How families are adapting to being around each other constantly ESSAY

How families are adapting to being around each other constantly ESSAY

How Families Are Adapting to Being Around Each Other Constantly

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread like wildfire around the world. In an effort to halt the spread of the virus, health authorities in many countries continue to implement various forms of containment measures including different forms of lockdowns, self-quarantine, and social distancing. With many people now working from the comfort of their homes, families have been forced to find new and creative ways to remain socially connected.

In my observations during the survey, it became evident that that technology has come in handy to facilitate interaction in the face of the pandemic. Families are now constantly holding meetings and catch-up sessions over social networks such as Skype, Facebook messenger, and zoom. The pandemic’s global movements are mobilizing new and intensified forms of social proximity that in many ways speak to the heightened need for emotional connections in times of such a crisis (Cinelli et al, 2020). But even with technology providing the much-needed service of keeping people connected, the fact is that many families are now more together in the homes than before the pandemic struck. Therefore, since this is a new phenomenon, the need for families to adapt to being around each other constantly arises.

The choice of this participant observation topic was due to its significance at the moment when family members are constantly around each other due to the containment measures in place in many places. The containment measures have forced families to stay more together particularly at homes especially because the number of people working from home has significantly increased. I use the qualitative research method of participant observation to collect data in two families that I interacted with.

Statement of Ethics

Collecting information from participants requires that consent or permission be explicit, informed, voluntary, and renegotiable. It is required that the researcher provides the participants with enough information about the data collection so that they can make informed decisions about whether or not they want to take part in the research or not (American Anthropological Association. 2012). The consent can either be written but it can also be verbal if applicable.

Before undertaking the survey, I telephoned my target respondents to request an interview with them at their homes. I let them aware of the purpose of the interview and the time it would take place. I informed them that the purpose of the interview was to learn about how families were adapting to being constantly together in the face of the coronavirus pandemic. They were then informed that the survey was voluntary and confidential, meaning that if they felt they did not wish to answer the questions, that was okay and if they felt like stopping part way through the interview it was also okay. I informed them that their names would not also be attached to their responses and that the survey was only for academic purposes. The difficulty I experienced was that some of the families I called were reluctant to grant me audience since they either feared for their privacy or they did not see the merit of the interview. Also, due to the fear of the spread of the virus, some families were hesitant to grant me audience fearing for their health.

Observations

I interviewed two families, one on 9th July 2020 and the other one on 10th July 2020. Both interviews were conducted in the evening when all family members were presumably present. For each of the families, three family members were interviewed, comprising both the mother and father and one of the children. In the first family, there were six members, father, mother, and four children. The second family had four members, father, mother, and two children.

In both families, members had different roles to play. The first family exhibited a more flexible style of behavior, while the other one exhibited a laissez-faire style of behavior. It is noteworthy that different families have different behavior patterns based on what is and what is not acceptable within the family. These behavior patterns are reinforced by daily family interactions (Galvin et al, 2015). In the flexible style of behavior family, there were set standards doing things but the members were at liberty to change them relative to prevailing conditions. For instance, whereas there were set times for children to watch television, they could do it at any other time so long as they had accomplished tasks assigned to them by their parents or their online tutors. On the other hand, with the laissez-faire style of behavior family, there were no specific rules set in the family for people to follow. Everyone is free to do whatever they wish so long as their actions do not result in any infringement of any moral standards.

The interviews took place face-to-face at the respondent’s homes. Both families excited to be interviewed and so the interview process was seamless as everyone responded to the questions enthusiastically and they also asked some questions in return. One unique notable observation was the fact that I had to keep a safe distance between myself and the respondents as a precautionary measure against any risks of COVID-19. So in the process of interviewing the respondents, I found myself speaking in a loud voice to ask questions while taking notes. 

I interviewed six people in total, both parents from the two families and one child in each of the families. There were no hiccups in the process of interviewing. The interview took approximately half an hour for both families while I took some more time to make personal observations. I observed that in both families there was more expression of love and oneness among family members. For instance, children were being assisted to continue with studies at home by their parents and older siblings. Conversely, children were also more eager to participate in domestic chores, helping their parents, which was a big deal for the parents. Parents were more dedicated to their families and the pandemic seems to have granted them an opportunity to bond with their children even more. This was evident from the way both parents and children engaged joyously in play activities both inside and in their backyards.

Anthropological Interpretation

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted every aspect of social life, with families having to adapt to the new normal that requires them to be together more constantly and not as before when many parents had been preoccupied with work and children with school work. From my interviews, many aspects of adaptation in the family were evident. Parents and their children expressed how they were coping with the changes brought about by the pandemic and even as there were obvious challenges, the positive side of the increased togetherness was greater.

One thing that the two families had to contend with is the fact that they have limited time to move around like they used to do before the stay at home orders were instituted. Parents are forced to work from home, and they find it both interesting and challenging at the same time. Asked what they felt about working from home, one of the parents was quick to say she felt guilty about trying to work while also helping her children with their schoolwork. However, from an emic point of view, both parents acknowledged the fact that working from home had made them establish more intimate relationships with their children hence enhancing family cohesion.

To balance between parenting and working, the parents stated that they had to establish schedules and guidelines for everyone in the family to follow. For children, there was a timetable to be followed to accomplish schoolwork while parents attended to their office work remotely. Children have their playtimes and parents as well find time to engage in physical activity after work. There is also time for family bonding, when both parents and children play together, chat the day off, and resolve any issues that may have arisen during the day.

From an etic perspective, there is a limitation of working from home in the form of distraction from children, house chores, and gadgets such as television (Anderson, 2020). One father had this to say about working from home, that, “working from home takes twice the amount of energy for me and it is half productive.” This requires a high level of discipline for one to remain productive while working from home. In a patriarchal society, we live in, working from home can be very overwhelming for mothers than for fathers since traditionally, and the former have more domestic responsibilities than the latter (McLaren et al, 2020).

Being together more constantly has led to increased love and commitment to family affairs from both parties. Domestic issues are resolved promptly when people are more together than apart as sufficient time is allocated to them. However, from an etic point of view, there may be increased levels of conflicts when family members are constantly together, due to breakdown in communication resulting from increased stress and anxiety (Anderson, M. (2020).

The laissez-faire style of behavior in one of the families allows family members to freely do what they think is right without necessarily dictating rules and regulations. This style of behavior is not effective from an etic perspective. Research shows that families usually run into problems when there is a lack of guidelines on the roles, rules, and acceptable behavior. For there to be harmony, families need to negotiate with each other on how family roles and rules are established and maintained.

In the flexible style of behavior family, the ability to adjust to changing situations allows members to respond appropriately to different circumstances affecting their family. Conflict resulting from roles, rules can easily be dealt with in this kind of family setup (Galvin et al, 2015). In this structure, there are guidelines on rules, roles, and acceptable behavior but there is room for flexibility which is attained through negotiation and consensus.

Conclusion

From the foregoing, it can be concluded that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a huge impact on how families socialize. More importantly, it has forced families to adapt to being together more constantly than before as a result of the stay at home orders by many health authorities around the world. As expected, this has its fair share of advantages and disadvantages alike. However, it is noteworthy that the pros and cons of the adaptations can be perceived both from etic and emic points of view. The positive side of families being more constantly together exceeds the negative side of it. Being together increases the family bond and commitment of family members to one another. The level of cooperation increases and in the event of conflicts, they are resolved in record time as adequate time is available from both parties.

The experience during the exercise has been informative by providing me an opportunity to witness firsthand how families are adapting to the conditions brought about by the outbreak of the pandemic. I have interacted with families to get their insights into their experiences about how they are adapting to being constantly together than before the pandemic emerged. I was excited to have been granted an audience by two families even when proximity to people is highly discouraged.

How families are adapting to being around each other constantly ESSAY