가족건강성과 건강가정정책

목차 (Table of Contents)

• The purpose of this study was to determine the factors affecting the family Strengths and therewith, suggest some policy alternatives for the family Strengths and welfare. For this purpose, the researcher sampled 208 college students to survey them for their perceptions of family concept and functions as well as their efforts for family functions for family members and society.
• The results of this study can be summarized as follows;
• First, as a result of surveying the subjects for their perception of family concept, it was found that almost all of them (99.0%) perceived that ''a family consists of couple and their children'' (item 1). The other items about family concept chosen by the majority of subjects were ''couple and adopted child'' (item 3 and 17), ''remarried couple and their children'' (item 9), ''single parent and children'' (item 2), ''three-generation family: couple, widow daughter and grand daughter'' (item 4), ''three sisters'' (item 7), ''unmarried woman living with a son born from a sperm bank'' (item 19), ''separated couple with no child'' (item 13), ''cousins living together'' (item 11), ''divorced man and his girl friend with child'' (item 15) and ''homosexual family'' (item 8).
• Second, as a result of assessing subjects'' needs for family functions and their efforts for family Strengths, it was found that the family functions for family members scored higher than those for the society, and that subjects'' efforts for the family functions conducive to both their family members and society scored lower than their needs for the family functions. The family function desired most by subjects for their family members was ''affectionate and emotional support and solidarity'', followed by ''recess'', ''children''s education'', ''child rearing'', ''property protection'', ''amusement and recreation'', ''child bearing'', ''production'' and ''consumption'' in their order. On the other hand, the area of family functions for which the subjects were making most efforts was ''children''s education'', followed by ''protection of family members and properties'', ''consumption'', ''child rearing'', ''recess'' and ''production'' in their order.
• The family function perceived most important for the society was ''stabilization of the society'', followed by ''inter-generational transfer of culture'' and ''maintenance of the economic order''. And the family function for which the subjects were making most efforts for the society was ''stabilization of the society'', followed by ''preservation of mankind and supply of social members'' and ''inter-generational transfer of culture'' in their order.
• Third, as a consequence of analyzing the overall family Strengths, it was disclosed that the overall family Strengths scored 3.46 (SD: 0.63) or a normal level, but that Strengths of individual families differed significantly depending on monthly family income. Namely, the families with lowest income scored lowest in family Strengths.
• Fourth, subjects'' needs and efforts for family functions were positively correlated with family Strengths. Namely, family functions were closely related with family Strengths. On the other hand, subjects needs for family functions for family members and society were positively correlated with their efforts for those functions. Specifically, subjects'' efforts for the family functions but fulfillment of sexual desire and child bearing were positively correlated with family Strengths. In particular, family Strengths was highly and positively correlated with such family functions for family members as ''affectionate and emotional support and solidarity'', ''protection of family members and properties'', ''recess'', ''amusement and recreation'' and ''religious function''. On the other hand, family Strengths was significantly correlated with such family functions for the society as ''maintenance of economic order'', ''inter-generational transfer of culture'' and ''stabilization of the society''. As discussed above, our modern men desire a family as the ground for affectionate and emotional support and solidarity with a minimum financial stability or as a recess and recreational space. When such functions were fulfilled, the subjects perceived their family relationships positively. Thus, the results of this study may well be significant in that they provide for some important basic data to improve the family life quality. Given the results of this study, it is conceived that the family welfare policies in Korea should aim at the unit families in a broader view to prevent family problems and encourage every family to live a Strengthsy family life. In this context, it is deemed required of the government to help the poorest families enhance their family functions by expanding the social welfare organizations and facilities associated with family Strengths service centers and thereby, improve the national welfare level and enhance the social safety net for every class of the people.
• The family Strengths service centers programmed to provide for family Strengths services should be established to help families enhance their functions through their life cycle. In this sense, the family welfare policies should not focus on the so-called desirable family types or emphasize the family functions only, but encompass treatment of the poorest families, intra-family emotional support, solutions of family problems. Namely, the family welfare policies need to be balanced between handicapped families and normal ones.