In Search of Family Resilience

Abstract

This study explores the construct of family resilience defined as a family variable that enables the family to survive major life challenges and as a coping resource that enables the individual to deal with traumas and to thrive from the experience. Nurses who were working with infected patients in a major epidemic in Singapore provided the sample and the context to search for family resilience. Two studies are reported in this article: Study 1 consisted of an in-depth interview with 30 nurses and some of their family members to identify the factors within their families that they perceived to have enabled them to cope with the stress and difficulties. Based on the results from Study 1, a family resilience (FR) scale was constructed. Using the FR scale, Study 2 employed a structured survey to identify the internal organization and the psychometric properties of FR. Factor analysis of the results identified five meaningful factors. The FR scale was found to have excellent psychometric properties. Path analyses were conducted to test whether family resilience is a spurious factor and whether it is a construct distinct and independent from individual resilience (IR). It was found that FR predicts individual well-being with both direct and indirect effect mediated by individual resilience, supporting the nonspurious nature of FR and the potential reciprocal causal effects between FR and IR.

An Actor-Partner Interdependence Model on Family Resilience and Subjective Wellbeing

“…At the same time, being a united family that accommodates and cooperates with other family members, building connections through commitment and effective communication with appropriate emotional expressions are also essential to a resilient family. These components are consistent with the dimensions of family resilience found in the Chang, Neo & Fung's (2015) Singapore study. The FRS dimensions are 1) Family solidarity (i.e., family connectedness, unity and flexibility), 2) Meaning-making (i.e., redefine the meaning of adversity and approach accordingly), 3) Religiosity, 4) Emotional Regulation (i.e., the control of emotional expression), whereby family solidarity and emotional control coincides with the component of "family organization and communication" regarding the unity and connectedness of the family found across many studies; while meaning-making and religiosity correspond with the "family belief systems" as summarized by Walsh (1996Walsh ( , 2003.…”

“…These questionnaires were: 1) Family Resilience Scale (Chang, Neo, & Fung, 2015); 2) Abbreviated 15-items Asian Subjective Well-being (Chang, 2003). The following section provides detailed descriptions of each of the questionnaires used Family Resilience Scale (Chang, Neo, & Fung, 2015).…”

“…Family Resilience Scale (Adapted from Chang, Neo, & Fung, 2015) 1) We make sacrifices for one another 2) We accommodate to one another's needs …”

“…In an interview study on how Singaporean nurses had coped with the 2003 SARS outbreak, it was observed frequently from their qualitative reports that they have coped with the crisis together as a family (Chang, Neo, & Fung, 2015). From this study, a Family Resilience Scale (FRS) was developed to represent the conceptualization and manifestation of resilience at the family level.…”

“…In other words, psychological resilience moderates the stress-and-coping process, and contributes to the coping outcome. Family resilience, a family level construct, reduces negative impact and promotes the likelihood for adaptive responses (Chang, Neo, & Fung, 2015;Cowan, Cowan & Schulz, 1996) of the family system (Walsh, 2002).…”