The world seems to have a lot of biases when it comes to elderly people. Personally, I sometimes tend to get irritated with them for being less aware of technological advancements. For instance, some may not be able to use modern cellphones because of these being equipped with complex features. According to Wangmo et al. (2017), the elderly often get disrespected and labeled as slow, dense, and annoying. In other words, they have been deemed a burden to society.
Attitudes Toward the Elderly
Using sociological theories and perspectives to analyze the familial trend can help limit biases and challenge assumptions by enabling society to understand that aging is a natural process that everyone experiences. Patel et al. (2021) speak about how an enormous variety of factors contributes to the changes of the elderly people’s minds, bodies and psyches. For instance, there is molecular and cellular damage, as well as the emergence of so-called geriatric syndromes. The value of different perspectives and trends is immense: exploring the problem from different angles helps people understand how tough it is to cope with natural occurrences, which can contribute to reducing stigmatization.
Some of the responses that were successful in addressing this familial trend’s negative impacts include having meaningful conversations with the elderly and speaking out about the issue. However, the one I find to be the most effective is the provision of home-based care. Warren and Blundell (2019) note that, as people age, their family becomes to them of utmost importance. As a result, they want to spend most of their time with their close family members. While said family members might not be necessarily excited about it, taking care about their elderly might be useful in terms of understanding how tough it is to be of age. Relatives are likely to become more empathetic towards the elders and not only start behaving more respectfully but also communicating to other how important it is.
Conclusion
In conclusion, family education is the most important response to addressing elderly abuse based on personal research. Although other responses have also worked, simple conversations are more likely to be less effective than seeing how much elder people suffer from stigmatization. Therefore, family education is a long-term solution that enlightens society on the importance of valuing the elderly. In short, it creates an acceptance attitude in all the society members.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender and queer (LGBTQ) community have become a broadly recognized designation for minorities based on gender and sex positioning. Members of these subdivisions have been subjected to comparable prejudice originating from traditions and beliefs about gender and sexuality. Like other nations, the US LGBTQs are suffering from social-economic and cultural injustices that affect the victims and their families at large. These families face many problems, including discrimination, harassment, violent threats, intolerance, to mention but a few. All these issues should be addressed in a just manner in the US to ensure these families fit into society and enjoy equal rights. In tendency for this, it is essential to analyze issues faced by such families in the community and thus provide recommendations on approaches to adopt during counseling sessions of LGBTQ families.
LGBTQ families face tremendous problems in a society where heterosexualism is the only good routine and homosexuality is deviant. These families face discrimination and disadvantage regarding social protection schemes like pensions and healthcare. These families are often viewed as a different species hence face abuse and homophobic violence in the US (Roberts & Christens, 2020). Most LGBTQ families endure harassment, while others chose to hide their sexual positioning in fear of losing their jobs in the labor market. This is a significant problem for homosexual families in many US states.
Same-sex couple families are mostly the hate crime victims. Common stigma results in aggressive feelings of hatred towards LGBTQ families. They are always the targeted victims of hate, violence, and crimes, with most people being people of color. Homophobic environs push such families to withhold their identity due to the adverse reactions that inform physical attacks or homophobic jokes. They could also end up being prejudiced.
Additionally, adoption is also another issue encountered by US homosexual families in many states. Each state has set its restrictions behind adoption since this process requires a closely monitored procedure to ensure that proper parenting will be given to the adopted child. However, LGBTQ faces significant challenges in parenting since many adoption agencies try to argue that both fatherly and motherly love is crucial in bringing up a kid. These “child-giving” agencies advocate for proper parenthood that consists of both males and females. Since they are of one gender, they might be under unfavorable surveillance to adopt a child or even be denied the right to adopt one. However, this could cause distress and lower the victim’s self-acceptance because their treatment as inferiors is due to their sexual orientation.
US LGBTQs come across many issues that have significant impacts even on the family. Their problems affect them and anything related to them, like their families or jobs. These families lose jobs at their workplaces, or their businesses can also be shut down due to vague legal claims. Typically, this happens because one cannot withhold their sexual orientation any longer, or one can be fed up with the discrimination and harassment at the workplace or from the legal authorities. LGBTQ families could also be denied access to given services since they are not aware of what they are entitled to, like specific insurances or pensions. Social exclusion and marginalization are other impacts experienced by homosexual families. These families are denied their social rights and even mobility to a particular area. Hence same-sex families experience psychological torture causing distress that could cause diseases like high blood pressure.
Homosexual families encounter various social-economic, religious, and political problems; hence, they should be entitled to multiple counseling strategies to handle these problems. Ideally, one should get involved with the issue, familiarize with it and strive for social change and justice. Reflect on areas of our own beliefs and attitudes towards them, which ought to be biased. Creating an affirmative setting, providing LGBTQ-friendly reading articles and resources will make the victims feel secure. One should never make heteronormative assumptions and should always consider the victims’ opinions. Advocating to challenge heterosexualism can also motivate same-sex families because this provides legit evidence for their support. This helps LGBTQ families to open up and feel fit in society. According to Earnshaw (2020), such families’ counseling gives them proper pro-active preparedness for the forthcoming issues and how to handle their impacts especially in schools. Educate LGBTQ same-sex on the difference between gender identity and sexual positioning.
Psychodynamic counseling can be adopted during counseling sessions since it involves establishing a solid alliance between LGBTQ individuals. The ultimate counselor essence is to help LGBTQ families develop the psychological tools needed to handle difficult situations and feelings, such as discrimination, rejection, and seclusion from society (Bojarski & Qayyum, 2018). LGBTQ individuals who have undergone this counseling approach tend to develop psychological complications and overcome any psychological issues due to their sexual nature.
To sum up, this research proves that LGBTQ families face various problems, with the most common being discrimination, rejection, and psychological distress. This has tremendous impacts on individual victims and their families in their daily activities. Several counseling strategies like educating homosexuals on the importance of accepting their sexual orientation are crucial. Thus, LGBTQ families will thrive freely and peacefully in society.
References
Bojarski, E., & Qayyum, Z. (2018). Psychodynamics of suicide in lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender youth. Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 17(3), 178-186. Web.
Earnshaw, V. A., Menino, D. D., Sava, L. M., Perrotti, J., Barnes, T. N., Humphrey, D. L., & Reisner, S. L. (2020). LGBTQ bullying: a qualitative investigation of student and school health professional perspectives. Journal of LGBT youth, 17(3), 280-297. Web.
Roberts, L. M., & Christens, B. D. (2020). Pathways to well‐being among LGBT adults: Sociopolitical involvement, family support, outness, and community connectedness with race/ethnicity as a moderator. American Journal of Community Psychology. Web.
Translated as “Slap” from Hindi, Thappad is a movie about the dynamics of a toxic relationship where the differences between the main characters’ families and personalities contribute to the growing gap between them irrespective of the woman remaining as submissive as possible and the man taking every advantage of the situation. Even though the story is about abuse, the couple seems to get on pretty well at first, as even the financial imbalance cannot strike their relationship to the point of no return. Nevertheless, the husband is much more interested in his professional career, and he does not care about how his wife feels because he sees that she expects him to win (Joshi, 2020).
The husband tends to take this for granted, and the wife does not expect their relationship to go downhill anytime soon. Yet, when the thappad occurs, the whole world turns upside down for the main character, as she stops realizing where the line between the good and the bad is. The families get divided because of the inability to assess the situation from both perspectives, and it leads to a situation where no one sees a viable solution to the issue.
Even though the Indian setting is much more different from the Western world, there is no question about the meaning of the slap throughout the movie, as the presence of abuse charges the main character’s instinct and helps her to stand up for her values at the end of the day. There is nothing wrong with her channeling her inner fighter, as there is practically no one to help her (except for her father). Therefore, Thappad is not just another story about how one should rant about domestic violence in order to stop it or at least try to prevent it.
The film goes beyond that and points out the crucial impact of conditioning that would subject women to aligning her actions against what society or even her own family believes in, making it harder to stand up for herself in the time of need (Desai & Andrist, 2010). This is the exact reason why the director shows other women suffering from abuse, as it becomes evident over time that there may be different rationales for anguish, but the outcome is always the same old submission. Whether it is hard to find a replacement or the person merely got used to being abused because of coming from a poorer family, it does never justify abuse, and Thappad is the evidence to the case.
The director of the movie does a great job by collocating a number of different topics to develop a complex story about how relationships should never unfold if there is a need to face the consequences of one’s actions. The conflict between the wife and the husband starts off rather subtly and then turns into a fully-fledged battle where the woman stands up for herself and tries to do everything in her power to outrun the gender-specific, stereotypical role of a submissive wife that should only proceed in accordance with her husband’s approval (Desai & Andrist, 2010).
The speech that the main character delivers when saying goodbye to her husband is the depiction of liberation that every woman experiencing abuse should be able to go through in order to step away from unfair treatment and feelings of regret and disgust. The matriarchal mentality is also present in the movie, but it does not receive a lot of attention prior to the drastic changes occurring within the mind of the main character.
References
Desai, S., & Andrist, L. (2010). Gender scripts and age at marriage in India. Demography, 47(3), 667-687.
Joshi, N. (2020). Polarities in gender representation-Kabir Singh and Thappad. Global Media Journal: Indian Edition, 12(1).
A theoretical perspective is a hypothetical explanation of a fact. There are many theoretical perspectives on the family as an institution. The perspectives may or may not complement each other.
Theoretical Perspectives of the Family
The family ecology perspective revolves around looking at how a family influences the surrounding environment and how it is influenced by it. Society does not affect the behavior of the family members but it presents limitations and interferences the same way it does with possibilities and opportunities. How a family lives are affected by educational, economic, religious and cultural institutions (Lamana and Reidman, 2005).
The family development perspective emphasizes the family as a unit of analysis. It states that families experience predictable changes over time.Its key concepts are family life cycle, developmental tasks, on-time transitions, and sequencing of roles.
The structural-functional perspective views the family as a social institution that performs important functions in society. Family structure varies according to the society it is in. The extended family existed in traditional societies while nuclear families are dominant in modern societies. The function of a family is to raise and socialize children responsibly as well as provide economic assistance and emotional security (Lamana and Reidman, 2005).
An integrationist perspective emphasizes interaction. It focuses on gestures, actions and talks that go in the family. It examines people who act in awareness of others. It does not identify a standard family structure. Its central concept is self-awareness. This involves feelings, abilities and self-worth. Each family is different and behavior does not have a single meaning.
The exchange theory perspective has an economic inclination to social relationships. It focuses on a persons resources such as education, income, and personality influence in a relationship. It states that people use their resources to get an advantage in their relationships. This in turn shapes power and authority in the family. Rewards and costs which influence the family could be either material or non-material.
The utility exchange perspective is subject to criticism in that it assumes human nature as rational but unrealistic about the function of love and responsibility. Emotions and commitment which make one concerned about his or her couple’s happiness are also considered (Lamana and Reidman, 2005).
The family systems theory looks at the family as a whole entity. The family functions in a way such that behavior and emotional expression are always a priority. Family boundaries and closeness or farness between family members are important in this perspective.
Conflict and feminist perspectives state that not all that happens in the family is good. Something that may be good for one family member may not be good for another. Interaction in the family can entail domestic violence and rituals on a day. It calls for attention to unequal power in the family for example in distribution of household chores between family members. The feminist perspective centers on gender issues. It looks at male dominance and oppression of women in society (Lamana and Reidman, 2005).
The role of religion, geography and social status in mate selection
Issues such as religion, geography, social status and race influence mate selection. People from one religion tend to choose a mate from their religion. The same applies to social class, race and ethnicity. Men and women tend to choose mates who are physically attractive. Culture influences how people view beauty. People prefer values such as dependability, sociability, intelligence and stability of potential mates. People may choose mates from different religions, age groups, religions, races, or social classes to improve their social class or to obtain rewards and minimize costs (Kenrich and Agnes, 2005).
There are other important factors about mate selection and dating. What one brings to a marriage is an important consideration when selecting a mate. Marriage age differs from society to society. Both traditional and modern cultures determine dating for instance free choice compared to arranged marriages. Another factor that may determine mate selection could be the open courtship system common in western countries.
References
Kenrich, S.T., & Agnes, R. (2005). Study Guide for Lamanna and Riedmann’s Marriages And Families: Making Choices in a Diverse Society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lamana, M., & Reidman, A. (2005). Marriage and Families: Making Choices in a Diverse Society. 9th ed. Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth.
The present paper aims to analyze the Family Development Center program described by Fischer (2000). The program is assessed using the four principles of community psychology, which include problems addressed, values reflected in the program approach and methods, conceptual foundation of the program, and action and research tools (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010). The recommendations for improvement are provided after the analysis.
Program Description
The Family Development Center program was conducted from 1991-1995 in College Park, GA (Fischer, 2000). The program young unmarried homeless mothers (17-26 years of age) without a record of substance abuse and with a determination to benefit from the program. It was a two-year program that provided young mothers with the experience of living in an assisted-living facility and transitioning to self-sustained living. During the first year, the participants were provided with a place to live, where they could learn to cook, care for themselves and the baby, and support their living. The participants were also provided social and vocational services and supervised by a young couple. During the second year, the participants were no longer provided a place to live individually, while all the other benefits remained intact. The program was evaluated using quantitative and qualitative methods (surveys) (phone interviews).
Program Evaluation
The program aimed at addressing the problem of homelessness among young single-parent mothers (Fischer, 2000). In particular, the program aimed at working on the issue of their inability to support their living and care for their children due to homelessness. The program aimed to help mothers change their lifestyles and acquire stability in housing, emotional state, and financial support. The program utilized complex measures, which were meant to transform the lifestyles of the participants. Thus, the program reflects a holistic, transformative ecological model (Nelson, & Prilleltensky, 2010).
While the values of the program were not clearly identified, they were reflected in the program description implicitly. The core value promoted through the program is self-sufficiency. Additionally, the program promoted the values of stability in income, housing, and health. Thus, the values of the program addressed the personal well-being of the participants.
The primary weakness of the program is that it was not based on any conceptual or theoretical framework. Fischer (2000) states that Family Development Center was based on the experienced of similar programs in other states. However, a lack of including a theoretical model may lead to inconsistency in methods.
The methods were appropriate to achieve the goals of the program. In particular, the program provided enough time for the participants to recover from the hardships of living on the streets by providing stability in the transitional living facility. Additionally, social, vocational, and psychological support was provided to ensure that young mothers would be able to support their own living financially and emotionally. The research methods were also appropriate, as they incorporated both qualitative and quantitative assessments of the program. Program providers as well ass participants actively participated in the implementation of the program.
Conclusion and Recommendations for Improvement
Even though the program was well-planned, the evaluation demonstrated the limited effect of the program. The primary drawback was that the program was not based on any theory, which may have caused inconsistency in methods and values. Thus, it is recommended that an appropriate theoretical basis is used to re-evaluate the program and make necessary corrections. Additionally, the program values need to be explicitly stated to ensure that all the methods are aligned with both theory and values.
References
Fischer, R. L. (2000). Toward self‐sufficiency: Evaluating a transitional housing program for homeless families. Policy Studies Journal, 28(2), 402-420.
Nelson, G., & Prilleltensky, I. (2010). Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
In recent years, the public and state agenda has been aimed at recognizing LGBTQ+ families as full members of society, endowed with equal rights. However, such families continue to face discrimination and infringement of rights. The family model directly affects the social status of family members and the well-being of children. LGBTQ+ families are significantly influenced by social, economic, and political factors. Challenges for LGBTQ+ families include prioritizing the patriarchal system, inequality in the labor market, and prejudice.
The Impact of Feminism, Patriarchy, Gender Roles, and Social Class
A feminist theory logically has a more substantial impact on the well-being of families with same-sex female parents. However, promoting equality and the absence of any form of discrimination also positively impact families with same-sex male parents. The patriarchal system that dominates society, on the contrary, negatively affects the LGBTQ+ family (Haines et al., 2018). Patriarchal society imposes gender roles, according to which both the family and community as a whole should be built. Gender roles, inviting all members of society to follow a given paradigm of traditionally feminine and masculine models, negatively affect the well-being of LGBTQ+ families. Members of such families can go two ways: distribute imposed gender roles, where even same-sex parents take on a ‘female’ and ‘male’ roles, or struggle with societal attitudes. Belonging to a particular social class has the same important role for LGBTQ+ families as for others, determining the wealth and comfort of life. Belonging to a specific social class depends on the conditions of the environment more than on sexual orientation and gender identity.
The Impact of the Market
Previous studies of the economic characteristics of LGBTQ+ households were based on the perception that there are systematic differences between the behavior of members of the LGBTQ+ community and others. Actually, there are no such differences; however, despite this, the lives of LGBTQ+ families are complicated by economic factors. Such families face much higher costs of adopting children, and they usually resort to this procedure more often than other families.
LGBTQ+ families are no different from others from the consumption point; it depends on the place of residence and income. The labor market’ influence, on the contrary, is quite strong: LGBTQ+ families often have lower wages, and employers are less willing to provide work for them. At the same time, gays face discrimination especially hard since social accepting their equality is more difficult due to contradictions with traditional notions of masculinity. LGBTQ+ families’ wealth level is lower than that of families in the neighborhood due to labor discrimination. Gender inequality also plays a significant role: men’s wages are higher than women’s, so a gay family is expected to be richer than a lesbian family.
The Impact of the State
The state provides LGBTQ+ families with equal rights and strives to protect them from discrimination. However, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people who become parents in the United States may experience disparities in parental rights (Horne et al., 2021). Every state allows couples to adopt children jointly, but there are states where LGBTQ+ families face religious discrimination. Religion often considers marriage possible only between a man and a woman so that same-sex parents may be denied adoption on personal grounds.
Access to education depends on the family’s wealth rather than on sexual orientation or gender identity. US law ensures education, accessible to all citizens, so schools do not have the right to refuse children from LGBTQ+ families. However, in educational institutions, children of same-sex parents may face discrimination and bullying from classmates and teachers. Thereby, LGBTQ+ families are protected legislatively and endowed with all rights, but their lives are more complicated than for other families.
Conclusion
Thus, LGBTQ+ families experience difficulties economically and socially: discrimination relates to the level of salaries, negative public perception, and the right to adopt children. Primarily, it happens because of the prejudices in society caused by traditional patriarchal ideas about the suitable family composition and the distribution of gender roles. The state formally protects same-sex families, but more action is needed to ensure equality in practice.
References
Haines, K. M., Boyer, C. R., Giovanazzi, C., & Galupo, M. P. (2018). “Not a real family”: Microaggressions directed toward LGBTQ families. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(9), 1138-1151.
Horne, S. G., Johnson, T., Yel, N., Maroney, M. R., & McGinley, M. (2021). Unequal rights between LGBTQ parents living in the U.S.: The association of minority stress to relationship satisfaction and parental stress. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice. Advance online publication.
Considering the explanation of what the program Family Hui Hawaii (FHH) does within the non-profit, it is firstly feasible to emphasize its mission and vision. According to the organization, every family should have access to the resources and social benefits required to guarantee the health status, security, and well-being of every child (About us, 2022). By giving children a secure and supportive environment to develop, prosper, and learn from one another, the organization’s aim is to assist, stimulate, and equip households to confront the difficulties of parenting children (About us, 2022). Special 10-week gatherings are focused on assisting families as they navigate parenthood from pregnancy to age 5. In fact, all of the Hui’s programs are based on the five protective factors: resilience, child development, communication, concrete support, and social group.
In actuality, peer-to-peer solidarity and a shared commitment to anonymity are the foundation of the Hui model’s authenticity. The founders of the organization first only used the Parent Cafés online. At the same time, the significance of in-person meetings is shifting as, for example, COVID-19 and variant numbers change and the necessity for them is becoming more critical. The organization needs to “hire” trained child minders since it is going to continue having in-person meetings. Furthermore, they will need to find qualified Resource Caregivers who have received trauma-informed care education and training. Additionally, experts who have prepared activities for the children of different ages who will participate to interact with their parents and one another are to be included.
The funds will assist in attaining the mission since additional support is required in order to complete current organizational tasks and plan future development and expansion. In general, the program provides effective practical results, for example, the evidence-based “Embracing Ohana Manual” proves positive outcomes for keiki, families, and communities at large. The program was elaborated since the initiators experienced the need for essential help while fostering and consequently provided peer-to-peer support. Hence, the initial motivation combined with documented work outcomes can be improved with the rational use of important resources.
The lawlessness of street gangs has become the burning issue of many poor districts of South Los Angeles. Who can protect citizens suffering from these street gangs? It seems that there is not any justice for them. The police should keep order and calm in these districts. Nevertheless, the police are aggressive towards such anxious districts and even innocent citizens of this district are afraid of the police too. The poor citizens of South Los Angeles have the same right to live in peace and calm as other Americans. They should be protected by the police as well as the rich people of prosperous districts. Who should solve this social problem? There are a lot of such cases all over the world when people who do not have enough money have a lack of civil services.
Beth Barrett presents the problem of street gangs in Southern California in her article Living in Fear: Gangs Keep Stranglehold on Southland Cities. The author describes the life of the poor districts of Los Angeles where banditry and willfulness reign. Most families live in the fear. Their life is compared to prison when they are afraid to go outside. Their children do not have the opportunity to play with their peers outside as far as they may be the victims of fights between the police and the local gangs. People are accustomed to the noise which does not stop at any time. Their life resembles the action film with gunshots and shouts. The police fight with these gangs prohibiting loitering, graffiti and drinking alcohol in public but they do not take into account the life of peaceful citizens who are not guilty (Barrett).
People use steel curtains on their doors and windows to protect their life from these gangs. These people cannot afford to move to peaceful districts as far as it is too expensive. That is why they have to bear the lawlessness of local gangs and they do not have anything to do. The police which seems to be the only protection do not care about the life of poor people. During the skirmish between the police and local gangs, innocent people suffer.
The author provides the example of Patricia Lopez who is a Mexican immigrant who has lived with her son in this dangerous district for two years. Of course, she wants a better life for her child but she does not have enough money for better conditions. She and her son have to endure the sirens of police and paramedics, the gunfire and people’s cries (Barrett). She is afraid when the sun is down and the evening begins. She is afraid that someone gets into her apartment with the gun in her hand. She sees when these gangs sell drugs openly on the street and she does not venture to say something to them. Everyone is afraid of the gangs. They cannot call the police as far as they get mad at them and hurt them too. These people do not have any protection from the government. Their rights are violated and this fact does not worry anyone. Who cares about the life of poor people? There is not only the social division on the rich and the poor but on those who are considered to be humans and have rights and those whose life does not worry anyone. People who have money can protect their life while the life of poor people is cheap in modern society. Patricia Lopez and her son do not have an opportunity to live an ordinary way of life. Her son brings his time primarily at home because his mother wants to protect him from danger. Another woman, Catalina Herrera who lives in this district with her husband and two little children compares their life with the prison. Their life is disturbed by current street sounds, shots and blaring music during the whole night (Barrett). Although the cops are everywhere in this district, all these people do not feel the protection in these governmental organizations.
People from these poor districts do not have any help from the government. They have to protect their lives themselves. As the result, the actions of local gangs are not prevented by the police and the peaceful citizens just shut their eyes on them trying not to attract their attention. The life of these people becomes the current fight for survival. The main aim of their life becomes to protect their family. They live as though in war times. There are gangbangers everywhere. Bob Smith, the inhabitant of this district says that he tries to be used to such a way of life. He does not think about these gangs. He does not look at them when he sees them on the street as far as they may think that you look for the troubles (Barrett). Such anarchy should be stopped by the government. The security of the citizens is the obligation of any government.
Works Cited
Barrett, Beth. “Living in Fear. Gangs Keep Stranglehold on Southland Cities”. The Los Angeles Daily News (2004).
Stress is often understood in the current context as the most frequent and, at the same, time, dangerous psychophysiological state of a modern person. This state of severe psychological stress, as a rule, is associated with an excessive number of necessary tasks and a heightened sense of high responsibility. The problem of stress is especially widespread in modern countries of the first and second worlds, where the very specifics of lifestyle can exert tremendous pressure. It is required to discover and describe those causal relationships that determine the presence of stress in a person. An attempt was made to identify the combination of stress factors that make the normal life of an ordinary person not only difficult but even unbearable. It is demonstrated that there is a close connection between modern work requirements and conditions, the stress experienced in family life and immediate harm to the psychological health of a person.
Primarily, this essay focuses on the factors that cause stress and at the same time represent a kind of combination between a person’s work and family activities. The so-called conflict between work and family is the overlap of one layer of activity on another. Taking care of one’s relatives implies financial assistance and interaction, the presence of a family budget, that is, work is a guarantee of the family’s security. However, today it happens to be extremely difficult to combine active labor activity with real care for the family. It is required to describe those factors of family life inherent exclusively in the modern situation in the world and society, which conflict with an adequately built regular activity.
One of the most problematic issues for a modern person at the moment is perhaps time management, the ability to organize a schedule in such a way as to conveniently distribute all his activities. Increasing productivity, performance of work, in this aspect, seems to be one of the main goals, since it is a condition for a reliable social position with a stable financial income (Rabenu et al. 1143). Consequently, a clear distribution of time, despite the possible difficult implications that it may have for a person, has become something like a condition of modern existence.
At the same time, it is difficult to say that such a life on a constant clear schedule contributes to the psychological health of a person. The need to fit into the formal framework, to subject one’s household chores and leisure to a clear time limit, seems to further complicate a person’s life. Moreover, one could say that the need to organize your free time, the search for a blank space in the schedule for rest, can negatively affect the very principle of getting pleasure from leisure. Thus, in contemporary socio-economic conditions, it becomes increasingly difficult for a person who cares about those they love to find time exclusively for themselves.
Young families who are just getting used to everyday life and organizing their independent life find it especially difficult due to the need to take care of children. In modern culture, the upbringing of children is at that historical stage when, according to public opinion, children should be given as much time as possible. Despite the seeming truth of this thesis, in the context of additional living conditions such as pressure at work, this massively widespread perception can occur to be its hard-hitting side. In the context of constant pressure at work, the need to spend more time with children can be expressed in increased tension between family members, conflict, and mutual misunderstanding.
Speaking about other family problems that a modern person is forced to pay attention to, it is necessary to stipulate the need to take care of elderly relatives. Due to the increased life expectancy and increased workload on a person, at the moment, young families need not only to raise their own children but also to take care of their own parents and grandparents. In the context of the controversial reputation that nursing homes and hospices have throughout history, as well as the moral pressures of this option, most families continue to constantly care for the older generations. Despite the unconditional ethical benefactor of such a decision, it should be noted that it hardly fits into the already busy life of a modern person.
At the same time, in this particular context, it should be said that taking care of elderly relatives, due to historically established cultural ideas, more often falls on a woman than on a man. Despite the gradual elimination of clear gender roles from modern culture, in this case, women are historically oppressed. It is no coincidence that the generation forced to raise its family and care for the families of relatives is usually called the “sandwich generation” (Hämäläinen & Tanskanen, p. 337). This is a special historically formed type, a stratum of society, subject to permanent pressure from both the previous and the next generation. Considering that in modern economic and cultural conditions a woman must also work and be the second earner in the family, the conditions of such a life turn out to be extremely stressful.
Speaking about the context as close as possible to modernity, one would also need to highlight the problem of stressful stress on a person’s family and work life in the context of a pandemic situation. In many countries, the 2020 lockdown has changed the way people think about economic reality (Spinelli et al. 639). Many people have lost their jobs or opportunities to engage in independent business activities. The economic system around the world has undergone a tremendous burden and, in the process of adapting the world to new realities, this has led to the need for retraining for many workers.
Those who previously had reliable jobs lost the opportunity to receive a stable income, which negatively affects the family budget and forces them to look for any other way to get money. Thus, the problem of unemployment and economic pressure during the pandemic only exacerbated the already enormous pressure on working family members. In particular, this tragic situation affected people of low income or low social status, for example, families forced to live in ghettos or slums (Spinelli et al. 640). However, socio-economic changes during the pandemic affected almost everyone, and for families, the lockdown situation also presented a great burden.
In particular, a condition contributing to the emergence of severe forms of stress during a pandemic is the need for constant coexistence. In the context of apartments and slums, this situation seems not only stressful, but also epidemiologically dangerous. Considering it in the context of permanent pressure on modern man, it also seems extremely disturbing. The pressure to pay constant attention to children who are also experiencing mixed emotions during a period of high global turbulence certainly puts pressure (Hämäläinen & Tanskanen 337). This constant responsiveness must also be taken in combination with the possible need to go to work remotely, right from home.
Thus, a person is either forced to work from home, or his work is unrealizable and, therefore, not paid. The availability of every person online in modern realities also seems to be extremely psychologically harmful. The notification systems installed in every modern mobile device actually make it so that a person is in constant access mode, without the ability to ignore updates and work requirements. The need for constant, round-the-clock reconciliation of family life and work leads to the impossibility of separating and balancing these branches of life (Rabenu et al. 1143). Such difficulties can be characterized as approaches to a critical psychological state, which has unpredictable consequences and results.
Thus, it can be concluded that modern working conditions, requiring constant availability and willingness to perform work, are superimposed on similar social requirements to constantly take care of the family and children. This load for certain strata and members of society may be superior to human capabilities, which, against the background of the need to act, is not noticed by a working person. A large amount of pressure, aggravated also by an unstable socio-economic situation, can imperceptibly deform the human psyche, causing enormous damage to it. This is an acute social problem since the most vulnerable of the able-bodied segments of the population are exposed to stress due to the combination of family and work. The conflict between work and family is a kind of mediation between stress at work and family crisis, exacerbating the negative aspects of both parts of a healthy and productive life.
From the readings, the following ideas and lessons can be derived. First, the mother’s house labor permits the provider, the husband, to labor, letting the woman undertake domestic duties such as food preparation, utensil washing, courtyard and home maintenance, and child care (Mosca et al., 2021). Thus, the societal predisposition and notion that women are lesser in the community should be abandoned, and greater emphasis should be placed on the critical functions they perform in the household. Additionally, notwithstanding the uncertainties, parents and guardians may transition from dread to meaning by intending to function as committed stakeholders in their children’s education.
Second, while partnerships can be characterized in various ways depending on who is connected, all healthy partnerships share important components: effective dialogue, appropriate limits, mutual understanding, and supportiveness. Adolescents learn to develop secure and healthful connections with their peers, families, guardians, instructors, and love companions during their adolescence. Teenagers frequently experiment with various identities and behavior, and each of these interactions contributes to their identity construction. Continued use of contraceptive methods can help avoid pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. Hormonal contraceptives such as pills and barrier measures such as condoms can significantly prevent the likelihood of pregnancy and minimize the danger of sexually transmitted infections.
Third, to label a same-sex spouse as gay, characterize their connection as gay, or refer to their affection as gay intercourse is extremely insulting and should be disregarded. Anti-gay radicals regularly utilize these formulations to disparage LGBT persons, partnerships, and engagements. Lastly, The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor advocates American principles, such as the legal system and individual freedoms, to foster robust, peaceful, successful, and autonomous governments. They contribute to American sovereignty in the fight against dictatorship and terrorism by defending religious, linguistic, and media freedom and the rights of citizens to peaceably protest and seek the government for grievance remedy.
The image below advocates for an inclusive society that supports and accepts every individual regardless of their sexuality.
Figure 1
Being a member of the LGBTQ community does not imply a proclivity for rape, molestation, sexual assault, sadomasochism, or incest. These assertions, equivocations, and correlations frequently suggest that LGBT individuals are a danger to the community, households, and especially children. Therefore, society should provide a varied, comprehensive, embracing, friendly, and supportive environment for all.
