Raising Kids in Non Nuclear Families (article) - Logos

            There is a lot of logos present in this article in order to set the basis of the argument, which is if the Nuclear Family type of household back in the sixties were more beneficial than the common currently types of households consisting of single parents, single sex parents, and single generations. The primary method logos is applied is through different case studies and their findings.

            The first type of household is single parenthood, and the author begins by stating 29.5% of American households were of single family. This is a two percent increase from 2000, and this article was written in 2013. 84.1% of the single parent households were also headed by the mother as opposed to the father at 15.9%. A nuclear household in the sixties had two parents and divorce was not common. Studies unanimously support traditional two parent households, mainly because of the financial security. The double parenting in turn leads to higher achievement inschool, lower levels of psychological distress, and later sexual activity. The logos mentioned for single parenting suggest that the Nuclear Family structured household was more beneficial to children.

            Most Nuclear Families also had a significant influence from grandparents. The author mentions one in twenty children in the United States grow up in a multigenerational household today, and these kinds of households have “more consistently positive outcomes.” One case study mentioned is of African American children and grades being higher in multigenerational families. Another case study from 1996 mentioned is about healthy habits and that kids are more likely to not smoke and drink if they’re raised in a home with grandparents. Again, these facts the author mentions propose the Nuclear Family structure from the sixties was more beneficial to children’s development.

            Homosexual parenting is another common type of household that is rapidly emerging today that did not exist in the sixties, as homosexuality was not deemed acceptable. Today however, one to nine million children has at least one gay parent. The author mentions common concerns about this type of structure such as the child will grow up sexually confused, socially inept, or not fully developed. Case studies the author mentions reveals that same sex parenting has no influence on psychological conditions of the child like depression or anxiety and does not have any correlation with drug use and bad behavior. Unlike the other two types of present day households, the logos the author mentions in this type of structure does not seem to be negative.

            The logos the author used was key in presenting the purpose of the article, which was comparing and contrasting different types of households found today and whether or not they are beneficial to the development of children. The statistics stated about single parents and non multigenerational households portrayed them in a bad light whereas the opposite occurred for homosexual households, as they seemed to have no effect on the children. By stating hard facts from case studies, the author maintains a professional and unbiased stance on the topic.

-Priyal Patel