Conflict Theory

Karl Marx initially introduced the conflict perspective but his focus was on the conflict between owners and workers. His collaborator, Frederick Engels, ventured into the realm of the family by theorizing the effects of a capitalist economic system on conflict among husbands and wives (see Materialist/Marxism wiki page).

Three main assumptions of the theory:

1) Conflict theory shares in common with rational choice theory (see Social Exchange/Bargaining Theory wiki page) the premise that humans act out of self-interest. Jetse Sprey, a conflict theorist of the family, fundamentally rejects the premise that families are havens from the heartless world. This idea would suggest family members are selfless, families are safe and emotionally supportive, and so on. For conflict theorists, society doesn’t exist outside of families but rather permeates and is a part of families and families permeate and are a part of society. So what happens in society also happens in families. This means that family dynamics can reflect and reinforce larger hierarchies in the society, but they may also help to challenge and undermine dominant power relations.

2) Another assumption of conflict theory is that conflict is endemic to social groups (in part because we are motivated by self-interest). Conflict is not an anomaly or an outcome of a bad relationship but rather a fundamental aspect of our interpersonal relationships. So in this perspective, conflict is present in interpersonal relationships on an ongoing basis. And this is because, they argue, family members have conflicting interests. But also because, in any group there is a perpetual quest for autonomy and jointness; for separation and togetherness. Sprey theorizes that this tension between independence and dependence is especially heightened in small intimate groups like families and marriages. This, in turn, sets the stage for ambivalence. Ambivalence arises when strong contrasting emotions or desires co-exist.

3) Since conflict is endemic to social groups, family harmony can only be explained by the management of conflict. Families don’t abolish differences and differing interests so much as manage them, Sprey contends. He argues there must be a set of shared, mutually understood, procedural rules for how families cooperate. Similarly, family dissolution is only one way to settle conflict. Moreover, conflict does not inevitably lead to dissolution. Families can be highly conflict-ridden and still persist. Finally, Sprey asserts that dissolution is not a form of conflict management since you are not managing conflict if you dissolve the relationship, you are ending it.

Systems theory is a framework used by sociologists to examine intimate partner violence (Lawson 2012) and the theory has strong overlap with conflict theory. According to this framework, violence within a family is the norm, not the exception and is not the product of a pathological individual or family structure but rather "a 'systemic product'" of family relations (see Lawson, p. 576, where she cites Straus [1973]). “Systems respond to feedback from interactions within the system: in the context of family violence, positive feedback increases or amplifies violence, negative feedback decreases or controls violence” (Lawson, p. 576)

Theorists adopting a family systems perspective view conflict within the family as normal and inevitable and say that how families manage conflict is key to understanding why violence is used. They examine issues and characteristics of the family structure, like socialization, family stressors or stress levels, the amount of time family members spend together, in trying to determine the potential for violence in the family system.