| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立彰化師範大學 === 輔導與諮商學系所 === 95 === Within the phenomenological paradigm, from the theoretical perspectives of ‘Chinese culture’ and ‘family system’ and through the experience of three different daughter-in-laws, this research tries to understand the essence of living together of different generations. The three daughter-in-laws are, respectively, living with her in-law parents, not allowed to move out and allowed to move out.
The research finds that living together is a dynamic process of ‘re-choice’. It is actually ‘relationship issues’ behind living together which is affected and restrained by culture, practicability and family structure.
In terms of ‘the choice of living together on marriage’ and ‘the choice of moving out after living together’, the filial piety and the patrilocal culture that are doctrines for Chinese people solidify the value living together. In way of the ‘face’ mechanism, this culture also forms social pressures by which the young couples are deprived of the legitimate rights to refuse living together and forced to passively fight against the parents with reasonable and safe causes. Especially with the case of moving out after living together, the couple can well be labeled as ‘discarding the parents while showing no filial piety’ or ‘something wrong with the family’--- therefore leads to a family revolution. The daughter-in-law will be deemed as a scapegoat and take the blame whether the revolution is successful. The couple, the parents and the whole family will suffer from the loss of face and the bad image. That’s why the issue of intergenerational disharmony while living together is a taboo topic. Besides, the two choices here are restrained by family system and cultural narrative. The strong sense of ‘men making women followers’ and ‘an order of family member ranking’ leaves the un-wedded or wedded wives no rights to choose and negotiate.
In terms of family structure, living or not living together will affect the family ranking status of the couple, the husband-wife subsystem and the intergenerational formation of interaction. Living together rather challenges husband’s family of origin for its flexibility because of the daughter-in-law as a new member and the establishment of a new subsystem. In enmeshing families, living together makes it hard for the subsystem to hold its clear boundary and survive. The husband/ son’s dishonesty, for example, is dealt with more often in the family of origin than in the marriage itself. Too much parental interference pressures the subsystem. In this case, the mother and the daughter-in-law share the same function so that they are in a ‘collaborative but competitive’ relationship. Living together is thus a warm bed for friction and confliction. ‘Home’ is a place full of pressure and hostility for daughter-in-laws.
Even if the couple have their own house for living once they get married, they may still have to withstand some intergenerational pressure and in-law issues. But the independent household can fairly help protect the boundary and the autonomy of the couple. This keeps the parental interference farer, which allows the subsystem more integrate and independent room to develop. This way, ‘home’ is an independent and comfortable place for daughter-in-laws.
‘Moving out’ and ‘not living together’ are the major strategies for daughter-in-laws to shake off intergenerational entanglement. And the husbands’ attitude is crucial in the success of moving out. Daughter-in-laws who can successfully move out start new lives. They have higher ranking statuses in the nuclear families, they are endowed the opportunity to mend the fence as husband and wife and correct the wrongs during living with their in-laws. To the contrast, the couples who can’t move out still suffer from the morass of living together, trying to protect themselves and survive.
At the end of the research, according to its results and limitations, it provides some suggestions for counseling profession, government policies and future studies.
|
|---|
