Особенности жизненных практик многодетных семей
The article analyzes the large families’ life practices using the RLMS-HSE data. The characteristics of large families’ life practices as compared to other types of families (with/without children) are identified. The specificity of participation of large families’ members in labor force is shown, the issue of «double employment» of women is raised. Ways of delegating responsibilities for child care, as well as the possibilities of receiving assistance and transfers are analyzed. There are no significant differences in the level of self-preserving behavior of large families (other than alcohol consumption) compared with other types of families, however, the self-reported health level of large families’ members was higher. In addition, there is a higher level of subjective well-being against the background of lower objective income indicators.
The article examines differences between two Russian regions – Moscow and Bashkortostan – through the following socio-psychological indicators: perceived social capital, trust, civil identity, life satisfaction, and economic attitudes.
The paper summarizes the principal trends and outcomes of coping research in psychology and presents the results of 3 studies (N=590) aimed at Russian-language adaptation of the COPE inventory (Carver, Scheier, Weintraub, 1989). The results indicate the reliability and structural, convergent, and discriminant validity of the inventory. The structure of the test was supported by confirmatory factor analysis. Coping strategies showed predictable associations with subjective well-being, self-regulation, and personality resource indicators. Gender and age differences in self-reported coping strategy use are presented. Specific coping strategies were associated with academic performance, self-regulation effectiveness, and psychological well-being in people with disabilities.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.