<p>This thesis takes as its point of departure the Swedish governmental family policy and the debate on the proposed reform ‘vårdnadsbidraget’. The supporters of the reform present it as something that will increase the freedom of choice for families and benefit the children, whereas the opponents warn for decreased equality and a return to the male breadwinner-model.</p><p>From a constructivist perspective, language is closely related to power through defining and ascribing meaning to reality. By applying a feminist political theory on the debate within the Swedish national parliament 2007/2008 and conducting a discourse analysis, the aim of this paper is to analyse which concepts are used and how they construct to what makes a family within the political debate – is there any difference or similarity between the view of the opponents and the supporters of ‘vårdnadsbidraget’?</p><p>The main conclusion of this paper is that even though the political ideal and rhetorical concepts differ between the supporters and the opponents, they still constitute the heterosexual nuclear family as an obvious norm in family politics. Even though the opponents of the reform are critical to the nuclear family as a ideal, their strife for gender equality contributes to reproduce the heterosexual nuclear family as the family norm.</p>

This thesis takes as its point of departure the Swedish governmental family policy and the debate on the proposed reform ‘vårdnadsbidraget’. The supporters of the reform present it as something that will increase the freedom of choice for families and benefit the children, whereas the opponents warn for decreased equality and a return to the male breadwinner-model. From a constructivist perspective, language is closely related to power through defining and ascribing meaning to reality. By applying a feminist political theory on the debate within the Swedish national parliament 2007/2008 and conducting a discourse analysis, the aim of this paper is to analyse which concepts are used and how they construct to what makes a family within the political debate – is there any difference or similarity between the view of the opponents and the supporters of ‘vårdnadsbidraget’? The main conclusion of this paper is that even though the political ideal and rhetorical concepts differ between the supporters and the opponents, they still constitute the heterosexual nuclear family as an obvious norm in family politics. Even though the opponents of the reform are critical to the nuclear family as a ideal, their strife for gender equality contributes to reproduce the heterosexual nuclear family as the family norm.