Discussion

As was found in results, there are some notable findings, but in whole, it is likely to our earlier predictions from the literature review. In this section the distinction and similarities of results will be analyzed and described.

First, there are not arguable or important, but there are should be mentioned findings. One third of respondents preferred not to show their social class. This point was not required to be answered, because in KIMEP university it is clear that there are majority of students from middle or upper class. The singular provision may be described with that that the respondent were one of the students with scholarship. Similarly, there are, how it was divined, respondent with single parent. It can be a singular situation where the family has only one parent, also. As we do not live in a perfect world, these situations should be taken into account. However, may be, the situation occurred by the lost of male’s responsibility for his family.

Second, there are results that show how family structure was changed over time. 80% of respondents’ families are modern, as they mentioned. Here we can see that many revolutions really affected the way our environment’s people think as Leslie (2001) noted. Many of respondents’ families’ members should be aware of modernization and globalization processes. As they have written “modern” is that families, which can easily accept new views and support their children. May be, that’s because of that that they and other family members satisfied with their family life and live in peace and wellness. Contrary, respondents that live in conservative families described the word “conservative” positively, also. “Conservative” means, according to them, respecting traditions. It can be result of their moral and material well being. Whatever family they have they are satisfied with that. On the other hand, students with modern families described “conservative” as “people with old and close mind that do not understand young generation”.

Additionally, there is equality on almost everything between parents. It shows positive sides of today’s changed family structures. Notably, here is the situation where fathers earn more, but more mothers regulate budgets, or in another word, spend more. According to Brennan, Barnett, and Gareis’s (2001) study financially dependent of a wife to husband creates family stability. From this, it is seen that spouses respect each other: both of them do what are likely them to do. Here we can mention that it has some relative parts with traditional old family structure where husband is a breadwinner and mother a contributor. In issues related to child upbringing women dominate as it was from early times, but not as stated the law (equal).

Third, here is respondents’ attitude on two different types of families: women-maintained families and families with househusbands. It is similar to Brand and Kvande’s

(2009) results. They found that for fathers seating at home to care after a child instead of mothers is very strange for Norwegian society. Similarly, most respondents were against househusbands. On the contrary, women breadwinners are accepted. Women-maintained families had only four people against its structure. May be, they are those ones that for the old traditions and from “conservative” families.

Finally, here are answers of respondents to the question what they would like to be when they will have their own family. As it was shown almost all respondents are likely to combine work with family. We can look at it in that way, here more than a half of the respondents are girls and they prefer to work and to make housework, also. It is proper for today’s modern family structures. It is seemed to be democratic type of family structure. It shows that in times of our peers’ marriage there are might be no significant changes in family structure. In addition, there is no man who would like to seat at home and it can mean that our population is against of use of Norway gender-neutral policy by fathers similarly to Brandth and Kvande’s findings.

In conclusion, here are some recommendations. For the KIMEP students that looking for a spouse from his or her classmates the paper may help to know how it is similar to his or her views and make a sure that his family views are likely to general KIMEP students’ views. This paper can be used by public person, like deputy to know what to propound to middle class families (for example, build more kinder garden for double-earner families’ children) in the future when running for a deputy to win.