Sociological Ambivalence and Family Ties: A Critical Perspective

A SYMPOSIUM ON AMBIVALENCE IN INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS We develop the concept of ambivalence as structurally created contradictions that are made manifest in interaction. We discuss how our reconceptualization enhances the relevance of ambivalence to sociological analyses of family ties. Ambivalence is a particularly useful concept when imbedded in a theoretical framework that views social structure as structured social relations, and individuals as actors who exercise agency as they negotiate relationships within the constraints of social structure. The strengths of conceptualizing ambivalence within this framework are illustrated with examples of caring for older family members and of balancing paid work and family responsibilities. Key Words: agency, ambivalence, family ties, gender, intergenerational relations, social structure. A long-standing concern in family research generally, and about intergenerational ties in particular, is the limited development of theoretical concepts and perspectives. Assessments of research and theory related to family ties and aging have emphasized several key themes: the need for multilevel analysis that connects interactions within families to social structure and culture, the importance of viewing conflict as a central feature of social life, the need to focus on relationships and families rather than on individuals exclusively, and the necessity to consider diversity in family life (Cohler & Altergott, 1995; Marshall, Matthews, & Rosenthal, 1993). These concerns combine in a call for bridging concepts that link social structure and individual action (Marshall, 1996). North American thinking about intergenerational family ties has been dominated by the solidarity model (Connidis, 2001), a perspective with limits to addressing these concerns because of its normative underpinnings (Marshall et al., 1993). A second common approach that focuses on the problems families face (e.g., caregiving, elder abuse) also falls short because it emphasizes the interpersonal conflict that results from family problems, rather than structural issues or links between social structure and the actions of family members. A concept with the potential to address the weaknesses of these perspectives and several other gaps in family and aging theory is ambivalence (Luscher & Pillemer, 1998). Our objective is to assess and further develop the concept of sociological ambivalence as it applies to family ties. As used to date, ambivalence may be defined as simultaneously held opposing feelings or emotions that are due in part to countervailing expectations about how individuals should act. Thus, ambivalence reflects the contradiction and paradox that are characteristic of social experience (Luscher & Pillemer, 1998; Smelser, 1998). Ambivalence has been conceptualized at two levels. At the social structural level, sociological ambivalence has been viewed as contradictory normative expectations that occur in institutional resources and requirements (statuses, roles, and norms) (Coser, 1966; Lischer & Pillemer, 1998; Merton & Barber, 1963). At the individual level, psychological ambivalence has been referred to as contradictions that are primarily subjective and evident in cognitions, emotions, and motivations (Luscher & Pillemer, 1998; Smelser, 1998). In our view, to serve as a more useful concept in the study of social life, including family interaction, ambivalence must be reconceptualized. In this article, we argue, first, that sociological ambivalence is conceptualized better as a feature of structured sets of social relations. Second, the contradictions and paradoxes of socially structured relations are reproduced in interpersonal relationships, including those between family members. Third, as social actors, individuals seek to exercise agency in the negotiation of relationships, and they experience ambivalence when social structural arrangements constrain their attempts to do so. …