) Quality Compared to Other 0 a Clty SChOOlS worse 30%: (9) 31%; (31) 100% (30) 100% (36) Q value N.S.S. Table V16 — Appendix F Family Type MFC MC Teachers, 0 0 Basis Building, 904 (26) 94A (34) For Curricula Evaluation of school 10/ 6/ Quality Prejudice, 3 2 Fear, etc. (3) (2) 1.00/0 (29) 100%) (36) Q value N.S.S. Involvement In Peer Choice of Children 178 Table VI7 - Appendix F Family Type MFC MC Yes 7270 (33) 57% (27) NO 2870 (13) 43% (20) J 100%) (46) 100% (47) Q value N.S.S. Table V18 - Appendix F Religious Training pf Children py Family Type Religious Training Compared To Others Family Type MFC MC Same/ 91% 78% More (43) (38) LeSS 9% (4) 22% (11) L 100% (47) 100% (49) Q value N.S.S. 179 Table V19 - Appendix F Encouraged Children pp Attend College py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Yes 694: (31) 78% (36) Encourage College Attendance a a NO 31/0 (14) 224) (10) 100% (45) 100% (46) Q value N.S.S. Table V110 — Appendix F Family Type MFC MC ggmggigl; For SOA (23) 54/0 (26) Value (Autonomy) Stressed a a other 50/0 (23) 46/0 (22) 1004 (46) 1004 (48) Q value N.S.S. 180 Table VI11 - Appendix F Attainment pf Black Rights py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Law & Persuasion 92% 85% How Non-Violent (46) (41) Blacks Protests Could Gain a o . Be Ready to 84 154 Rights Use Violence (4) (7) 1004 (59) 1004 (48) Q value N.S.S. Table V112 - Appendix F Perception pf Similarity p: Black-White Problems py Family Type Family Type MFC MC Same 49% (24) 514 (25) Similarity Of Black- White Problems. 0 a Different 51/0 (49) 494) (24) 1004 (49) 1004 (49) Q value N.S.S. W11111111111111 1 1