Specific Family Policies in different countries and people’s attitude on it

There are some policies that were provided in order to adapt to changes. Chile’s government a provides policy for female labor in order to reduce poverty. Buvinic and Gupta (1997) illustrate the direct and indirect benefits not only to the family, but to society, also. It became a national program and has perceived organizational support from the public and is encouraged because it focused on increasing incomes, improving welfare, and fighting female gender discrimination. This points lead the program to succeed and find support. The article describes how the program is going to be implemented. Although the government spends more money for supporting on child care, transportation, and female security, the incomes of the program are much more. There is one more optimistic hypothesis that males’ marital role quality and interactions between child and father can be increased.

There is another country focused on father-child interactions, namely on equality on parenting. Norway introduced two policies on child care (Brandth & Kvande, 2009). One of them is gendered, but it is perceived as gender-neutral and another one is gender-neutral perceived as gendered, feminine. With the gendered policy, a quota for fathers, gives six weeks (now ten weeks from July 1, 2009) of parental leave (either 29 weeks with 100percent or 39 weeks with 80 percent parental salary payment) to fathers to care for the child. This policy does not really care parents’ choice who will stay with the child because by stereotype the caring parent is mother, but the gender-neutral policy does care. Essentially, the second policy gives more opportunities for equality, because the couple decides who is going to get the parental leave. However, mostly females get it as traditionally and that is why it is perceived as gendered. The perspective policy is now gendered one. Now, after 15 years, the father’s quota recognized as a normal.

On the other hand, there are other countries where the government contributes less to family well-being. They are Australia, New Zealand, and Canada (Dulac, 2005). Dulac’s article reviews Baker’s book, where the author shows how family life of these countries changed in new century, describes the reasons why, and compares results. Baker analyzes almost every sphere related to family and these countries that has been mentioned in this review. She found that Australia and New Zealand have more similarities, but Canada differs on mothering at home. She explains that the results or similarities and differences between countries may or may not be caused by systematic reasons of countries, but participants’ dissimilarity. It is an influential conclusion. Basically, from recent changes and revolutions there are many kinds of people. All research should be done and analyzed based on its population’s feature.

In brief, the studies mentioned and discussed different issues about family. Although the general picture of family structure may be found by reviewing group of different countries’ studies, the specific population shows its own dissimilar construction. In addition, the results and analysis depends on researchers’ method and objectivity. There was no study found that surveyed KIMEP university students and this study will fill the missing point.