In recent years, the family structure has changed, as well as family roles. What are the changes occurring? Do you think these changes are positive or negative?
In recent times, there have been some remarkable changes in terms of the household living arrangement and also the role of the family. Although there is a host of evolution in the family arrangement which in turn creates many advantages and drawbacks, from my perspective, the negative aspects of this trend outweigh the optimistic changes.
On the one hand, it is apparent to see that nowadays, people tend to live in a household that has two married parents and children, compared to the past when the most ubiquitous type of living arrangement was extended family. This nuclear family type evolving is synonymous with family roles changing noticeably. Over the past decade, women’s educational attainment and labor force participation has surged remarkably. Thus, there are several positive changes forming such as financial stability. This can be improved as there is more than one family member working on a daily basis. And as a result of this, the living standard can be developed to fully accommodate the needs of each family member.
On another hand, the changes in the family living arrangements can be more pessimistic and damaging than their perks. One of the most remarkable problems that a two-parent family structure can create is the lack of emotional support for children. Because the working conditions required the father and mother to commute to their office from nine to five, small offsprings who stay at home during that time can feel lonely and isolated. Moreover, if the person who takes care of the young children is careless, many unwanted incidents can happen. For that reason, the changes in terms of family structure can be negative.
Another reason why the evolving of household arrangements can be detrimental is that the emotional connection between the grandparents and grandchildren can be worsened. It is undeniable that in order to maintain and bolster relationships between those two generations, frequent visits and interactions play a pivotal role. However, when children live with their parents, the chances for them to see their grandparents are low. And throughout the time, with rare visits and the growth procedure of teenagers, the relationship with their grandparents can negatively develop.
To conclude, although there have been several changes in the structure and roles of family, the changes that occurred from that trend are mainly pessimistic.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-08 | nguyenhuynhnhu233 | 73 | view |
| 2021-10-07 | mimio5 | 89 | view |
| 2021-09-21 | mirsohails | 73 | view |
| 2021-09-21 | mirsohails | 73 | view |
| 2021-09-06 | Amna Zeeshan | 56 | view |
- The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999 78
- The table and chart shows data from a survey of library users 78
- Some people think that real life skills like cooking housekeeping and gardening should be included in the curriculum as compulsory subjects Do you agree or disagree 84
- What are the advantages and disadvantages for children of watching television Discuss both sides 78
- The table shows the obesity rate in one country over a period of time Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, moreover, so, thus, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2031.0 1615.20841683 126% => OK
No of words: 383.0 315.596192385 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30287206266 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8637120472 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516971279373 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 636.3 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7315767825 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.833333333 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2777777778 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.27777777778 7.06120827912 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240641275812 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0905176604848 0.084324248473 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0991275502541 0.0667982634062 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159773438774 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0816480807712 0.056905535591 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.