title: Unemployment and Its Impact on Families type: Theoretical papers language: English published: 31 May 2020 updated: 31 May 2020 category: Sociálna práca author: PhDr. Tímea Csikósová DiS

Introduction

Unemployment is a current social problem to which researchers still devote attention, as it can affect not only individuals, but primarily families and their functioning. Brožová (2006) characterizes unemployment as a common social phenomenon that becomes complex particularly when it is long-lasting and high, and it is accompanied by multidimensional consequences, whether in the social, economic, psychological, etc. sphere. In general, Mareš (2002) defines unemployment as the current state of an individual, who has no paid employment, who is either registered at the labour office or is actively seeking work, but is neither willing nor able to start work immediately.

It is of utmost importance that family receives sufficient attention in this matter, since it is the basic unit of society. If the separate functions of the family are disrupted, this primarily brings negative effects. In the unemployment of one family member, the economic function is threatened, which can in turn disrupt other functions. Unemployment of a family member can significantly change how the family operates, and also their outlook on the future.

As a result of unemployment, other socio-pathological phenomena may emerge in individual family members, such as alcoholism, drug dependence, and many others. These negative impacts do not affect only individual family members but the family as a whole, and in extreme cases can lead to its breakdown. Every family is specific, and therefore this specificity is also reflected in the social worker’s work with this client group. The social worker therefore has to respond promptly to this family’s social problem and intervene not only preventively, but also choose an appropriate form of intervention to protect especially minor family members.

Consequences of unemployment on families

It can be said that studying unemployment as a social problem is complex, since it does not affect only the unemployed individual directly but also indirectly affects his or her closest environment, namely the family. As for its effect on the developing person or child, it is not only the environment in which they live, but also the environment in which their close ones participate. This can be linked to the bioecological theory of human development. According to this theory, there is what is called the exosystem, which represents the link between the individual systems that make up a person’s world, and events occurring in this system influence the environment in which the person lives. (Bronfenrenner, Morris, 2006). If we link these facts, we can state that this is about parents’ work environment as members of the family, or its absence in the case of one parent’s unemployment. Children do not participate in their parents’ working life, but by extension they experience with their parents the parents’ work successes and failures (Buchtová et al., 2013), since these are transferred into other social environments. For this reason, according to Shumowa and Lomax (2002), children of parents who show a higher sense of usefulness are more adaptable from an emotional standpoint.

Unemployment unquestionably has negative effects on the family. In this context, Mareš (2002) categorizes the following effects of unemployment, which, however, are not related to financial difficulties:

  • structural disorganization and crisis, a crisis of the family system, and disruption of daily family routines,
  • changes in social relationships and social isolation of the family,
  • changes in the position of the unemployed parent in the family system, loss of status and authority derived from employment and income,
  • changes in the division of household tasks.

Unemployment does not mean only the loss of family income or satisfaction from an individual perspective, but primarily has an intergenerational impact, where one can speak of the domino effect of unemployment. This effect is supported by research findings and reflects the fact that fathers’ unemployment, especially if involuntary, has a negative impact on sons’ satisfaction with their lives (Kind, Haisken-DeNew, 2012). Research by Goede et al. (2000), which also speaks of intergenerational transmission of male unemployment, found that sons of unemployed fathers actually show the greatest difficulties in finding work in early adulthood, and that fathers’ unemployment has the most significant association with unemployment among men in early adulthood. This phenomenon regarding adolescents was also examined by Cinamonová (2001), according to whom daughters have a stronger association with unemployed fathers. According to the author, adolescents with unemployed and employed fathers also show significantly different work values.

The effect of parental unemployment is also manifested in a significant life change in children’s lives, such as the transition from primary to secondary school. While most children have larger problems during this normative change, children whose parent or parents are unemployed show a much higher level of these problems. These children also show the lowest level of social competence, adaptability, and so on. It can therefore be concluded that parental unemployment is an important risk factor that may potentially increase children’s problems regarding adjustment, which are normal at some developmental stages. (Kalil, Ziol-Guest, 2008). According to Harland et al. (2002), these children also show a higher level of emotional problems and behavior problems. The author also notes that these problems most often appear in children whose parents were removed from employment only recently, but in relation to family life these problems have a greater short-term impact. Last but not least, it is necessary to emphasize that parental unemployment affects the subjectively perceived health of their children (Šléšková et al., 2006). The research findings of these authors showed the impact of long-term unemployment of fathers on sons’ subjectively perceived health, but also daughters’. If a mother is long-term unemployed, this has a negative effect on daughters’ perception of health. In the context of this issue, it is also necessary to note that due to unemployment of one or both parents, conflicts can arise between them and their adolescent children, which is not always easy to resolve (Sumec, 2005).

Based on these facts, one can state the markedly negative impact of parental unemployment on their children. Family is our natural social environment, and what we gain in it influences our lives in all areas, including the working sphere. For this reason, when designing preventive programs, attention must be focused not only on unemployed parents, but also on their children, who, as many research findings show, are affected by this parental unemployment.

The impact of unemployment on the family can be both negative and positive. The positive character is seen when family members support an unemployed member of an otherwise well-functioning family, because it is unquestionably easier for that person to search for work and, above all, not fall into hopelessness, which strengthens family solidarity and cohesion. As for the negative character, it is a situation where the family does not have sufficient financial resources, which can cause a crisis in the family, disrupt its family habits, and so on. (Schraggeová, 2011).

Another area of unemployment’s impact on the family is economic consequences. These may be considered the most serious, as based on them other consequences arise or are added. The problem in this area is that a lack of financial resources affects not only the unemployed family member but also other members, which can lead to the emergence of negative socio-pathological phenomena. (Schavel, Oláh, Čišecký, 2010). “A serious current problem in Slovakia and beyond is the increase in socio-pathological phenomena in society, whether criminality, addictions, as well as many others” (Emmerová, 2012, p. 13). According to Mareš (2002), unemployment in a family member may on one hand trigger chronic disorganization of life, showing itself in indifference, instability, depression, etc., but on the other hand may trigger the already mentioned criminal offenses, excessive alcohol consumption, use of drugs, and other destructive individual behavior, which may in turn provoke analogous socio-pathological phenomena such as a value crisis, decline in respect for authority, a family crisis and crises of other institutions, crime, and more.

According to Mareš (1999, in: Matoušek et al. 2005), the economic consequences of unemployment do not only cause a decline in the standard of living of individual family members, but can ultimately cause suffering in the family’s reproductive function, where the family, due to lack of financial means, does not want to have more children. In evaluating the effects of unemployment, Schraggeová (2011) points out that paid work is not only an important source of a family’s financial security, but also satisfies additional needs, among which the author includes appropriate self-confidence, self-esteem, creativity, social recognition, and social status. This relates to another area of unemployment impacts, tied to the psychical well-being of individual family members.

From a psychological perspective, the length of unemployment is significant, and the longer a family member is unemployed, the more he or she and his or her family lose hope of finding new work. A long-term unemployed family member not only loses self-confidence, but has problems with communication, with declining life satisfaction, which can manifest as inability to communicate with other family members, bitterness, a sad mood, even depression, and it can affect family functioning as a whole. (Šatánek, 2004). According to Schraggeová (2011), work is extremely important for mental well-being and emotional stability, and its consequence may be a pronounced worsening of the physical and mental health of the unemployed family member, other family members, and also a negative outlook on the world or one’s future and the family’s future. In this context, Schavel, Oláh and Čišecký (2010) point out that another consequence of unemployment for the family is the disruption of family cohabitation, disruption of internal rules of its functioning related to the division of domestic work and household activities. The loss of professional role of one or both parents manifests, according to Vágnerová (2002), as:

  • changes in relationships among family members,
  • loss of roles (the breadwinner role becomes unemployed), which is connected with status change,
  • disruption of family life stereotypes,
  • disruption of family customs relating to consumption due to limited financial resources, resulting in a necessary reduction of individual family members’ needs.

Unemployment is unquestionably linked with family poverty, which, according to Matouška and Pazlarová (2014), is associated with increasing stress in individual family members, which affects family functioning. For children it brings increased risk not only in relation to physical or mental development, but also regarding their future integration into society. Children from poor families face complications linked to inadequate nutrition, lack of medical care, and a higher probability of premature death. According to these authors, adolescents from poor families show higher levels of depression, but also a higher tendency toward overeating. Experts note that violence appears more frequently among them, which is in effect the culmination of their desperate family situation.

Prevention in relation to unemployment

In the previous part, negative impacts of unemployment on family and its members were presented. It must nevertheless be emphasized that unemployment can also have a positive effect, expressed in family cohesion and solidarity, emotional support, social support, and the feeling that the unemployed individual belongs somewhere, etc. In the context of this issue, it is essential to point to the possibilities of preventive action by the social worker regarding unemployment and its negative impact on the family as a whole, as well as its individual members.

According to Lachytová (2011), to perform social work as a helping profession it is necessary to accept the reality that in every society social problems emerge and unemployed individuals either cannot help themselves or do not want to solve their situation. A social worker’s mission should be to work with these individuals regarding their better adaptation to the situation they are experiencing, to its more responsible resolution, to prevention of the emergence of socio-pathological phenomena as consequences of unemployment, and also to better use of financial resources and improved interpersonal relationships. Social prevention is defined by Schavel et al. (2012) as the activity of the social worker that contributes to creating favorable conditions in the economic, cultural, social, and educational domain related to employment. It also contributes to creating conditions for the family’s use of free time, improvement of its standard of living, humanization, spiritual development, and the improvement of the quality of life.

The essence of social work with this client group lies in the direct, intentional and immediate action of social workers on the unemployed family member and their family with the aim of preserving both the individual’s integrity and family integrity (Mühlpachr, 2008). In this context, Kozoň (2009) presents a combined work methodology which he considers an effective instrument for reaching the goal of social work, namely changes in life situations of the unemployed family member, through the following approaches:

  • changes through the client’s own action,
  • changes conditioned by direct influence from the social worker,
  • changes conditioned by indirect influence, where counseling is understood as both therapy and intervention aimed at supporting awareness so that the client takes responsibility for changing his or her life situation, which has a direct effect on the family as well.

In relation to prevention of the impacts of long-term unemployment on the family, social counseling plays a significant role. Counseling for unemployed people fulfills, according to Tokárová et al. (2002), a function of preventing long-term unemployment with respect to clients of employment offices, since it indirectly prevents or eliminates social tension in society. In this area, a social worker acting as an advisor can help families with one or more unemployed members with selecting or expanding professional competencies, by assisting within activation programs, and so on. (Gabura, 2005). In social counseling, securing the rights and obligations of the unemployed family member regarding self-assessment of his or her situation and recognition of social position is important. For this reason, the social worker is an irreplaceable intermediary who has the competence to provide orientation in social relationships and understanding of social reality, not only from the perspective of the unemployed member, but also from the perspective of the family as a whole (Schavel, Oláh, 2010). Gabura (2005) defines a system of social counseling for unemployed people that has three levels. At the first basic level it is the provision of information-counseling service; the second intermediate level includes counseling related to professional orientation, legal and psychological counseling. The third level represents specialized counseling intended for unemployed family members traumatized by job loss and who show long-term problems with re-establishing themselves on the labour market.

Basic counseling represents general counseling provided by the social worker to unemployed family members in problems relating to information about their personality. In this area, the social worker uses job-placement mediation methods, conducts ongoing observation, establishes contact with the unemployed person, and possibly with his or her family, among other things. The social worker also keeps records of job seekers and informs the unemployed family member about his or her rights and duties regarding this register. (Tokárová et al., 2002).

Another of the social worker’s counseling services is professional counseling, which is client-oriented. It is a highly qualified approach of a social worker with an individual approach to each unemployed family member, accepting their requests, assumptions for re-entering the labour market again, and also for use of their potential (Kamarášová, 2009). The social worker as a professional counselor works sensitively with the unemployed family member and at a professional level helps them accept unemployment. From the social worker’s side, this means offering services of medical, legal, entrepreneurial and psychological counseling. (Kostolanský, 1991). In this context, Tokárová et al. (2002) note that unemployed family members seek these services either individually, or they are offered or recommended if they have basic information but problems with labour-market placement continue.

Finally, it is also important to mention individual counseling, which is carried out in interaction between the social worker and the unemployed family member. Introverted types of unemployed individuals tend toward this form of counseling, as from objective or subjective reasons they do not want to talk about their labour-market placement problems in group counseling. Here the social worker uses a counseling interview, and the record from it is summarized for further purposes into these areas:

  • the area of labor mobility,
  • the area of social resourcefulness and relationships,
  • the area of work attitudes,
  • the area of work motivation,
  • the area of self-reflection related to the realism of his or her perceptions. (Tokárová et al., 2002).

Conclusion

Unemployment as a social problem affects not only the unemployed individual, but primarily their family as the closest social environment. Findings of various conducted studies proved the intergenerational impact of unemployment of one parent on sons and daughters in adulthood. Apart from the impacts in connection with parental unemployment, this social problem also affects the economic sphere, the psychological sphere, and the social sphere, but not least the demographic sphere concerning society, which is shown, for example, by strain in family reproductive function, and others. For this reason preventive action by the social worker as a helping professional in work with the family is essential before the negative impacts of long-term unemployment occur.

The paper therefore consisted of two parts. The first was focused on clarifying the individual impacts of unemployment on the family in different domains. The second part focused on characterizing the social worker’s activity in preventing the effects of unemployment on families and their members, with reference to the implementation of social counseling.

Authors: PhDr. Tímea Csikósová DiS doc. PhDr. Nataša Bujdová, PhD

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

BRONFENBRENNER, U. – MORRIS P. A. 2006. The Bioecological model of human development. In DAMON, W. – LERRNER R. M, eds. Handbook of child psychology. Volume one: Theoretical models of human development. New Jersey : John Wiley & Sons, 2006. pp. 793-828. ISBN 978-0-470-17657-3. BROŽOVÁ, D. 2003. Společenské souvislosti trhu práce. Praha : Sociologické nakladatelství, 2003. 140 s. ISBN 80-86429-16-4. BUCHTOVÁ B. et al. 2002. Nezaměstnanost psychologický, ekonomický a sociálni problém. Praha : Grada Publishing, 2002. 240 s. ISBN 80-247-9006-8 CINAMON, R. G. 2001. Father´s unemployment and career related variables of his adolescent child. In International Journal of the Advancement of Counselling. ISSN 1574-0455, 2001. pp. 295-309. EMMEROVÁ, I. 2012. Spolupráca školy s odborníkmi z oblasti pomáhajúcich profesií pri prevencii a riešení problémov v správaní. In: Zborník vedeckovýskumných prác Katedry pedagogiky (8). Banská Bystrica: UMB. s. 207. ISBN 978-80-557-0464-7. GABURA, J. 2005. Sociálne poradenstvo. Bratislava : Občianske združenie Sociálna práca, 2005. 222 s. ISBN 80-89185-10-X. GOEDE, M. et al. 2000. Family problems and youth unemployment. [online]. In Adolescence, 2000. pp. 587-601. [cit. 2018-01-28]. Dostupné z: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/.../Goede%202000.pdf?...1 HARLAND, P. et al. 2002. Family factors and life events as risk factors for behavioural and emotional problems in children. In European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. ISSN 1018-8827, 2002. pp. 176-184. KALIL, A. – ZIOL-GUEST, K. M. 2008. Parental employment circumstances and children´s academic progress. In Social Science Research. ISSN 1785 3788, 2008. pp. 500-515. KAMARÁŠOVÁ, L. 2009. Profesijné kompetencie sociálneho pedagóga v prevencii sociálno-patologických javov. Banská Bystrica : PF UMB, 2009. 178 s. ISBN 978-80-8083-826-3. KIND, M. – HAISKEN-DENEW, J. P. 2012. Unexpected victims: How parents‘ unemployment affects their children’s life satisfaction. Melbourne: University of Melbourne, 2012. pp. 1-20. ISBN 978-0-7340-4262-0. KOSTOLANSKÝ, R. 1991. Metodika poradenských programov : poradensko-výcvikové programy pre nezamestnaných. Bratislava : VÚPSVR, 1991. ISBN 80-8068-086-8. KOZOŇ, A. 2009. Sociálna práca s rizikovým klientom. Trenčín : SpoSoIntE, 2009. 68 s. ISBN 978-80-970121-2-0. LACHYTOVÁ, L. 2011. Základy sociálnej práce. Prešov : VŠMP ISM Slovakia v Prešove, 2011. 116 s. ISBN 978-80-89372-31-7. MAREŠ, P. 2002. Nezaměstnanost jako sociální problém. Praha : Sociologické nakladatelství, 2002. 172 s. ISBN 8086429083. MATOUŠEK O. et al. 2005. Sociální práce v praxi: specifika různych cílových skupin a práce s nimi. Praha : Portál, 2005. 351 s. ISBN 80-7367-002-X. MATOUŠEK, O. – PAZLAROVÁ, H. 2010. Hodnocení ohroženého dítěte a rodiny v kontextu plánování péče. Praha : Portál, 2010. 184 s. ISBN 9788073677398. MÜHLPACHR, P. 2008. Sociopatologie pro sociální pracovníky. Brno : MSD, 2008. 194 s. ISBN 978-80-7392-069-2. SHUMOW, L. – LOMAX R. 2002. Parental efficacy: Predictor of parental behavior and adolescent outcomes. In Parenting: Science and Practice. ISSN 1529-5162, 2002. pp. 127-150. SUMEC, M. 2005. Rodina a medzigeneračné vzťahy. Bratislava : STU, 2005. 112 s. ISBN 80-227-2212-X. SCHAVEL. M. et al. 2012. Sociálna prevencia. Liptovský Ján : Prohu, 2012. 125 s. ISBN 978-80-89535-06-4. SCHAVEL, M. – OLÁH, M. – ČIŠECKÝ, F. 2010. Sociálna prevencia. Bratislava : Vysoká škola zdravotníctva a sociálnej práce sv. Alžbety, 2010. 145 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-22-1. SCHRAGGEOVÁ, M. 2011. Nezamestnanosť v psychologických súvislostiach. Nové Zámky : Psychoprof, 2011. 115 s. ISBN 978-80-89322-08-4. ŠATÁNEK, J. 2004. Komunikácia v rodine. Banská Bystrica : UMB, 2004. 84 s. ISBN 80-8055-981-3. ŠLÉŠKOVÁ, M. et al. 2006. Does parental unemployment affect adolescents‘ health? In Journal of Adolescent Health. ISSN 1054-139X, 2006. pp. 527-535. TOKÁROVÁ, A. 2003. Sociálna práca. Prešov : Akcent print, 2003. s. 572. ISBN 978-80-9694-198-8.