Hosegood- Wharton

The Hosegood source described a type of society and a type of household that we have yet to discuss. The article uses terminology such as "stretched households" and "non-resident household members," these are dynamics that add a new dimension to our studies of family and household. Never have we really considered how a household could also represent a network by being composed of individuals who lived outside of the actual dwelling, but provided funding and support to the nodal family unit. The article goes so far as to claim that in the KwaZulu Natal area, "28% of household heads are nonresident," (1250). What does this say about the household itself? How does the lack of physical presence of the head of a household impact the household's organization?

It is clear from reading this article that HIV and AIDS have a significant impact upon many individuals, families, households, and networks in KwaZulu Natal. However, the publication discusses the impact of these illnesses and associated complications upon the household after its formation, which leads me to wonder how the fears and stigmas associated with this illness impact individuals and couples forming a household for the first time? In the various case studies, there were no obvious representations of married couples (as they would have been represented by the double-strike on a family tree diagram). How does such a high prevalence of HIV and AIDS impact the social relationships between men and women in KwaZulu Natal? Is there a lack of trust or fear of loving another individual associated with such a high death rate? Is the contraction of HIV or AIDS throughout the course of one's life expected in this area of South Africa? Is the relationship between HIV and AIDS and intercourse fully understood? Overall, how does the prevalence of serious and frequently fatal illnesses that are passed by sexual contact impact relationships between men and women and the formation of new families in the KwaZulu Natal region?