Discuss how far sociologist would agree that children born into poverty will grow up to be poor throughout their lives
On one hand, some sociologist would argue that children who are born into poverty will grow up to be poor throughout their lives is true. Marxist argue that not everyone in society have the same chances, for example within schools students are put into sets depending on their ability, however lower sets are not given the chance to take higher tier paper, this is unfair as it doesn’t give them chance to get top marks and also some students are labeled as ‘gifted + talented’, therefore these students will start to internalize this label and most likely achieve the highest grades.
Another reason is that there is now a culture of poverty; people in poverty have their own norms and values that differ from the rest of society, this most likely keeps them in poverty. Primary socialization being the most important type of socialization means that individuals are now brought up in a way that they can’t escape poverty. One example of a value that tends to keep them in poverty is fatalism. Fatalism is when people do little to change or improve the situation they are in so they might as well just accept the way things are. Most parents who are in poverty may have a fatalistic view on their child’s school life, this is because they don’t push or motivate their children as their education is not their main priority and they don’t care about it as they have made themselves believe their child will fail, but also they can may believe that they don’t need a career as there are benefits.
Immediate gratification is also an alternative value that people in poverty develop. It is when they live for the moment and don’t think about what tomorrow will bring, if they have a bit if money saved, they will spend it rather than saving up. Social security reinforces this, as if a person has savings above a certain limit they will cut their benefits off, so for that person it would make no sense to them to save. Another example is if a child at school is more interested in having a laugh and mucking around rather than concentrating and focusing on their exams (immediate gratification) because they don’t believe it is worth getting good grades for a good job (fatalism).
New Rights believe that children born into poverty will grow up to be poor throughout their lives. They call the underclass ‘welfare scrounges’ describing them as sponges, they believe that they are to use to having handouts, wasting the money they do have on drinking, smoking or gambling. New Rights claim that parents influence their children not to work but take benefits for income instead of working; they feel that they pass this on during primary socialization.
Lastly, material deprivation suggests that a child will grow up to be poor if born in poverty as if a person in poverty can’t afford basics such as food, they will then become very ill, making them unable to find a job and earn money, this now becomes a cycle of poverty as there is an inability for those individuals to escape from poverty.
On the other hand some sociologist would argue that children born into poverty will not grow up to be poor throughout their lives. A reason supporting this is social mobility; this refers to the movement up or down the class system. This therefore suggests that if a child was to be born into poverty, they always have chances to change that and go on to better things in life. Also within the 21st century it is now easier for people in poverty to move up the