Kuka kasvattaa, kuka opettaa? : Genealoginen tutkimus perheen ja koulun välisen kasvatusvastuun politiikasta

FAMILIES AND SCHOOLS AND THE POLITICS OF RESPONSIBILITIES - a genealogical study on family and school as carers and educators of the child population in modern society This study aims to uncover the politics behind such discourses in the media which have claimed the family to be totally responsible for children and which ignore the various responsibilities accorded to the state in matters concerning the child population. Using Max Weber s and Michael Mann s theorizing on the history of power relationships, feminist social history on patriarchy and Foucauldian power analytic concept of dispositif the study traces two competing child policies which have influenced the historical formation of modern generational order in Western societies. One of them is based on the interests of the hegemonic bourgeois elite and the other on the interests of the non-elite population, which were expressed during the phase of building the welfare state in Finland in the 1960 1980 s. The central strategies of the bourgeois child policy are 1) to construct the childhood years as a time for preparation and formation of the individual according to the interests of the elite, 2) to construct the family as the sole site of holistic care and responsibility of children in society, and 3) compulsory schooling of children of the non-elite population in state organized schools. To implement these strategies the elite uses strategically patriarchal cultural formations/dispositifs in modernized versions. The result has been the formation of a sexually divided and hierarchical order of care and education, where, on the one hand, there is the less important feminine care of children done by mothers at home and, on the other, the real education of the school, where children are made the object of authoritarian shaping and where the needs and the personal experiences of the child are ignored. The welfare order of care and education is based on the ethos of welfare society, where the state and the families are seen to share the responsibility for the child population. In this vein, families and schools are seen as partners who both have a caring attitude to children s welfare and learning. The study shows that discourses and terminology in the mainstream educational policy texts in Finland create a chaotic linguistic game which makes it difficult to have a rational discussion about the roles of family and school in the holistic care and education of children. This has opened the door to political discourses where familist interpretations of the question of responsibility are claimed to be based on law.

Ydinperheen politiikka

The research topic is the formation of nuclear family understanding and the politicization of nuclear family. Thus, the question is how did family historically become understood particularly as nuclear family and why did it become central in terms of politics and social? The research participates in discussions on the concept and phenomena of family. Central theme of analysis is to ask what is family? Family is seen as historically contingent and the discussions on the concept and phenomena are done via historical analysis. Center of attention is nuclear family, thus, a distinction between the concepts of family and nuclear family is made to be able to focus on historically specific phenomena of nuclear family. Family contrary to the concept of nuclear family -- in general is seen to be able to refer to families in all times and all cultures, as well as all types of families in our times and culture. The nuclear family understanding is examined through two separate themes, that of parent-child relationships and marital relations. Two simultaneous processes give nuclear family relations its current form: on the one hand the marital couple as the basis of family is eroding and losing its capacity to hold the family together; on the other, in Finland at least from 1950s on, the normal development of the child has became to be seen ontologically bound to the (biological) mother and (via her to) the father. In the nucleus of the family is the child: the biological, psychological and social processes of normal development are seen ontologically bound to the nuclear family relations. Thus, marriages can collapse, but nuclear family is unbreakable. What is interesting is the historical timing: as nuclear family relations had just been born, the marriage dived to a crisis. The concept and phenomena of nuclear family is analyzed in the context of social and politics (in Finnish these two collapses in the concept of yhteiskunnallinen , which refers both to a society as natural processes as well as to the state in terms of politics). Family is political and social in two senses. First, it is understood as the natural origin of the social and society. Human, by definition, is understood as a social being and the origin of social, in turn, is seen to be in the family. Family is seen as natural to species. Disturbances in family life lead to un-social behaviour. Second, family is also seen as a political actor of rights and obligations: family is obligated to control the life of its members. The state patronage is seen at the same time inevitable family life is way too precious to leave alone -- and problematic as it seems to disturb the natural processes of the family or to erode the autonomy of it. The rigueur of the nuclear family is in the role it seems to hold in the normal development of the child and the future of the society. The disturbances in the families first affect the child, then the society. In terms of possibility to re-think the family the natural and political collide: the nuclear family seems as natural, unchangeable, un- negotiable. Nuclear family is historically ontologised. The biological, psychological and social facts of family seem to be contrary to the idea of negotiation and politics the natural facts of family problematise the politics of family. The research material consists of administrational documents, memoranda, consultation documents, seminar reports, educational writings, guidebooks and newspaper articles in family politics between 1950s and 1990s.

Pathways to health : Determinants of health, health behaviour and health inequalities in early adulthood

There is increasing evidence that the origins of poor adult health and health inequalities can be traced back to circumstances preceding current socioeconomic position and living conditions. The life-course approach to examining the determinants of health has emphasised that exposure to adverse social and economic circumstances in earlier life or concurrent adverse circumstances due to unfavourable living conditions in earlier life may lead to poor health, health-damaging behaviour, disease or even premature death in adulthood. There is, however, still a lack of knowledge about the contribution of social and economic circumstances in childhood and youth to adult health and health inequalities, and even less is known about how environmental and behavioural factors in adulthood mediate the effects of earlier adverse experiences. The main purpose of this study was to deepen our understanding of the development of poor health, health-damaging behaviours and health inequalities during the life-course. Its aim was to find out which factors in earlier and current circumstances determine health, the most detrimental indicators of health behaviour (smoking, heavy drinking and obesity as a proxy for the balance between nutrition and exercise), and educational health differences in young adults in Finland. Following the ideas of the social pathway theory, it was assumed that childhood environment affects adult health and its proximal determinants via different pathways, including educational, work and family careers. Early adulthood was studied as a significant phase of life when many behavioural patterns and living conditions relevant to health are established. In addition, socioeconomic health inequalities seem to emerge rapidly when moving into adulthood; they are very small or non-existent in childhood and adolescence, but very marked by early middle age. The data of this study were collected in 2000 2001 as part of the Health 2000 Survey (N = 9,922), a cross-sectional and nationally representative health interview and examination survey. The main subset of data used in this thesis was the one comprising the age group 18 29 years (N = 1,894), which included information collected by standardised structured computer-aided interviews and self-administered questionnaires. The survey had a very high participation rate at almost 90% for the core questions. According to the results of this study, childhood circumstances predict the health of young adults. Almost all the childhood adversities studied were found to be associated with poor self-rated health and psychological distress in early adulthood, although fewer associations were found with the somatic morbidity typical of young adults. These effects seemed to be more or less independent of the young adult s own education. Childhood circumstances also had a strong effect on smoking and heavy drinking, although current circumstances and education in particular, played a role in mediating this effect. Parental smoking and alcohol abuse had an influence on the corresponding behaviours of offspring. Childhood circumstances had a role in the development of obesity and, to a lesser extent, overweight, particularly in women. The findings support the notion that parental education has a strong effect on early adult obesity, even independently of the young adult s own educational level. There were marked educational differences in self-rated health in early adulthood: those in the lowest educational category were most likely to have average or poorer health. Childhood social circumstances seemed to explain a substantial part of these educational differences. In addition, daily smoking and heavy drinking contributed substantially to educational health differences. However, the contribution of childhood circumstances was largely shared with health behaviours adopted by early adulthood. Employment also shared the effects of childhood circumstances on educational health differences. The results indicate that childhood circumstances are important in determining health, health behaviour and health inequalities in early adulthood. Early recognition of childhood adversities followed by relevant support measures may play an important role in preventing the unfortunate pathways leading to the development of poor health, health-damaging behaviour and health inequalities. It is crucially important to recognise the needs of children living in adverse circumstances as well as children of substance abusing parents. In addition, single-parent families would benefit from support. Differences in health and health behaviours between different sub-groups of the population mean that we can expect to see ever greater health differences when today s generation of young adults grows older. This presents a formidable challenge to national health and social policy as well as health promotion. Young adults with no more than primary level education are at greatest risk of poor health. Preventive policies should emphasise the role of low educational level as a key determinant of health-damaging behaviours and poor health. Keywords: health, health behaviour, health inequalities, life-course, socioeconomic position, education, childhood circumstances, self-rated health, psychological distress, somatic morbidity, smoking, heavy drinking, BMI, early adulthood