Family vs. State

     Today we learned about the 3 types of families that Zimmerman came up with. He talked about the trustee family, the atomistic family, and the domestic family. I found this subject very interesting, especially his idea that when the family is strong, the state is weak (and vice versa). I had never considered this before, but now I am sure that he is right. In the case of a society with a trustee family trend, the state is bound to be weak because they have little responsibility and therefore little control. In the case of a society with an atomistic family trend, the state will be strong because it has to be to support the people, but the individual family is quite weak. I think that there are certain issues that must be dealt with by the family, and other issues that must be dealt with by the state. Though the family may be strong and the state weak, there is no way for the family to stay indefinitely strong without eventually requiring outside help. For example, in the case of a serious medical emergency a family can do the best they can, but they have a weakness in this situation that they cannot solve on their own. In a true trustee family society, a very ill person will have to care of a trained healthcare person in their extended family; however they will not be provided the same care that a large hospital funded by the state could give them. I think that the solution to this is a society of domestic families. If both the family and the state have a portion of the responsibility and control, then both can be strong. In fact I think that by working together, the family and the state are both stronger than they would have been on their own because together they fill in the gaps that the other left out.