[LottiFurmann]

"Nucleating due to over crowding is not a problem. Nucleating for catering individual's likes and dislikes creates problems."

I am not sure they are completely different, particularly because the definition of "crowd" is subjective. One can feel completely at home with a huge bunch of people but feel very suffocated in the company of even one or two people. So the feeling of overcrowding itself has its roots in the individual's likes and dislikes.

I think the one-couple-one-child policy is likely to redefine the joint family. Parents living with children and their children and so on. Vertically joint with strong filial bonds but no significant horizontal joints to speak of. Slowly brothers, sisters and consequently uncles, aunts, nephews and nieces would become rare species. Is this as scary as it sounds ? Perhaps we should chew on this....

[radikal]

From my personal experience, I could realise that even the brother sister relationship is a bit diluted after marriage ...

the same old fondness is missing now a days ....

not sure how you all feel .........

[Slonopotam845]

From my personal experience, I could realise that even the brother sister relationship is a bit diluted after marriage ...

the same old fondness is missing now a days ....

not sure how you all feel .........

balaji anNe,

I too have noticed this, my unlces(mum's brothers) and my mum dont BOND as much as they did when they were back in Sri Lanka, UK is far more MATERIALITIC country than Sri Lanka, i suppose, ppl here dont even have time to speak to their family members!

[LottiFurmann]

Joint family as system of supporting the old (grandparents) and the young (grandchildren) is without doubt the best way of life. But siblings, cousins... also hmm thats tough.

Again with earning of family members differing (not a problem between Parent-Child, Husband-Wife relation ) the traditional joint family becomes difficult.

As someone correctly put 'My Child' is definitely more important that "My brothers Child". Again as the same person said this has been the truth from the time of Ramayana and Mahabharatha, so dont blame western influence.

[TorryJens]

Does EGO has something to do with Joint-Family ?

Yes or No !

[Beerinkol]

Does EGO has something to do with Joint-Family ?

Yes or No !

Defn yes !!!

[Slonopotam845]

Well then comes the question ... whos EGO ?

[PhillipHer]

Again as the same person said this has been the truth from the time of Ramayana and Mahabharatha, so dont blame western influence.

Sensible point. We tend to blame most of our social and moral problems on the Western culture. Some of it may be true, but not all.

The demise of Joint family can be attributed more to the changes in our lifestyle more than anything else.

Long time ago, the whole family did the same job, it was more like a family job or business. All in the family were farmers (farming the same land) or priests or businessmen. So it was a team and all of them were working towards a common goal.
When all in the family are doing more or less the same thing, then the possibilities of rift are less likely.
But now each member of the team have a different goal. Its very rare to come across a family where all the siblings are involved in the same job, in the same geographical area. Its natural for a joint family system under such circumstance to work against the benefit rather than for the benefit of the whole family.
Even in present days there are lots of family businesses going on and they all live under the same roof.
Demise of joint family can be explained as adapting to the changing environment (in order to succeed) rather than the emergence of 'my' concept (which has been with us for since the evolution of mankind).
IMO the worrying trend is the ever sprouting Old age Homes. Old people who need to be looked after by their children, are left to fend for themselves, it’s the children’s responsibility to look after parents in their old age. Its degradation of this simple moral value that needs to be addressed.

[PhillipHer]

Well then comes the question ... whos EGO ?

Ego of mother-in-law vs daughter-in-law for ONE (mother wanting son to do things her way, and son's wife wanting somethingelse).

In the olden days, the women's role was completely to stay home, and take care of the family. Even if they did work, they did not have an attitude of I am INDEPENDENT and I should have a say in everything, as women of today might. So people, for the most part, got get on with family life as usual.

Today, both husbands and wives work, and they both have to balance family life and careers. So the wife feels she is an EQUAL to the husband. So, depending on the woman's personality, inappropriate/out-of-line actions by the extended family can lead to problems. The same problems may have existed before, but women were more dependant on men then, and were not vocal about these things.

Joint family has its advantages and disadvantages. Basically, if people learnt to respect others' boundaries (and yes, there should be boundaries), then they would work better.

[HedgeYourBets]

One of the causes for the breaking up of the joint family into smaller nuclear units is, the decline in family values. Previously the elders of the clan / family were held in great respect and they took most of the important decisions for all the members in the family. But due to the influence of western culture, the younger generation started deviating from these values. Women became more empowered and started asserting themselves within the family.

This led to inevitable ego clashes between the older and the younger generations. The elders could not adapt themselves to the changes in the moderan world and expected & demanded the same kind of respect from their sons, which they themselves had shown towards their elders, so many decades ago. The mother-in-law expected her son's wife to show her the same amount of respect which she herself had given to her mother-in-law.

This huge descripancy between the expectations of the elders on one hand, and what were the ground realities lead to an invisible divide between the two generations within the joint famliy setup. This barrier widened further when the sons started leaving the family in search of greener pastures.

And after living in this kind of independent setup, the wives of these sons also got accustomed to their new found "freedom" - of being able to do whatever they want, without the constant "interference" of their in-laws. And were not wiling to settle to living again with their in-laws once the sons returned after earning money and respect.

And thus, the Nuclear familly came into existence !

[brraverishhh]

Ramky ... that was a nice piece of highlighting the values of family !

Well, FAMILY huh ! earlier this was not just guy n a gal with their children .... there simply existed one more family concept,prevailing today .... only the guy n the gal and only their children till they get married ! ONce the son or daughter gets married there exists no relationship logically is wat ppl think as of today !

Well no one person is held for such a drift ! Both the current and the previous generation have to be held responsible for this !

[MannoFr]

Well, FAMILY huh ! earlier this was not just guy n a gal with their children .... there simply existed one more family concept,prevailing today .... only the guy n the gal and only their children till they get married ! ONce the son or daughter gets married there exists no relationship logically is wat ppl think as of today !
Well no one person is held for such a drift ! Both the current and the previous generation have to be held responsible for this !

A bitter truth indeed, BG!
Neways, I've been wondering abt this issue of increase in old age homes.....
In today's scenario, ppl. r said to hav better incomes comp'd w/ the previous generations........esp. now tat both husband & wife in most families happen to be in jobs w. high earnings.....(esp. in most cases of the sons who hav a high-paying job & marry girls in similar profession/range of income!)
How come in this context they r said to find it difficult to take care of the parents/in-law then? In the past it was possible w/ jus one earning member of the family!

[Lillie_Steins]

Yes, I share your feelings regading old age homes. That is unacceptable.

[Raj_Copi_Jin]

Originally Posted by ramky One of the causes for the breaking up of the joint family into smaller nuclear units is, the decline in family values. Previously the patricarch of the family was held in great respect and he took most of the important decisions for all the members in the family. But due to the influence of western culture, the younger generation started deviating from these values. Women became more empowered and started asserting themselves within the family.

I think this is not the case in 100% of the households. Our lives today revolve around work. Most of us are not doing what our parents did. So making decisions in our work, falls down to us. Even having family functions are governed by availability of the relatives involved. For example, having the traditional ear pricking ceremony for a child. In olden days i am sure the whole thing was decided by the patriarch of the family and an invitation was sent out to dear and near. But in today's life it depends on when the child's mama will get holidays to come down from US. So the involvement of the patriarch is very limited. dsath, I was pointing out the origin of the nuclear family concept and not about the present day situation about which I am well aware, and hence have no dispute with your what you have stated above.

I think we had very strong women from time immemorial. Well may be education and career opportunities were limited, but within the household they were strong and very assertive.

Agreed, but with all their knowledge, they were willing to live under the guidance of their elders ( FIL, MIL both ) and the wife didnt try to force her husband to move to another house.

Attributing women empowerment to the demise of the joint family system is unacceptable IMO.

I didnt mean to imply that it was so, only that it could have been one of the causes. But in the present day scenario, isnt the feud between the Mother-in-law and Daughter-in-law a primary factor for the sons to set up a separate establishment ? Of course, they give enough explanations for doing so MIL : "my son's office is nearer from there"; or the DIL : "my daughter's school is quite distant from my in law's place", and so on ! We seldom see any instance of the FIL and SIL being the cause for it.

As i said earlier there are many families which still maintain the joint family system. But most of them are families were all have the same trade and are jointly involved in building/maintaining the trade. In such cases the patriarch of the family has a lot of say and is looked up to in decision making process.

Well I have seen such instances in Gujarati, Marwadi, Punjabi & Sindhi families but dont know reg Tamil families. ....

[S.T.D.]

Agreed, but with all their knowledge, they were willing to live under the guidance of their elders ( FIL, MIL both ) and the wife didnt try to force her husband to move to another house.

I didnt mean to imply that it was so, only that it could have been one of the causes. But in the present day scenario, isnt the feud between the Mother-in-law and Daughter-in-law a primary factor for the sons to set up a separate establishment ? Of course, they give enough explanations for doing so MIL : "my son's office is nearer from there"; or the DIL : "my daughter's school is quite distant from my in law's place", and so on ! We seldom see any instance of the FIL and SIL being the cause for it.

I am not so sure about this ramky. If you read the story of Kanaki and Kovalan they lived in a separate house even when they were living in the same town/village as their parents. I don't think Kanaki would have urged Kovalan to set up a separate household. I am of the opinion that Joint family system started for mere convince than for any thing else and stopped for the same reason.
The whole MIL-DIL thing is a hype and its taken to new levels of exaggeration by all these tele-serials.
Its difficult for 2 different people to get along well. In the case of Husband and wife love between them plays a major role. But the same thing cannot be applied to other relations including mother,father,brother,sister,-in-laws. So there will always be friction and this is blown out of proportions and is made to look larger than life by jokes,stories and serials.

Well I have seen such instances in Gujarati, Marwadi, Punjabi & Sindhi families but dont know reg Tamil families. ....

There are a few Tamil joint families and as i said before, they are all trading families mostly hotliers and farmers.

[TorryJens]

A bitter truth indeed, BG!
Neways, I've been wondering abt this issue of increase in old age homes.....
In today's scenario, ppl. r said to hav better incomes comp'd w/ the previous generations........esp. now tat both husband & wife in most families happen to be in jobs w. high earnings.....(esp. in most cases of the sons who hav a high-paying job & marry girls in similar profession/range of income!)
How come in this context they r said to find it difficult to take care of the parents/in-law then? In the past it was possible w/ jus one earning member of the family!

A real pathetic situation !

Who is held responsible for this situation ! i would say both the hubby n wife and the parents too !

Mistakes that the Parents make :
=> Decision Making - they wanted a say in everything !
=> Adjustment - They dont want to change to the current situation
=> Feelings - This is really pathetic, neither of them can be held responsible ... What say ? if the mother's son is married, she feels she has lost his son to the girl ! that he is no more her son ... but somebody elses husband !

Mistakes sons make:

=> Importance - he, after marriage, thinks only his wife n his children are his family ... forgetting the ppl who brought him up !
=> Care - He works for 14 hrs a day, the rest of the time ... he has time only for his immediate family ... he says a HI to his papa,during his morning coffee and a hi to mom when she serves his bfast (for both him and his wife)
Till date they have taken care of the son, now tis the turn of the son to take care of the parents !


Both are held responsible !

[Paul Bunyan]

Some nice discussions / exchange of thoughts here. Pl continue. I am going through all the posts .

[S.T.D.]

Y dont u contribute too Balaji u must have thoughts of ur own !

[radikal]

My point is families WILL break if there is "no explicit need" for them to remain together, especially patriarchial families. Most joint families are patriarchial in nature. They are built around ownership of resources and not due to natural instincts. There is no such instinct as father instinct. Simply the humans did not evolve with the knowledge who the father was. All they needed was a dominant man around.

So the patriarchial joint families are miracles indeed as far as nature is concerned. A lot of compromise is demanded from the women's part. One can only imagine how odd they will feel living with strangers. So women expect a lot of compensation for their compromises.

[Peptobismol]

One of the causes for the breaking up of the joint family into smaller nuclear units is, the decline in family values. Previously the patricarch of the family was held in great respect and he took most of the important decisions for all the members in the family. But due to the influence of western culture, the younger generation started deviating from these values. Women became more empowered and started asserting themselves within the family.

I think this is not the case in 100% of the households. Our lives today revolve around work. Most of us are not doing what our parents did. So making decisions in our work, falls down to us. Even having family functions are governed by availability of the relatives involved. For example, having the traditional ear pricking ceremony for a child. In olden days i am sure the whole thing was decided by the patriarch of the family and an invitation was sent out to dear and near. But in today's life it depends on when the child's mama will get holidays to come down from US. So the involvement of the patriarch is very limited.
I think we had very strong women from time immemorial. Well may be education and career opportunities were limited, but within the household they were strong and very assertive.
Attributing women empowerment to the demise of the joint family system is unacceptable IMO.

As i said earlier there are many families which still maintain the joint family system. But most of them are families were all have the same trade and are jointly involved in building/maintaining the trade. In such cases the patriarch of the family has a lot of say and is looked up to in decision making process.