Emile Durkheim on the Family

Books

Mary Ann Lamanna

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Understanding Families

    Series Editors: Bert N. Adams, University of Wisconsin

    David M. Klein, University of Notre Dame

    This book series examines a wide range of subjects relevant to studying families. Topics include, but are not limited to, theory and conceptual design, research methods on the family, racial/ethnic families, mate selection, marriage, family power dynamics, parenthood, divorce and remarriage, custody issues, and aging families.

    The series is aimed primarily at scholars working in family studies, sociology, psychology, social work, ethnic studies, gender studies, cultural studies, and related fields as they focus on the family. Volumes will also be useful for graduate and undergraduate courses in sociology of the family, family relations, family and consumer sciences, social work and the family, family psychology, family history, cultural perspectives on the family, and others.

    Books appearing in Understanding Families are either single-or multiple-authored volumes or concisely edited books of original chapters on focused topics within the broad interdisciplinary field of marriage and family.

    The books are reports of significant research, innovations in methodology, treatises on family theory, syntheses of current knowledge in a family subfield, or advanced textbooks. Each volume meets the highest academic standards and makes a substantial contribution to our understanding of marriages and families.

    • Multiracial Couples: Black and White Voices
    • Paul C. Rosenblatt, Terri A. Karis, and Richard D. Powell
    • Understanding Latino Families: Scholarship, Policy, and Practice
    • Edited by Ruth E. Zambrana
    • Current Widowhood: Myths & Realities Helena Znaniecka Lopata
    • Family Theories: An Introduction
    • David M. Klein and James M. White
    • Understanding Differences Between Divorced and Intact Families
    • Ronald L. Simons and Associates
    • Adolescents, Work, and Family: An Intergenerational Developmental Analysis
    • Jeylan T. Mortimer and Michael D. Finch
    • Families and Time: Keeping Pace in a Hurried Culture
    • Kerry J. Daly
    • No More Kin: Exploring Race, Class, and Gender in Family Networks
    • Anne R. Roschelle
    • Contemporary Parenting: Challenges and Issues
    • Edited by Terry Arendell
    • Families Making Sense of Death
    • Janice Winchester Nadeau
    • Black Families in Corporate America
    • Susan D. Toliver
    • Reshaping Fatherhood: The Social Construction of Shared Parenting
    • Anna Dienhart
    • Problem Solving in Families: Research and Practice
    • Samuel Vuchinich
    • African American Children: Socialization and Development in Families
    • Shirley A. Hill
    • Black Men and Divorce
    • Erma Jean Lawson and Aaron Thompson
    • Romancing the Honeymoon: Consummating Marriage in Modern Society
    • Kris Bulcroft, Linda Smeins, and Richard Bulcroft
    • The Changing Transition to Adulthood: Leaving and Returning Home
    • Frances Goldscheider and Calvin Goldscheider
    • Families and Communes: An Examination of Nontraditional Lifestyles
    • William L. Smith
    • Women, Work, and Family: Balancing and Weaving
    • Angela Hattery
    • Emile Durkheim on the Family
    • Mary Ann Lamanna

    Copyright

    View Copyright Page

    Photo

    Preface

    Emile Durkheim on the Family is intended to make visible this classical sociologist's work on the family. Durkheim's writings on the family are little known, but in fact the family was one of his primary interests. Intended subject of a book that was never written, Durkheim's ideas on the family appeared only in scattered sources, and a number of those sources have not been translated into English. His sociology of the family has not yet been presented and analyzed holistically. The goal of this book is to do that.

    The purpose of the book is to bring together Durkheim's ideas on the family from diverse sources and to present his family sociology systematically and comprehensively. I have combed bibliographies of works on Durkheim, searched his journal Année sociologique and other journals of the period, followed leads in the many books and articles on Durkheim, scanned compendia of his work and pursued the original sources, read his major books and those less prominent, all in search of material on the family broadly defined. Some things are quite visible to Durkheim scholars and others (e.g., his views on women expressed in Suicide, 1897). Much is not. And because the material is so fragmented, getting a clear picture of Durkheim's work on the family requires a book that presents and integrates his writings.

    In Emile Durkheim on the Family, I have organized Durkheim's ideas topically, described his sociological perspective on the family, and provided analytical commentary. His theories are situated in their historical context, and comparisons are also drawn to present-day sociology of the family and family issues. Chapter topics include Durkheim's life and times; his evolutionary theory of the family; methodologies for studying the family; the changing relationship of kin, conjugal family, and the state; the interior of the family; family policy; gender; and sexuality. Although the presentation of Durkheim's theory is in my own words, quotations from Durkheim's writings are selected to enrich the presentation of his ideas.

    An examination of Durkheim's work on the family reveals its close connections to his well-known books and theories and enables us to get a fuller understanding and appreciation of Durkheim as social theorist. For the family studies scholar, this book reveals that Durkheim's work was an invisible forerunner of later themes in sociology of the family. The issues he addressed are still of interest in the field today. Emile Durkheim on the Family should interest audiences in sociology of the family, social theory, family science, social philosophy, European intellectual history, women's studies, legal history, and those generally interested in family studies and/or nineteenth-and early twentieth-century Europe. It should be useful to scholars in these areas because it provides a comprehensive view of Durkheim's work on the family and a roster of sources that can be pursued further. For those with a more limited interest, the book offers a broad overview of Durkheim on the family.

    There are some technical points regarding the many quotations from Durkheim's work that appear in the book that I would like to explain to the reader. I selected quotations primarily according to two opposite principles. First of all, I chose quotations that were representative of Durkheim's thought. Substantially similar versions of a point might have appeared in more than one publication or debate, sometimes repeated a number of times. I chose these. At the same time, I selected quotes that I was surprised to find in Durkheim's work. To present a quote one would not have thought typical of Durkheim is to expand our understanding of him. Last, I wanted the quotations to give something of the flavor and style of Durkheim's writing, and I chose with that goal in mind.

    I myself have done all the translation of Durkheim material included in the book, save for a very few where I could not locate the original source in French. Translation philosophies and styles vary. My preference is to render a natural-sounding expression of what the author has said in the original language rather than a literal word-for-word translation that may sound forced and awkward. Most often, my translation choices do not depart that far from the literal.

    I have sometimes eliminated words that do not carry substantive meaning, such as “in effect.” I have broken up sentences with many clauses to avoid what in English is considered a “run-on” sentence. That has involved changing punctuation accordingly. Certain French words, such as “morale,” have multiple meanings or different meanings from the English; I have tried to explain these in footnotes.

    I have used terms that are avoided today, such as “illegitimate,” because they capture the tone of the discourse of the times. The same is true regarding gender-neutral pronouns. Nineteenth-century writing used a firm “he” for the human. Also, categories referenced by male pronouns often were in fact uniformly male in composition. To convert these to suit present-day sensibilities would be essentially inaccurate as a characterization of the times.

    In the bibliography and in citations in the text, I have used the French system of capitalization for works written in French. The fact that Durkheim is French is not coincidental to my deciding to write this book. When Professor Fabio DaSilva of Notre Dame suggested Durkheim as a paper topic in his theory class, I was not excited. Emile Durkheim was not even my classical theorist of choice; I preferred Simmel. But Durkheim did have the advantage of being French. So what did that have to do with anything? A lot. Professor DaSilva knew that I read French and also that my chosen area of specialization was sociology of the family. He called my attention to an article by Georges Davy, Durkheim's student and later colleague, that summarized the notes Davy had taken on Durkheim's family course. I had not known of Durkheim's interest in the family and was intrigued. A class paper did not seem to be that much of a commitment.

    Some years later, I was at work on a book on Durkheim's sociology of the family, which is now completed. Forced (so to speak) to take a broader—and ultimately deeper—look at Durkheim's work, I developed an appreciation for his complex reasoning, his wide interests, his elucidation of so many ideas I had thought to be original with my contemporaries. I got to know a Durkheim who was not so apparent from secondary sources. I see limitations both to Durkheim's interests in the family and his theoretical approach. But he is always interesting, and I have enjoyed the time spent in putting this book together and trying to make it better.

    I also began to think of it as a mission. I was surprised to learn there was a Durkheim on the family; who wouldn't have been? I wanted to let others know. That is what I have tried to do in this book—to make varied audiences aware of Durkheim's writing (and speaking) on the family. I wanted not only to make its existence known but also to expand on that so that those who will not necessarily pursue original sources to find Durkheim's sociology of the family can nevertheless be somewhat informed on the subject.

    There is a personal satisfaction for me in a project that depends on working with French. That comes from personal history, the chance factor of growing up next door to a French professor, his wife, and their French-speaking children. I picked up some French by learning the lingo I needed for my baby-sitting job. Younger brothers of the professor came from Quebec for the summer. The visiting brothers, with time on their hands, taught me French vocabulary and grammar a little more systematically. Soon, I was off to college as a French major (for a time) and then to France to study political science and the European community. The Durkheim book project has meant that I could combine my two intellectual interests: sociology and the French language.

    I need to begin my acknowledgments with an appreciation for these former St. Louis neighbors, Henri Robitaille and Nancy (Robitaille) Moberly. It is a thanks that goes beyond the language opportunity to a recognition that it is they who prodded me to think of myself as an intellectual. I want to let Professor Emeritus Fabio DaSilva of the University of Notre Dame know that I have never forgotten his initiative in giving me the idea for what has now become a book. He could do that because of his amazing knowledge of the field of sociology and his skill at inspiring his students.

    Ideas need a venue for their expression, and it is through Bert Adams and Dave Klein and the Understanding Families series that I have been able to write about Durkheim's sociology of the family with the prospect of an audience. They took an interest in Emile Durkheim on the Family when it was still somewhat unformed, far from complete. They have been totally encouraging and very patient during the process of writing the book. Their critical feedback and that of an anonymous reviewer have contributed to great improvement of the manuscript over its starting point. (Though they are, of course, not responsible for remaining faults or inadequacies.) I am honored to be included in the quality series that they have put together as Understanding Families. They have been a pleasure to work with as series editors, very thoughtful and quite stimulating intellectually.

    I also want to thank the editorial and production people at Sage Publications for their work in bringing my book to publication. Jim Brace-Thompson, Sociology Editor, who took over a project in progress, has been very good to work with—very supportive in the final stages of book completion. Karen Ehrmann, Editorial Assistant, handled the transition from manuscript submission to production process smoothly, all the while fielding my numerous questions. Diana Axelsen, Senior Production Editor, and Kathryn Journey, Editorial Assistant, have managed the production process competently and well. I am most directly aware of the work of Marilyn Power Scott, copy editor, because we have had frequent and detailed communication. Her questions and suggestions have contributed greatly to the substance of the book, improving clarity and smoothing wording to enhance the presentation of my ideas. Her adeptness in handling the French language references and the numerous quotations were but one aspect of a professional competence evident to me in every detail of our correspondence. Doreen Barnes, typesetter, did a beautiful—and accurate—job of putting the manuscript into print. Thanks to you all and to unknown others at Sage who have worked on Emile Durkheim on the Family.

    There are other persons who have contributed to the book in important ways. I am enormously grateful to M. Etienne Halphen, Emile Durkheim's grandson, who sent family photos and gave permission for their use on the cover and in the interior of the book. I am very happy to be able to include these informal photos of M. Durkheim with his wife, daughter (M. Halphen's mother), a grandson, and other family members in a book that has Durkheim's work on the family as its theme. I thank M. Halphen for making this possible and for responding to my request so quickly. I am also very indebted to Geoff Alpert (whose father was Durkheim's biographer) without whom I would not even have known of the existence of these photos. And I thank Stjepan Meštrović (author of three books on Durkheim), who took considerable time and trouble to tell me about Durkheim family photos, to mail me photos several times over, and, in general, to express enthusiasm for the book and offer practical support for its aesthetics.

    Thanks to Stephen Turner and to Rebecca Emigh for sending me papers useful in reflecting on Durkheim's work. Every now and then, I mentioned my book project to Bob Antonio of the University of Kansas, and he was always affirming. I owe a huge debt to the University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO) Interlibrary Loan Department, and I would like to list by name those who did work related to my book: Ben Blackwell, Diane Davis, Molly Fairchild, Jason Gaines, Steve Hunt, Mary Mick, Matt Rohde, John Schneiderman, Catherine Walker, Madaline Williams, and Richard Wyatt. A book whose sources are primarily French and from earlier in the century is a challenge in terms of library resources. The UNO library has some surprising things, including a facsimile edition of Année sociologique. But I was very dependent on interlibrary loan resources, and this group filled hundreds of requests, many for obscure French titles, and some of them several times over as I thought of one more thing that needed checking. The UNO Sociology and Anthropology Department has provided me with resources, and more important, with good colleagues.

    Numerous friends encouraged me throughout this project, and to attempt to name them one by one would be to risk not including all who should be. At UNO, I would mention especially Lourdes Gouveia, my sociology colleague and friend, and Elvira Garcia and Patrice Proulx, who keep me in touch with the French language. Margaret Porter, Diane and Joe Wood, Diane and Mike Gillespie, Mary Tourek, Jenny White, Catharine Krull, Mary and Pat Sweaney, Susan Poser, and Steve di Magno have helped me finish this book by their friendship, which has kept me going through a long project. My children, Valerie Lamanna and Larry Lamanna, and Janice, his wife, have always helped me to see the world beyond the office.

    And finally, to my companion and friend of twenty years, Sam Walker, to whom this book is dedicated, thanks for finding this book an admirable project, for encouraging and supporting my work on it in so many ways, and for being a model as a scholar.

    Dedicated to Sam

  • References

    Works by Durkheim
    Buisson, Ferdinand and EmileDurkheim. 1911. “Enfance.” Pp. 552–53 in Nouveau dictionnaire de pédagogie et d'instruction primaire, edited by FerdinandBuisson. Paris: Hachette.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1885. Review of A. Schaeffle, Bau und Leben des Sozialem Körpers, vol. 1. Revue philosophiqueXIX:84–101.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1886. Review of de Greef, Guillaume, Introduction à la sociologie, 1ème Partie, Paris and Brussels. Revue philosophiqueXXII:658–63.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1888a. “Introduction à la sociologie de la famille.”Annales de la Faculté des Lettres de Bordeaux10:257–81.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1888b. “Suicide et natalité: étude de statistique morale.”Revue philosophiqueXXVI:446–63.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1889. Review of Ferdinand Tönnies, Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft: Abhandlung des Communismus und des Socialismus als empirischer Culturformen. Revue philosophiqueXXVII:416–422.
    Durkheim, Emile. [1893] 1978. De la division du travail social. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France [Alcan].
    Durkheim, Emile. [1895a] 1956. Les Règles de la méthode sociologique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France [Alcan].
    Durkheim, Emile. 1895b. “Revue critique: L'Origine du mariage dans l'espèce humaine, d'après Westermarck.”Revue philosophiqueXL:606–23.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1895c. “Lo stato attuale degli studi sociologici in Francia.”La riforma socialeIII: 607–622; 691–707. Pp. 73–108 in Emile Durkheim: Textes, vol. 1, edited by VictorKarady. Paris: Les Editions de minuit, 1975.
    Durkheim, Emile. [1897a] 1930. Le suicide: Étude de sociologie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France [Alcan].
    Durkheim, Emile. 1897b. “Il suicidio dal punto di vista sociologico.”Rivista italiana di sociologicaI:17–27. [Italian translation of pp. 1–15 of Emile Durkheim, Le suicide, slightly modified.].
    Durkheim, Emile. 1897c. Review of Antonio Labriola, Essais sur la conception matérialiste de l'histoire, Paris: Girard et Brière. Revue philosophiqueXLIV:645–51.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898a. “L'individualisme et les intellectuels.”Revue bleue (4e série)X:7–13. (Also cited as Revue politique et littéraire).
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898b. “Préface.”Année sociologiqueI:i–vii.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898c. “La Prohibition de l'inceste et ses origines.”Année sociologiqueI:1–70.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898d. Letter to the Editor. American Journal of Sociology3:848–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/ajs.1898.3.issue-6
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898e. Review of B. H. Baden-Powell, The Indian Village Community, London: Longmans, Green, 1896. Année sociologiqueI:359–63.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898f. Review of Ernest Grosse, Die Formen der Familie und die Formen der Wirthschaft, Fribourg-en-Brisgau: Mohr. Année sociologiqueI:319–32.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898g. Review of Jobbé-Duval, “La Commune annamite,” Nouvelle Revue historique de droit français et étranger, Oct., Dec. 1896. Année sociologiqueI: 363–66.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898h. Review of Joseph Kohler, Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe. Totemismus, Gruppenehe, Mutterrecht, vol. 1, Stuttgart: Enke. Année sociologiqueI:306–19.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898i. Review of Ed. Meynial, “Le Mariage après les invasions,” Nouvelle Revue historique de droit français et étranger (1896:4, 6; 1897:2). Année sociologiqueI:340–43.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1898j. Review of Ernest Miler, “Die Hauskommunion der Südslaven,” 1897, pp. 199–222 in Jahrbuch der Internationalen Vergleichen de Rechtswissenschaft und Volkswirtschaftelehre, Division I. Année sociologiqueI:339.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899a. “Antisémitisme et crise sociale.” Pp. 59–63 in H.Dagan, Enquête sur l'antisémitisme. Paris: Stock.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899b. “Morphologie sociale.”Année sociologiqueII:520–21.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899c. “Préface.”Année sociologiqueII:i–vi.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899d. Review of W. v. Bulow, “Die Ehegesetze der Samoaner,” Globus 73:185ff. Année sociologiqueII:343.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899e. Review of Stanislas Ciszewski, Künstliche Verwandtschaft bei Den Südslaven, Dissertation, University of Leipzig, 1897. Année sociologiqueII:321–23.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899f. Review of A. Lefas, “L'Adoption testamentaire à Rome,” Nouvelle Revue historique de droit français et étranger, No. 6. 1897. Année sociologiqueII:325–27.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899g. Review of D. Théophil Loebel, Hochzeitsbräuche in der Türkei, Amsterdam: J.-H. de Bussy, n.d. Année sociologiqueII:334–36.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899h. Review of K. Heinrich Schaible, Die Frau im Altertum, Karlsruhe: Braun, 1896. Année sociologiqueII:313–14.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1899i. Review of W. I. Thomas, “The Relationship of Sex to Primitive Social Control,”American Journal of Sociology3 (1898):754–76. Année sociologiqueII:328–329.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900a. Review of Franz Boas, The Social Organization and the Secret Societies of the Kwakiutl Indians. Année sociologiqueIII:336–40.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900b. Review of Arsène Dumont, Natalité et démocratie, Paris: Schleicher, 1898. Année sociologiqueIII:558–61.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900c. Review of J. Goldstein, Die vermeintlichen und die wirklichen Ursachen des Bevoelkerungsstillstandes in Frankreich, Munich: Piloty & Loehle, 1989. Année sociologiqueIII:561–63.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900d. Review of N. Klugmann, Vergleichende Studien zur Stellung Frau im Talmud, Frankfurt: Kauffmann, 1898. Année sociologiqueIII:388–89.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900e. Review of Anna Lampérière, Le rôle social de la femme, Paris: Alcan, 1898. Année sociologiqueIII:390–91.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900f. Review of Victor Marx, Die Stellung der Frauen in Babylonien, Leipzig: Pries, 1989. Année sociologiqueIII:389–90.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900g. Review of A. Posada, Feminismo, Madrid: Fé, 1899. Année sociologiqueIII:391.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900h. Review of Prinzing, “Die Sterblichkeit der Ledigen und der Verheirateten,” Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv, vol. 1, Halband. Année sociologiqueIII:563.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900i. Review of G. B. Salvioni, “Zur Statistik der Haushaltungen,” pp. 191–236 in Allgemeines Statistiche Archiv, vol. 1. Année sociologiqueIII:571–73.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900j. Review of C.-V. Starke, La famille dans les différentes sociétés, Paris: Giard et Brière, 1899. Année sociologiqueIII:365–70.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900k. Review of Thorstein Veblen, The Beginnings of Ownership. Année sociologiqueIII:398.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1900l. Review of Thorstein Veblen, “The Barbarian Status of Women,” American Journal of Sociology 4 (1899):503–15. Année sociologiqueIII:392.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901a. “Introduction” [to the section on] “Sociologie criminelle et statistique morale.”Année sociologiqueIV:433–36.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901b. Review of Albert Cahuzac, Essai sur les institutions et le droit malgaches, vol. 1. Paris: Chevalier-Maresq, 1900. Année sociologiqueIV:342–45.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901c. Review of Alfred Fouilleé, La France au point de vue moral, Paris: Alcan, 1900. Année sociologiqueIV:443–45.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901d. Review of J.-G. Fraser, “Suggestions as to the Origin of Gender in Language,” The Fortnightly Review (Jan. 1900):79–90. Année sociologiqueIV:364–65.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901e. Review of Ludwig Fuld, “Die frauen und das Bürgerliche Gesetzbuch,” Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, 1900, No. 4. Année sociologiqueIV:365.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901f. Review of Paul Kollmann, “Die sociale Zusammensetzung der Bevoelkerung im Deutschen Reiche,” Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Volkswirtschaft (1900):59–107. Année sociologiqueIV:436–38.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901g. Review of Friedrich Lindner, Die unehelichen Geburten als Socialphaenomon, Leipzig: A Deichert, 1900. Année sociologiqueIV:441–43.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901h. Review of Jacques Lourbet, Le problème des sexes, Paris: Giard et Briére, 1900. Année sociologiqueIV:364.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901i. Review of Prinzing, “Die sociale Lage der Witwe in Deutschland;” Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, 1900, No. 2:96–109; No. 3:199–205; “Grundzúge und Kosten eines Gesetzes über die Fürsorge für die Witwen und Waisen der Arbeiter, Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, 1900, No. 4:262–77. Année sociologiqueIV:438–40.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901j. Review of W. Rein, “Jugendliches Verbrechertum und seine Bekaempfung,” Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, 1900, No. 1:41–57. Année sociologiqueIV:451–52.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1901k. Review of Fritz Roeder, Die Familie bei den Angelsachsen, Halle: Niemeyer, 1899. Année sociologiqueIV:357–58.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902a. “Quelques remarques sur les groupements professionels.” “Préface.” Pp. i–xxxvi in De la division du travail social,
    2d ed.
    Paris: Alcan.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902b. “Sur le totémisme.”Année sociologiqueV:82–121.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902c. Review of J. Bertillon, “Nombre d'enfants par famille,” Journal de la société de statistique de Paris (1901), No. 4:130–45. Année sociologiqueV:435–36.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902d. Review of Ernest Crawley, The Mystic Rose: A Study of Primitive Marriage, London: Macmillan, 1902. Année sociologiqueVI:352–58.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902e. Review of de J. Du Plessis Grenédan, Histoire de l'autorité paternelle et de la société familiale en France avant 1789, Paris: Artur Rousseau, 1900. Année sociologiqueV:376–79.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902f. Review of Havelock Ellis, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Philadelphia: Davis, 1901. Année sociologiqueV:392.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902g. Review of Freidrich Prinzing, “Die eheliche Fruchtbarkeit in Deutschland,” Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft 1901, Issue 1:336–338; Issue 2:290–311; Issue 3:188–90. Année sociologiqueV:436–37.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1902h. Review of Félix Dupré la Tour, De la recherche de la paternité en droit comparé, Paris: Rousseau, 1900. Année sociologiqueV:379–81.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1903a. Review of R. Caillemer, Origines et développement de l'exécution testamentaire, Lyon: 1901. Année sociologiqueVI:345–50.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1903b. Review of Maurice Courant, En Chine: moeurs et institutions, Paris: 1901. Année sociologiqueVI:367–69.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1903c. Review of A. Esmein, “Les coutumes primitives dans les écrits mythologiques grecs et romains,” Nouvelle revue historique de droit français et étranger 5–32; 113–46. Année sociologiqueVI:359–61.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1903d. Review of Abel Pouzol, La recherche de la paternité: Etude critique de la sociologie et de législation comparée, Paris: Giard et Brière, 1902. Annèe sociologiqueVI:415–18.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1903e. Review of William Rullkoeter, The Legal Protection of Woman Among the Ancient Germans, Chicago: 1900. Année sociologiqueVI: 366.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1903f. Review of C.-A. Stuart Verrijn. “Untersuchungen über die Beziehung zwischen Wohlstand, Natalität und Kindersterblichkeit in den Niederlanden,” Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, 1901, Issue 10:649–62. Année sociologiqueVI:546–47.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904a. “L'Elite intellectuelle et la démocratie. Revue bleue 5ème, 1. No. 23 (June 4):705–706.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904b. “La Sociologie et les sciences sociales.” Resumé d'une conference à l'Ecole des hautes études sociales à Paris (1903). Revue internationale de sociologieXII: 83–87.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904c. Remarks at oral examination of doctoral candidate Glotz on “Solidarity of the Family in the Criminal Law of Ancient Greece.”Revue de PhilosophieIV (2) (Oct.). Translation (by Lukes) pp. 624–26 in Steven Lukes, Emile Durkheim. New York: Harper, 1972.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904d. Review of Max Bauer, Das Geschlechtsleben in der deutschen Vergangenheit, Leipzig, 1902. Année sociologiqueVII:439–40.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904e. Review of E. Glasson. Histoire du droit et des institutions de la France, vol. VIII Epoque Monarchique, Paris: F. Pichon, 1902. Année sociologiqueVII: 428–33.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904f. Review of Charles Letourneau, La condition de la femme dans les diverses races et civilisations, Paris: Giard et Brière, n.d. Année sociologiqueVII:433–34.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904g. Review of E. Maurel, Causes de notre dépopulation, Paris: Doin. Année sociologiqueVII:655.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904h. Review of Richard Niese, “Das Personnen—und Familienrecht der Suaheli,” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 16:203–48, Stuttgart, 1903. Année sociologiqueVII:420–23.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904i. Review of Pierre-André Pidoux, Histoire du mariage et du droit des gens mariés en Franche-Comté, Dôle: 1902. Année sociologiqueVII:436–38.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904j. Review of Hans Stockar, Ueber den Entzug der vaeterlichen Gewalt im roemischen Recht, Zurich: Schulthess, 1903. Année sociologiqueVII:427–28.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1904k. Review of Max Thal, Mutterrecht, Frauenfrage und Weltanschauung, Breslau: Schottlander, 1903. Année sociologiqueVII:418.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905a. “Sur l'organisation matrimoniale des sociétés australiennes.”Année sociologiqueVIII:118–47.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905b. “Le Problème de la solidarité familial et du totémisme chez les Hébreux.” Resumé du débat à la soutenance de thèse de L. Germain-Lévy. Revue de Philosophie V:486–89. Pp. 130–33 in Emile Durkheim. Textes, vol. 2. Edited by VictorKarady. Paris: Les Editions de minuit.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905c. Review of Gustave Glotz, La Solidarité de la famille dans le droit criminel en Grèce, Paris: Funtemoing, 1904. Année sociologiqueVIII:465–72.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905d. Review of Clément Juglar, Tableau des naissances en France, en Angleterre, en Prusse, en Allemagne, et dans leurs capitales, Orléans: Paul Pigelet, 1903:20 in 8r (Extrait du compte rendu de l'Academie des sciences morales et politiques). Année sociologiqueVIII:616–17.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905e. Review of A.-N. Kiaer, Statistische Beitraege zur Beleuchtung der ehelichen Fruchbarkeit, Christiana: Jacob Dybwad, 1903. Année sociologiqueVIII:618–19.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905f. Review of Fusamaro Tsugaru, Die Lehre von der Japanischen Adoption, Berlin: Mayer and Müller. Année sociologiqueVIII:409–13.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1905g. Review of Kojiro Twasaky, Das japonische Eherecht, Leipzig: 1904 and of Saburo Sakamoto, Das Ehescheidungsrecht Japans, Berlin: 1903. Année sociologiqueVIII:421–25.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1906a. “Le Divorce par consentement mutuel.”Revue bleue, 5e série, V:549–54.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1906b. Review of George Elliott Howard, A History of Maltrimonial Institutions, 3 vols, London: Fisher Unwin; Chicago: Callahan. Année sociologiqueIX:384–92.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1906c. Review of Othmar Spann, “Die Stiefvaterfamilie unehelichen Ursprungs. Zugleich eine Studie zur Methodologie der Unehelichkeits-Statistik, Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft (1904):539–74. Année sociologiqueIX:435–38.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1906d. Review of Alfred Valensi, L'application de la loi du divorce en France, Paris: Larose et Tenin, 1905. Année sociologiqueIX:438–43.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1906e. Review of Edward Westermarck, “The Position of Women in Early Civilization,” American Journal of Sociology 10 (1904):408–21. Année sociologiqueIX:380.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1907a. “Deuxième Lettre de M. Durkheim.”Revue néo-scolastiqueXIV:612–14.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1907b. Review of James Bryce, Marriage and Divorce, New York: Oxford University Press, 1905. Année sociologiqueX:436–37.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1907c. Review of Thad. Engert, Ehe-und-Familienrecht der Hebräer, München, Lenther'sche Buchhandlung 1905. Année sociologiqueX:427–29.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1907d. Review of Henri Guigon, La succession des bâtards dans l'ancienne Bourgogne, Dijon: 1905. Année sociologiqueX:435–36.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1907e. Review of Edward Westermarck, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, vol. 1, London: Macmillan 1906. Année sociologiqueX:383–95.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1908. Débat sur l'explication en histoire et en sociologie. Bulletin de la société française de philosophieVIII:229–45, 347.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1909a. “Sociologie et sciences sociales.” Pp. 259–85 in De la Méthode dans les Sciences, 1ère série, edited by FélixAlcan. Paris: Alcan.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1909b. Contribution to discussion of “Mariage et divorce.” Pp. 258–59, 261–62, 266–68, 270, 273, 277–83, 293 in Libres entretiens: Questions relatives à la condition Economique et Juridique des Femmes. Paris: Union pour la vérité.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910a. Contribution to discussion of “La Notion d'égalité sociale” (Dec. 30, 1909). Bulletin de la société française de philosophie10:59–63, 65–67, 69–70. Translated as “A Debate on Egalitarian Ideas.” Pp. 86–193 in Emile Durkheim, On Politics and the State, edited by Anthony Giddens. Translated by W. D. Halls. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1986.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910b. Review of Georg Buschan, Geschlecht und Verbrechen, Berlin and Leipzig, Hermann Seemann, n.d. Année sociologiqueXI:492–94.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910c. Review of Joseph Kohler, “Ueber Totemismus und Urehe.” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenshaft XIX:177–88; “Eskimo und Gruppenehe,” Z.f.v.R. XIX:423–32; “Nochmals ueber Gruppenehe und Totemismus,” Z.f.v.R. XIX:252–67. Année sociologiqueXI:359–61.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910d. Review of H. A. Krose, Die Ursachen der Selbstmordäufhigkeit, Freiburg: B. Herder, 1906. Année sociologiqueXI:511–15.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910e. Review of Alfred Obrist, Essai sur les origines du testament romain, Lausanne: 1906. Année sociologiqueXI:352–54.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910f. Review of Gaston Richard, La femme dans l'histoire, Paris: 1909. Année sociologiqueXI:369–71.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910g. Review of Alexa Stanischitsch, Ueber den Ursprung der Zadruga: Eine Soziologische Untersuchung, Bern: Buchdruckeri Scheitlin, Spring and Co., 1907. Année sociologiqueXI:343–47.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910h. Review of Otto Stoll, Das Geschlechtsleben in der Voelkerpsychologie, Leipzig: Viet, 1908. Année sociologiqueXI:375–83.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1910i. Review of Marianne Weber, Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung. Année sociologiqueXI:363–69.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1911. Contribution to discussion of “L' Education sexuelle.” Bulletin de la societé française de philosophie XI:33–38, 44–47. Pp. 241–51 in Emile Durkheim, Textes, vol. 2. Paris: Les Editions de minuit, 1975.
    Durkheim, Emile. [1912] 1979. Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France [Alcan].
    Durkheim, Emile. 1913a. Review of Gaëtan Aubéry, La Communauté de biens conjugale, Paris: Pichon et Durand-Auzias, 1911. Année sociologiqueXII:434–37.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1913b. Review of Franz Boas, The Mind of Primitive Man, New York: Macmillan. Année sociologiqueXII:31–33.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1913c. Review of Richard Gebhard, Russisches Familien-und Erb-recht, Berlin: Guttentag, 1910. Année sociologiqueXII:424–26.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1913d. Review of Otto Opet, Brauttradition und Consensgespräch in mittelalterischen Trauungsritualen, Berlin: Vahlen, 1910. Année sociologiqueXII:433.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1915a. L'Allemagne au-dessus de tout: La mentalité allemande et la guerre. Paris: Colin.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1915b. “La Sociologie.” Pp. 39–49 in La science française, vol. 1. Paris: Larousse. For the “Exposition universelle et internationale de San Francisco.”.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1917. “Durkheim (André-Armand).” L'Annuaire de l'association amicale des anciens élèves de l'Ecole Normale Supérieure. Pp. 446–52 in Emile Durkheim: Textes, vol. 1, edited by VictorKarady. Paris: Les Editions de minuit, 1975.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1921. “La famille conjugale.”Revue philosophiqueXC:1–14. Edited with notes by Marcel Mauss.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1922. Education et Sociologie. Paris: Alcan.
    Durkheim, Emile. [1925] 1974. L'éducation morale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France [Alcan].
    Durkheim, Emile. [1938] 1969. L'Evolution Pédagogique en France,
    2ème ed.
    Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1950. Leçons de sociologie: physique des moeurs et du droit. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; Istanbul: Université d'Istanbul. Translated by Cornelia Brookfield as Professional Ethics and Civic Morals. London: Routledge, 1957.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1973. “Lettres d'Emile Durkheim à Georges Davy.” Pp. 299–313 in L'homme; le fait social et le fait politique, edited by GeorgesDavy. Paris: Mouton.
    Durkheim, Emile. 1986. Durkheim on Politics and the State, edited by AnthonyGiddens. Translated by W. D.Halls. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    Durkheim, Emile and A.Bianconi. 1913. Review of Torday and Joyce, “Notes ethnographiques sur les peuples communément appelés Bakuba, ainsi que sur les peuplades apparentées Les Bushongo,”Annales du Musée du Congo belges, Bruxelles: Spineux, 1911 and
    Hilton-Simpson, Land and Peoples of the Kasai, London: Constable, 1911. Année sociologiqueXII:384–90.
    Durkheim, Emile and E.Denis. 1915. Qui a voulu la guerre?: L'origines de la guerre d'après les documents diplomatiques. Paris: Colin.
    Durkheim, Emile and PaulFauconnet. 1903. “Sociologie et sciences sociales.”Revue philosophiqueLV:465–97.
    Durkheim, Emile and MarcelMauss. 1903. “De quelques formes primitives de classification: contribution à l'étude des representations collectives.”Année sociologiqueVI:1–72.
    Works by other Authors
    Abercrombie, Nicholas, StephenHill, and Bryan S.Turner. 1994. The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology, 3d ed.London: Penguin.
    Abrams, Philip. 1982. Historical Sociology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    Acock, Alan C. and David H.Demo. 1994. Family Diversity and Well-Being. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Adams, Bert N.1968. Kinship in an Urban Setting. Chicago: Markham.
    Adams, Bert N.1971. The American Family: A Sociological Interpretation. Chicago: Markham.
    Adams, Bert N.1995. The Family: A Sociological Interpretation,
    5th ed.
    New York: Harcourt Brace.
    Adams, Bert N. and SuzanneSteinmetz. 1993. “Family Theory and Methods in the Classics.” Pp. 71–94 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by Pauline G.Boss, William J.Doherty, RalphLaRossa, Walter R.Schumm, and Suzanne K.Steinmetz. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_3
    Adams, Bert N. and R.A.Sydie. 2001. Sociological Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
    Ahrons, Constance. 1994. The Good Divorce: Keeping Your Family Together When Your Marriage Comes Apart,
    rev. ed.
    New York: Harper.
    Aldous, Joan. 1972. “An Exchange between Durkheim and Tönnies on the Nature of Social Relations, with an Introduction by Joan Aldous.”American Journal of Sociology77:1191–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/ajs.1972.77.issue-6
    Aldous, Joan. 1991. “In the Families' Ways.”Contemporary Sociology20:660–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2072174
    Alexander, Jeffrey C.1982. The Antonomies of Classical Thought, vol. 2. Marx and Durkheim. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Aldous, Joan. 1985. Neofunctionalism. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Alexander, Jeffrey C., ed. 1988. Durkheimian Sociology: Cultural Studies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598258
    Allen, Katherine R., RosemaryBlieszner, and Karen A.Roberto. 2000. “Families in the Middle and Later Years: A Review and Critique of Research in the 1990s.”Journal of Marriage and the Family62:911–926. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00911.x
    Alpert, Harry. [1939] 1961. Emile Durkheim and His Sociology. New York: Russell and Russell.
    Alpert, Harry. 1974. Review of Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work, by Steven Lukes.
    Harper and Row, 1972. Contemporary Sociology3:198–200.
    A. M. P. 1997. “The Ups and Downs of Testosterone.”Psychology Today, November/December, p. 18.
    Andrews, Howard F.1993. “Durkheim and Social Morphology.” Pp. 111–35 in Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Moralist, edited by Stephen P.Turner. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203168257_chapter_5
    Areen, Judith. 1992. Cases and Materials on Family Law,
    3d ed.
    Westbury, NY: Foundation Press.
    Ariès, Phillipe. 1962. Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. New York: Knopf.
    Bachofen, J. J. [1861] 1948. Das Mutterrecht. Basel: Benno Schwabe.
    Bachofen, J. J. [1880] 1966. Antiquarische Briefe. Basel: Schwabe.
    Bainville, Jacques. 1924. Histoire de France. Paris: Arthème Fayard.
    Bamberger, Joan. 1974. “The Myth of Matriarchy: Why Men Rule in Primitive Society.” Pp. 263–280 in Women, Culture, and Society, edited by Michelle Z.Rosaldo and LouiseLamphere. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    Bane, Mary Jo. 1976. Here to Stay: American Families in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic.
    Bartholet, Elizabeth. 1993. Adoption and the Politics of ParentingBoston: Houghton-Mifflin.
    Bartlett, Katharine T.1988. “Re-Expressing Parenthood.”Yale Law Journal98:293–430. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/796703
    Bartlett, Katharine T.1999. “Improving the Law Relating to Postdivorce Arrangements for Children.” Pp. 71–102 in The Postdivorce Family: Children, Parenting, and Society, edited by Ross A.Thompson and Paul R.Amato. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452234038
    Bartos, O. J.1996. “Postmodernism, Postindustrialism, and the Future.”The Sociological Quarterly37:307–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1996.tb01751.x
    Baumrind, Diana. 1971. “Current Patterns of Parental Authority.”Developmental Psychology Monograph4:1–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0030372
    Beauvoir, Simone de. [1949] 1978. The Second Sex. New York: Knopf.
    Becker, Gary. 1960. “An Economic Analysis of Fertility.” Pp. 209–40 in Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries for National Bureau of Economic Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Becker, Gary. 1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Bedford, Victoria Hilkevitch. 1995. “Sibling Relationships in Middle and Old Age.” Pp. 201–22 in Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences, edited by RosemaryBlieszner and Victoria H.Bedford. Westport, CN: Greenwood.
    Bell, Norman W. and Ezra F.Vogel, eds. 1960. A Modern Introduction to the Family. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Bellah, Robert N.1959. “Durkheim and History.”American Sociological Review24:447–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2089531
    Bellah, Robert N.1973. “Introduction.” Pp. ix–lv in Emile Durkheim on Morality and Society: Selected Writings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Bellah, Robert N., RichardMadsen, William M.Sullivan, AnnSwidler, and Steven M.Tipton. 1985. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Bendix, Reinhard. 1968. “Max Weber.” Pp. 493–502 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 16, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Berger, Peter I. and HansfriedKellner. 1970. “Marriage and the Construction of Reality.” Pp. 49–73 in Recent Sociology No. 2, edited by Hans-PeterDreitzel. New York: Macmillan.
    Bernard, Jessie. 1986. “The Good-Provider Role: Its Rise and Fall.” Pp. 125–44 in Family in Transition,
    5th ed.
    , edited by ArleneS. and Jerome H.Skolnick. Boston: Little, Brown.
    Bernstein, Richard. 1990. Fragile Glory: A Portrait of France and the French. New York: Knopf.
    Bertillon, Jacques. 1880. La statistique humaine de la France: Naissance, mariage, mort. Paris: Baillère.
    Besnard, Philippe. 1973. “Durkheim et les femmes ou le Suicide inachevé.”Revue française de sociologieXIV:27–61.
    Besnard, Philippe. 1982. “A New Revised Durkheim.”Contemporary Sociology11:509–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2068389
    Besnard, Philippe, ed. 1983. The Sociological Domain: The Durkheimians and the Founding of French Sociology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Besnard, Philippe ed. 1993a. “Anomie and Fatalism in Durkheim's Theory of Regulation.” Pp. 169–90 in Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Moralist, edited by Stephen P.Turner. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203168257_chapter_7
    Besnard, Philippe1993b. “When Was L'Education Morale Written?/De quand date l'Education morale?”Durkheim Studies/Etudes durkheimiennes5:8–10.
    Besnard, Philippe1996. Review of Jennifer M. Lehmann, Durkheim and Women. European Sociological Review12:106–107.
    Besnard, Philippe1997. “Mariage et suicide: la théorie durkheimienne de la régulation conjugale à l'épreuve d'un siècle.”Revue française de sociologieXXXVIII:735–58.
    Besnard, Philippe and MarcelFournier. 1998. “Introduction.” Pp. 1–19 in Emile Durkheim, Lettres à Marcel Mauss, presentées par Philippe Besnard et Marcel Fournier. Paris: Presses Universaires de France.
    Binford, Lewis and SallyBinford. 1966. “A Preliminary Analysis of Functional Variability in the Mousterian of Levallois Facies.”American Anthropologist68:238–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/aa.1966.68.2.02a001030
    Black, Naomi. 1989. Social Feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    Blau, Peter M.1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley.
    Blumberg, Rae L. and Robert F.Winch. 1972. “Societal Complexity: Evidence for the Curvilinear Hypothesis.”American Journal of Sociology77:898–920. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/225230
    Bohl, Joan C.1997. “Family Autonomy vs. Grandparent Visitation: How Precedent Fell Prey to Sentiment in Herndon v. Tuhey.”Missouri Law Review62:755ff.
    Booth, Alan, ed. 1991. Contemporary Families: Looking Forward, Looking Back. Minneapolis, MN: National Council on Family Relations.
    Booth, Alan and Paul R.Amato. 1997. A Generation at Risk: Growing Up in an Era of Family Upheaval. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Booth, Alan, KarenCarver, and Douglas A.Granger. 2000. “Biosocial Perspectives on the Family.”Journal of Marriage and the Family62:1018–1034. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01018.x
    Boss, Pauline, William J.Doherty, Ralph L.LaRossa, Walter R.Schumm, and Suzanne K.Steinmetz. 1993. Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0
    Bottoms v. Bottoms. S.C. of Virginia. 1995. 249 Va 410, 457 S.E.2d 102.
    Boulding, Elise. 1977. Women in the Twentieth Century World. New York: Halsted (Sage).
    Bourgin, Hubert. 1913a. Review of Edith Abbott, Women in Industry: A Study In American Economic History, New York: Appleton. Année sociologiqueXII: 760.
    Bourgin, Hubert. 1913b. Review of Elizabeth Beardsley Butler, Saleswomen in the Mercantile Store 1909: New York: Charities Publishing Co., 1911. Année sociologiqueXII:762.
    Bourgin, Hubert. 1913c. Review of Elizabeth Beardsley Butler, Women and the Trades, Pittsburgh 1907–08, New York: Charities Publishing Co., 1911. Année sociologiqueXII: 761–62.
    Boxer, Marilyn. 1981. “When Radical and Socialist Feminism Were Joined: The Extraordinary Failure of Madeleine Pelletier.” Pp. 51–73 in European Women on the Left, edited by JaneSlaughter and RobertKern. Westport, CN: Greenwood.
    Bridenthal, Renate. 1982. “The Family: The View from a Room of Her Own.” Pp. 225–39 in Rethinking the Family: Some Feminist Issues, edited by BarrieThorne. New York: Longmans.
    Brines, Julie and KaraJoyner. 1999. “The Ties That Bind: Principles of Cohesion in Cohabitation and Marriage.”American Sociological Review64:333–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2657490
    Broderick, Carlfred. 1971. “Beyond the Five Conceptual Frameworks: A Decade of Development in Family Theory.”Journal of Marriage and the Family33:139–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/350161
    Broderick, Carlfred. 1993. Understanding Family Process: Basics of Family Systems Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Brody, Jane E.1998. “Genetic Ties May be Factor in Violence in Stepfamilies.”New York Times, February 10, pp. B9, B12.
    Brogan, D. W.1966. The Development of Modern France, Vol.1. From the Fall of Empire to the Dreyfus Affair. New York: Harper.
    Brooks v. Parkerson. Ga. S.C. 1995. 265 Ga. 189, 454 S.E.2d 769.
    Brown, Clair Vickery. 1982. “Home Production for Use in a Market Economy.” Pp. 151–67 in Rethinking the Family: Some Feminist Issues, edited by BarrieThorne. New York: Longmans.
    Buehler, Cheryl. 1995. “Divorce Law in the United States.” Pp. 99–120 in Families and Law, edited by Lisa J.McIntyre and Marvin B.Sussman. New York: Haworth.
    Burgess, Ernest W. and Harvey J.Locke. [1945] 1960. The Family: From Institution to Companionship,
    2d ed.
    New York: American Book.
    Burgess, Ernest W. and PaulWallin. 1953. Engagement and Marriage. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
    Burns, Michael. 1991. Dreyfus: A Family Affair, From the French Revolution to the Holocaust. New York: HarperCollins.
    Burr, Wesley R.1973. Theory Construction and the Sociology of the Family. New York: John Wiley.
    Burr, Wesley R., ReubenHill, F.Ivan Nye, and Ira L.Reiss, eds. 1979a. Contemporary Theories About the Family, 2 vols. New York: Free Press.
    Burr, Wesley R., ReubenHill, F.Ivan Nye, and Ira L.Reiss1979b. “Introduction.” Pp. 3–16 in Contemporary Theories About the Family, vol. 1, edited by WesleyBurr et al. New York: Free Press.
    Bynder, Herbert. 1969. “Emile Durkheim and the Sociology of the Family.”Journal of Marriage and the Family31:527–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/349776
    Caldwell, John C.1999. “The Delayed Western Fertility Decline: An Examination of English-Speaking Countries.”Population and Development Review25:479–513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.1999.00479.x
    Campbell, Donald T. and Julian C.Stanley. 1966. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
    Carlson, Allen C.1988. Family Questions: Reflections on the American Social Crisis. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Carlson, Allen C.1993. From Cottage to Work Station: The Family's Search for Social Harmony in the Industrial Age. San Francisco: Ignatius.
    Carlson, Allen C.1998. “The State's Assault on the Family.” Pp. 39–49 in The Family in Civil Society, edited by ChristopherWolfe. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
    Challenger, Douglas. 1996. Review of Jennifer M. Lehman, Durkheim and Women. Social Forces75:350–51.
    Charle, Christophe. 1984. “Le Beau Mariage d'Emile Durkheim.”Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales55:45–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/arss.1984.2238
    Chateaubriand, François R., Vicomte de. [1827] 1905. Atala. Boston: Heath.
    Cheal, David. 1988. “Theories of Serial Flow in Intergenerational Transfers.”International Journal of Aging and Human Development26:261–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/V2E8-UEAT-5MJ7-UQ6F
    Cherlin, Andrew J.1998. Public and Private Families. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
    Cherlin, Andrew J.2000. “Generation Ex-.”The Nation. December 11. Retrieved April 30, 2001(http://www.thenation.com).
    Christensen, Bryce. 1993. “Caring for America's Elderly: Washington's Way vs. Clinton's Way.”The Family in America8(11):1–8.
    Christensen, Harold T.1964a. “Development of the Family Field of Study.” Pp. 3–32 in Handbook of Marriage and the Family, edited by Harold T.Christensen. Chicago: Rand McNally.
    Christensen, Harold T., ed. 1964b. Handbook of Marriage and the Family. Chicago: Rand McNally.
    Cladis, Mark S.1992. A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and Contemporary Theory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    Cladis, Mark S.1995. Review of Jennifer Lehmann, Durkheim and Women, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
    1994. Philosophy of the Social Sciences25:535–39.
    Clark, Terry N.1968a. “Bertillon, Jacques.” Pp. 69–71 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 2, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Clark, Terry N.1968b. “Tarde, Gabriel.” Pp. 509–14 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 15, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Clark, Terry N.1973. Prophets and Patrons: The French University and the Emergence of the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Clignet, Remi. 1995. “Efficiency, Reciprocity, and Ascriptive Equality: The Major Strategies Governing the Selection of Heirs in America.”Social Science Quarterly76:274–93.
    Collier, Jane, Michelle Z.Rosaldo, and SylviaYanigisako. 1982. “Is There a Family? New Anthropological Views.” Pp. 25–39 in Rethinking the Family, edited by BarrieThorne. New York: Longmans.
    Concise Columbia Encyclopedia. 1994. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Connel-Thouez, Katherine. 1987. “Succession and the Family: Reflections on the Evolution of Social Structures, Fundamental Values, and Civil Law.”Canadian Journal of Family Law/Revue canadienne de droit familiale6:103–108.
    Connell, R.W.1997. “Why Is Classical Theory Classical?”American Journal of Sociology102:1511–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/231125
    Cooley, Charles H.1909. Human Organization. New York: Scribners.
    Coontz, Stephanie. 1992. The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. New York: Basic.
    Coontz, Stephanie. 1997. The Way We Really Are: Coming to Terms with America's Changing Families. New York: Basic.
    Coontz, Stephanie. 1999. “Divorcing Reality: New State Laws That Slow Down Divorce.” Pp. 377–79 in Sociology of Families: Readings, edited by CherylAlbers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
    Coontz, Stephanie. 2000. “Historical Perspectives on Family Studies.”Journal of Marriage and the Family62:283–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00283.x
    Cooper, David Graham. 1971. The Death of the Family. New York: Pantheon.
    Copley, Antony. 1988. Sexual Moralities in France, 1790–1980: New Ideas on Family, Divorce, and Homosexuality; An Essay on Moral Change. London: Routledge.
    Coser, Lewis A.1960. “Durkheim's Conservatism and Its Implications for Sociological Theory.” Pp. 211–32 in Emile Durkheim, 1858–1917; A Collection of Essays. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
    Cott, Nancy F.1986. “Feminist Theory and Feminist Movements: The Past Before Us.” Pp. 49–62 in What Is Feminism? edited by JulietMitchell and AnnOakley. New York: Pantheon.
    Cotterrell, Roger. 1991. “The Durkheimian Tradition in the Sociology of Law.”Law and Society Review25:923–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3053875
    Cova, Anne. 1991. “French Feminism and Maternity: Theories and Policies 1890–1918.” Pp. 119–37 in Maternity and Gender Policies: Women and the Rise of the European Welfare States, 1880s-1950s. London: Routledge.
    Cowan, Philip. 1993. “The Sky Is Falling, but Popenoe's Analysis Won't Help Us Do Anything About It.”Journal of Marriage and the Family55:548–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353336
    Craib, Ian. 1997. Classical Social Theory: An Introduction to the Thought of Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Simmel. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Crittenden, Danielle C.1999. What Our Mothers Didn't Tell Us: Why Happiness Eludes the Modern Woman. New York: Simon and Schuster.
    Danigelis, Nick and WhitneyPope. 1979. “Durkheim's Theory of Suicide as Applied to the Family: An Empirical Test.”Social Forces57:1081–106.
    Darwin, Charles. [1859] 1964. On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Daudet, Alphonse. 1927. “La dernière classe.” Pp. 4–12 in Contes de lundi, nouvelle ed. Paris: Charpentier.
    Davis, Kingsley and JudithBlake. 1956. “Social Structure and Fertility: An Analytical Framework.”Economic Development and Cultural Change4:211–235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/449714
    Davy, Georges. 1919. “Emile Durkheim: L'homme.”Revue de métaphysique et de morale26:181–98.
    Davy, Georges. 1925. “Vues sociologiques sur la famille et la parenté d'après Emile Durkheim.”Revue philosophique100:79–117.
    Davy, Georges. [1931] 1950. “La famille et la parenté d'après Durkheim.” Pp. 6–122 in Sociologues d'Hier et d'Aujourd'hui,
    2d ed.
    , edited by GeorgesDavy. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Reprint of Davy 1925.
    Degler, Carl N.1980. At Odds: Women and the Family in America From the Revolution to the Present. New York: Oxford.
    Degler, Carl N.1991. In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinian Social Thought. New York: Oxford.
    “Divorce, American Style.”2000. Letters from David Blankenhorn and Judith S. Wallerstein. Reply from Katha Pollitt. The Nation. December 4, pp. 43–44.
    Dixon, Suzanne. 1992. The Roman Family. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
    Dolgin, Janet L.1993. “Just a Gene: Judicial Assumptions About Parenthood.”UCLA Law Review40:637–94.
    Donzelot, Jacques. 1979. The Policing of Families. New York: Pantheon.
    Dorsey, James Owen. 1884. “Omaha Sociology.” Pp. 205–370, 595–606 in 3d Annual Report of the U.S. Bureau of Ethnography, 1891–92. Washington, DC: Bureau of Ethnography.
    Dörmann, Johannes. 1968. “Johann Jacob Bachofen.” Pp. 493–94 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 1, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    “Elian Decision Is Protested in Miami.”2000. New York Times. January 6, p. A16.
    Eller, Cynthia. 2000. The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Won't Give Women a Future. Boston: Beacon.
    Emigh, Rebecca Jean. 1994. “Cultural Anthropology and Formal Demography: A Sociological Treatment of Inheritance Strategies.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Society, August 8–9, San Francisco.
    Engels, Friedrich. [1884] 1972. The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State. Edited with an introduction by EleanorBurke Leacock. New York: International Publishers.
    Erickson, Victoria Lee. 1992. “Back to the Basics: Feminist Social Theory, Durkheim, and Religion.”Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion8: 35–46.
    Erickson, Victoria Lee. 1993. When Silence Speaks: Feminism, Social Theory, and Religion. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.
    Erlanger, Steven. 2000. “Birthrate Dips in Ex-Communist Countries.”New York Times, May 4, p. A8.
    Etzioni, Amitai. 1993. The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibilities and the Communitarian Agenda. New York: Crown.
    Evans, Sara M.1979. Personal Politics: The Roots of Women's Liberation in the Civil Rights Movement and the New Left. New York: Knopf.
    Farber, Bernard. 1964. Family Organization and Interaction. San Francisco: Chandler.
    Farber, Bernard. 1973. Family and Kinship in Modern Society. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
    Farber, Bernard. 1981. Conceptions of Kinship. New York: Elsevier.
    Farrington, Keith and ElyChertock. 1993. “Social Conflict Theories of the Family.” Pp. 357–81 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by PaulineBoss et al. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_15
    Fenton, Steve. 1984. Durkheim and Modern Sociology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Ferrante, Joan. 2000. Sociology: The United States in a Global Community. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Filloux, Jean-Claude. 1970. “Introduction.” Pp. 5–71 in Emile Durkheim, La science sociale et l'action, edited by Jean-ClaudeFilloux. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
    Filloux, Jean-Claude. 1976. “Il ne faut pas oublier que je suis fils de rabbin. Revue française de sociologie17:259–66.
    Filloux, Jean-Claude. 1977. Durkheim et le socialisme. Paris: Droz.
    Filloux, Jean-Claude. 1993. “Inequalities and Social Stratification in Durkheim's Sociology.” Pp. 211–28 in Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Moralist, edited by Stephen P.Turner. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203168257_chapter_9
    Fineman, Martha Albertson. 1991. The Illusion of Equality: The Rhetoric and Reality of Divorce Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Fineman, Martha Albertson. 1995. The Neutered Mother, the Sexual Family, and Other Twentieth Century Tragedies. New York: Routledge.
    Fletcher, Alice C. and FrancisLaFlesche. 1911. “The Omaha Tribe.” Pp. 15–672 in the 27th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnography. Washington, DC: Bureau of Ethnography.
    Fletcher, Yaël Simpson. 1991. “‘La solution équitable, juste, humaine, moderne, démo-cratique’: The Advocacy of Legal Divorce in France, 1858–1884.” M.A. thesis, University of Maryland.
    Fouillée, Alfred. 1893. “La Psychologie des sexes et les fondements physiologiques.”Revue des deux mondes, série 9 (Sept. 15):397–429.
    Fouillée, Alfred. 1897. “Les jeunes criminels: l'école et la presse.”Revue des deux mondes, série 10, v. 139:417–49.
    Frazer, James Q. [1887] 1910. Totemism and Exogamy, 4 vols. London: Macmillan.
    Freeman, Jo. 1995. “From Suffrage to Women's Liberation: Feminism in Twentieth Century America.” Pp. 509–28 in Women: A Feminist Perspective,
    5th ed.
    , edited by JoFreeman. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
    Friedan, Betty. 1963. The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norton.
    Friedl, Ernestine. [1975] 1984. Women and Men: An Anthropological View. Prospect Heights, IL: Itasca.
    Fustel de Coulanges, Numa Denis. [1864] 1912. La Cité Antique. Paris: Hachette.
    Gallagher, Maggie. 1989. Enemies of Eros: How the Sexual Revolution Is Killing Family, Marriage, and Sex, and What We Can Do About It. Chicago: Bonus.
    Gallagher, Maggie. 1996. The Abolition of Marriage: How We Destroy Lasting Love. Washington, DC: Regnery.
    Gane, Mike. 1983. “Durkheim: Woman as Outsider.”Economy and Society12: 227–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085148300000014
    Gane, Mike. 1992. The Radical Sociology of Durkheim and Mauss. London and New York: Routledge.
    Gane, Mike. 1993. Harmless Lovers: Gender Theory and Personal Relationships. New York: Routledge.
    Gane, Mike. 1995. “Jennifer Lehmann's Durkheim.”Durkheimian Studies1:63–69.
    Giddens, Anthony. 1964. “The Suicide Problem in French Sociology.”British Journal of Sociology16:3–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/588563
    Giddens, Anthony. 1971. Capitalism and Modern Social Theory: An Analysis of the Writings of Marx, Durkheim, and Max Weber. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Giddens, Anthony. 1972. “Introduction.” Pp. 1–50 in Emile Durkheim: Selected Writings, edited by AnthonyGiddens. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Giddens, Anthony. 1976. “Classical Social Theory and the Origins of Modern Sociology.”American Journal of Sociology81:703–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/226140
    Giddens, Anthony. 1978. Durkheim. London: Fontana.
    Giddens, Anthony. 1986. “Introduction.” Pp. 1–31 in Emile Durkheim, Durkheim on Politics and the State, edited by AnthonyGiddens. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
    Giele, Janet S.1988. “Gender and Sex Roles.” Pp. 291–323 in Handbook of Sociology, edited by Neil J.Smelser. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Giele, Janet S.1996. “Decline of the Family: Conservative, Liberal, and Feminist Views.” Pp. 89–115 in Promises to Keep: The Decline and Renewal of Marriage in America, edited by DavidPopenoe, JeanBethke Elshtain, and DavidBlankenhorn. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
    Gilder, George. 1973. Sexual Suicide. New York: Triangle.
    Gilder, George. 1974. Naked Nomads: Unmarried Men in America. New York: Quadrangle.
    Gilder, George. 1986. Men and Marriage. Gretna, IA: Pelican/Quadrangle.
    Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Giraud-Teulon, Alexis. 1874. Les origines de la famille: questions sur les antécédents des sociétés patriarchales. Geneva: Cherbuliéz.
    Giraud-Teulon, Alexis. 1884. Les origines du mariage et de la famille. Geneva: Cherbuliéz.
    Glendon, Mary Ann. 1977. State, Law and Family: Family Law in Transition in the United States and Western Europe. Amsterdam: North Holland.
    Glendon, Mary Ann. 1981. The New Family and the New Property. Toronto: Butterworths.
    Glendon, Mary Ann. 1987. Abortion and Divorce in Western Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Glendon, Mary Ann. 1989. The Transformation of Family Law: State, Law, and Family in the United States and Western Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Glendon, Mary Ann. 1991. Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. New York: Free Press.
    Glenn, Norval D.1993. “A Plea for Objective Assessment of the Notion of Family Decline.”Journal of Marriage and the Family55:542–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353334
    Glenn, Norval D.1996. “Values, Attitudes, and the State of American Marriage.” Pp. 15–33 in Promises to Keep: The Decline and Renewal of Marriage in America, edited by DavidPopenoe, JeanBethke Ehlstain, and DavidBlankenhorn. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
    Glenn, Norval D.1997a. Closed Hearts, Closed Minds: The Textbook Story of Marriage. New York: Institute for American Values.
    Glenn, Norval D.1997b. “A Critique of Twenty Family and Marriage and Family Textbooks.”Family Relations46:197–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/585115
    Goetting, Ann. 1986a. “The Developmental Tasks of Siblingship Over the Life Cycle.”Journal of Marriage and the Family48:703–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/352563
    Goetting, Ann. 1986b. “Parental Satisfaction: A Review of Research.”Journal of Family Issues7:83–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019251386007001006
    Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor.
    Goldscheider, Frances K. and Linda J.Waite. 1991. New Family, No Family?Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Goode, Erica. 2000a. “Back to the Stone Age.”New York Times, December 31, p. F1.
    Goode, Erica. 2000b. “Human Nature: Born or Made?”New York Times, March 14, pp. D1, 9.
    Goode, William. 1959. “Horizons in Family Theory.” Pp. 178–96 in Sociology Today, edited by Robert K.Merton, Leonard, Broom, and Leonard S.Cottrell, Jr.New York: Basic Books.
    Goode, William. 1963. World Revolution and Family Patterns. New York: Free Press.
    Goode, William. [1964] 1982. The Family,
    2d ed.
    Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Goode, William. 1982. “Why Men Resist.” Pp. 31–50 in Rethinking the Family: Some Feminist Questions, edited by BarrieThorne. New York: Longmans.
    Gouldner, Alvin W.1970. The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. New York: Basic.
    Graglia, F. Carolyn. 1998. Domestic Tranquility: A Brief Against Feminism. Dallas, TX: Spence.
    Gramont, Sanche de. 1969. The French: Portrait of a People. New York: Putnam.
    Granquist, Hilma. 1968. “Edward Westermarck.” Pp. 529–31 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 16, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Green, Martin. 1974. The Von Richtofen Sisters: The Triumphant and the Tragic Modes of Love. New York: Basic.
    Greenberg, Louis M.1976. “Bergson and Durkheim as Sons and Assimilators: The Early Years.”French Historical Studies9:619–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/286208
    Greenhouse, Linda. 2000. “Case on Visitation Rights Hinges on Defining the Family.”New York Times, January 4, p. A14.
    Gruber, Jacob W.1968. “John Lubbock.” Pp. 487–88 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 9, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Habakkuk, H. D.1955. “Family Structure and Economic Change in Nineteenth-Century Europe.”Journal of Economic History15:1–12.
    Hadden, Jeffrey K. and Marie L.Borgatta, eds. 1969. Introduction to “Origins of the Family: Some Early Works.” Pp. 19–20 in Marriage and the Family: A Comprehensive Reader. Itasca IL: Peacock.
    Hafen, Bruce C.1990. “Individualism in Family Law.” Pp. 161–77 in Rebuilding the Nest: A New Committment to the American Family, edited by DavidBlankenhorn, StevenBayme, and JeanBethke Ehistain. Milwaukee, WI: Family Service of America.
    Halbwachs, Maurice. 1918. “La doctrine d'Emile Durkheim.”Revue philosophique85:353–411.
    Hall, Robert T.1988. Ethics and the Sociology of Morals. New York: Greenwood.
    Hause, Steven. 1987. Hubertine Aubert: The French Suffragette. New Haven: Yale.
    Hause, Steven and AnneKenney. 1984. Women's Suffrage and Social Politics in the French Third Republic. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Hayden, Doloros, ed. 1981a. “Introduction.” Pp. 3–29 in The Grand Domestic Revolution, edited by DolorosHayden. Boston: MIT Press.
    Hayden, Doloros, ed. 1981b. The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes and Neighborhoods. Boston: MIT Press.
    Heilbron, Johan. 1995. The Rise of Social Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
    Henry, Jules. 1971. Pathways to Madness. New York: Random House.
    Hewlett, Sylvia Ann and CornelWest. 1998. The War Against Parents: What We Can Do to Help Beleaguered Moms and Dads. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
    Hill, Gretchen. 1995. “Inheritance Law in an Aging Society.”Journal of Aging and Social Policy7:57–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J031v07n01_05
    Hill, J. L.1991. “What Does It Mean to be a ‘Parent’?: The Claims of Biology as the Basis for Parental Rights.”NYU Law Review66:353–420.
    Hill, Reuben and D.Hansen. 1960. “The Identification of Conceptual Frameworks Utilized in Family Study.”Marriage and Family Living22:299–311. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/347242
    Hinkle, Roscoe E., Jr.1960. “Durkheim in American Sociology.” Pp. 267–95 in Emile Durkheim, 1857–1917, edited by Kurt H.Wolff. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
    Hochschild, Arlie. 1989. The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home. New York: Viking.
    Hoffman, Lois W. and MartinHoffman. 1973. “The Value of Children to Parents.” Pp. 19–76 in Psychological Perspectives on Population, edited by James T.Fawcett. New York: Basic Books.
    Hoffman, Lois W. and Jean D.Manis. 1979. “The Value of Children in the United States: A New Approach to the Study of Fertility.”Journal of Marriage and the Family41:583–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/351628
    Homans, George C.1961. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt Brace.
    Huber, Joan. 1973. “Symbolic Interaction as a Pragmatic Perspective.”American Sociological Review38:274–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2094400
    Huber, Joan and GlennaSpitze. 1988. “Trends in Family Sociology.” Pp. 425–48 in Handbook of Sociology, edited by Neil J.Smelser. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Hughes, John A., Peter J.Martin, and W. W.Sharrock. 1995. Understanding Classical Sociology: Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Hunt, Janet G. and Larry L.Hunt. 1986. “The Dualities of Careers and Families: New Integration or New Polarization?” Pp. 275–86 in Family in Transition,
    5th ed.
    , edited by Arlene S.Skolnick and Jerome H.Skolnick. Boston: Little, Brown.
    Hunt, Lynn. 1992. The Family Romance of the French Revolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Hutter, Mark. 1981. The Changing Family: Comparative Perspectives. New York: John Wiley.
    Hynes, Eugene. 1975. “Suicide and Homo Duplex: An Interpretation of Durkheim's Typology of Suicide.”Sociological Quarterly16:87–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1975.tb02140.x
    Johnson, Barclay D.1994. “Suicide and the Birth Rate, a Study in Moral Statistics: A Translation and Commentary.” Pp. 115–204 in Emile Durkheim: Le Suicide One Hundred Years Later, edited by DavidLester. Philadelphia: Charles.
    Johnson, Kathryn K.1979. “Durkheim Revisited: Why Do Women Kill Themselves?”Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior9:145–53.
    Jones, Robert Alun. 1974. “Durkheim's Response to Spencer: An Essay Toward Historicism in the Historiography of Sociology.”Sociological Quarterly15:341–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1974.tb00899.x
    Jones, Robert Alun. 1986. Emile Durkheim: An Introduction to Four Major Works. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Jones, Robert Alun. 1993. “Durkheim and La Cité Antique.” Pp. 25–51 in Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Moralist, edited by Stephen P.Turner. London: Routledge.
    “Josef Kohler.”Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved January 26, 2001 (http://www.britannica.com).
    Kandal, Terry R.1988. The Woman Question in Classical Sociological Theory. Miami: Florida International University Press.
    Kando, Thomas M.1976. “L'Annee Sociologique: From Durkheim to Today.”Pacific Sociological Review19:147–74.
    Kantor, David and WilliamLehr. 1975. Inside the Family. New York: Harper.
    Kao, Emily, Gong-SoogHong, and RichardWiddows. 1997. “Bequest Expectations: Evidence From the 1989 Survey of Consumer Finances.”Journal of Family and Economic Issues18:357–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024943421055
    Karady, Victor. 1981. “The Prehistory of Present-Day French Sociology (1917–1957).” Pp. 33–47 in French Sociology: Rupture and Renewal Since 1968, edited by Charles C.Lemert. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Kerber, Linda K.1980. Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
    Kerckhoff, Alan. 1965. “Nuclear and Extended Family Relationships: A Normative and Behavioral Analysis.” Pp. 93–112 in Social Structure and the Family: Generational Relations, edited by EthelShanas and GordonStreib. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Kimmel, Michael S.1987. “Men's Responses to Feminism at the Turn of the Century.”Gender and Society1:261–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089124387001003003
    Kingsbury, Nancy and JohnScanzoni. 1993. “Structure-Functionalism.” Pp. 195–217 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by PaulineBoss et al. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_9
    Kirkpatrick, Clifford. 1968. “Family: Disorganization and Dissolution.” Pp. 313–322 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 5, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Klein, David M. and JoanJurich. 1993. “Metatheory and Family Studies.” Pp. 31–67 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by PaulineBoss et al. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_2
    Klein, David M. and James M.White. 1996. Family Theories: An Introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Kohler, Josef. 1889a. Johann Jakob Bachofen und das Natursymbol. Basel: Schwabe.
    Kohler, Josef. 1889b. “Johann Jakob Bachofen.”Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtwissenschaft8:148–55.
    Kohler, Josef. [1897] 1975. On the Prehistory of Marriage: Totemism, Group Marriage, and Mother Right. [Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Konner, Melvin. 1988. “The Aggressors.”New York Times Magazine, August 14, p. 33.
    Krause, Harry D.1986. Family Law in a Nutshell,
    2d ed.
    St. Paul, MN: West.
    Kubali, Hüssein Nail. 1950. “Avant-propos.” Pp. i–iv in Leçons de sociologie by EmileDurkheim. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
    Labriola, Joseph. [1896] 1966. A Materialist Conception of History. New York: Monthly Review Press.
    LaCapra, Dominick. [1972] 1985. Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Philosopher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Ladd, Everett Carll. 1999. The Ladd Report. New York: Free Press.
    Laing, Ronald D.1972. “The Family and the ‘Family.’” Pp. 3–19 in R. D.Laing, The Politics of the Family and Other Essays. New York: Random House.
    Laing, Ronald D. and A.Esterson. 1970. Sanity, Madness, and the Family. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UK: Penguin.
    Lamanna, Mary Ann. 1990. “Durkheim on Women and the Family: Theoretical Models and Social Reality.” Paper presented to the University of Notre Dame Sociology Department, April 6, Notre Dame, IN.
    Lampérière, Anna. 1898. Le rôle social de la femme. Paris: Alcan.
    Lasch, Christopher. 1977. Haven in a Heartless World: The Family Beseiged. New York. Basic Books.
    Laslett, Peter. 1965. The World We Have Lost: England Before the Industrial Age. New York: Scribner.
    Lawler, Edward J. and Shane R.Thye. 1999. “Bringing Emotions Into Exchange Theory.”Annual Review of Sociology25:217–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.217
    Lawler, Edward J. and JeongkooYoon. 1993. “Power and the Emergence of Commitment Behavior in Negotiated Exchange.”American Sociological Review58:465–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2096071
    Leacock, Eleanor Burke. 1972. “Introduction.” Pp. 7–67 in FriedrichEngels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State. New York: International.
    Lee, Gary R., and LindaHaas. 1993. “Comparative Methods in Family Research.” Pp. 117–31 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by PaulineBoss et al. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_5
    Lee, John Allen. 1973. The Colours of Love. Toronto: New Press.
    Leeuwen, Louis Th. van. 1981. “Early Family Sociology in Europe: Parallels to the United States.” Pp. 95–139 in A Social History of American Family Sociology, 1865–1940, by Ronald L.Howard, edited by JohnMogey. Westport, CN: Greenwood.
    LeGates, Marlene. 1995. “Feminists Before Feminism: Origins and Varieties of Women's Protest in Europe and North American Before the Twentieth Century.” Pp. 494–508 in Women: A Feminist Perspective, edited by JoFreeman. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
    Lehmann, Jennifer M.1990. “Durkheim's Response to Feminism: Prescriptions for Women.”Sociological Theory8:163–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202203
    Lehmann, Jennifer M.1991. “Durkheim's Women: His Theory of the Structures and Functions of Sexuality.”Current Perspectives in Social Theory11:141–67.
    Lehmann, Jennifer M.1993. Deconstructing Durkheim: A Post-Post-Structuralist Critique. London: Routledge.
    Lehmann, Jennifer M.1994. Durkheim and Women. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
    Lehmann, Jennifer M.1995a. “Durkheim's Theories of Deviance and Suicide: A Feminist Reconsideration.”American Journal of Sociology100:904–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/230604
    Lehmann, Jennifer M.1995b. “The Question of Caste in Modern Society: Durkheim's Contradictory Theories of Race, Class, and Sex.”American Sociological Review60:566–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2096295
    Le Play, Frédéric. [1855] 1877–79. Les ouvriers européenes,
    2d ed.
    Tours, France: Mame.
    Lester, David, ed. 1998. Emile Durkheim: Suicide 100 Years Later. Philadelphia: Charles.
    L'Huillier, Fernand. 1955. Histoire de L'Alsace. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
    LeTourneau, Charles. [1888] 1894. L'Evolution du mariage et de la famille. Paris: Vigot.
    Levenger, George. 1974. “A 3-level Approach to Attraction: Toward an Understanding of Pair Relatedness.” In Foundations of Interpersonal Attraction, edited by T. L.Huston. Orlando, Florida: Academic.
    Levi-Strauss, Claude. 1945. “French Sociology.” Pp. 503–37 in Twentieth Century Sociology, edited by GeorgesGurvitch and Wilbert E.Moore. New York: Philosophical Library.
    Lewin, Tamar. 2000. “Grandparents Play a Big Part in Grandchildren's Lives, Survey Finds.”New York Times, January 6, p. A16.
    Levy, Marion J., Jr.1968. “Marcel Granet.” Pp. 241–43 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 6, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Libres entretiens, 5e série. 1909. Questions relatives à la condition économique et juridique des femmes. Paris: l'Union pour la Vérité.
    Libres entretiens, 8e série. 1912. Sur la culture générale et la réforme de l'enseignement. Paris: l'Union pour la Vérité. P. 322 presented as “Remarque sur l'évolution récente de la famille,” pp. 104–105 in Emile Durkheim, Textes, vol. 3, edited by Victor Karady. Paris: Les Editions de minuit.
    Lienhart, R. B.1968. “James George Frazer.” Pp. 550–53 in International Encylopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 5, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Litwak, Eugene. 1960a. “Geographical Mobility and Extended Family Cohesion. American Sociological Review25:385–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2092085
    Litwak, Eugene. 1960b. “Occupational Mobility and Extended Family Cohesion.”American Sociological Review25:9–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2088943
    Litwak, Eugene. 1965. “Extended Kin Relations in an Industrial Democratic Society.” Pp. 290–323 in Social Structure and the Family: Generational Relations, edited by EthelShanas and GordonStreib. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Llobera, Josep R.1981. “Durkheim, the Durkheimians, and their Collective Misrepresentation of Marx.” Pp. 214–40 in The Anthropology of Pre-capitalist Societies, edited by Joel S.Kahn and Josep R.Llobera. London: Macmillan.
    Lourbet, Jacques. 1896. La femme devant la science contemporaine. Paris: Alcan.
    Lourbet, Jacques1900. Le problème des sexes. Paris: Giard et Brière.
    Lubbock, John. [1870] 1912. The Origin of Civilization and the Primitive Condition of Man: Mental and Social Conditions of Savages,
    7th ed.
    New York: Longmans.
    Lukes, Steven. 1972. Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work. New York: Harper and Row.
    Lukes, Steven. 1985. Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work,
    2d ed.
    Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    Lyotard, Jean-François. 1984. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
    The Mabinogion. 1976. Translation and introduction by Jeffrey Gantz. New York: Dorset.
    Macionis, John J.2000. Society: The Basics,
    5th ed.
    Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Maine, Henry Sumner. [1861] 1888. Ancient Law. New York: Holt.
    Mannheim, Karl. 1936. Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Harcourt Brace.
    Marciano, Teresa Donati. 1987. “Families and Religions.” Pp. 285–315 in Handbook of Marriage and the Family, edited by Marvin B.Sussmann and Suzanne K.Steinmetz. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-7151-3_11
    Marx, Karl. [1848] 1988. The Communist Manifesto. New York: Norton.
    Masters, William H. and VirginiaJohnson. 1974. The Pleasure Bond: A New Look at Sexuality and Commitment. Boston: Little, Brown.
    Mauss, Marcel. 1920. Untitled introduction to Emile Durkheim. “Introduction à la morale.”Revue philosophique89:79–80.
    Mauss, Marcel. 1925. “In memoriam: l'oeuvre inedité de Durkheim et de ses collaborateurs.”Année sociologique, n.s. 1:7–29.
    Mauss, Marcel. 1927. “Notice biographique: Madame Louise Emile DURKHEIM.”Année sociologique, n.s. 2:8–9.
    Mauss, Marcel. 1969. “André DURKHEIM.” P. 498 in Oeuvres, vol. 3, edited by VictorKarady. Paris: Les Editions de minuit.
    Mazeaud, Henri, LéonMazeaud, and JeanMazeaud. 1967. Leçons de droit civil, vol. 1,
    4th ed.
    , edited by Michelde Juglart. Paris: Montchrestien.
    Mayntz, Renate. 1968. “Georg Simmel.” Pp. 251–58 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 14, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    McGuire v. McGuire. 1953. 157 Neb. 226, N.W. 2d 336 (S. Ct. of Neb.).
    McIntyre, Lisa J.1995. “Law and the Family in Historical Perspective: Issues and Antecedents.” Pp. 5–30 in Families and Law, edited by Lisa J.McIntyre and Marvin B.Sussman. New York: Haworth.
    McIntyre, Lisa J. and Marvin B.Sussman, eds. 1995. Families and Law. New York: Haworth.
    McLain, Raymond and AndrewWeigert. 1979. “Toward a Phenomenological Sociology of the Family: A Programmatic Essay.” Pp. 160–205 in Contemporary Theories About the Family, vol. 2, edited by WesleyBurr, ReubenHill, F.Ivan Nye, and IraReiss. New York: Free Press.
    McLennan, John Ferguson. [1865] 1970. Primitive Marriage: An Inquiry Into the Origin of the Form of Capture in Marriage Ceremonies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    McNamee, Stephen J. and Robert K.Miller. 1989. “Estate Inheritance: A Sociological Lacuna.”Sociological Inquiry59:7–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1989.tb01077.x
    McNamee, Stephen J. and Robert K.Miller. 1998. “Inheritance and Stratification.” Pp. 193–213 in Inheritance and Wealth in America, edited by Robert K.Miller and Stephen J.McNamee. New York: Plenum.
    Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Mellman, Mark, EdwardLazarus, and AllanRivlin. 1990. “Family Time, Family Values.” Pp. 73–92 in Rebuilding the Nest, edited by DavidBlankenhorn, StevenBaynes, and JeanBethke Ehlstain. Milwaukee, WI: Family Services of America.
    Merton, Robert K. [1957] 1968. “On the History and Systematics of Sociological Theory.” Pp. 1–38 in Social Theory and Social Structure,
    2nd ed.
    New York: Free Press.
    Meštrović, Stjepan G.1988. Emile Durkheim and the Reformation of Sociology. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.
    Meštrović, Stjepan G.1991. The Coming Fin de Siècle: An Application of Durkheim's Sociology to Modernity and Postmodernism. New York: Routledge, Chapman.
    Meštrović, Stjepan G.1992. Durkheim and Postmodern Culture. New York: Aldine.
    Meštrović, Stjepan G.1996. Review of Jennifer Lehmann, Durkheim and Women. Humanity and Society20: 84–85.
    Meyer v. Nebraska. 1923. 262 U.S. 390, 43 S.Ct. 625, 67 L.Ed. 1042.
    Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County, 450 U.S. 464 (1981).
    Miller, Robert K. and Stephen J.McNamee, eds. 1998. Inheritance and Wealth in America. New York: Plenum.
    Mitterauer, Michael and ReinhardSieder. 1982. The European Family. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Moen, Phyllis and Kay B.Forest. 1999. “Strengthening Families; Policy Issues for the Twenty-First Century.” Pp. 633–63 in Handbook of Marriage and the Family,
    2d ed.
    , edited by MarvinSussman, Suzanne K.Steinmetz, and Gary W.Peterson. New York: Plenum.
    Moore, Barrington. 1958. “Thoughts on the Future of the Family.” Pp. 160–78 in BarringtonMoore, Political Power and Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
    Morgan, D. H. J.1975. Social Theory and the Family. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    Morgan, D. H. J.1985. The Family: Politics and Social Theory. London: Routledge.
    Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1871. Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family, Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 17, Publication No. 218. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.
    Morgan, Lewis Henry. [1877] 1964. Ancient Society. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University.
    Morrison, Ken. 1995. Marx, Durkheim, Weber: Formation of Modern Social Thought. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Morselli, Enrico. [1879] 1882. Suicide: An Essay on Comparative Moral Statistics [Il Suicido]. New York: Appleton.
    Moses, Claire. 1984. French Feminism in the Nineteenth Century. Albany: SUNY.
    Münch, Richard. 1988. Understanding Modernity: Toward a New Perspective Going Beyond Durkheim and Weber. London: Routledge.
    Murdoch, George P.1949. Social Structure. New York: Free Press.
    Nandan, Yash, ed. 1980a. Contributions to L'Année sociologique. New York: Free Press.
    Nandan, Yash, ed. 1980b. “Editor's Introduction.” Pp. 1–44 in Emile Durkheim: Contributions to L'Année sociologique, edited by YoshNandan. New York: Free Press.
    Naughton, Kevin. 2001. “Billionaire Backlash.”Newsweek, February 26, p. 48.
    “Nécrologie: Emile Durkheim.”1918. Revue philosophique85:95–96.
    Nichols, Julie E.1997. “Grandpa Take Me Home: The Constitutionality of Michigan's Grandparent Visitation Statue Under the Due Process Clause.”Wayne Law Review43:1887ff.
    Nielsen, François. 1994. “Sociobiology and Sociology.”Annual Review of Sociology20:267–303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.20.080194.001411
    Nisbet, Robert. 1966. The Sociological Tradition. New York: Basic Books.
    Nock, Steven L.1998. Marriage in Men's Lives. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Nye, F. Ivan and Felix M.Berardo, eds. [1966] 1981. Emerging Conceptual Frameworks in Family Analysis,
    2d ed.
    New York: Praeger.
    Oates, Joyce Carol. 1973. “The Myth of the Isolated Artist.”Psychology Today6:74–75.
    Offen, Karen. 1984. “Depopulation, Nationalism, and Feminism in Fin-de-Siécle France.”American Historical Review89:648–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1856120
    Offen, Karen. 1987. “Feminism, antifeminism, and National Family Politics in Early Third Republic France.” Pp. 177–86 in Connecting Spheres: Women in the Western World, 1500 to the Present, edited by Marilyn J.Boxer and Jean H.Quataert. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Offen, Karen. 1988. “Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach.”Signs14:115–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/494494
    Ogburn, William F.1933. “The Family and Its Functions.” Pp. 661–708 in Recent Social Trends in the United States. Report of the President's Research Committee on Social Trends. New York: McGraw Hill.
    Ogburn, William F. and Meyer F.Nimkoff. 1955. Technology and Changing Family. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    Oppenheimer, Valerie Kincade. 1997. “Women's Employment and the Gain to Marriage: The Specialization and Trading Model.”Annual Review of Sociology23:431–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.23.1.431
    Orrù, Marco. 1995. Review of Jennifer Lehmann, Durkheim and Women. Contemporary Sociology24:283.
    Ortner, Sherry B.1996. “Is Female to Male as Nature Is to Culture?” Pp. 21–42 in Making Gender: The Politics and Erotics of Culture. Boston: Beacon.
    Papanek, Hanna. 1973. “Men, Women, and Work: Reflections on the Two-Person Career.” Pp. 90–110 in Changing Women in a Changing Society, edited by JoanHuber. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. [1937] 1949. The Structure of Social Action, vol. 1. New York: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1951. The Social System. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1954. “The Kinship System of the Contemporary United States.” Pp. 177–196 in Essays in Sociological Theory,
    rev. ed.
    Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1955a. “The American Family: Its Relations to Personality and Social Structure.” Pp. 3–33 in Family Socialization and Interaction Process, edited by TalcottParsons and Robert F.Bales. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1955b. “Family Structure and the Socialization of the Child.” Pp. 35–131 in Family Socialization and Interaction Process, edited by TalcottParsons and Robert F.Bales. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1960. “Durkheim's Contribution to the Theory of Integration of Social Systems.” Pp. 118–53 in Emile Durkheim, 1858–1917, edited by Kurt H.Wolff. Columbus: Ohio State University.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1961. “An Outline of the Social System.” Pp. 30–79 in Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Social Theory, vol. 1, edited by TalcottParsons, EdwardShils, KasparNaegele, and JessePitts. New York: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1965. “The Normal American Family.” Pp. 31–50 in Man and Civilization: The Family's Search for Survival, edited by SeymourFarber, PieroMustacchi, and Roger H. L.Wilson. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Parsons, Talcott. 1968a. “Durkheim, Emile.” Pp. 311–20 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 4, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Parsons, Talcott and Robert F.Bales. 1955. Family Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Parsons, Talcott and ReneeFox. 1952. “Illness, Therapy, and the Modern American Family.”Journal of Social Issues8:31–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1952.tb01861.x
    Pearce, Frank. 1989. The Radical Durkheim. London: Unwin Hyman.
    Peters, E. L.1968. “William Robertson Smith.” Pp. 329–35 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 14, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Pickering, W. S. F.1994. “The Enigma of Durkheim's Jewishness.” Pp. 10–39 in Debating Durkheim, edited by W. S. F.Pickering and H.Martins. New York: Routledge.
    Pierce v. Society of Sisters. 1925. 268 U.S. 510, 45 S.Ct. 571, 43 /S.Ct. 625.
    Pitts, Jesse R.1964. “The Structure-Functional Approach.” Pp. 51–124 in Handbook of Marriage and the Family, edited by Harold T.Christensen. Chicago: Rand McNally.
    Pitts, Jesse R.1968. “Le Play, Frédéric.” Pp. 84–91 in The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 9, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Platt, Jennifer. 1995. “The United States Reception of Durkheim's The Rules of the Sociological Method.”Sociological Perspectives38:77–105.
    Pollitt, Katha. 2000. “Social Pseudoscience.”The Nation, October 23. Retrieved February 26, 2001 (http://www.thenation.com).
    Poggi, Gianfranco. 1972. Images of Society: Essays on the Sociological Theories of Tocqueville, Marx, and Durkheim. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    “The Poorest Adult Sibling Gets Most from Parents.”1994. Population Today (June): 4.
    Popenoe, David. 1988. Disturbing the Nest: Family Change and Decline in Modern Society. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
    Popenoe, David. 1990. “Family Decline in America.” Pp. 39–51 in Rebuilding the Nest: A New Commitment to the American Family, edited by DavidBlankenhorn, StevenBayme, and JeanBethke Ehlstain. Milwaukee, WI: Family Service America.
    Popenoe, David. 1993. “American Family Decline, 1960–1990: A Review and Appraisal.”Journal of Marriage and the Family55:527–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353333
    Popenoe, David, and BarbaraDafoe Whitehead. 1998–99. The State of Our Unions: The Social Health of Marriage in America. Report of the National Marriage Project. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
    Popenoe, David, and BarbaraDafoe Whitehead2000. The State of Our Unions 2000: The Social Health of Marriage. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, National Marriage Project.
    Porter, Theodore M.1995. “Statistical and Social Facts from Quételet to Durkheim.”Sociological Perspectives38:15–26.
    Postema v. Postema. 1991. 189 Mich. App. 89, 471, N.W.2d 912.
    Putnam, Robert. 1995. “Bowling Alone.”Journal of Democracy6: 65–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.1995.0002
    Putnam, Robert. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
    Putnam, Ruth. 1915. Alsace and Lorraine: From Caesar to Kaiser, 58 B.C.-1871 A.D. New York: Putnam.
    Quale, G. Robina. 1988. A History of Marriage Systems. Westport, CN: Greenwood.
    Queen, Stuart A., Robert W.Habenstein, and Jill S.Quadagno. 1988. “The Family of the Ancient Romans.” Pp. 2–16 in Family Relations: A Reader, edited by Norval D.Glenn and MarionTolbert Coleman. Chicago: Dorsey.
    Rawls, Anne Warfield. 1997. “Durkheim's Epistemology: The Initial Critique, 1915–1924.”Sociological Quarterly38:111–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1997.tb02342.x
    Ray, J.1913. Review of Sophonisba Breckinridge and Edith Abbott. The Delinquent Child and His Home.
    Charities Publication Committee, 1912. Année sociologiqueXII: 574–78.
    Reher, David Sven. 1998. “Family Ties in Western Europe: Persistent Contrasts.”Population and Development Review24:203–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2807972
    Reiss, Ira J.1965. “The Universality of the Family: A Conceptual Analysis.”Journal of Marriage and the Family27:443–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/350182
    Reiss, Ira J.1971. The Family System in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
    Reskin, Barbara and PatriciaRoos. 1990. Job Queues, Gender Queues: Explaining Women's Inroads Into Male Occupations. Philadelphia: Temple.
    Rheinstein, Max. 1972. Marriage Stability, Divorce, and the Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Richard, Gaston. 1900. Review of Prinzing (Fred.), “Der Einfluss der Ehe auf die Kriminalitaet des Mannes” and “Die Erhoehung der Kriminalitaet des Weibes durch die Ehe,” Berlin, Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, Nos. 1, 2, and 6, 1899. Année sociologiqueIII:466–69.
    Rockett, Ian R. H.1998. Injury and Violence: A Public Health Perspective. Population Bulletin53, No. 4 (December).
    Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist. 1974. Women, Culture, and Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    Rossi, Alice S.1984. “Gender and Parenthood.”American Sociological Review49:1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2095554
    Roth, Guenther. 1989–90. “Durkheim and the Principles of 1789: The Issue of Gender Equality.”Telos14:71–88.
    Rowe, D. C.1994. The Limits of Family Influences: Genes, Experience, and Behavior. New York: Guilford.
    Rude-Antoine, Edwige. 1986. “Les Familles maghrebines en France et l'heritage.”Sociologia del Diritto13:95–104, abstracted (English) in Sociological Abstracts, #87R2690.
    Russett, Cynthia Eagle. 1989. Sexual Science: The Victorian Construction of Womanhood. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Ryun, Jim and AnneRyun. 1995. “Courtship Makes a Comeback.”Focus on the Family (November):10–12.
    Sabatelli, Ronald M. and Constance L.Shehan. 1993. “Exchange and Resource Theories.” Pp. 385–417 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by PaulineBoss et al. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_16
    Sapiro, Virginia. 1994. Women in American Society: An Introduction To Women's Studies,
    3d ed.
    Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
    Scanzoni, John H.1970. Opportunity and the Family. New York: Free Press.
    Scheppele, Kim Lane. 1994. “Legal Theory and Social Theory.”Annual Review of Sociology20:383–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.20.080194.002123
    Schmergel, Greg, ed. 1990. Let's Go: France. New York: St. Martin's.
    Schneider, David. 1968. American Kinship: A Cultural Account. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Schoenfeld, Eugene and Stjepan G.Mesˇtrovic′. 1989. “Durkheim's Concept of Justice and Its Relationship to Social Solidarity.”Sociological Analysis50:111–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3710982
    Schutz, Alfred. 1970. On Phenomenology and Social Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Schwartz, T. R.1996. “Durkheim's Prediction about the Declining Importance of Family and Inheritance: Evidence from the Wills of Providence, 1775–1985. Sociological Quarterly36:503–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1996.tb00751.x
    Scott, Joan Wallach. 1996. “The Rights of ‘the Social’: Hubertine Aubert and the Politics of the Third Republic.” Pp. 90–124 in Only Paradoxes to Offer: French Feminists and the Rights of Man, edited by Joan W.Scott. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Seligman, B. Z.1950. “The Problem of Incest and Exogamy: A Restatement.”American Anthropologist52:305–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/aa.1950.52.3.02a00010
    Sennett, Richard. 1970. Families Against the City: Middle Class Homes of Industrial Chicago, 1872–1890. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Shope, Janet Hinson. 1994. “Separate but Equal: Durkheim's Response to the Woman Question.”Sociological Inquiry64:23–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1994.tb01087.x
    Shorter, Edward. 1975. The Making of the Modern Family. New York: Basic Books.
    Simmel, Georg. [1890–1911] 1985. Schriften zur Philosophie und Soziologie der Geslecter. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
    Simpson, George. 1965. “A Durkheim Fragment.”American Journal of Sociology70: 527–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/223929
    Sirjamaki, John. 1964. “The Institutional Approach.” Pp. 33–50 in Handbook of Marriage and the Family, edited by Harold T.Christensen. Chicago: Rand McNally.
    Skolnick, Arlene S.1991. Embattled Paradise: The American Family in an Age of Uncertainty. New York: Basic Books.
    Skolnick, Arlene S.1996. The Intimate Environment: Exploring Marriage and the Family,
    6th ed.
    New York: HarperCollins.
    Skolnick, Arlene and JeromeSkolnick. 1999. “Introduction.” Pp. 1–15 in Families in Transition,
    10th ed.
    , edited by A.Skolnick and J.Skolnick. New York; Longmans.
    Slaughter, Jane and RobertKern. 1981. “Introduction.” Pp. 3–12 in European Women on the Left. Westport, CN: Greenwood.
    Smelser, Neil J.1988. “Introduction.” Pp. 9–19 in Handbook of Sociology, edited by Neil J.Smelser. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Smith, Raymond T.1968. “Family: Comparative Structure.” Pp. 301–13 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 5, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Somerville, John. 1982. The Rise and Fall of Childhood. Beverly Hills: Sage.
    Soukhanov, Anna, ed. 1999. Encarta: World English Dictionary. New York: St. Martin's.
    Spencer, Baldwin and F. J.Gillen. 1899. The Native Tribes of Central Australia. London: Macmillan.
    Spencer, Baldwin and F. J.Gillen. 1904. The Northern Tribes of Central Australia. London: Macmillan.
    Spencer, Herbert. [1873] 1961. The Study of Sociology. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
    Spencer, Herbert. [1876–96] 1898–99. Principles of Sociology. New York: Appleton.
    Spiro, Melford E. [1958] 1965. Children of the Kibbutz: A Study in Child Training and Personality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Spiro, Melford E.1960. “Is the Family Universal?—The Israeli Case.” Pp. 64–75 in A Modern Introduction to the Family, edited by Norman W.Bell and Ezra F.Vogel. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
    Sprey, Jetse. 1990. Fashioning Family Theory: New Approaches. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Stacey, Judith. 1990. Brave New Families: Stories of Domestic Upheaval in Late Twentieth-Century America. New York: Basic Books.
    Stacey, Judith. 1993. “Good Riddance to ‘The Family’”: A Response to David Popenoe. Journal of Marriage and the Family55:545–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353335
    Stack, Carol B.1974. All Our Kin: Strategies for Survival. New York: Harper and Row.
    Stetson, Dorothy McBride. 1987. Women's Rights in France. New York: Greenwood.
    Stocking, George W., Jr.1968. “Edward Burnett Tylor.” Pp. 170–77 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 16, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    Stocking, George W., Jr.1987. Victorian Anthropology. New York: Free Press.
    Stone, Lawrence. 1979. The Family, Sex, and Marriage in England, 1500–1800. New York: Harper and Row.
    Strathern, Marilyn. 1985. “Kinship and Economy: Constitutive Orders of a Provisional Kind.”American Ethnologist12:191–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/ae.1985.12.2.02a00010
    Straus, Murray A.1964. “Power and Support Structures of the Family in Relation to Socialization.”Journal of Marriage and the Family26:318–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/349463
    Straus, Murray A.1994. Beating the Devil Out of Them: Corporal Punishment in American Families. New York: Lexington.
    Strenski, Ivan. 1997. Durkheim and the Jews of France. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Sussman, Marvin B.1965. “Relationships of Adult Children with Their Parents. Pp. 62–92 in Social Structure and the Family: Generational Relations, edited by EthelShanas and GordonStreib. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Sussman, Marvin B. and LeeBurchinal. 1969. “Kin Family Network: Unheralded Structure in Current Conceptualizations of Family Functions.” Pp. 133–52 in The Family and Change, edited by John M.Edwards. New York: Knopf.
    Sussman, Marvin B. and Suzanne K.Steinmetz, eds. 1987. Handbook of Marriage and the Family. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-7151-3
    Sydie, Rosalind A.1987. Natural Women, Cultured Men: A Feminist Perspective on Sociological Theory. New York: New York University Press.
    Talbot, Margaret. 2000. “Who Wants to Be a Legionnaire?”New York Times Book Review, June 25, pp. 11–12.
    Thibaut, John W. and Harold S.Kelley. 1959. The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: Wiley.
    Thomas, Darwin and H. B.Roghaar. 1990. “Postpositivist Theorizing: The Case of Religion and Family.” Pp. 136–70 in Fashioning Family Theory, edited by JetseSprey. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Thompson, Ross A. and Jennifer M.Wyatt. 1999. “Values, Policy, and Research on Divorce; Seeking Fairness for Children.” Pp. 191–232 in The Postdivorce Family: Children, Parenting, and Society, edited by Ross A.Thompson and Paul R.Amato. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452234038
    Thorne, Barrie, ed. 1982. Rethinking the Family: Some Feminist Issues. New York: Longmans.
    Tiger, Lionel. 1978. “Omnigamy: The New Kinship System”Psychology Today12: 14ff.
    Tilly, Louise A.1981. “Women's Collective Action and Feminism in France 1870–1914.” Pp. 207–31 in Class Conflict and Collective Action, edited by Louise A.Tilly and CharlesTilly. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Tiryakian, Edward A.1995. Review of Jennifer Lehmann, Durkheim and Women. American Journal of Sociology100:1375–77.
    Tönnies, Ferdinand. 1887. Gemienschaft und Gesellschaft. Leipzig, Germany: Reisland.
    Tönnies, Ferdinand. 1896. “Review of Emile Durkheim, De la division du travail social.”Archiv fur systematische Philosophie2:497–99.
    Tosti, Gustavo. 1898. “Suicide in the Light of Recent Studies.”American Journal of Sociology3:464–478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/210724
    Traugott, Mark, ed. 1978. Durkheim on Institutional Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Trevino, Alberto Javier (organizer).1999. Session on “Systems-Functionalist Theory After Talcott Parsons: From 1979 and Beyond.” Annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, August 6, Chicago, IL.
    Troxel v. Granville. 1999. S.C. No. 99–138, 137 Wash. 2d 1, 969 P. 2d 2l, affirmed.
    Turner, Bryan S.1999. Classical Sociology. London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446219485
    Turner, Jonathan. 1998. The Structure of Sociological Theory,
    6th ed.
    Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Turner, Jonathan, LeonardBeeghley, and Charles H.Powers. 1998. The Emergence of Sociological Theory,
    4th ed.
    Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Turner, Stephen P.1986. The Search for a Methodology of Social Science: Durkheim, Weber, and the Nineteenth-Century Problem of Cause, Probability, and Action. Dordrecht: Reidel.
    Turner, Stephen P.1993. “Introduction.” Pp. 1–22 in Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Moralist, edited by Stephen P.Turner. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203168257_INTRODUCTION
    Turner, Stephen P., ed. 1995a. “Celebrating the 100th Anniversary of Emile Durkheim'sThe Rules of the Sociological Method.” Sociological Perspecitves38(1) [Special Issue].
    Turner, Stephen P., ed. 1995b. “Durkheim's The Rules of the Sociological Method: Is It a Classic?”Sociological Perspectives38:1–13.
    Turner, Stephen P., ed. 1996. “Durkheim Among the Statisticians.”Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences32: 354–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/%28SICI%291520-6696%28199610%2932:4%3C354::AID-JHBS3%3E3.0.CO;2-R
    Tylor, Edward B. [1871] 1958. Primitive Culture, 2 vols. Gloucester, MA: Smith.
    Udry, J. Richard. 2000. “Biological Limits of Gender Construction.”American Sociological Review65:443–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2657466
    United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2000. The World's Women: Trends and Statistics. New York: United Nations.
    Vargus, Brian S.1999. “Classical Social Theory and Family Studies: The Triumph of Reactionary Thought in Contemporary Family Studies.” Pp. 179–204 in Handbook of Marriage and the Family,
    2d ed
    , edited by Marvin B.Sussman, Suzanne K.Steinmetz, and Gary W.Peterson. New York: Plenum.
    Ventura, Stephanie, Joyce A.Martin, Sally C.Curtin, T. J.Mathews, and Melissa M.Park. 2000. Births: Final Data for 1998. National Vital Statistics Reports 48 (3). Hyattsville, MD: U.S. National Center for Health Statistics.
    Vogt, W. Paul. 1976a. “The Politics of Academic Sociology in France, 1890–1914.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
    Vogt, W. Paul. 1976b. “The Uses of Studying Primitives: A Note on the Durkheimians.”History and Theory15:33–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2504875
    Vogt, W. Paul. 1993. “Durkheim's Sociology of Law: Morality and the Cult of the Individual.” Pp. 71–94 in Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and Moralist, edited by Stephen P.Turner. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203168257_chapter_3
    Von Bertalanffy, L.1975. Perspectives on General System Theory: Scientific-Philosophic Studies. New York: Braziller.
    Vucht Tijssen, Lieteke van. 1991. “Women and Objective Culture: Georg Simmel and Marianne Weber.”Theory, Culture, and Society8:203–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026327691008003014
    Wadlington, Walter. 1995. Cases and Materials on Domestic Relations,
    3d ed.
    Westbury, NY: Foundation Press.
    Waite, Linda J.1995. “Does Marriage Matter?”Demography32:483–507. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2061670
    Waite, Linda J.2001. “The Family as a Social Organization: Key Ideas for the Twenty-First Century.”Contemporary Sociology29:463–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2653933
    Waite, Linda J. and MaggieGallagher. 2000. The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially. New York: Doubleday.
    Waline, Marcel. 1945. L'individualisme et le droit. Paris: Domat Montchrestien.
    Walker, Samuel E.1998. The Rights Revolution: Rights and Community in Modern America. New York: Oxford.
    Wallerstein, Judith and SandraBlakeslee. 1989. Second Chances: Men, Women and Children a Decade After Divorce. New York: Ticknor and Fields.
    Wallerstein, Judith, Julia M.Lewis, and SandraBlakeslee. 2000. The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25-Year Landmark Study. New York: Hyperion.
    Wallwork, Ernest. 1972. Durkheim: Morality and Milieu. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Wattenberg, Benjamin J.1987. The Birth Dearth. New York: Pharos.
    Weber, Eugen. 1986. France: Fin de Siècle. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
    Weber, Marianne. 1907. Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung. Tübingen: Mohr.
    Weber, Marianne. 1919. “Die Fraue und die objektive Kultur.” In MarianneWeber, Frauenfrage und Frauengedanke. Tübingen: Mohr.
    Weber, Marianne. 1927. Max Weber, ein Lebensbild. Heidelberg.
    Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged. 1976. Editor-in-Chief, Philip Babcock Gove. Springfield, MA: Merriam.
    Weeks, John R.1999. Population: An Introduction to Concepts and Issues.
    7th ed
    . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Weigert, Andrew J. and Darwin L.Thomas. 1971. “Family as a Conditional Universal.”Journal of Marriage and the Family33:188–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/350165
    Weisberg, D. Kelly. 1993. “The Equality Debate: Equal Treatment v. Special Treatment.” Pp. 121–27 in Feminist Legal Theory, edited by D.Kelly Weisberg. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
    Weitzman, Lenore. 1981. The Marriage Contract: Spouses, Lovers, and the Law. New York: Free Press.
    Weitzman, Lenore. 1985. The Divorce Revolution: The Unexpected Social and Economic Consequences for Women and Children in America. New York: Free Press.
    Westermarck, Edward. [1891] 1921. The History of Human Marriage, 3 vols. London: Macmillan.
    Whitchurch, Gail G. and Larry L.Constantine. 1993. “Systems Theory.” Pp. 325–52 in Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, edited by PaulineBoss et al. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_14
    White, Edmund. 1999. Marcel Proust. New York: Viking Penguin.
    White, Leslie. 1968. “Lewis Henry Morgan.” Pp. 496–98 in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 10, edited by David L.Sills. New York: Macmillan.
    White, Lynn K. and AgnesRiedmann. 1992. “When the Brady Bunch Grows Up: Step/Half-and Full-Sibling Relationships in Adulthood.”Journal of Marriage and the Family54:197–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353287
    Whitehead, Barbara Dafoe. 1996. The Divorce Culture. New York: Knopf.
    Whyte, Martin King, ed. 2000. Marriage in America: A Communitarian Perspective. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.
    Williams, Wendy. 1991. “The Equality Crisis: Some Reflections on Culture, the Courts, and Feminism.” Pp. 15–34 in Feminist Legal Theory: Readings in Law and Gender, edited by Katharine T.Bartlett and RosanneKennedy. Boulder, CO: Westview.
    Winch, Robert F. and Rae L.Blumberg. 1974. “Societal Complexity and Familial Organization: Evidence for the Curvilinear Hypothesis.” Pp. 94–113 in Selected Studies in Marriage and the Family,
    4th ed.
    , edited by Robert F.Winch et al. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
    Winton, Chester A.1995. Frameworks for Studying Families. Guilford, CN: Dushkin.
    Wisconsin v. Yoder. 1972. 406 U.S. 205, 92 S.Ct. 1526, 32 L.Ed. 2nd 15.
    Wityak, Nancy and RuthWallace. 1981. “Durkheim's Non-Social Facts About Primitives and Women.”Sociological Inquiry51:61–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb01027.x
    Wolfe, Alan. 1998. One Nation, After All: What Middle-Class Americans Really Think About God, Country, Family Racism, Welfare, Immigration, Homosexuality, Work, the Right, the Left, and Each Other. New York: Viking.
    Wolfe, Alan. 1999. “Bowling with Others.”New York Times Book Review, October 17, p. 20.
    Wolff, Kurt H.1960. Emile Durkheim, 1858–1917: A Collection of Essays. Columbus: Ohio University Press.
    Young, Frank W.1994. “Durkheim and Development Theory.”Sociological Theory12:73–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/202036
    Zeitlin, Irving M.1968. Ideology and the Development of Social Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Zeldin, Theodore. 1984. The French. London: Fontana.
    Zelditch, Morris, Jr.1964. “Family, Marriage, and Kinship.” Pp. 680–733 in Handbook of Modern Sociology, edited by Robert E. L.Faris. Chicago: Rand McNally.
    Zelizer, Viviana. 1985. Pricing the Priceless Child: The Changing Social Value of Children. New York: Basic Books.

    About the Author

    Mary Ann Lamanna is Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, where she has been on the faculty since 1977. She spent a postbaccalaureate year at the University of Strasbourg, France, on a Fulbright Scholarship. She earned an MA in sociology is from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a PhD in sociology from the University of Notre Dame (1977).

    She is the author (with Agnes Riedmann) of Marriages and Families: Making Choices in a Diverse Society, now in its seventh edition. She has published articles on nineteenth-century women, adolescent women's discourse on sexuality and reproduction, images of mothers in legal opinions, gender issues in the teaching of criminal law, the gift exchange in organ and tissue donation, and the sociological framing of the abortion issue. She plans a future book on sociological themes in the writings of Marcel Proust.


    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website