The Symbolic Child: A Cultural Sociological Analysis of the Changing Role of the Child in the Family

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: Aile Özel Sayısı, 103 - 120, 19.10.2025

Vildane Özkan

https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1704491

Abstract

Drawing on the realization that classical family sociology often treats children as passive dependents—rendering them analytically invisible—this study examines the transformation of the concept of the “symbolic child,” a culturally constructed image of the child’s role and meaning in family life, from agrarian societies to the digital age. This research aims to re-center the symbolic child as a key analytical figure in family sociology and considers how historical and cultural shifts in the symbolic meaning of childhood have redefined the role and meaning of the family institution. The analysis acknowledges that conceptions of childhood are not monolithic; it notes variations by gender, class, and historical-cultural context, bringing an intersectional nuance to the findings. Methodologically, using a qualitative, interpretive, and historical-comparative analysis grounded in cultural sociology, the study traces and compares changes in the symbolic status of children across successive periods. The key findings reveal a profound transformation in the role of children: from economic agencies and labor contributors in agrarian households, children became emotional focal points in industrial-era families, and in today’s media-saturated society they have become precociously adultified participants. Overall, the findings suggest that to understand the family as a cultural institution, the evolving symbolic child must be placed at the center of sociological analysis.

Keywords

Changing childhood , family , symbolic child , agrarian societies , digital age

Simgesel Çocuk: Ailede Çocuğun Değişen Rolü Üzerine Kültürel Sosyolojik Bir Analiz

Abstract

Klasik aile sosyolojisinin çocukları genellikle edilgen bağımlılar olarak ele aldığı ve onları analitik olarak görünmez kıldığı gerçeğinden yola çıkan bu çalışma, tarım toplumlarından dijital çağa, çocuğun aile yaşamındaki rolü ve anlamının kültürel olarak oluşturulmuş bir imgesi olan "simgesel çocuk" kavramının dönüşümünü incelemektedir. Bu araştırma, simgesel çocuğu aile sosyolojisinde önemli bir analitik figür olarak yeniden merkeze koymayı ve çocukluğun simgesel anlamındaki tarihsel ve kültürel değişimlerin aile kurumunun rolünü ve anlamını nasıl yeniden tanımladığını ele almayı amaçlamaktadır. Analiz, çocukluk anlayışlarının tek tip olmadığını kabul eder; cinsiyet, sınıf ve tarihsel-kültürel bağlama göre farklılıkları not ederek bulgulara kesişimsel bir nüans katar. Metodolojik olarak, kültürel sosyolojiye dayalı nitel, yorumlayıcı ve tarihsel-karşılaştırmalı bir analiz kullanan çalışma, ardışık dönemlerde çocukların sembolik statüsündeki değişiklikleri izler ve karşılaştırır. Temel bulgular, çocukların rolünde derin bir dönüşümü ortaya koyuyor: Tarımsal hanelerde ekonomik eyleyiciler ve emek sağlayıcılar olan çocuklar, sanayi dönemi ailelerinde duygusal odak noktaları haline gelirken, günümüzün medyaya doymuş toplumunda ise erken yetişkinleşmiş katılımcılar haline geldiler. Genel olarak bulgular, aileyi kültürel bir kurum olarak anlamak için, gelişen simgesel çocuğun sosyolojik analizin merkezine yerleştirilmesi gerektiğini gösteriyor.

Keywords

Değişen çocukluk , aile , simgesel çocuk , tarım toplumları , dijital çağ

References

• Alexander, J. C., & Smith, P. (2003). The strong program in cultural sociology: Elements of a structural hermeneutics. In J. C. Alexander (Ed.), The meanings of social life: A cultural sociology (pp. 11–26). Oxford University Press.
• Allen, R. J., & Nakonechnyi, A. (2022). Orphans, displaced, and institutionalized children: Causes of children growing without parents and a sampling of global responses. In A. Jakobsson (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of global social problems (pp. 1–20). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Ariès, P. (1962). Centuries of childhood: A social history of family life. New York: Random House.
• Austin, S. (2024). Working with children in contemporary performance. Routledge.
• Caldwell, J. C. (1976). Toward a restatement of demographic transition theory. Population and Development Review, 2(3/4), 321–366. https://doi.org/10.2307/1971615
• Coontz, S. (1992). The way we never were: American families and the nostalgia trap. New York: Basic Books.
• Corsaro, W. A. (2015). The sociology of childhood (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Cunningham, H. (1995). Children and childhood in Western society since 1500. London: Longman.
• Donzelot, J. (1979). The policing of families. New York: Pantheon.
• Gibbons, J. A. (2007). Sociological and symbolic family processes in the structure of orphanages in Egypt. International Journal of Sociology of the Family, 33(1), 199–217. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23070770
• Gillis, J. (2012). The Birth of the Virtual Child: A Victorian Progeny. In W. Koops & M. Zuckerman (Eds.), Beyond the Century of the Child: Cultural History and Developmental Psychology (pp. 82-95). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Goode, W. J. (1963). World revolution and family patterns. New York: Free Press.
• Hardman, C. (2001). Can there be an Anthropology of Children? Childhood, 8(4), 501-517. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568201008004006
• Heywood, C. (2001). A history of childhood: Children and childhood in the West from medieval to modern times. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Holloway, S. L., & Valentine, G. (2003). Cyberkids: Children in the information age. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• James, A., & Prout, A. (Eds.). (2015). Constructing and reconstructing childhood: Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
• Jenks, C. (1996). Childhood. London: Routledge.
• Kipping, M., Wadhwani, R. D., & Bucheli, M. (2014). Analyzing and interpreting historical sources: A basic methodology. In M. Bucheli & R. D. Wadhwani (Eds.), Organizations in Time: History, Theory, Methods (pp. 305–329). Oxford University Press.
• Lancy, D. F. (2015). The anthropology of childhood: Cherubs, chattel, changelings (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Lee, N. (2001). Childhood and Society: Growing Up in an Age of Uncertainty. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
• Mayall, B. (2002). Towards a sociology for childhood: Thinking from children’s lives. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Mintz, S. (2004). Huck’s raft: A history of American childhood. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (1955). Family, socialization and interaction process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
• Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
• Phillips, N., & Hardy, C. (2002). Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. Sage.
• Pollock, L. A. (1983). Forgotten children: Parent-child relations from 1500 to 1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Postman, N. (1982). The disappearance of childhood. New York: Delacorte Press.
• Prout, A. (2005). The future of childhood: Towards the interdisciplinary study of children. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• Qvortrup, J. (1994). Childhood matters: An introduction. In J. Qvortrup, M. Bardy, G. Sgritta, & H. Wintersberger (Eds.), Childhood matters: Social theory, practice and politics (pp. 1–23). Aldershot: Avebury.
• Senior, J. (2014). All joy and no fun: the paradox of modern parenthood. Ecco.
• Thelen, K., & Mahoney, J. (2015). Comparative-historical analysis in contemporary political science. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Advances in comparative-historical analysis (pp. 3–36). Cambridge University Press.
• United Nations General Assembly. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. G.A. Res. 44/25, 20 November 1989. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_44_25.pdf (Accessed: 10.02.2025).
• Zelizer, V. A. (1985). Pricing the priceless child: The changing social value of children. New York: Basic Books.