The purpose of this study was to describe the relationship between family stress and adaptation in families with a disabled child through literature review using McCubbin's Double ABCX family crisis framework. The literature review focused on (1) family stress and factors affecting family stress, (2) the critical individual, familial and social resources which families acquire and employ over time in managing crisis situation, (3) the changes in definition and meaning families develop in an effort to make sense out of their predicament, (4) the coping strategies families employ, and (5) the range of outcomes of these family efforts The results showed that families reported financial difficulties and the burden of care-giving demands as major family stressors. Siblings of disabled children manifested depressive symptoms and social isolation, but was not consistent study results. The parents' views of the cause of the disabling condition fundamentally affected their behavior toward their disabled child. Especially, the fathers' views of the child's characteristics made the greatest contribution to positive changes in the mothers' perceptions. The term perceived social support refers to the cognitive appraisal by individuals that they are cared for and valued, that significant others are available to them if needed, and that they are satisfied with their interpersonal relationships. The perceived social support was more protective than social support source, network size and network density. Parental adaptation was found to be related to the child's communication competence rather than family coping strategies proposed by Lazarus and Folkman. One study results showed that there was no difference in depressive symptoms and physical health between mothers with a disabled child and those without all though mothers with a disabled child had negative attitudes and perceived themselves as having significantly less social support and lower family functioning. But a longitudinal study revealed decreases in the negative impact of the child and increases in sibling and overall family adaptation.
The purpose of this study was to identify the relationship among family stress, family meaning and family adaptation of families with high risk neonates.
The date was collected on the basis of self- report questionnaires (August 2004 to March 2005); Tow-hundred twelve parents, who had high risk neonates in C hospital's neonatal intensive care unit, participated on request.
Family sense of coherence, family meaning, social support, family stress, marital communication and patient condition had a significant, direct effect on family adaptation. Family cohesion, religion, confidence in the health professional, and length of stay had a significant, direct effect on family meaning.
The results of this study suggest the consequences associated with high risk neonates may be alleviated by a family support intervention designed to improve parental communication skills as well as to maintain family cohesiveness. Medical care could also encourage more emotional support of parents towards their neonate.
Even though a number of studies have suggested that appropriate measuring instruments of family stress for working women have to be developed, the validity and reliability of the instruments used have not been consistently examined. The purpose of the present study was to develop a sensitive instrument to measure family stress for married working women, and to test the validity and reliability of the instrument.
The items generated for this instrument were drawn from a comprehensive literature review. Twenty four items were developed through evaluation by 10 experts and twenty one items were finally confirmed through item analysis. Psychometric testing was preformed and confirmed with a convenient sample of 240 women employed in the industrial sector.
Four factors evolved by factor analysis, which explained 50.5% of the total variance. The first factor ‘Cooperation’ explained 28.1%, 2nd factor ‘Satisfaction with relationships’ 10.6%, 3rd factor ‘Democratic and comfortable environment’ 6.3%, and 4th factor ‘Disturbance of own living’ 5.5%. Cronbach's coefficient of this instrument was 0.86.
The study supports the validity and reliability of the instrument.