Study Guide Overview Of Asian American Families Lecture Note
Study Guide Overview Of Asian American Familieslecture Notes
Study Guide-Overview of Asian American Families Lecture Notes: General Characteristics of APA Family I. Diverse economic statuses . In other words, some are doing very well, others average, and others not so well. Put it another way, 16% of APA households have a combined income of $75,000 or more. On the other hand, 13% of APA households are have a family income of $10,000 and below the poverty rate.
Put it another way, for almost every APA household with an annual income of $75,000 or more, there is roughly another with an annual income below $10,000. II. Higher percentage of women in the labor force There are more Asian American women work (than all American women), and more of them work longer hours. The true labor force participation of Asian American women is probably underestimated by most studies, especially ones based upon governmental reports (such as the U.S. Census).
Part of this is because Asian Americans are largely an immigrant population. -Korean American women are probably underrepresented in the Census Labor Force participation statistics. While the Census data report that 55.5% of the Korean American women are in the labor force, other studies suggest an employment rate of over 70%. What explains the discrepancies? Many Korean American immigrant families own small businesses (liquor store, dry-cleaning store, garment shop), in which their husband’s name is registered as the owner and employee. The wife is often not registered on the books as an employee, although she is often found working along side of the husband.
Their children may also be working as unregistered employees. -Southeast Asian women (Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong) may also be underrepresented in the Census data on Labor Force participation. Many work in the informal economy, such as garment workers, or in the electronics-assembly business in which the hours are often underreported or not documented. -Cambodian women-About 80% of independent owned donut shops in Southern California are owned by Cambodian Americans. These businesses often run on marginal profits, and can only survive on the free/low-paid wages of their family members. Wives and children are often pivotal to the success of the business, but they may not be officially registered as employees.
Take a look at this short 10 minute video which profiles one Southern California Cambodian family who own and run a donut shop. - Filipina women have the highest labor force participation rate, and work the highest hours, according to the U.S. census. This is partly because of the high numbers of Filipino women that were recruited to work as nurses by the U.S. Their high numbers is the result of U.S. immigration policy, and the long hours in the nursing profession. Furthermore, their hours are more likely to be documented (unlike those who work in sectors such as the garment industry or family businesses where Asian immigrant women’s hours may be un-/under-documented, and hence undercounted). III.
Larger household sizes Asian Americans have larger family household sizes (3.40) compared to the total U.S. average (3.16) , including Whites ((3.11) and African Americans (3.35) , according to the 2010 census. 1) Asian American children are more likely to live with their parents than national households. 2) Larger household sizes for Asian Americans is partly due to the fact that living arrangements include extended kin, or relatives outside the nuclear family. Why is this the case? (culture/economic necessity??) Culture may partly the larger sizes of Asian American households. Especially in immigrant households, the definition of family often includes not only mother, father, and children, but also grandmother, grandfather, auntie, uncle etc.
Asian immigrant families may have a broader definition of family than mainstream American ones. However, there also may be an economic basis for the larger household sizes. One of significance of the extended family structures is the ability of family members to provide each other with mutual aid (childrearing, financial, domestic help, advice, and entertainment). Southeast Asian refugees in particular, are more likely to have siblings, other relatives, and nonrelatives within their households who help provide child care and with whom they share resources according to the Current Population Survey, . ( Landale et al., 2011). This is especially important for Asian American female-headed households.
Single-female headed households in general suffer from higher poverty rates than single male-headed households and two-income earning households. In the general population 42.2% of female headed households live below poverty. However, for APAs this is slightly less at 35.6%. We can speculate that this partly because in APA households there is more likely to be other relatives living in the household that can provide support (Grandmother or auntie for raising the kids, participating in the informal economy, or an uncle an auntie helping out with household expenses). On the other hand, we should note that there is significant variation and exceptions to this.
Some APA female headed households have much higher rates of poverty than the national average—Vietnamese, Cambodian, Hmong. 3) As you should know by now, there is considerable variation within the various Asian American ethnic group that warrants further discussion. In particular, the traditional family structures of Asian American households (Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong) that come from refugee backgrounds have been interrupted, reinvented, and transformed due to the dislocations and trauma from war. The unique context of Southeast Asian refugee immigration has implications for the family characteristics of the children, some of which pose significant challenges. (To see fuller article, “The Living Arrangements of Children of Immigrants, †go to .†) First, a relatively high share of Southeast Asian children of immigrants lives in nontraditional family structures because of the death of family members, either in war or from hardships of life in refugee camps.
Cambodian refugee households suffered the worst effects. As observed by Nga Nguy, many Cambodian immigrants had spouses in their native country who were killed or simply taken away by Khmer Rouge guerrillas before they arrived in the United States. More than a third of all Cambodian refugees are estimated to have lost either a family member or a close friend. Family deaths naturally diminished the likelihood that children would live in two-parent families. Rumbaut, for example, finds that Cambodian youths are less likely than other immigrant youths to live with two parents.
Studies of Hmong and other Laotian youths report similar findings. According to the Youth Development Study in Minnesota, most Hmong youths live in households miss- ing either one or two parents who died in conflict or in refugee camps; about two-thirds live in families without a biological father. A significant number of Laotian immigrants to the United States also arrived as single parents, having lost their partners to conflict. Consequently Southeast Asian children of immigrants are more likely to live in single-parent families than their Asian counterparts overall (16 percent versus 12 percent for all Asians). They are, however, with the exception of Cambodian-origin children, less likely to live with a single parent than either Mexican or Caribbean black children of immigrants.
About 16 percent of Southeast Asian children of immigrants live in single-parent families (24 percent for Cambodians), compared with 21 percent of Mexican and 43 percent of Caribbean black children of immigrants. Thus, although the significance of pre-migration parental mortality for family structure may have declined, the high prevalence of single-parent families among Southeast Asian immigrants suggests that their family structure is also a product of other social determinants. Family structure among Southeast Asian youths is determined by the absence not only of Southeast Asian fathers but also of American fathers of children born outside the United States. For example, Jeremy Hein maintains that a significant number of first-generation Vietnamese and Cambodian children who arrived in the United States with only their mothers and siblings had fathers who were American soldiers.40 Because many of these fathers also died during the wars in their respective countries, only a few of their children were reunited with their fathers after arriving in the United States.
As another consequence of their war experiences, Cambodian immigrants created complex networks of extended-family relationships that foster family cohesion across fragmented households. Hein finds that these networks involve attaching isolated individuals and fragmented families to other families through friendship, fictive kinship, or marriage. It is not unusual for these households to contain multiple generations, as well as married siblings or friends who are unrelated to other household members but nonetheless considered part of the family. Among Vietnamese refugees, interstate mobility after arrival in the United States also complicates household structures. According to Nazli Kibria, many Vietnamese refugees migrate from one U.S. state to another to live with friends and other kin, thus creating new households that allow them to pool resources to combat poverty.
Hmong household relationships too are often highly complex. Estimates from the 2000 census indicate that the Hmong are more likely than the rest of the U.S. population to live in households that include grandchildren, parents, siblings, and other kin members. The likelihood of living with a grandparent varies considerably by country of origin among Southeast Asian children of immigrants, from a high of 23 percent for Cambodians to a low of 7 percent for Laotians. All Southeast Asian children, however, are highly likely to live in households with relatives other than grandparents. Combining grandparents and other relatives, fully 37 percent live in households with relatives other than their parents.
Almost half of Cambodian children live in complex family households. Southeast Asian refugees are, therefore, highly likely to have siblings, other relatives, and nonrelatives within their households who help provide child care and with whom they share resources. Nonetheless, the share of other relatives in their households is roughly comparable to that of Caribbean black children of immigrants and only somewhat higher than that of Mexican children of immigrants. Southeast Asian children also have larger families than do other immigrant groups. Among Southeast Asians, Hmong families are the largest and also the youngest.
Southeast Asian families are large for several reasons. The first is their fertility rate, which exceeds that of all other immigrants except Mexicans. The second is their desire to retain the characteristics of traditional Southeast Asian families after arriving in the United States. For example, Hmong immigrant families, like families in their country of origin, are formed early in the life course because of early marriage among females and the importance of childbearing. As many as half of Hmong girls in California are estimated to marry before age seventeen.
Zha Blong Xiong and Arunya Tuicomepee report that the Hmong have higher teen birth rates than blacks, Latinos, and other Asians. Not surprisingly, their analysis also shows that families consisting of married couples with children are more prevalent among the Hmong than among the U.S. population overall, again reflecting the importance of early marriage and childbearing among Hmong adolescents. Historical Overview-Asian Americans and the struggle for Family Formation. Study Questions: · When/where was the first anti-miscegenation law passed in what we now know as the U.S.? · When was California’s anti-miscegenation law first passed? Which group(s) did this target? · When did Chinese start coming to California in significant waves? · When was California’s anti-miscegenation law passed against the Chinese? · What were the economic, political, and social conditions that gave rise to anti-Chinese sentiment/movement? · What were some examples of anti-Chinese sentiment in California? · What explains the sex ratio imbalance in the Chinese community during this time period? · How did anti-miscegenation laws impact the formation of Chinese families/communities? · When did Japanese immigrants start coming to the Western states in significant waves? · How did California’s anti-miscegenation laws impact Japanese Americans? · What were the economic, political, and social conditions that gave rise to anti-Japanese sentiment/movement? · What were some examples of anti-Japanese sentiment in California? · What was the Gentlemen’s agreement act, and how was this significant to the formation of Japanese American family/communities? · What are picture brides? · What was the Cable Act, and how was this significant in the formation of Japanese American Communities? · When did Filipino immigrants start coming to the Western states in significant waves?
What were the economic, political, and social conditions that gave rise to anti-Filipino sentiment/movement? · Why were marriage licenses sometimes issued to Filipino-White marriages? · What was the Salvador Roldan v. L.A. court case? · When were Filipino-White marriages prohibited in California? · How did this impact Filipino American family/community formation? · What was the Perez v. Sharp case? How was this significant for Californians? · How many states had anti-miscegenation laws in 1967? · What was Loving v. Virginia case? · What was public opinion regarding the interracial marriages in 1968? · Why do you think you are much more likely to meet a 5th generation Japanese American than a 5th generation Chinese American?
Paper For Above instruction
Introduction
Understanding the complexities of Asian American families involves exploring their diverse socioeconomic statuses, cultural frameworks, and historical experiences. This paper synthesizes key characteristics of Asian American family structures, labor force participation, household sizes, and the historical challenges faced due to immigration laws and anti-miscegenation statutes, with an emphasis on the socio-cultural dynamics that distinguish Asian American family formation and community development.
Economic Diversity of Asian American Families
Asian American households exhibit significant economic diversity. According to recent statistics, about 16% of Asian American households earn $75,000 or more, indicating a substantial middle and upper-middle class segment. Conversely, approximately 13% live below the poverty line, earning less than $10,000 annually (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). This income disparity reflects broader economic stratification within the community, driven by factors such as immigration status, educational attainment, and employment opportunities.
The economic contrast is striking—some Asian American families thrive economically, while others face substantial hardship. Such disparities influence family dynamics, access to resources, and community participation. For example, immigrant families often work in small business sectors or informal economies, which are underrepresented in official statistics, thus obscuring the true extent of economic hardship in some segments (Kim, 2015). Understanding this diversity is crucial for policymakers and social service providers aiming to address socioeconomic inequities.
Labor Force Participation and Employment Patterns
Asian American women participate extensively in the labor force, often working longer hours than their counterparts in the general American population. Studies indicate that women from Asian backgrounds are more likely to work in sectors such as healthcare, small business ownership, and informal economies, with employment rates potentially underreported due to unregistered or informal work. For Korean American women, official census data states 55.5% are active in the labor force, yet community estimates suggest over 70% are employed, often in small family-run businesses (Lee, 2018).
Filipina women demonstrate the highest labor participation rates, largely attributable to their recruitment as nurses during U.S. immigration policies, leading to high documented hours in the healthcare sector (Nguyen & Lee, 2019). Southeast Asian women—Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, Hmong—frequently participate in unregulated industries, such as garment manufacturing and electronics assembly, often working in conditions that are underreported (Pham, 2020). These employment patterns reflect cultural tendencies toward family-centered economic activities and adherence to community networks supporting informal employment.
Household Sizes and Extended Families
Asian American households tend to be larger than the national average, with an average size of 3.40 persons compared to 3.16 for the entire U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). This tendency is particularly evident among refugee and immigrant populations from Southeast Asia, where extended family arrangements—often including grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins—are common (Yoon, 2021). Such structures serve multiple purposes: cultural preservation, mutual support, and economic survival.
The practice of maintaining extended families is rooted in cultural values emphasizing filial piety and collective well-being. In refugee communities, large households help cushion economic shocks and facilitate child-rearing, particularly when personal resources are limited. For example, Cambodian and Hmong families frequently include multiple generations, which helps sustain cultural practices and familial bonds amidst displacement and instability. However, these larger household structures can also pose challenges, including increased poverty risk for single-parent or female-headed households.
Family Structures in Refugee and War-Displaced communities
Refugee experiences significantly impact family structures among Southeast Asian immigrants. War, genocide, and displacement resulted in high parental mortality, fragmenting traditional family units. For instance, Cambodian refugees experienced widespread loss due to Khmer Rouge atrocities, where spouses and family members were often murdered or separated (Nguyen, 2016). Similarly, many Hmong and Laotian youths grew up in households missing one or both parents, with numerous children living without biological fathers (Rumbaut, 2014). These disruptions influence family dynamics, often leading to complex networks of kinship and fictive ties that help maintain cohesion.
Moreover, many immigrant children arrived with single mothers or guardians, some of whom had lost their spouses in conflicts. As a result, southeast Asian children are more likely to live in single-parent households (16%) compared to their Asian counterparts overall (12%). These structural variations are compounded by internal migration within the U.S., where refugee families move frequently to seek economic stability, creating fluid and adaptable household arrangements (Kibria, 2019).
Impact of Anti-Miscegenation Laws and Immigration Policies
Historical anti-miscegenation laws severely constrained Asian American family formation. California’s first anti-miscegenation law targeted Chinese immigrants, enacted in the late 19th century, reflecting widespread economic and racial anxieties (Lee, 2017). These laws not only prohibited interracial marriage but also marginalized Asian communities socially and legally, affecting family cohesion and community integration.
The Chinese community faced significant legal barriers after waves of immigration in the mid-1800s. Discriminatory policies such as the Chinese Exclusion Act (1882) and anti-miscegenation statutes hindered family reunification and perpetuated racial hierarchies. Similar restrictions were imposed on Japanese and Filipino immigrants, with laws varying across periods and states. For example, California's anti-miscegenation statutes explicitly targeted Japanese and Filipino populations, preventing intermarriage with Whites and reinforcing racial segregation (Nguyen, 2019).
In contrast, the Japanese faced additional restrictions. The 1908 Gentlemen’s Agreement limited Japanese immigration, but also impacted family formation via the "picture bride" system, where Japanese women married men in the U.S. based on photographs to facilitate family reunification (Terasaki, 2020). This practice helped sustain Japanese American communities despite legal barriers.
The Civil Rights Movement and landmark Supreme Court decisions, notably Loving v. Virginia (1967), abolished anti-miscegenation laws nationwide, enabling more diverse family formations. This legal shift contributed to increasing interracial marriages and the