Mutli-child family in the context of child's living environment

CULTURAL CONDITIONING FOR WELLNESS

ROZDZIAŁ I

Department of Social Pedagogy

The Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce

Zakład Pedagogiki Społecznej

Uniwersytet Jana Kochanowskiego w Kielcach

PAULINA FORMA

Multi-child family in the context of child’s living environment

Rodzina wielodzietna jako środowisko życia dziecka

“Multiple children”, “multi-child family” seem to be terms with multiple

meaning depending on particular scientific subdiscipline, theoretical criteria

or scientific approach. The above-mentioned terms are differently defined in

social policy, demography, economics, psychology and pedagogy.

Even though differently defined, the family with multiple children is al-

ways regarded as a basic social unit eligible to receive social, legal and eco-

nomic protection (The European Social Charter, Part I).

In terms of social policy, based on analysis of Polish family’s financial

situation and the cost of living, multi-child family is referred to as a family

raising three or more children. This point of view has been supported by

such authors, among others, as J. Hrynkiewicz (2006, p.5) and B. Borzęcka

(2002, p. 31). Social policy as a field of social sciences addresses multi-child

family in the context of legal, political, sociological, economic and demo-

graphic issues. This approach correlates with demographic (population) and

family policy.

It should be emphasized that, according to demographic approach, the

multi-child family is defined as a family raising four and more children (S.

Kawula, 1980, p. 29). This point of view is represented by D. Graniewska

(1989, p. 6), among others. In the theories of demography, understanding of

multi-child family concept comes down not only to systematising certain

mechanisms within the study of population and the laws of its development

(impact of families with

Cultural conditioning for wellness

12

multiple offspring), but it primarily allows new hypothesis to be formulated

and verified by other disciplines including social pedagogy. The table below

includes data concerning families with three children recognised by the Insti-

tute of Labour and Social Affairs (Polish: Instytut Pracy i Spraw Socjalnych)

as multi-child families.

Table I. Total number of children in multi-child families by sex

Total number

of children

in multi-child families

By sex

The sequence of birth in multi-child families

3rd

child 4th

child 5th

child 6th

child 7th

child 8

th child

and next

In total 38931 12484 4885 2205 1079 1291

Boys 19871 6367 2496 1116 549 658

Girls 19060 6117 2389 1089 530 633

Source: Author’s study based on Demographic Yearbook of Poland 2008 (Polish:

Rocznik demograficzny 2008 (tab.78))

Based on Demographic Yearbook of Poland 2008, it might be concluded

that families raising three children seem to be the most frequent among mul-

ti-child families. They live both in rural and urban areas. The common stere-

otype of undereducated multi-child family living in a rural area has not been

proved.

Table II. The number of children in multi-children families by place of

residence

The number

of children

in multi-children

families

by place of residence

The sequence of birth in multi-child families

3rd

child

4th

child

5th

child

6th

child

7th

child

8th

child and

next

urban area 19202 5345 1869 803 333 333

rural area 19729 7139 3016 1402 746 958

Source: Author’s study based on Demographic Yearbook of Poland 2008 (Polish:

Rocznik demograficzny 2008 (tab.79))

R. Milewski (1994, p. 82) and L. Nowak (2006, p. 27) represent econom-

ic approach to the issue of family with multiple offspring. They emphasize

relationships between multi-child families and unemployment or poverty.

The analysis of multi-child families is then presented in comparison with so-

called economic account. Economists define family with multiple children in

Paulina Forma,


13

the context of social development, changes that occur within the family (so-

cial progress and regress), as well as family income.

Sociological approach represented by A. Kotlarska – Michalska (2002, p.

57) defines multi-child family as a family unit with higher than average

number of children characterised by specific relationships between family

members. Sociologists often focus their deliberations on the issues concern-

ing real life of families with three or more children paying special attention

to parenting. Sociological approach to the family might be compared to the

words of Pope John Paul II included in his apostolic exhortation of 1981:

“However, the fruitfulness of conjugal love is not restricted solely to the

procreation of children, even understood in its specifically human dimen-

sion: it is enlarged and enriched by all those fruits of moral, spiritual and

supernatural life which the father and mother are called to hand on to their

children, and through the children to the Church and to the world”(Jan Paweł

II, 1981, p. 13)

From pedagogical point of view, multi-child family denotes a family rais-

ing multiple children. Many scientists define multi-child family as “a poly-

categorial pedagogical system”, multifaceted in its nature. This indicates

complementary pedagogical approach which combines sociological and

psychological aspects (B. Krzesińska-Żach, 2003, p. 147).

In pedagogical literature, the family with multiple offspring tends to be

perceived positively, as a value, especially nowadays when a model of fami-

ly with one or two children seems to be prevalent. It is emphasized that in

spite of higher cost of living (monthly rent) and higher expenses on chil-

dren’s school supplies or equipment, multi-child family provides better so-

cialisation and becomes a source of demographic potential of Poland. Ac-

cording to T. Szlendak (2000, p. 317), multiple children seem to be more

involved in household duties, they tend to have more responsibilities, but

they are also better prepared to perform social roles. In families raising mul-

tiple offspring, the relationships between parents and children are closer and

stronger, as well as bonds between siblings.

There is a new, compared with the last century, tendency among multi-

child families to become more integrated and to provide family self-help

support (B. Balcerzak – Paradowska, 1994, p. 8).

The family raising multiple offspring is also negatively perceived in ped-

agogy as an environment which threatens successful child socialisation

mainly due to the lack of financial assets which are essential for proper edu-

cation and child development. These conclusions are included in the study of

A.Roter (2006, p. 60) who regards raising multiple children as one of the

reasons behind poverty. They are also proved by World Bank data according


14

to which, poor families in Poland tend to have more children and consist of

approximately 4.3 persons.

Discussed in pedagogical literature, unemployment, resulting from trans-

formation processes in Poland, apart from poverty, appears to have negative

effects on multi-child families (this issue is discussed further below). This

has been proved by the research of B. Balcerzak-Paradowska (1991, 1994,

and 1997) (D. Graniewska, 1997, p.142), D. Staszewska (1991,), D.

Graniewska (1991, 1994), B. Kołaczek (1991), D. Głogosz (1994), L.

Kozaczuk (1991) (B. Balcerzak-Paradowska, 1998, p. 9-14), B. Kłos (1994),

W. Warzywoda-Kruszyńska (1999, 2003, 2005, p.56 ), G. Gniedziuk (1997,

p. 121), M. Dziubińska- Michalewicz (2002, p.16).

According to the above-mentioned authors, the multi-child family, simi-

larly to the families of PGR workers (Polish: PGR, Państwowe Gospodarst-

wo Rolne, a state-owned collective farm in the People’s Republic of Poland),

belongs to the families affected by pauperization.

In comparison with one-child families (Table 3), there are three times

more three-child families who suffer from poverty and five and half times

more four-child families. This indicates that every tenth one-child family is

poor, comparing to two-thirds of poor families raising four and more chil-

dren. In the last four years the highest increase in the number of poor fami-

lies occurred within multi-child families.

Table III. Percentage of multi-child families in Poland

percentage

of one-child

families

percentage

of

two-child

families

percentage of multi-child families

46.9% 36.2%

16.9%

(1.024 thousand of families raising three and more

children under the age of 24; this constitutes 12.8% of

all families and 16.8% families with children)

Source: Author’s study based on data provided by United Nations Information Cen-

tre (UNIC) in Warsaw, November 2004.

According to Central Statistical Office (Polish: GUS) , “Report on the

situation of young and multi-chid families” submitted by the Ministry of

Labour and Social Policy, Department of Family Benefits, Warsaw 2002 and

accepted by the Polish government, as well as the outcome of the conference

on “The situation of multi-child families in Poland”( Post-conference report

“The situation of multi-child families in Poland” organised by the Commis-

sion of Family and Social Policy on18.07.2006) organised by the Commis-

Paulina Forma,


15

sion of Family and Social Policy, the financial situation of families raising

multiple children has been deteriorating in recent years. The above-

mentioned report reveals that multi-child families allocate most of their ex-

penses to the cheapest food and accommodation fees. When families with

multiple children have to cope with difficulties in meeting essential needs,

they primarily try to limit day-to-day expenses, take a bank loan, ask their

relatives for help, rarely search for extra work or additional employment, and

finally apply for social security benefits. Accommodation expenses which

cover a rent, electricity and water supplies, as well as heating considerably

charge household budget. Additionally, multi-child families tend to be

charged with VAT (Value Added Tax), which is included in the above-

mentioned fees, even more since they do not only pay higher than average

family regular costs of living (due to increase in the consumption of electric-

ity, gas, water supplies etc.), but they also need to pay higher taxes than an

average Polish family.

According to statistical data provided by Central Statistical Office, in

1989, at the beginning of political transformation process in Poland, 37% of

families with four and more children belonged to the group with low income,

which means those who lived below subsistence level; a year later, in the

fourth quarter of 1990, there were 85% of such families. In 1992, statistical

multi children family lived far below subsistence level, even below insuffi-

cient income. Living standards of families raising multiple children have not

seriously changed since the end of the 1990s.

Unfortunately, the above diagnosis has remained topical. It is quite the

opposite, a growth in unemployment and financial crisis of the country affect

multi-child families in multiple ways pushing them out to the margins of

society (P. Wosicki, 2008, pp. 14-16).

The relationship between negative socio-demographic factors and the

number of children in a family may uncover other negative processes influ-

encing multi-child families such as juvenilisation of poverty and social pov-

erty. It should be emphasized that the problem of poverty is not limited to the families

with multiple children or children being raised with many siblings. As W.

Warzywoda-Kruszyńska (2003, p.56) claims, a significant majority of children liv-

ing in poverty have only one brother/sister or no siblings at all. This denies previ-

ous stereotypes.

As far as parental care is concerned, based on existing data, multi-child

family is more likely to face difficulties in meeting basic needs of family

members, providing health care, controlling regular school attendance or

socializing. Socialisation, however, may or may not lead to desirable out-

comes especially when children’s basic needs are not satisfied (A. Roter,


16

2006, p. 35). What is more, children in large families are affected by limited

access to education and culture. Children raised in one-child families tend to

achieve better school results in comparison with their counterparts from

families raising multiple children (Z. Zaborowski, 1975, pp. 100-105). Ac-

cording to the author of the above-mentioned comparative research, this

might be caused by higher level of parents’ education and better learning

conditions.

On the other hand, factors which positively affect upbringing and sociali-

sation processes within the multi-child family should be also taken into con-

sideration. It is emphasized in specialist literature that modern families rais-

ing multiple children live not only in rural areas. The number of multi-child

families living in urban environment has recently increased. Nowadays,

thanks to higher level of education, parents are more aware of their chil-

dren’s roles in multi-child families where the process of raising children

seems to be easier due to better, positive socialisation. Families with multi-

ple children are also long-lasting and stable in comparison with one- or two-

child families (I. Kowalska, 2006, p. 11).

Modern multi-child families differ in terms of interactions and relation-

ships. According to B. Matyjas (B. Matyjas, 2008, p.129), such family func-

tions as parenting care and socialisation are affected by changes that occur

within standard family system and by various external factors (i.e. globalisa-

tion).

Existing analysis of multi-child family condition reveal that current re-

search clearly indicates that a family raising multiple children often requires

social care and assistance. Hence, it might be concluded that it is necessary

to act in accordance with priorities and directions of social policy (“Strategy

on social policy in 2007-2013”, a document adopted by the Council of Min-

isters on 13 September 2005) through proper school education, family coun-

selling, health protection, giving equal educational opportunities, and pre-

venting alienation (social exclusion)in order to create favourable conditions

for families so that they could take conscious, deliberate decisions on raising

multiple children.

In this study, multi-child family is generally defined as a family with

three or more children.

TYPOLOGY OF MULTI-CHILD FAMILIES

In specialist literature, different typologies of multi-child families are dis-

cussed depending on the author and his/her criteria for analysis and evalua-

tion of the research findings. The comparison of selected authors’ approach-

es to typology of the families raising multiple children is discussed below.

Paulina Forma,


17

G. Firlit – Fesnak (2008, p. 476) discusses multi-child families in relation

to difficult family situations. The author provides the list of families that

need government assistance:

a) single-parent families;

b) multi-child families;

c) families with disabled members;

d) pathological families, including criminal families.

Based on the above classification (J. Bragiel, 1998, p. 153), it should be

emphasized that families with multiple offspring are often found in really

difficult situation. Raising multiple children requires parents to meet the

social and economic needs of at least five family members.

According to the criterion of efficiency in performing parental care and

socialization function suggested by S. Kawula (P. Forma, 2011, p. 152),

multi-child families can be classified as follows:

a) normal family;

b) efficient family;

c) dysfunctional family;

d) pathological family;

e) model family which functions properly in all spheres of life.

Such a classification reveals that the proper development of children

raised in multi-child families is seriously threatened. This typology is based

on three groups of factors that need to be taken into consideration while ana-

lysing the level of efficiency in performing socialisation function in each

family type. This is proved by the author’s own research (S. Badora, 2001,

pp. 19-23) conducted in 2003/2004 in the Family Diagnostic and Consulta-

tion Centre in Kielce. The factors affecting pathological families, including

those with multiple offspring, can be divided into the following groups:

socio-economic factors (family size, source of income, financial sup-

port, division of family roles and responsibilities);

cultural factors (parents’ level of education, attention to the use of

proper language, parents’ cultural heritage, ways of spending free

time, parents’ attitude towards their children’s school education and

professional career, parental attitude towards customs, traditions, new

ideas and changes);


18

psychological and social factors (type and strength of emotional

bonds, accepted patterns of home and family life, family attitude to-

ward pathology, types of parenting, family atmosphere, type of paren-

tal control over children, general opinion of neighbours and parents’

workmates on the family).

As far as social bonds in multi-child family are concerned

The typology of multi-child families presented by S.Badora, B. Czere-

decka and D. Marzec (S. Badora, 2001, pp. 19-23) relating to social bonds

includes the following family types:

a) normal (typical) family (based on child-parent biological bond and

healthy atmosphere);

b) single-parent family as a result of one parent’s persistent absence due

to different reasons (e.g. death, divorce, separation, living abroad etc.;

these are the reasons for various behaviour problems);

c) reconstituted family (created through marriage or remarriage of people

who had children by former partners when a previous union may have

been broken through death of a spouse or divorce; such a family in-

volves a network of sophisticated relationships between natural or

step-parents and their natural or step-children);

d) criminal family (although this family often remains in conflict with

the law or breaks the social rules, its members are able to maintain

strong relationships based on mutual loyalty; such a family, however,

is the main source of child depravation);

e) socially disorganised family (conflict relationships which affect the

process of socialisation).

The family structure, one of the most common criteria for multi-child

family typology, according to E. Trempała (2005, p. 88), has a significant

influence on the child situation at school which is one of the most important

aspects of socialisation.

As far as the structure and proper functioning of the family with multiple

offspring is concerned, Z. Tyszka’s typology relating to internal structures,

value system and specific culture appears to be worth discussing. Z.

Tyszka’s typology is based on the assumption that “regardless of family type

or model, the most important element influencing proper family functioning

is the sense of happiness felt by family members thanks to which appropriate

conditions for upbringing and socialisation of children are created”(Z.

Tyszka, 2002, p. 34).

Paulina Forma,


19

Discussing multi-child family in terms of parenting it is necessary to

mention all the internal and external factors that influence child’s proper

development, upbringing and socialisation as well as determine meeting the

child’s needs. Financial condition of the family influence not only standard

of living but also meeting cultural needs of the family members. Atmosphere

at home is also determined by parent-child relationships.

Based on research of 1982 and 1995, F. Adamski (1982, p. 244) suggest-

ed another typology of family depending on the number of family members,

structure, place of residence, sources of income and family life style. Taking

family structure into account, he distinguished:

a) two-generation conjugal families or nuclear families that consist of

husband, wife and children, which are further divided into small pro-

ductive families (family workshop), institutional families (based on

fixed norms and family roles), small families based on friendly rela-

tionships (mutual expression of love);

b) multi-generation extended families (also called large families where a

few generations live in one household);

c) polygamous families wherein the family unit consist of more than

two partners (they mainly occur in the Islamic world);

d) modified extended families which comprise casual relationships of

nuclear families;

Taking place of residence into consideration, F. Adamski distinguished

the following family types:

a) peasant family;

b) family of blue-collar workers;

c) family of white-collar workers;

d) urban family;

e) rural family.

R.B. Woźniak (1997, p. 290) classified families (according to source of

income and place of residence) into the following categories: peasant family

whose main source of income comes from farm, family of blue-collar work-

ers whose source of income comes from hired manual labour, and family of

white-collar workers whose members are engaged in non-manual labour.

The categories of families discussed above provoke reflection on change-

ability of affiliation to a certain social group. Nowadays, social importance

of multi-child, white-collar workers and rural families has been redefined.


20

The criteria for classification of family types tend to change regardless of

place of residence. This is proved by families with multiple offspring which

constitute one of the family types occurred in the past system.

S. Kowalski (1986, p.68) developed classification of families based on

their structure:

a) complete family;

b) single-mother family (unmarried mother with child);

c) incomplete family (due to mother or father death);

d) broken family (abandoned by mother or father);

e) reconstituted family (with father, stepmother and adopted child).

Due to a multitude of different typologies, all their authors cannot be

quoted. However, the classifications which bring new elements into existing

schemes and lead to a new, innovative approach towards multi-child families

are always worth discussing.

Analysing multi-child family environment, it should be emphasized that

family and social roles are specifically diversified depending, among other

things, on the family type. Family roles are different in small and large fami-

lies, complete and broken families or reconstituted and extended families.

Therefore, I believe M. A. and H. J. McCubbin’s family classification based

on the level of coherence is worth analysing. They classified families into

the following categories:

a) regenerative families – characterized by their level of hardiness and

coherence which involve emphasis on acceptance and loyalty as well

as internal strengths and durability thanks to which family members

are able to overcome difficulties;

b) resilient families – based on tight family bonds, flexibility, the ability

to maintain supportive relationships; such families are able to solve

problems, change expectations, alter family roles and resolve con-

flicts;

c) rhythmic families demonstrate evidence for family bonding through

different forms of free time activities (planned and unplanned) that

foster a sense of shared purpose (M. A. McCubbin i H. J. McCubbin,

cf. B. Matyjas 2003, p. 19.).

Not only did the above mentioned authors characterise families in details,

but they also developed family models.

B. Matyjas (2008, p. 127) discussed the above-mentioned types of fami-

lies in her study providing more details to particular family models which

Paulina Forma,


21

are further analysed below for the needs of multi-child family considera-

tions. They are presented below in details.

FAMILIES

regenerative rythmic resilient

- vulnerable families

- secure families

- durable families

- regenerative families

- fragile families

- affine families

- flexible families

- resilient families

- unpatterned families

- intentional families

- structuralized families

- rythmic families

Source: B. Matyjas, Dzieciństwo w kryzysie. Etiologia zjawiska, Wyd. Żak, War-

szawa 2008, p. 127

Figure1. Family types and models

It should be emphasized that such a classification of family types and

models correlates with one of the aims of this study to present families rais-

ing multiple children in terms of antinomy.

As far as different typologies are concerned, multi-child families are also

categorized in specialist literature. Depending on criteria, different subcate-

gories of multi-child families can be distinguished. Based on internal family

situation, L. Dyczewski distinguished three categories of families with mul-

tiple offspring which require supportive social policy, assistance and support

activities:


22

a) families with one breadwinner (described as single-parent multi-child

families and characterized by divorce); according to the research con-

ducted in 1993, single-mother families are predominant (73 247)

among families with multiple offspring in comparison with single-

father families (6 339). A significant majority of single-mother multi-

child families constitute those broken due to divorce;

b) disabled families (described as families including disabled members

and raising three and more children);

c) young families (a significant majority of families with pre-school aged

children, up to 6 years old, which amount to 71.84%; parents were

born during the Baby Boom which peaked in the late 1960s and early

1970s) (L. Dyczewski, 1993, pp. 19- 20).

To sum up the considerations on typology of multi-child families, I

would like to present the main criteria for classification of families raising

multiple children with particular emphasis on those with three and more

children in the group of dysfunctional families.

Table IV. Criteria for typology of multi-child families

Criterion Classification

Difficult family

situations

a. incomplete families

b. multi-child families

c. disabled families

d. pathological families, including criminal families

Upbringing

and socialisation

efficiency

a. normal family

b. still efficient family

c. dysfunctional family

d. pathological family

e. model family which functions properly in all spheres

of life

Social bonds

within a family

a. typical family

b. single-parent family as a result of one parent’s persis-

tent absence due to different reasons

c. reconstituted family

d. criminal family

e. socially disorganised family

Number of family

members

a. two-generation conjugal families or nuclear families

that consist of husband, wife and children

b. multi-generation extended family

c. polygamous family

d. modified extended family

Paulina Forma,


23

Criterion Classification

Family strukture

a. complete family

b. single-parent family

c. incomplete family

d. broken family

e. reconstituted family

Place of residence

a. peasant family

b. family of blue-collar workers

c. family of white-collar workers

d. urban family

e. rural family

Source: Author’s own study

Taking the above-mentioned criteria for typology of multi-child families

into consideration, it might be concluded that existing approach towards

interpretation of family types, its functions and roles needs to be revised due

to faster and more intensive child development which consequently acceler-

ates the process of socialisation. Therefore, the adults – parents, older sib-

lings, caregivers, tutors and teachers are obliged to follow appropriate be-

haviour patterns and attitudes towards secondary school children raised in

multi-child families (J. Izdebska, 2002, p. 32).

ANTINOMIES OF MULTI-CHILD FAMILY FUNCTIONS

In specialist literature related to families with multiple offspring, not only

different functions, tasks and values are discussed, but also irregularities

tend to be analysed. The values concerning multi-child family are discussed

in social, cultural, educational, religious, caregiving and welfare context.

Each of the multi-child family functions is related to a specific area of family

life, but all of them are included in one unit which might be broken when

any of dysfunctional conditions occur.

In this study, antinomies of multi-child family functions refer to so called

practical antinomies where the conditions of performing particular functions

mutually exclude one another. Therefore, antinomies of multi-child family

functions are discussed in terms of the results of actions or behaviour typical

of particular social group, in this case - the multi-child family. They can be

intentional or unintentional. This approach refers to the functions influenced

by internal and external family factors. Multi-child family functions are de-

termined by socio-economic condition of the family as well as its abilities to

meet the needs of family members. Therefore, they can be discussed in terms


24

of social influences since the family is a social group affected by intra-

family and cultural factors.

The idea of discussing the notion of antinomy in terms of multi-child

family functions is associated with a kind of self-reference and descriptive

approach to this issue. That is the reason why antinomies of multi-child fam-

ily functions have been rather described than cancelled.

CLASSIFICATION OF MULTI-CHILD FAMILY FUNCTIONS

In most societies family is the principal institution for the socialisation of

children. Therefore, in this study, several classifications of primary family

functions have been discussed. Multi-child family functions can be divided

into primary and secondary functions based on different approach to this

issue discussed in pedagogy, sociology and psychology.

Many of family specialists often refer to Z. Tyszka’s (1979, p. 62) classi-

fication which includes the following family functions:

a) financial – economic;

b) protection, care and support;

c) procreation or reproduction;

d) legalisation – control;

e) socialising;

f) class;

g) cultural;

h) recreational – sexual;

i) social;

j) emotional – expressive.

According to J.A. Pielkowa (1988, p.8-22), family functions can be de-

scribed as the results of the actions which meet psychological, emotional and

social needs of the family members and without which a society is not able

to exist. These actions are directed towards the family and the society. Social

importance of the family as well as all spheres of family life is determined

by family functions.

M. Ziemska (1996, p. 32) suggested the other classification of family

functions that refers to family and social responsibilities (M. Ziemska, 1986,

pp. 234-235) :

Paulina Forma,


25

a) procreation function contributes to continuity of the family which reg-

ulates the sexual behaviour of husband and wife in relation to the sat-

isfaction of sexual needs;

b) productive function is associated with providing the society with new

employees; this contributes to the increase in production forces;

c) service and care function provide all family members with everyday

services (catering, healthy living, accommodation, clothing etc.);

d) socialising function tends to be the most important function of the

family since it teaches children the rules for behaviour within the so-

ciety, spouses, when interacting, are also influenced by socialisation

processes;

e) psycho – hygienic function contributes to emotional maturity of fami-

ly members thanks to providing stabilisation, security, emotional sup-

port and conditions for proper personality development (also referred

to as expression of feelings, understanding and recognition).

It is impossible to discuss all the classifications of family functions.

Therefore, I focus on the most essential and common which influence the

process of child’s socialisation.

Apart from different general classifications of family functions, the one

which refers to pedagogy seems to be worth discussing:

a) biological – protective;

b) cultural – social;

c) economic;

d) educational (J. Brągiel, 1998, p. 57).

With reference to the laws and regulations for child-care institutions fol-

lowing the example of multi-child family (e.g. foster homes) the following

functions can be distinguished:

a) care and protection;

b) educational;

c) socialising;

d) compensatory;

e) teaching.


26

Family specialists agree that primary family functions involve procrea-

tion, care and protection, as well as socialisation. They are further described

below:

a) procreation (ensures that population of the society will be maintained;

this function involves reproducing the society, both biologically,

through procreation and socially, through socialisation; the family

gives a person a legitimate legal status and social approval for repro-

duction provides the appropriate mechanism through marriage to regu-

late sexual behaviour of husband and wife);

b) protection and care (involves care, protection, security of family

members and fulfills all other needs to make the child fit in the socie-

ty; this function determines mental and emotional health of family

members) (A. Rodzewicz, 1980, p.9);

c) socialisation (the process by which individuals learn the culture of

their society; the family teaches its younger members the rules and

expectations for behaviour within their society; thanks to socialisation

an individual is turned into a social being; in multi-child family social-

isation enables its young members to achieve particular social posi-

tion; it is the family which teaches children to observe and respect

norms, values and social patterns).

Successful performance of family functions discussed in the above classi-

fications depend on several factors including children’s stage of life, parents’

efficiency in upbringing, emotional bonds between children and parents,

family financial condition, awareness of parents’ obligations to their chil-

dren, cultural influences and multi-child family living environment.

Each family including that with multiple offspring can be characterised

by relative stability and its own identity. According to E. Leśniak and A.

Dobrzyńska – Masterhazy (E. Leśniak, 1996, p. 84) the family unit, as a

dynamic structure, is constantly changing and developing.

When optimal level of performing any of multi-child family functions

decreases, the sense of safety and security of family members is limited,

sometimes disintegration of family life and crisis may occur, and finally, the

family is perceived in both positive and negative aspects (antinomy). Such

approach according to which the family with multiple offspring, similarly to

multi-problem families, is threatened by social exclusion and marginalisation

appears to be clearly visible in pedagogical literature.

The overview of family functions discussed above reveals that each clas-

sification involves “a certain core including procreative, social, emotional

and economic function. Polish and foreign family specialists tend to agree

Paulina Forma,


27

that regardless of the number of family functions and the method of their

classification, the essential family task is to maintain biological and cultural

continuity of the society, to meet essential emotional needs including the

need for security, that is, psycho-emotional balance in the family” (U.

Kzubowska, 1997, p. 322).

THE ROLE OF MULTI-CHILD FAMILY

In theoretical analysis regarding the child from multi-child family, the

concept of tasks (roles) to perform should be discussed. They are definitely

worth analysing in relation to the multi-child family functions described

above. According to J. Żebrowski, “family functions comprise the set of

tasks to perform and their effects”(J. Żebrowski, 2001, p. 16).

In pedagogical literature, the following tasks are performed by the fami-

lies with multiple offspring:

physical maintenance: a healthy family satisfies economic and health

care needs of the child through providing conditions necessary for

proper child physical development (food, hygiene, housing and lei-

sure), as well as through teaching interactions with others and cooper-

ation;

meeting psychological, especially emotional needs of the family

members, teaching how to express feelings, how to understand and

cooperate with others;

meeting intellectual needs through creating conditions for improving

knowledge, providing appropriate conditions for learning, developing

passions and life aspirations, as well as motivating for life-long learn-

ing;

transmission of cultural heritage, teaching social norms and values,

providing knowledge on socio-political issues, as well as developing

and promoting patriotic attitude;

preparation for work, developing a sense of responsibility and ability

to work in teams;

preparation for life within the family and society (H. Śpiczko, 1981, p.

59).


28

The family roles discussed above comprise all the spheres of child devel-

opment: physical, psychological, intellectual, social, cultural and emotional.

Providing detail description of multi-child family tasks, I would like to

refer to McCubbin’s typology of families discussed above (M. A.

McCubbin, 1989, pp. 44-63). It should be emphasized that not all contempo-

rary families raising multiple children require help. The figure below pre-

sents different tasks of families with multiple offspring in relation to their

basic functions and models (Figure 2).

meeting the needs of family members

CARE AND PROTECTION

iden

tity

develo

pm

en

t

ED

UC

AT

ION

AL

FAMILY

SOCIALISATION

preparation for social life,

participation in cultural life

ma

inte

na

nce o

f

bio

log

ical

con

tin

uit

y

PR

OC

RE

AT

ION

Source: Author’s own study

Figure 2. Main tasks resulting from the functions of multi-child families

It might be assumed from the figure presented above that in terms of so-

cialisation multi-child family performs significant functions which involve

the following tasks:

a) cognitive – which refer to learning terms and definitions, appropriate

behaviour, as well as social, natural and technical environment etc.;

b) emotional – that comprise meeting the needs for safety and security,

love, family bonds, acceptance and social interactions;

Paulina Forma,


29

c) care, protection and service – regarding physical maintenance of fami-

ly members to satisfy economic and health care needs;

d) social – which teach family members (beginning from their birth) so-

cial rules and norms and refer to transmission of cultural heritage;

e) preparatory – which relate to preparing for creative life and future pro-

fessional career, shaping active attitude to work, and pre-planning pro-

fessional career;

f) stimulating development of children’s hobbies, interests, passions and

abilities;

g) organisational, particularly in creating salutary situations inside and

outside the family.

The family tasks discussed above refer to the process of social influence

and occur inseparably. Bearing in mind that the process of secondary-school

child’s socialisation is significantly influenced by primary environment, I

would like to emphasize that everything the child is learned at the earliest

age comes from his/her parents and close, family members. Child develop-

ment in the family raising multiple offspring might be positively influenced

by attitudes of mutual friendliness expressed by all family members. Unfor-

tunately, the families where negative atmosphere and conflicts arise between

family members also occur.

To sum up the considerations on multi-child family in the context of child

living environment, it ought to be emphasized that proper development and

functioning of gymnasium student tend to be determined by providing all the

family members with everyday physical maintenance and service, as well as

satisfying their needs in particular situations. Performing specific tasks

(roles), parents considerably influence intellectual and social development of

their children through transmitting norms, values, linguistic culture, behav-

iour patterns, customs and traditions, as well as preparing children for future

social roles and shaping their moral and social attitudes.

Undoubtedly, the range and nature of the above-mentioned tasks and ob-

ligations of the family changes in different stages of child development. It is

specific for the child in the period of adolescence when the role of out-of-

family environments increases.

REFERENCES

1. Adamski F. (red.): Miłość - małżeństwo – rodzina, Wyd. Apostolstwa

Modlitwy, Kraków 1982, p. 244.


30

2. Bajkowski T.: Miejsce dziecka we współczesnej rodzinie w dobie globa-

lizacji [in:] Dziecko i media elektroniczne – nowy wymiar dzieciństwa,

red. J. Izdebska, T. Sosnowski, Wyd. Trans Humana, Białystok 2005, p.

48

3. Badora S. „i wsp.”: Rodzina i formy jej wspomagania, Wyd. Impuls,

Kraków 2001, pp. 19-23.

4. Balcerzak – Paradowska B. „i wsp.”: Rodziny wielodzietne a bezrobocie,

„Studia i Materiały IPiSS z 9/1992 [in:] B. Kłos, Kobieta a bezrobocie

(przegląd badań wykonanych w Instytucie Pracy i Spraw Socjalnych),

Kancelaria Sejmu, BSE, Warszawa 1994, No. 262, Pakiet IP-46 S, Mate-

riały i Dokumenty, Sytuacja kobiet w Polsce, cz. II, p.8.

5. Balcerzak – Paradowska B. (red.), Rodziny wielodzietne w Polsce. Te-

raźniejszość i przyszłość, Wyd. IPiSS, Warszawa 1997, p. 142.

6. Balcerzak – Paradowska B.: Rodzina i polityka rodzinna na przełomie

wieków. Przemiany, zagrożenia, potrzeba działań, Wyd. IPiSS, Warsza-

wa 2004, p. 114.

7. Balcerzak – Paradowska B.: Wokół wielodzietności. „Problemy Rodzi-

ny” 1998, pp. 9-14;

8. Borzęcka B.: Budżet czasu dzieci i młodzieży w rodzinach wielodziet-

nych, „Kwartalnik Edukacyjny” 2003, No. 2, p.31.

9. Brągiel J. „i wsp.”: Pedagogika rodziny, Wyd. Adam Marszałek, Toruń

1998, p. 153.

10. Dyczewski L.: Rodzina wielodzietna w okresie transformacji systemo-

wej. „Problemy Rodziny” 1993, No. 6, pp. 19- 20.

11. Dziubińska – Michalewicz M.: Sytuacja bytowa rodzin wielodzietnych w

Polsce, Kancelaria Sejmu, Biuro Studiów i Ekspertyz wrzesień 2002, nr

918; Europejska Karta Społeczna, Część I, pkt.16 [The European Social

Charter, Part I, item 16].

12. Europejska Karta Społeczna: Część I, pkt.16, The European Social Char-

ter, Part I

13. Firlit – Fesnak G. „i wsp.”: Polityka społeczna, Wyd. PWN, Warszawa

2008, p. 476.

14. Forma P.: Rodzina wielodzietna jako środowisko wychowawczo-

eduakcyjne. Diagnoza i możliwości wsparcia (na przykładzie wojewódz-

twa świętokrzyskiego), Wyd. Impuls, Kraków 2011, p. 152;

Paulina Forma,


31

15. Forma P.: Sytuacja opiekuńczo – wychowawcza dzieci z rodzin patolo-

gicznych, „Pedagogika rodziny” 2007, No. 1(2), p. 200

16. Gaweł – Luty E.: Pedagogika społeczna, Wyd. WSH TWP, Szczecin

2004, p. 49.

17. Głogosz D.: Rodziny wielodzietne w Polsce. Teraźniejszość i przyszłość

[in:] B. Balcerzak-Paradowska (red.) Wyd. IPiSS, Warszawa 1997, p. 46.

18. Gniedziuk G.: Sytuacja socjalno – bytowa rodzin wielodzietnych [in:]

Kwestie społeczne w doświadczeniu lokalnym, red. J. Danecki, Wyd.

UW, Warszawa 1997, p. 121.

19. Graniewska D.: (red.) Sytuacja rodzin i polityka rodzinna w Polsce. Uwa-

runkowania demograficzne i społeczne, I Kongres Demograficzny w Pol-

sce, T. XII, Wyd. IPiSS, Warszawa 2004, p. 6.

20. Graniewska D.: Polityka rodzinna w świetle procesów demograficznych.

Tendencje w skali światowej i europejskiej [in:] Okresowa dezaktywiza-

cja kobiet wychowujących dzieci jako element polityki rodzinnej, red. D.

Graniewska, Wyd. IPiSS, Studia i materiały, zeszyt 12, Warszawa 1991,

p. 15.

21. Hrynkiewicz J.: Polityka społeczna wobec rodzin wielodzietnych [in:]

Sytuacja rodzin wielodzietnych w Polsce a polityka rodzinna, Biuro In-

formacji i Dokumentacji Kancelarii Senatu, OE–55, Lipiec 2006, p. 5.

22. Ilnicka R. M.: Środowiskowy kontekst niedostosowania społecznego,

Wyd. Akapit, Toruń 2008, p. 85.

23. Izdebska J.: Dziecko w świecie globalizacji – wyzwanie dla nauk peda-

gogicznych [in:] Pedagogika wobec aktualnych problemów społecznych,

red. Z. Gawlina, S. Scisłowicz, Wyd. Ostrowiec Świętokrzyski 2002, p.

32.

24. Jan Paweł II: Familiaris consortio, Adhortacja apostolska Ojca Świetego

Jana Pawła II o zadaniach rodziny chrześcijańskiej w świecie

współczesnym, 22 XI 1981r., p. 28-Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris

Consortio of Pope John Paul II to the Episcopate, to the Clergy and to the

Faithful of the whole Catholic Church on the Role of Christian Family in

the modern world, [22.11.1981].

25. Kawula S.: Problemy rodziny wielodzietnej, „Problemy Opiekuńczo-

Wychowawcze” 1980, No. 10, p. 29.


32

26. Kazubowska U.: Rodzina i dziecko w kontekście transmisji kulturowej –

analiza i próba diagnozy [in:] J. Nikitorowicz, Rodzina wobec wyzwań

edukacji międzykulturowej, Wyd. Trans Humana, Białystok 1997, p. 322.

27. Kłos B.: Kobieta a bezrobocie (przegląd badań wykonanych w Instytucie

Pracy i Spraw Socjalnych), Kancelaria Sejmu, BSE, Warszawa 1994, No.

262, Pakiet IP – 46 S, Materiały i Dokumenty, Sytuacja kobiet w Polsce,

cz. II, p. 2.

28. Kotlarska – Michalska A.: Więź w rodzinach wielodzietnych, [in:] Rocz-

niki Socjologii Rodziny, Vol. XIV, Życie rodzinne – uwarunkowania

makro i mikrostrukturalne, Wyd. UAM, Poznań 2002, p. 57.

29. Kowalska I.: Rodzina wielodzietna w procesie demograficzno–

społecznych zmian modelu dzietności w okresie transformacji ekono-

micznej [in:] Sytuacja rodzin wielodzietnych w Polsce a polityka rodzin-

na, Dział Informacji i Ekspertyz, Biuro Informacji i Dokumentacji Kan-

celarii Senatu, OE-55, Lipiec 2006, p. 11.

30. Kowalski S.: Socjologia wychowania w zarysie, Wyd. PWN, Warszawa

1986, p. 68.

31. Kozaczuk L.: Sytuacja rodzin wielodzietnych, „Praca Socjalna” 1991,

No. 3-4, p. 23; L. Kozaczuk, Sytuacja rodzin wielodzietnych w świetle

badań własnych przeprowadzonych na terenie województwa chełmskie-

go, „Problemy Opiekuńczo – Wychowawcze” 1997, No. 4, p. 22.

32. Krzesińska-Żach B.: Dziecko w rodzinie z problemem bezrobocia [in:]

Dziecko w rodzinie i środowisku rówieśniczym, red. J. Izdebska, Wyd.

Trans Humana, Białystok 2003, p.147.

33. Leśniak A. „i wsp.”: Rodziny w kryzysie: diagnoza i interwencja kryzy-

sowa [in:] Wybrane zagadnienia interwencji kryzysowej. Poradnik dla

pracowników socjalnych, wybór i opracowanie, red. W. Badura – Madej,

Wyd. Interart, Warszawa 1996, p. 84.

34. McCubbin M. A. „i wsp.”: Theoretical Orientations to Family Stress and

Coping [in:] Treating Stress in Families, red. Ch. Figley, Brunnel/Mazel

publishers, New York 1989, pp. 44-63.

35. McCubbin M. A. „i wsp.”: cf. B. Matyjas, Dzieciństwo w rodzinie bezro-

botnych w środowisku małego miasta (na przykładzie Pińczowa), Wyd.

AŚ, Kielce 2003, p. 19

36. Matyjas B.: Dzieciństwo w kryzysie. Etiologia zjawiska, Wyd. Żak, War-

szawa 2008, p. 129.

Paulina Forma,


33

37. Milewski R.: Elementarne zagadnienia ekonomii, Wyd. PWN, Warszawa

1994, p. 82.

38. Nowak L.: Statystyczny obraz sytuacji ekonomicznej rodzin wielodziet-

nych [in:] Sytuacja rodzin wielodzietnych w Polsce a polityka rodzinna,

Dział Informacji i Ekspertyz, Biuro Informacji i Dokumentacji Kancelarii

Senatu, OE-55, Lipiec 2006, p. 27.

39. Pielkowa J. A.: Rodzicielskie troski, Wyd. PWN, Warszawa 1988, pp. 8-

22.

40. Radziewicz – Winnicki A.: Napięcia i destabilizacja w wewnętrznych

strukturach jednostkowych współczesnej rodziny w dobie emancypacji

społecznej, [in:] Pedagogika społeczna w służbie rodzinie, T. I, red. K.

Gąsior, T. Sakowicz, Wyd. AŚ, Kielce 2005, p. 15.

41. Raport Ministerstwa Pracy i Polityki Społecznej o sytuacji rodzin mło-

dych i wielodzietnych, Departament Świadczeń na Rzecz Rodziny, War-

szawa 2002 [Report of the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy on the

situation of young and multi-chid families, Department of Family Bene-

fits, Warsaw 2002].

42. Raport pokonferencyjny „Sytuacja rodzin wielodzietnych w Polsce”

(konferencja zorganizowana w Senacie przez Komisję Rodziny i Polityki

Społecznej 18.07.2006) [Post-conference report “The situation of multi-

child families in Poland” organised by the Commission of Family and

Social Policy on18.07.2006].

43. Rodzewicz A.: Funkcje współczesnej rodziny, „Rodzina i Szkoła” 1980,

No. 9, p. 9

44. Roter A.: Proces socjalizacji dziecka w warunkach ubóstwa społecznego,

Wyd. UŚ, Katowice 2006, p. 60.

45. Staszewska D.: Rodziny wielodzietne a bezrobocie, „Studia i Materiały

IPiSS” z 9/1992 [in:] B. Kłos, Kobieta a bezrobocie (przegląd badań wy-

konanych w Instytucie Pracy i Spraw Socjalnych), Kancelaria Sejmu,

BSE, Warszawa 1994, No. 262, Pakiet IP – 46 S, Materiały i Dokumenty,

Sytuacja kobiet w Polsce, cz. II

46. Szlendak T.: Rodzina [in:] Encyklopedia socjologii, red. Z. Bokszański,

T. 3, Wyd. Oficyna Naukowa, Warszawa 2000, p. 317.

47. Śledzianowski J.: Rodzina międzypokoleniowa w Polsce na progu XXI

wieku, Wyd. UHP, Kielce 2008, p. 7.


34

48. Śpiczko H.: Opiekuńcze problemy współczesnej rodziny [in:] Funkcje

wychowawcze współczesnej rodziny, Wyd. UW, Białystok 1981, p. 59.

49. Tremapała E,: Dziecko w domu i szkole [in:] Wymiary dzieciństwa, red.

J. Bińczycka, B. Smolińska – Theiss, Wyd. Impuls, Kraków 2005, p. 88.

50. Tyszka Z.: Rodzina we współczesnym świecie, Wyd. Naukowe UAM,

Poznań 2002, p. 34

51. Tyszka Z.: Socjologia rodziny, Wyd. PWN, Warszawa 1979, p. 62.

52. Warzywoda – Kruszyńska W.: Zjawisko biedy dzieci a zagrożenie wy-

kluczeniem społecznym w przyszłości. Mapa biedy – rozmieszczenie i

zakres biedy wśród dzieci na terenie województwa łódzkiego, Instytut

Socjologii, Łódź 2005, p. 56.

53. Wosicki P.: Rodziny wielodzietne muszą odejść?!, „Głos dla życia”

2008, No. 4, pp. 14-16.

54. Woźniak R. B.: Zarys socjologii edukacji i zachowań społecznych, Wyd.

Miscellanea, Koszalin 1997, p. 290.

55. Zaborowski Z.:, Uczeń-jedynak, Wyd. WSiP, Warszawa 1975, pp. 100-

105.

56. Ziemska M.: Stosunki międzyosobowe w rodzinach dwu- i trzypokole-

niowych [in:] Kobieta współczesna, red. M. Sokołowska, Wyd. Warsza-

wa 1996, p. 32.

57. Ziemska M.: Rodzina i dziecko, Wyd. PWN, Warszawa 1986, pp. 234-

235.

58. Żebrowski J.: Współczesne przeobrażenia w funkcjonowaniu rodziny

polskiej [in:] Rodzina polska na przełomie wieków. Przeobrażenia zagro-

żenia, patologia, Wyd. Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, Gdańsk 2001, p. 16.

Streszczenie

Współcześnie, na temat polskiej rodziny pisze się i mówi bardzo dużo. Pu-

blikacje naukowe, te o charakterze intelektualnych rozważań nad rodziną, oparte na

teoretycznych bądź eksperymentalnych założeniach, starają się ukazywać reali-

styczny i obiektywny obraz rodziny[1]. Niewątpliwie, rodzina jest tym środowi-

skiem wychowawczym, które ma wpływ na dziecko przez całe jego życie, a sytuacja

rodzinna jest istotnym czynnikiem regulującym przebieg procesu socjalizacji.[2]

Rodzina jako grupa pierwotna przejawia bezpośrednie stosunki względem swoich

Paulina Forma,


35

podopiecznych, nacechowane emocjonalnością, intymnością, sięgające głęboko w

osobowość jej członków. Ma ona swój specyficzny charakter, swoją historię, trady-

cję, podejście do świata wartości, a przy tym jest grupą otwartą, do której przenikają

aktualne problemy społeczne. Podlega wpływom postępu społeczno – kulturalnego i

jest nierzadko miejscem współżycia wielu pokoleń. Pod wpływem procesów trans-

formacyjnych funkcjonowanie i typologia rodziny ulega stałym zmianom, stającym

się przedmiotem badań wielu dyscyplin naukowych.[3]

Autorzy zajmujący się problematyką „familologiczną” przedstawiają wiele

typów rodzin i czynników, które wpływają na ich klasyfikację, są jednak zgodni w

wyodrębnianiu jednej wspólnej cechy, a mianowicie takiej, iż zaczątkiem każdej

rodziny jest para małżeńska, a konkretnie - ojciec i matka. Są oni pierwszymi isto-

tami, które zaspokajają podstawowe potrzeby dziecka dając w ten sposób dowód

własnej miłości i wywołując w nim podobne uczucia.[4]

Słowa kluczowe

Rodzina wielodzietna, wielodzietność, środowisko życia dziecka

Keys Word

“Multiple children”, “multi-child family”, living environment of child

Abstract

“Multiple children”, “multi-child family” – a discussion of terminology

Nowadays, the Polish family is widely discussed in literature. In academic

publications, characterised by intellectual deliberations on family issues and based

on theoretical or experimental assumptions, the image of family tends to be present-

ed in a realistic and objective way.[5] Undoubtedly, the family as an educational

environment has a significant influence on child’s life and family situation consider-

ably determines the process of socialisation.[6] Affecting family members’ personal-

ity, direct relationships within a family are marked by emotions and intimacy. The

family has certain common characteristics such as its own history, traditions and a

value system. This unit is an open group influenced by not only current social prob-

lems, but also socio-cultural progress where family generations interact. Family

functions and its typology – the subjects of numerous scientific researches – have

been constantly changing under the influence of transformation processes.[7] Alt-

hough family specialists distinguish several types of families and determinants of

family types, they agree to emphasize that it is a couple, namely a father and a

mother who begin a family. Demonstrating their love and commitment, parents are

first to meet basic needs of their offspring and evoke similar feelings in them.[8]

“Multiple children”, “multi-child family” – multiple meaning terms

Mutli-child family in the context of child's living environment

Documents