Les cahiers du Lasmas - will get through comparison

Transcription

Les cahiers du Lasmas
Série Documents de travail
ISSP 2002 : Family and changing gender
roles. Report on the French survey
03-2
Clotilde LEMARCHANT
Cahiers du Lasmas – Série Documents de travail, n° C03-2, octobre 2003
ISSP 2002 :
FAMILY AND CHANGING GENDER ROLES
REPORT ON THE FRENCH SURVEY
Clotilde Lemarchant
CNRS – LASMAS
Institut du longitudinal / MRSH
Université de Caen – 14032 Caen cedex
Since 1985, the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) has federated more and more
countries - 38 today- with the object of developing comparative studies about practices and
values on a specific sociological or political theme. Each year, this international quantitative
survey chooses a particular theme and begins a new wave of inquiries, with the aim of taking
up the same themes again (every six or seven years) in a longitudinal perspective1.
In 2002, the theme of the survey was the same as in 1994: family life, its different
significations for men and women, with many questions focusing on the effects of women's
work on family life – and reciprocally. In France, where we have taken part in the ISSP since
1996, the method of self-administrated survey has been maintained. 10,000 questionnaires
were sent by mail to a representative sample (twice to the same people). This report presents
the first results of the French data of ISSP 2002.
I- The sample
This sample isn’t a weighted sample yet. I will present here a draft of first results given by
“crude material” which will be completed and refined in a second time.2
The sample is composed of 1,951 people, 1,288 women and only 656 men: two-thirds women
and one-third men. The theme of the questionnaire has influenced the constitution of the
sample and the answers: it is perceived as a feminine problem for most people.
The age
The respondents are from 18 to 93 years old. Age groups above 55 years of age are not so
represented as we have seen in a few precedent ISSP surveys. We have 1,919 answers to that
question.
667 people are from 18 to 35 (34%).
454 are from 36 to 45 (23.6%)
305 are from 46 to 55 (15.9%)
* Thank you to Alain DEGENNE (LASMAS-CNRS) and Yannick LEMEL (CREST-INSEE) for their invitation
to take part in this survey and for their advices. I thank Laurence BOUVARD (centre Quetelet) and Michel
FORSÉ (LASMAS-CNRS) for all the verifications they are making these days on the data. And thank you to
Catharine MASON (University of Caen) for her careful rereading.
1
Pierre BRÉCHON, “Les grandes enquêtes internationales (eurobaromètres, valeurs, ISSP) : apports et limites”,
L’année sociologique, vol. 52, n°1, 2002, p.105-130.
2
Especially as concerns classification of occupations.
1
257 are from 56 to 65 (13.4%)
136 are over 65 (7.1%)
Thus, 34% are under 35; 20.5% are over 55. Proportionally, the sample contains fewer old
people than in the French society. (The national average in France of people over 65 is
15,6%).
The family situation
Family Situation
Married people
Widower
Divorcee
Separated
Spinster
No answer
1101
113
154
53
429
101
56.4%
5 .8%
7.9%
2.8%
22%
5.1%
Married people are in the majority. Then come the spinsters, whose a part cohabits.
People who cohabitate
352
18%
We can not know exactly which is the right family situation of the respondents because the
questionnaire considers unmarried people who cohabitate in a question apart. Thus, we can’t
know if the 352 persons who declare that they cohabitate had previously declared that they are
spinster, nor if they have answered. An in-depth research makes confused results. Many
people who cohabitate had previously claimed that they were married. In France, there are a
lot of unmarried people who cohabitate and it is a complete way of life, which is maintained
even with the birth of children. Some of them can’t think of themselves as spinsters. We
should not have to separate the two questions. It is the same point in fact. We should have to
add the question of unmarried people who cohabitate to the first list of different family
situations.
Proportionally, divorced women aren’t more numerous than other women.
The children
41% haven’t got any children who are less than 18. (But we have 488 no answer).
23.5% have one child ; 23.5% have two children and 12% have three children or more.
Educational attainment
Only 20 people haven’t answered that question.
People who have answered this questionnaire have a rather high level of qualification. 890
people, that means 46% of them, have a higher education level of qualification. The technique
of self-administrated questionnaires, sent by an unknown and distant institution, certainly
leads to this effect.
We can notice as well that a lot of people (17.3%) have a short vocational qualification (in
France, CAP, BEP).
2
Qualifications
No qualification
Primary school
1st cycle of secondary education
First level of vocational education
Vocational version of the baccalauréat
Second cycle of secondary education
Baccalauréat
First university degree (bac +2)
Bac +3 and more
31
170
157
334
88
111
150
361
529
1.61 %
8.8%
8.1%
17.3%
4.5%
5.7%
7.7%
18.7%
27.4%
Very few women at home
People who answered are essentially full time employees, (49.5%), retired (19.4%) and parttime employees (15-35 hours a week) (12.3%). Women at home are very few (6.7%). The
students, the unemployed and the employees who only work less than 15 hours a week
haven’t answered a lot (students 4.2%; unemployed 3.4%).
Eventually, women who answered are essentially working. They do part-time or full-time
work. Women who stay at home remain a minority.
Incomes
Low incomes aren’t so frequent.
Level of monthly professional income (frequency order)
7,000-10,000 F
10,000-15,000
5,000-7,000
3,000-5,000
No personal incomes
15,000-20,000
402
392
261
149
133
123
24%
23.3%
15.5%
8.9%
7.9%
7.3%
Level of global monthly income of the family
15,000-20,000 F
10,000-15,000
20,000-25,000
7,000-10,000
25,000-30,000
30,000-40,000
5,000-7,000
365
364
245
170
122
112
93
22.5%
22.4%
15%
10.5%
7.5%
6.9%
5.7%
In 60% of our cases, monthly incomes of the family are between 10,000 et 25,000F.
Work, Values and Ways of Life
36.7% of the people who answered are in charge of other people at work.
16.8% belong to a trade-union. (The national average is 11.6% 3).
As concerns politics, 814 people say that they prefer left-wing polities, 517 prefer right-wing
polities.
3
Données sociales, INSEE, 1999.The date of the census is 1995.
3
Two-thirds of our respondents consider that they are involved in a religion, and in this case,
90% of them are members of the catholic religion.
45% of our respondents consider that they belong to the middle class. 19% doesn’t feel that
they belong to any class.
40% consider that they are living in a town or an urban area, 27.8% in a mixed zone (half
rural, half urban), and 31.5% in the country (which is more than in the national average).4
II- The sharing of household tasks: feminine preponderance, masculine mea
culpa
Most people answer to the first questions of opinion. But there are more missing (about 500)
when the questions tackle the concrete organisation of household work and the domestic
power.
As concerns financial organisation, the fusion (uniting) pattern prevails over other models of
couples: almost 62% said that “we pool all the money and each takes out what we need.”
Only 2% delegate the whole responsibility of money to their partner or spouse (“my
spouse/partner manages all the money and gives me my share”). 19% prefer a mixed pattern:
to pool some of the money and keep the rest separate, and 13% opt for an autonomous model
in which each keeps his own money separate.
The household tasks which involve more mixed tasks (“about equal or both together”) include
shopping for groceries (45.5%) and caring for sick family members (41.1%); the less mixed
includes the laundry, as J.C. Kaufmann has pointed out5. Household cleaning is the tasks
which is the most often done by someone from outside the household, but in 5.6% of cases
only.
Time spent on household work seems to be difficult to evaluate: only two thirds answered that
question. The number of hours which corresponds with the greatest frequency (that is to say
158 persons, 12.1% of respondents) is 10 hours a week. Although the distribution is broken
up and irregular, with round figures for target (5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35), nearly the majority
(47%) is concentrated between a participation of 2 hours and an other of 8 hours a week, the
number of concerned people is decreasing when the number of hours is rising.
How many hours a week do you personally spend on household work?
Number
%
0-4
427
32,8
5-9
325
25
10 - 14
264
20,3
15 - 19
99
7,6
20 - 24
79
6
25 - 29
42
3.2
30 -34
25
1.9
35 -39
16
1.2
40 et +
25
1.9
The estimation of the number of hours of household work done by the partner is reduced,
more oriented over small values: 57.2% of the partners are doing less than 4 hours and more
preciously 43.8% never do more than two hours a week.
4
But in this self-administrated questionnaire, we have retained the feeling of people, not an administrative or
statistic definition.
5
Jean-Claude KAUFMANN, La trame conjugale, analyse du couple par son linge, Paris, Nathan, 1992.
4
How many hours a week does your spouse/partner spend on household work?
Number
%
0-4
728
57.2
5-9
225
17.7
10 - 14 15 – 19 20 - 24 25 - 29
150
56
50
11
11.8
4.4
3.9
0.8
30 -34
32
2.5
35 -39
3
0.02
40 et +
17
1.3
The general feeling about the sharing of household work is those who feel that they do
roughly their fair share (40.8%) or much more than their fair share (43.7%). Only 15.4%
recognises that they do less than their fair share.
J.C. Kaufmann, a French researcher who studies the complex relationships and feelings
attached to household tasks, shows that it is difficult to be involved in a couple without
finding a status quo or an agreement about these daily questions. Thus, 62.5% of our
respondents consider that they rarely or never disagree about domestic chores in their own
couple. 75% disagree several times a year or less. Only 18.2% of respondents disagree several
times a month or week.
III- Opinions about the women’s work and the conciliation between work life and
family life.
1- Nothing could be more justified than women’s work but when it doesn’t hinder family
life. It doesn’t seem to be a disruptive factor of conjugal life.
Initially, everybody thinks that women’s work is legitimate. Men and women agree or
strongly agree with the following idea: “Both the man and woman should contribute to the
household income.” (men: 70%, women insist : 75.5%). A big majority thinks that “A
working mother can establish just as warm and secure a relationship with her children as a
mother who does not work.” “After marrying and before having children, what a woman
should do is to work full-time” 79.5% of men questioned agree with this while 87.5% of
women agree.
But when there are young children, the fact that women are working is beginning to be seen
as disturbing and troublesome, especially when they are working full-time. Men and women
agree on this point. 47% of men and 42% of women are quite convinced that “all in all, family
life suffers when the woman has a full-time job.”
The difference between them concerns the solution glimpsed to get round difficulties: women
prefer working part-time (48% when they have very young children) to coming back home
full-time (34.5%), whereas men perceive both these solutions as equivalent (42%).
2- French women laud part-time work when they have young children
Working part-time is seen as the best solution and has a great legitimacy in France. Women
especially make a distinction between full-time and part-time. 47% of men and 42% of
women think “all in all, family life suffers when the woman has a full-time job.”
A few questions draw the life trajectory dreamt by women for themselves. They reason in
terms of life cycle, about stages in life that follow the steps of growth of children. Their ideal
would be to work full-time when they are married but without children, (87.5% of women) as
5
opposed to working part-time (48%) or staying at home (34.5%) when children are under
school age; many would choose to work part-time (60%) or full-time (28%) after the youngest
child starts school; and to work full-time (70%) or part-time (17.5%) after the children leave
home. At this stage, no more reason to stay at home (1.5%).
We can notice the great attraction of the pattern of part-time work for women who have
children, whatever the age of these children: not only when they are very young but when
they are at school as well. (May be that means they are involved in the school trajectory of
their children?). But we can’t have more information about the pattern of part-time work : do
women prefer working 80%? Half-time ? The questionnaire contains no question about this
“detail”.
3- Differences between dreams and reality
According to the survey, women with young children are working more than they would like
to. Part-time employment is more a dream than a reality. In fact, if they are working full-time
before they have children, they continue to do so after their children are born, more often fulltime than they indicate in their ideal model. In the case of underage school children, 50% of
women have worked full-time outside the home, 23% part-time (whereas this pattern is given
as an ideal model for 48% of women) and 26% stayed at home (an ideal for 34.5% of
women). After their youngest child has started school, 52% of women questioned have
worked full-time, 30% part-time in of cases and 18% have stayed at home.
4- Autonomy as a value. The women’s point of view
Women emphasize the value of autonomy. “Are married people generally happier than
unmarried people?” Women do not seem to be convinced. 36% of them strongly disagree to
24.5% of men questioned. 46% of them disagree or strongly disagree to 34% of men. Women
stand aloof from the marriage, more than men: but we don’t know what this term means for
either of them: the couple or its institutionalisation?
Likewise, women do not at all appreciate the idea that “It is better to have a bad marriage than
no marriage at all.” 71% of men and 82% of women strongly disagree with this statement.
According to the survey, having a child born out of wedlock isn’t a real problem for many
women. The following statistic shows this:
« People who want children ought to get married »
Men
Women
(strongly) agree (strongly) disagree
46%
36 %
32%
48%
Do women even stand aloof from couple life?
« One parent can bring up a child as well as two parents together »
Men
Women
(strongly) agree
24%
30%
6
(strongly) disagree
64%
49%
We can see that men are more radical when they deem it necessary that two parents are
needed to bring up a child together. Even if women prefer to assume this responsibility with
their partner, they seem to be ready to assume it alone.
But, if the majority says that “divorce is usually the best solution when a couple can’t seem to
work out their marriage problems,” women are more indecisive than men. Men (strongly)
agree in 63% of the cases and women in 57%.
Women especially approve of couples living together without intending to get married (56%
of them to 43.5% of men strongly agree).
But women especially have a positive idea of welfare incomes, which are for them a security
if they should divorce or separate: 25% of men and 40% of women agree with the following
idea: “Families should receive financial benefits for child care when both parents work.”
Women agree more strongly than men that “Working women should receive paid maternity
leave when they have a baby.” But has this question been well understood? In France, there is
still a paid maternity leave: some people have perhaps understood “maternity pay”?
5- Men assign women the maternal role a little more than women wish for themselves
Only 36% of women consider that a child under school age suffers if her or his mother is
working whereas 53% of men hold this to be true. Women strongly disagree with the Parsons
pattern: a functionalist model of a single salary family where the man is working outside and
the woman stays at home.6 Only 13% of women agree or strongly agree with this model to
27% of men. 55.5% of men and 75% of women disagree. Above all, 57% of women
questioned and 37% of men strongly disagree. But men are on average older than women in
this sample (which is not a weighting sample).
This following idea “Being a housewife is just as fulfilling as working for pay” leads to
different points of view. 32% of men and 45% of women disagree (or strongly disagree); 40%
of men and 30% of women agree (or strongly agree).
When the youngest child has begun school, women stand aloof from the model of housewife,
when 10% of men think that it is the right place for women. Only 5% of the women
questioned conceive this model in this case.
Men and women imagine the same ideal trajectory for women. But men qualify full-time
work for women and insist on the role of the housewife.
Everybody agrees to this statement: “Having a job is the best way for a woman to be an
independent person.” But women are more sensitive to the question: 53% of women and 41%
of men strongly agree.
Women who responded to this survey are involved in their role as mothers but not in an
exclusive or definitive way. They emphasize the short stage of childhood, tackle the question
of work with the idea of a succession of periods, and only imagine leaving the work market
for a short time or on a part-time basis.
6
PARSONS T., BALES R., Family, socialization and interaction process, Glencoe, Free Press, 1955.
7
6- The influence of the maternal model
We know that different generations of women in a family can influence each other about the
choices to be made in organising work and family life.7 We know that there are influences
between mothers and daughters, mothers-in-law and daughters-in-law.
In this inquiry, people who have a working mother, at least one year before the age of 14, tend
to have a more positive idea of relationships between work and family. They can’t imagine
such negative consequences of women’s work on family life. Their own experience of
childhood hasn’t be a traumatism: on the contrary, it has convinced them that both activities
are possible.
Persons whose mothers have worked are less inclined to think that a child under school age
suffers when his or her mother is working (10%) than people whose mothers never worked
outside the house (20%). Another example: those whose mothers worked do not consider that
“all in all, family life suffers when the woman has a full-time job.” Only 11.5% reply
affirmatively to 21.5% of those whose mothers never worked.
Those whose mothers have worked insist on the idea that “Both the man and woman should
contribute to the household income.” (50.5% against 44.5%).
Globally, French respondents disagree with the pattern of Parsons. But people whose mother
worked at least a little more strongly disagree: 58.5% to 42.7% of those whose mothers never
worked.
Among those who agree with full-time feminine work even if they have young children, two
thirds are people who saw their own mother working. On the other hand, full-time is
perceived as less plebiscite by persons whose mothers never worked, even when the youngest
child has started school. Concretely, people stay at home more and come back to the work
market later when they have a mother who has always stayed at home herself.
7- The positive influence of family responsibility in working life?
The consequences of women’s work on family life aren’t the only focus of this questionnaire.
A few questions take up the opposite dimension: the possible influences of family life on
work life.
Although they have, more so than men, the responsibilities of home life and children, women
do not feel much more bothered than men by family burdens on their professional life. (Those
who claim not to be very inconvenienced, or even at all, include 77% of men questioned and
62.5% of the women). They don’t attest to difficulties of concentration for example in spite of
the “mental burden”8 and the daily implications of these responsibilities.
Nothing in this survey has allowed me to interpret these findings. I can only point to a few
hypotheses.
1- Women cultivate an attitude of denial. Women tend to refuse to see the reality of their
lives and their own concrete difficulties.9
7
Clotilde LEMARCHANT, Belles-filles. Avec les beaux-parents trouver la bonne distance, Rennes, PUR,
1999 ; Georges MENAHEM, “activité féminine ou inactivité : la marque de la famille du conjoint”, Economie et
statistique, 1988, n°211 et “les rapports domestiques entre femmes et hommes s’enracinent dans le passé familial
des conjoints”, Population, 1989, n°3.
8
Monique HAICAULT, “La gestion ordinaire de la vie en deux”, Sociologie du travail, 1984, n°3, p.268-277.
9
Chantal NICOLE-DRANCOURT, Le labyrinthe de l’insertion, La Documentation française, 1991.
8
2- Women have anticipated the difficulties and they have chosen work which makes it easier
to conciliate family life and work life.10
3- Women get a sense of pride from having succeeded on their own in overcoming daily
difficulties.11
4- The role of mother provides them with a positive status which is reflected in their
professional identity. At work, private life is discretely, but most certainly evaluated.
Women with children are given a stamp of “normality”, social and psychological
normality. It guarantees her a place in social hierarchy. Eventually, her professional
network recognizes her organisational capacities (that could be used later). These are
secondary benefits of the family burden. Some surveys show the ambivalent feelings of
managers towards spinster executives (as dangerous perhaps); their preference is for
married executive, whose reputation is to be “responsible” and “stable”.12
This association of different causes would be able to explain that very few feelings of
culpability, indecision, doubt or weariness appears.
8- Rural specificities?
To a few questions, rural people express a small amount of reserve towards full-time women’s
work. 55% of Parisians and 42.5% of rural inhabitants say that “a working mother can
establish just as warm and secure a relationship with her children as a mother who does not
work.” 32.5% of Parisians and 47% of rural inhabitants (strongly) think that: “a pre-school
child is likely to suffer if his or her mother works.” 39.5% of Parisians and 55.5% of rural
inhabitants consider that “all in all, family life suffers when the woman has a full-time job.”
Rural women agree with this less strongly than rural men (45%). In the same way, they stand
aloof, more than men, from the model with separated roles.
But on other points, rural people and Parisians are alike and different from middle towns.
Thus, both Parisians and rural inhabitants are the most distant towards educative aptitudes of a
single parent. Another example: they (strongly) agree that “Men ought to do a larger share of
childcare than they do now” (64% et 68%), but with less enthusiasm than in average-sized
and big cities ( 81% and 90%).
9- Religious specificities?
It is difficult to compare different congregations because, except for Catholics, the number of
respondents is very small (for example, we have only 10 Jewish respondents).
Muslims who answered are more afraid of the risks incurred by children whose mother is
working. But they dissociate from the Parsonian model as all people of the inquiry. (48.5%
strongly disagree, which is very close to the average of 50%).
10
Marie DURU-BELLAT, L’école des filles. Quelle formation pour quels rôles sociaux ? Paris, L’Harmattan,
1990.
11
Jacques COMMAILLE, Les stratégies des femmes, travail, famille et politique, Paris, La Découverte, 1992.
12
Catherine MARRY, Charles GADEA, “les pères qui gagnent”, Travail, genre et sociétés, 2000, n°3, p.109135.
9
The replies from Catholics are very similar to the average results in general. They just
maintain a little more that “all in all, family life suffers when the woman has a full-time job.”
50% agree at different degrees whereas the average is 44%.
Contrasts appear clearly between people who declare a religious affiliation and those who are
far from such an affiliation. People who do not hold religious convictions have a more
positive point of view about women’s work and a negative view of the Parsonian pattern:
respondents disagree in 67% of the cases; people with religious feeling in 42% of cases). 30%
of the non religious respondents and 50.5% of the members of a religion consider that “all in
all, family life suffers when the woman has a full-time job.” 32% of people without religious
convictions and 48% of the members of a religion think that “a pre-school child is likely to
suffer if his or her mother works.”
10- Age and generation effects
People over 65 think with less convinction that “A working mother can establish just as warm
and secure relationship with her children as a mother who doe not work” : only 29% truly
agree. 31% disagree, to 13% of those aged 18-25. With the increase of age, people tend to say
that “a pre-school child is likely to suffer if his or her mother works.” (28.5% of the 18-25 age
group; 57.5% of the 55-64; and 71% of those over 65).
We can notice some contradictory answers with respect to age when people say what they
think about the following proposition: “all in all, family life suffers when the woman has a
full-time job.” 5% of 18-25 and 30.5% of those over 65 strongly agree with this idea; 35% of
the 18-25 age group and 6% of those over 65 strongly disagree.
The Parsonian model is more popular with the generation which created it: 50% of those over
65 and 5% of the 18-25 age group approve of it. We can notice that 26% of the older
respondents of the sample are against these kind of view.
However, the majority of those over 65 says that “Both the man and woman should contribute
to the household income.” And 75% say that “Men ought to do a larger share of household
work than they do now”.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can see that these initial results correspond to those of other French surveys.
Very few surprises incur, except perhaps the low level of female complaints concerning the
effects of family burden on work life. At this point, it would be important to develop our
study, once the data is weighted, to emphasize the dimension of occupational classification
and to examine differences which occur between women of different social classes. The next
task will be to cross gender and social classification.

10
References
Pierre BRECHON, “Les grandes enquêtes internationales (eurobaromètres, valeurs, ISSP) :
apports et limites”, L’année sociologique, 2002, vol. 52, n°1, p.105-130.
Jacques COMMAILLE, Les stratégies des femmes, travail, famille et politique, Paris, La
Découverte, 1992.
Rosemary CRAMPTON, Gender and Stratification, Polity Press, 2002.
Rosemary CRAMPTON, Class and Stratification: an Introduction to Currents Debates,
Polity Press, 1998.
Rosemary CRAMPTON, Nicky LEFEUVRE, “Paid Employment and the Changing System
of Gender Relations: a cross-national Comparison”, Sociology, 1996, vol.30, n°3, p.427-445.
Alain DEGENNE, Marie-Odile LEBEAUX, Catherine MARRY, “Les usages du temps :
cumuls d'activités et rythmes de vie.”, Economie et statistiques, 2002, n° 352-353, p.81-99.
Marie DURU-BELLAT, L’école des filles. Quelle formation pour quels rôles sociaux ? Paris,
L’Harmattan, 1990.
Charles GADEA, Catherine MARRY, “Les pères qui gagnent : descendance et réussite
professionnelle des ingénieurs.”, Travail, genre et sociétés, 2000, n°3, p.109-135.
Monique HAICAULT, “La gestion ordinaire de la vie en deux.”, Sociologie du travail, 1984,
n°3, p.268-277.
Linda HANTRAIS, Managing Professional and Family Life: A Comparative Study of French
and British Women, Dartmouth, Aldershot, 1990.
Linda HANTRAIS, M.-T. LETABLIER, Familles, travail et politiques familiales en Europe,
Paris, PUF, 1996.
Jacqueline HUPPERT-LAUFER, La féminité neutralisée ? Les femmes cadres dans
l'entreprise, Paris, Flammarion, 1982.
Jean-Claude KAUFMANN, La trame conjugale, analyse du couple par son linge, Paris,
Nathan, 1992.
Jacqueline LAUFER, Catherine MARRY, Margaret MARUANI (sous la dir.), Masculinféminin : questions pour les sciences de l’homme, Paris, PUF, 2001.
Clotilde LEMARCHANT, Belles-filles. Avec les beaux-parents trouver la bonne distance,
Rennes, PUR, 1999.
Yannick LEMEL, “Indifférenciation progressive des modèles de rôles féminins et
masculins.”, Louis Dirn, La société française en tendances, Paris, PUF, 1990.
11
Georges MENAHEM, “activité féminine ou inactivité : la marque de la famille du conjoint”,
Economie et statistique, 1988, n°211.
Georges MENAHEM, “Les rapports domestiques entre femmes et hommes s’enracinent dans
le passé familial des conjoints”, Population, 1989, n°3.
Chantal NICOLE-DRANCOURT, Le labyrinthe de l’insertion, Paris, La Documentation
Française, 1991.
PARSONS T., BALES R., Family, socialization and interaction process, Glencoe, Free
Press, 1955.
Irène THERY, Couple, filiation, et parenté aujourd’hui. Le droit face aux mutations de la
famille et de la vie privée, Paris, Odile Jacob, 1998.
12
Les Cahiers du Lasmas
Série Documents de travail
Lasmas-IdL / CNRS
IRESCO
59-61 rue Pouchet
75849 PARIS CEDEX 17
Directeur de la publication :
Roxane Silberman
Secrétariat de rédaction :
Jocelyne Léger
Dépôt légal : octobre 2003