Changing Families in the Changing World: Social Work Imaginations

“Changing Families in the Changing World: Social Work Imaginations” Delegation Report on 3rd International Conference of Centre for Research on Families and Relationships (CRFR) cum Study Visit

(Conference: Edinburgh, Jun 16-18, 2010) (Study Visit: Edinburgh and London, Jun 21 – 22, 2010)

List of Delegates

Delegation Leader : Mr Charles Ng, Christian Family Service Centre

Other Delegates : Ms Grace Chan, Caritas Hong Kong Mr Moses Mui, The Hong Kong Council of Social Service Mr Anthony Wong, The Hong Kong Council of Social Service Ms Gloria Yuen, The Society of Rehabilitation and Crime Prevention, Hong Kong

Table of Contents I. Introduction

While the Conference we attended is entitled “Changing Families in a Changing World,” and we listened to many presentations that there are many new practices of family, many local practitioners, who attended our seminar after the conference and study visit, did not think that those practices are new. Many of the so-called old forms of families are perhaps not old. Many of the new practices may however have existed for very long time already. Old or new, they perhaps just have different very manifestations in the new social and cultural contexts. It really doesn’t matter whether those practices are new or not. What matters is how we understand this variety of family forms and practices in these contexts and deliberate more policy and practice measure to support these changing family forms and practices.

In this report, we will first map out the different forms and practices of families and identify some of the emerging issues facing families in different parts of the world. We will then identify a number of major issues that deserve more discussion and exploration in the context of Hong Kong. They are namely diversity of family forms, transnational families and practices, and parenting. As there are diverse forms and practices of families, no simple wisdom or paradigm is adequate in understanding the families of our time. More conceptual deliberation and empirical research are needed. In this report, we shall also be highlighting a action research project conducted in Scotland and illustrate how evidence-based practice can support diverse forms of families in the globalized world.

4 II. Mapping the Family Issues in the Globalized World

Roughly categorized, the variety of family practices heard of during the conference could be summarized in the table below:

Marriage & Parenting Child care/ elder Parenthood: Reproduction Partnership care Fatherhood/ Motherhood Inter-ethnic Mixed children Left behind Delayed parenthood marriage children Late fertility and infertility Forced marriage inInternational adoption Work-life the West balance Singlehood Grandparent’s parenting and care Conflict and violence Gay/Lesbian ICT: Living apart together Ecology relationship & family designs New Polygamy Extra-familial care a. Marriage and Partnership In our time, whether marriage is getting less attractive or not remains a matter of debate. What is more clear is that divorce is getting prevalent. In a time when the society has a mixture of diverse attitudes towards marriage and partnership, one could expect that there would be diverse forms of partnerships/relationships. Also, mixture of old and new forms of relationship practices could also be seen. For example, a study in UBC shows that societal- level pressure to marry is positively associated with dating violence (Carrie Yodanis , University of British Columbia, Canada). This is absolutely not new a phenomenon. What is new perhaps is the increased transparency of misbehaviors in relationships/partnerships resulted from the societal pressure that pushes people to get married with someone. Likewise, we heard of retraditionalization of family life (Julia Carter, University of York, UK), but at the same time this is practiced with much precedent relationship experiments of people who see other fleeting sexual relationships as “necessary distractions” on the path to commitment and marriage. For them, family as “a sort of refuge in the chilly environment of our affluent, impersonal, uncertain society” is still very much treasured. In a society full of uncertainties, choices of forms of relationships available to some people may in some sense be the same set, but the trajectory of their relationship choosing is no longer stable. Increased level of transparency of a relationship does not secure the relationship more. Rather, it raises the question of trust more sharply. For other people, new forms of marriage and partnerships emerge out of a

5 context of highly connected transnational environment of the world. Some are chosen and some not.

 Inter-ethnic Marriage  New Forced Marriage  New Polygamy  Singlehood  Gay and Lesbian Marriage/Relationships

These forms of relationships, again, may not be new, but in terms of the magnitude and the ways these relationships are played out in the new globalized contexts, new relationship phenomena certainly deserve close attention. For example, inter-ethnic marriage has emerged for many years, but it’s much more prevalent now. Increased level of connectedness of different ethnicities produce more such relationships in quantity but at the same time produce more inter- ethnic conflicts at the background of these relationships, giving these individually chosen relationships a new set of social and cultural dynamics to consider. Likewise, polygamy now acquires a new form of legitimacy, one that does not require any legitimacy. A transnational subject finds no material as well as moral burden to sustain relationships in different parts of the world. All in all, there is not just a variety of pre-determined forms of partnership or relationship that one can choose from. Like engineering, people can choose different parts of human relationships, and re-combine it into something new. People are free to choose and to re-combine. Yet, out of a certain life situation or conditions, they are also being shaped and re-combined. The concept of “new family design” is relevant here. People design their relationship so as to provide solutions to their current constraints in their everyday life. In other words, they design to fit a certain larger societal design. b. Parenting and Family Care (Child Care, Elder Care) In our time, parenting and family care giving are increasingly not just a household matter. As there is a massive scale of flow of parents (as well as children) due to employment (as well as study), the parenting and caring situation of the family has experienced a profound change. In some migrant villages in the South East Asia, for example, almost all active members of the families are aboard. Only care givers, children, old people and the sick stay at home. The active members however usually are the most important parenting and care taking players for the children and the old, but they are most distant from the household. The result of the tug-of-war between the workplace (labour market) and the household is clear. Care is therefore rendered by someone employed than the family members (usually, others’ mothers). An economically mobile parent at the North hires someone from the South to take care of his family members who are radically stuck in the household. The latter then is radically stuck in the fomer’s local household. Although she is relatively mobile in her own family in the South, her mobility is captured by her employer. Care giving is rendered in this hierarchy of “mobility”. Apparently, those who really can’t move will find themselves not being taken care of but by themselves. Intersecting with this hierarchy of

6 mobility are also gender, race and ethnicity. Yet, even for those whose families are taken care of, they will find themselves restless in looking for compensation strategies to maintain their family relationships. A whole new set of transnational strategies and measures are produced to meet this massive need of compensation such as ICT products and services to maintain communication, cash remittances and consumers goods to serve as material compensation.

More and more people turn to their old generation for help in child care. Grand- parenting is generally revived, but again it reproduces a whole new set of dynamics in the family. In the old days, grand-parents were usually the authority figures. They were the sources of wisdom in child care. As family care is outsourced, available in the market in various forms, while the parents are exposed to enormous amount of child care information, a new set of expectations are produced on how children are to be cared. The quality of grandparenting is of course an issue. Accountability also emerges as an issue in the family. It may originate from the parents, but more so from the grandparents themselves. The intergenerational relationship is therefore re-configured by new practices of parenting and grandparenting. c. Parenthood (Fatherhood, Motherhood, and Reproduction) Whether and how to be a father/mother in the current context of global economic competition and crisis is a central question for people of our time. However, the parameters being taken into account in making these choices are not just familial but social and economical. The interaction among these parameters put parents in an endless process of anxiety. Employment insecurity delays parenthood, and delayed parenthood reminds parents of economic insecurity when they get old. In spite of this anxiety, delayed parenthood has a social connotation of being privileged, as they have jobs that they need to retain. They are therefore perceived by the larger society not as disadvantaged but as privileged. So, whether one wants to be a father or a mother is more and more a calculated social and economic choice.

For those who choose to be parents, issues like family-work life balance, parenting, conflict, domestic violence all have long-term social and economic implications to parenthood. They are all sources of anxiety for parents.

Naturally, some could not have this choice, even if this generates endless anxiety, because biologically they have problems of reproduction. But as infertility gets more prevalent, more and more strategies and technologies are available for parents to choose from. Adoption is one such strategy. But adoption is no longer like before. Improved communication technology, transportation, and information access etc have enabled not only transnational adoption, but also activities concerning the making of identity of the adopted children and the adopting parents’ identification with the children. Parents can now go back to the country of origin of the children, understand their social and cultural characteristics of the original place of birth of their children, hoping to re- construct their relationship with their children. Donor insemination, commercial

7 surrogacy, and other technologies or biogenetic substances that attempt to resolve the problem of infertility entail some impact on relationship, care and nurturing. A prevalent trend of such kind of relationships which are based originally on purchase of fertility service generates not just ethical issues, legal, social, psychological issues on the part of children as well as parents.

8 III. Changing patterns of family formation a. Factors affecting patterns of family formation Diversity of family forms in contemporary societies is closely related to economic level of the family, changes of gender roles in family, state policies as well as the increasing mobility of people.

In traditional rural societies, childlessness was rare to ensure the economic manpower in production. Each member was restricted by the sex role of the traditional family, the father as the breadwinner and the mother as the home- marker. With rapid socio-economic development, the mother is becoming the supplementary provider to the family while still retains her responsibilities of child rearing. Female participation in labor force leads to their delayed parenthood and childbearing. Fertility rate drops in many societies. Singlehood is common in many advanced countries too.

The current economic situation is also characterized by a large gap between the rich and the poor. Women from the developing countries migrate to the rich countries through transnational marriage. State policies and advanced transportation make it possible and easier. Different patterns of partnering, childbearing and child caring are associated with these families who are of the same or different ethnicities. b. Changes of Family Formation in Different Parts of the World Family researches identified several phenomena of family patterns that deserve attention of researchers and policy planners. For instance, the increasing average age of marriage, decreasing fertility rate, rising singleton population, increasing number of gay, lesbian and bisexual couples as well as interracial marriage and mixed children have drawn much attention. In the conference, we have heard of presentations related to these as below:

Postponing parenthood in Central and Eastern Europe (I. Szalam, University of Budapest, Hungary; H. Haskova, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Czech Republic) During the socialist period, childlessness was rare in the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). However, since 1990s, CEE became a region with the lowest fertility rates. Similar to developed countries, the postponed children may not be born and permanent childlessness is expected to grow in CEE. For example, there is a trend in the family formation among youngsters of Hungary that their transitions to parenthood currently take place at a later stage in life course and growing age at first birth than it did a few decades ago. Employment insecurity and unemployment further influence family formation of these young adults.

Experience singleness in Malaysia, Italy and Britain (R. Ibrahim, National University of Malaysia, Malaysia; S. Rapisarda, University of Leed, United Kingdom)

9 The marriage practice of people has changed drastically over the past decades. The major change is the increasing average age of marriage. In most of the developing and developed countries, women are marrying at later age and some even remain single throughout their childbearing years due to their participation in higher education and later into the job market. Singlehood is a dynamic process in which women learn and relearn how to become women without being wives and mothers. They may fulfill the natural vocation as ‘women’ by adopting children. In the case of Malaysian Malay Muslims, the total percentage of never- married women over the age of 30 increased from 3.1% in 1960 to 23.3% in 2000. They have to bear heavy societal pressure of being unmarried. By contrast, singlehood is increasingly accepted in European countries such as Britain and Italy. The sense of commitment is weakening and the affirmation of the individual identity is rising in these countries. Besides, social networks other than the family become the key element in the lives of single people to deal with an uncertain future.

Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) couples in United Kingdom and Belgium (P. Nordqvist, University of Manchester, United Kingdom; C. Herbrand, Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium) The rising number of lesbian, gay and bisexual couples in some European countries signifies the change of prevalent meaning of family that involves blood or marital relationship. The couples have their own children through either adoption or reproductive technologies of conception such as surrogacy. Moreover, the parenting practice is no longer the same as the traditional one. There is the new family design of “co-parenthood” among gays and lesbians in order to maintain family-work balance, familial flexibility, joint custody and parental functions. The co-parenthood is a parental arrangement between a man and a woman, who are not a couple. More concerns are recently given to whether co-parenthood can apply beyond gays and lesbians. Moreover, the LGB elders often worry about their end of life care and thus social networks gradually replace the traditional kinship relationship.

Patterns of partnering of transnational families in North Europe and in developing countries (K. Caarls, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Thao Thi Vu, University of Copenhagen, Denmark) Globalization leads to high level of transnational mobility. Most migrants of developed countries tend to marry someone from the host country. Marriage becomes the last route of migration to ensure upward economic mobility. According to the research study in the Netherlands, migration was related to an increase in separation and divorce. The partnering relationship of transnational marriages was affected by the conflicting gender expectations between men and women. In these families, the men often seek a traditional wife while the women hope for a more modern husband. Besides, there is an important trend in migration flows that there is the growing numbers of independent female migrants of developing countries such as Vietnam. This development has allowed many women to obtain economic independence and take up new social positions in families and local communities. In this connection, there are great challenges

10 for the left behind families in terms of shifting gender boundaries and family care. c. Challenges to the Society – An Example in Scotland With reference to the situation in Scotland, it would be hard to talk about “typical family” by 2020. In Scotland, people often marry later or cohabit without marriage. An increasing number of children are born outside marriage. The separation and divorce rates also increase dramatically in recent decades. Among them, the divorce rate is 33% higher for families with children of disability. Household with one adult with children rise from 150,000 in 2004 to 200,000 in 2024. About 25% of parents are lone parents who require more flexible job to earn a living while retaining their responsibility in childrearing. In Scotland, 30% of all mothers will spend some time in stepfamily before the age of 45. As estimated by the government, step-families are the dominant family form in Scotland in 2010 (Parenting Across Scotland, 2010). Changes in marital relationship and quality of parents’ relationship affect how the children adapt to changing family situations. Not only do what parents do to the child matter, but also how the parents behave with each other. Parenting and partnership are thus higher up in the Government’s agenda.

In response to economic crisis in recent years, the policy of United Kingdom aims to re-establish the financial capability of individuals through flexible job, child care subsidy and tax concession. In Scotland, women and lone parents are supported to take up or sustain employment or to attain college study for a better future. The local government provides flexible child care to encourage self- reliance of concerned groups who are suffering from obesity, mental illness and alcoholic addiction. Therefore, they would no longer depend on social welfare only. d. Family changes in Hong Kong society Similar to other countries, Hong Kong society also experiences significant changes in family formation. Similar pattern of changes is found. According to the report of Census and Statistics Department in July 2010, the proportion of the population aged 65 and over is projected to rise markedly, from 13% in 2009 to 28% in 2039. The sex ratio (i.e. the number of males per 1,000 females) of the population is projected to fall noticeably, from 889 in 2009 to 744 in 2039. Besides the changes in population, recent trends of late marriage and postponement of childbearing also indicate the rising number of singleton people and one-child family. In addition, the family composition becomes diverse as a result of rising number of new immigrants from Mainland and increasing ethnicity of Hong Kong society. Families with disabled members or prisoners have more complicated interactions in partnering and parenting decisions. Last but not least, the recent court case about whether a transsexual woman will be allowed to marry her boyfriend drew much societal attention. There is still lack of local consensus and agreed cultural basis to redefine "man" and "woman".

With globalization, there are changing patterns of family formations in different

11 contemporary societies. The changes bring forth the discussion on personal relationship, family functions such as reproduction and parenting as well as social support networks that are different from the traditional ones. Social work practitioners have to be aware of own values and to modify practice responsively to fit for ever changing family situations.

12 IV. Migration and Transnational Families

Transnational family can be said to be one of the most outstanding theme in the conference. Many presentations were related to the issues concerning transnational families. What defines transnational family is not so much the act of cross border movement of the family, but the dispersion of the family across international borders where different family members stay temporarily in one or the other country for different reasons -- political reasons, economic reasons and educational pursuit, etc. In the meantime, globalization also leads to new patterns of transnational mobility and migration. With the advancement of communication/information technology and transportation technology, it also contributes to the emergence of transnational families. The emergence of transnational families as a result of migration for work abroad / labor migration and the challenges experienced by these transnational families was quite a common theme.

Concerning the challenges of transnational families, papers presented in the Conference covers various areas of interests including:  what influences the families have in shaping the migration decision making, the traditional gender roles in shaping women’s migration decision making;  the loss experienced by family members who stay behind / are “left behind”;  how migration affects family life in terms of reproductive practice/child bearing, parenting, and the distancing among those who maintain transnational relations;  future orientation among those who form new families in the post migration scenario;  the practice of caring and support in transnational family solidarity across three generations—interplay of stages of the family life, gender, generation, social categories, life circumstances and historical context. a. Challenges of Transnational Families A lot of challenges are experienced by transnational families as reflected from the research findings of the conference paper presenters. Migration always leads to experiences of discontinuity for families through temporary separation of family members and through dislocation. These families have to adapt to the new culture and societal circumstances and norms different from their own country of origin. They have to struggle between dealing with family separation and at the same time maintaining family ties, struggling in the involvement in family matters such as the children’s education and well-being, but somehow this is difficult because of geographic distance, limited resources and other limitations. There is paper presented in the conference exploring mothers’ and children’s views and practice of constructing identities and belongings, and the role that ethnicity, class and language play in these practices. There is also research paper trying to find the ways transnational families, with members having migrated to European countries especially to Spain, Italy, U.K. and Ireland from Romanian villages, manage to function when almost all active members of the families are abroad, leaving only caregivers, children and old people and the sick remaining at home.

13 While living spatially apart, it also challenges the maintenance of intimate relationship among couples and parent-child of the transnational families. b. Global Care Chain European Commission 2007 defines “circular migration” as “a form of migration that is managed in a way allowing some degree of legal mobility back and forth between two countries”. Global care chain was first used by Arlie Hochschild to describe a series of personal link between people across the globe basing on paid or unpaid work of caring (Hochschild, 2003). In the Conference, such phenomenon of global care chain was identified in some of the research papers on transnational families. The labor migrants move from the poor to affluent countries to care for the young, the old and the sick while leaving those young, old and the sick to whom they normally provide care for to be cared by other paid or unpaid worker, or usually not being cared for at all. There is the trend for international trade of domestic workers. In the process, female is often central to global care chain, with female supplying care labor while consuming other women’s care labor. Lower down the chain, it may be even an older daughter who substitutes for her mother in providing unpaid care for her younger siblings. c. Shifting of Gender Boundaries Another theme concerning challenges of transnational families discussed a lot in the conference covers the family members staying behind. While there is a trend of feminization of migration, it is often the female labors working in other countries as labor migrants. As a result, it is the husbands and the children who stay behind and some researchers even term it as families being “left behind”. While the wives own the breadwinner’s role by working as labor migrants abroad, it’s the husbands who do the domestic work in their countries of origin. Then when the wives earn more, with better knowledge and exposure, their voice in family decision making becomes stronger. The masculinity of men who stay behind to be responsible for the domestic and child care work is challenged. This seemingly and subtly pushes the original gender boundaries. The traditional gender boundaries between public and domestic sphere then have to be renegotiated in the transnational families in view of the feminization of migration. d. Transnational Mobility of the “Invisible” Grandparents While much coverage on transnational families are on the challenge of labor migration families as presented in the Conference, it is worth noting that there was discussion on the transnational mobility of the grandparents from China who move to provide care works to their migrated children in terms of post-natal care, child care and housework, etc. However, when they are suffering from major illness, they will choose not to burden their children’s finance by returning to their homeland. While facing challenges in daily living in terms of unfamiliar language, social network, etc., these grandparents were found experiencing 3 “NOTs” in their relationship with their children and grandchildren, namely:  Not a master as they can’t make decisions for the families;  Not a guest as they have to do housework and child care;

14  Not a servant as they are not paid for those domestic and child care work.

During decade before the return of sovereignty of Hong Kong from Britain to China in 1997, a lot of the families experienced migration and became transnational families. The decision making process of migration, the staying behind in China and the issue of “astronaut families” all challenged quite a lot of Hong Kong families at that time. In the past two decades, there has been a trend of cross-border marriages with HK men getting married with women in Mainland China. There are also a lot of families with family members, often the husbands, working in China for a few days a week and then back to Hong Kong in weekend. To what extent they are experiencing similar challenges of the transnational families as reflected in the Conference is worth exploring.

Besides, as far as migration is mentioned, people often refer to cross country migration or migration of a long term or even permanent one. Yet, in fact, in Asian countries such as Vietnam, quite many people are labor migration from one province to another which is in fact with quite different culture though within the same country. We have to expand our conceptualization of migration and its challenges brought forth. The following areas being touched in the Conference are much worth looking into when we are to understand transnational families in our HK context: • From a ‘migration’ to a ‘transnational’ framework • Increase in the ‘circularity’ of migratory movements • The extent national borders impede or facilitate circularity through migration, citizenship and visa controls • The impact on belonging and social inclusion • Kinship networks and patterns of relation and communication across and between the generations • Kinship practices and patterns of care giving by gender, class & migration type • Social uses of new technologies (travel and communication) • Cultural constructions of care giving and family.

As a lot of families “outsourcing” domestic care labor work to domestic workers from South or SE Asia such as the Philippines, Indonesia and Thailand, a lot of families in Hong Kong are also on the nodes in the global care chain and there seemingly is a commoditization of care. How do we social workers view those domestic workers at the lower node down the global care chain but are contributing domestic care work to many families in Hong Kong? What is the implication behind the notion of global care chain are to Hong Kong families? All these are worthy of further exploration.

15 V. Parenting in a Changing World

Socialization through parenting is one of the core functions of family. Since families are under on-going changes in the world, changes in parenting in the modern world seems unavoidable. Numbers of researches presented in this conference witnessed changing patterns of family formation because of the ‘role delay’ faced by various members in respective developmental stage. Some examples in Hungary, East Europe and UK have been mentioned above. a. Grandparenting

Grand-parents’ role in parenting has been strengthened in modern families. In Australia, frequent grand-childcare is more prevalent than any of the European nations. The gendered meanings and practices of grand-childcare evident in interviews show grandmothers are often positioned as nurturing, coordinators of care and struggling to balance care and time while grandfathers are most described as male role models to grandchildren and can opt in and out caring labour (Briony Horsfall, Swinburne, university of Technology, Australia).

A research in Germany has found out that relationships between adult children and their parents are defined and reconstructed across the transition to grand- parenthood. The transition towards the parental status is widely perceived as fundamentally ambivalent in terms of intergenerational relations within the family. (Katharine Ulbrich, Dresden Leibniz Graduate School, Germany). With diversifying forms of families, increased life expectancy, growing numbers of dual- worker households and high rates of family breakdown, grandparents are now playing more prominent role in their grandchildren’s lives.

Results of a research of adolescent-grandparent relationships supported the position that grandparents are a significant factor in the lives of adolescents. The interactions consistently emphasized the role of parents as gatekeepers of intergenerational exchanges (Jo-Pei Tan, University of Putra Malaysia, Malaysia). b. Parenting in the Internet Age

Furthermore, challenges faced by parents in the internet age are real. As new technology and different types of media have increasing presence the family household, the current view of children’s leisure activities is of isolated sedentary activities rather than active social play and a concern about safety in their neighborhoods (Erika Doyle, University of Dublin, Ireland).

In an age where public and parental concern constrains young peoples’ use of public spaces, the teenage bedroom is a new site for the development of self and identity and a new focus for the negotiation of boundaries of privacy. The rise of the Internet, and the active engagement of young people in networked spaces, add a new and complex layers to this dynamic (Zachari Duncalf, Strathclyde

16 University, United Kingdom).

The last thirty years has seen a boom in communications technology, an increase in geographical mobility, and an increase in the number working and lone parents, to name just a few transformations. One result of these changes has been an increasingly individualized society, which has led to changes in the family unit. The emergence of technology has dramatically altered play, supervision, and communication.(Leanne Franklin, Loughborough University, United Kingdom). c. Parenting as Socialization However, no matter how late people takes part in parenting, socialization is still a core objective that parents should reach among various family functions. It is not easy for parents nowadays to shape their children as in previous decades. In local situation, some frontline social workers observe that parents are even impacted by their children in a negative manner and both their parental goals and expectation are changed. To examine this phenomenon, parents’ subjective feelings and thought should be taken into account. The following study, named “From Good Babies to Bad Mothers” conducted by an anthropologist, Dr. Kelly Davis of the University of Edinburgh, does bring us insight. The Research studied the Kinship and expert advice in the process of learning to be mother. There were 33 interviewees (mother-daughter pairs in Scotland, both mothers) who were white, British, mainly middle-class, relatively well-educated and non-religious from the three cohorts, 1945-1960; 1961-1980; 1990-2004. Besides, the scholar reviewed professionally published childrearing literature in these cohorts.

‘ Habit training’ and ‘Socializing discipline’ are focuses of this study. Habit Training refers to the establishment and performance of care for babies and very young children, e.g. sleeping, eating toilet training. Socializing discipline means how to behave inside and outside the home; interactions with family, friends and strangers; values, attitudes and personality characteristics.

The research told us that expectations of mothers and the intensity of mothering had changed from 1945-2004. Changing experts’ discourses about the form and goal of children’s socialization were also found. Women’s notions did mirror professional opinions.

The first cohort, 1945-1960, was named as adult-like management. In this period which was full with post-war anxiety, published childrearing advice were inflexible. Interviewees expected even very young babies to follow routine, i.e. mother set the structure of daily living. ‘Successful’ training meant the child fit into social conventions of adult world. This value led to proper socializing of older child, where ‘spoiling’ was avoided by instilling obedience. None of the interviewees spoke of being a ‘bad’ mother. ‘Good’ baby was equal to non- demanding, placid, content, who did not cry often.

17 In the second cohort, controlled flexibility (1961-1980), increasing flexibility in childrearing might be viewed as an extension of changing moral values. Control still important, but experts paid increasing attention to a child’s individual character. ‘Timing’ and ‘readiness’ were key concepts as developmental pediatrics and psychology gained recognition and influence. Some interviewees spoke of strictness; others felt they were less rigid than previous generations. While there were still references to ‘good’ babies, anxiety over being a ‘bad’ mother was also expressed. In socializing discipline, expert literature stressed children’s emotional and psychological stability. ‘Love’ became reinforcement for the mother-child relationship, so that cooperation based on affection was important. For the women, the notion of the individuality of each child influenced their socializing discipline practices. Many mothers remembered the lack of personal recognition in their own upbringing.

From 1992 onwards, i.e. the third cohort named ‘happy individual’ (1990-2004), increasing multiplicity in family forms and ideologies. Given these changes, professional literature concentrated on the quality rather than the form of the parent-child relationship. A multitude of approaches, flexibility and ‘shopping around’ related to the personality of each child. The multiplicity of approaches talked about and tried by interviewees indicates the extent of choice. Optimum routine one that suited both mother and child with least amount of stress. Women’s references to ‘feeling like a bad mother’ often stemmed from the dissonance between the approaches a mother wanted to take and which method they had to employ. Narratives on socializing discipline focused on a fluid, interactive and reflective process. Compared to older cohorts, the children had much more influence in the disciplining process. Mutual satisfaction in the mother-child relationship meant ‘success’ in the socialization. More references to letting children ‘have a say’ or ‘spreading their wings’. Meant to build up child’s self-esteem, ensuring they are ‘kind’, ‘generous’ ‘open-minded’.

A shift in the moral undertone of childrearing, from the mother preventing her child from being ‘demanding’ in the 1945-1960 period to the mother doing her utmost to preserve her child’s ego and the quality of the mother-child relationship by the period 1990-2004. As the intensification of a mother’s duty in socializing her children increased, many women sought outside advice, which was steadily multiplying and was often conflicting. These factors together manifested in more women’s narratives revealing feelings of ‘flawed’ mothering. This concurrence of the intensification of a mother’s socializing/childrearing and the proliferation of possible methods locates any long-term difficulties or problems as a failure on the mother’s part to employ the proper practices. Thus, there was a greater burden of interpretation on the mother to know her child and act accordingly. This burden of interpretations expected when a child was still very young, for it was the means by which a mother secures a harmonious relationship with her child.

18 Be aware of global in the local, we find during the past six decades, mothers were changed from demanding their children to demanding themselves. Although more and more professional advice was offered, they thought some of them were conflicting. Children in fact have more influence in the disciplining process. In response to this change, local practitioners unavoidably have to review their goal of parenting education. The traditional perspective, named parent-effect perspective, is no longer suitable to nowadays complicated parent-child relationship. Parents may not be the only shaper to their children. It is high time for the sector to think about the necessity of having a paradigm shift or inducing new perspective in parenting education in order to address challenges faced by the parents. Everyone thinks that parents influence their children, but few people ask the ways in which children affect their parents. The love, satisfaction, and fulfillment children offer can change parents’lives. So can the stress and worry that brought by the unsatisfactory parent- child relationship . And, it may be a neglected issues of family dynamics, in global and in local.

19 VI. Family Research, Policy and Practice – A British Experience

While the above mentions more about some major trend of family issues and practices that we observed during the conference and visitation, we were also very much impressed by the momentum of evidence-based practice in UK and many countries in Europe. Research projects carried out are deliberately linked with practices and policies, and the scale of projects is very big. We have seen more and more longitudinal studies being carried by these countries to trace changes of families and the family members at different life stages. a. The “About Families” Project In recent years, there has been a very considerable increase in interest by researchers, practitioners and policy-makers in “knowledge transfer” within the welfare sector in Hong Kong. Similar discussion was found commonly in United Kingdom. During the study visit, the delegation had visited the Parenting across Scotland, and got to know one of a project entitled “About Families.” The project is aimed at providing relevant and accessible evidence to inform service development for the families affected by disability.

“ About Families” project, funded by the National Lottery through Big Lottery Fund, is a three-year project which started in March 2010. The project leverages joint efforts of various partners, including Centre for Research on Families and Relationship (research institute), Parenting across Scotland and Capability Scotland (NGOs). The rationale and guiding principles of “About Families” project are as below:

Gathering evidence “About Families” project links existing research with the experiences of parents, practitioners and disabled people to identify and explore key challenges facing parenting and disability services and the families they work with.

Sharing information Information and evidence are presented in user-friendly topic reports which help services to identify clear routes to developing service provision.

Informing action Voluntary and public sector agencies use our topic reports to assess what action needs to be taken based on the evidence presented. “About Families” works with key agencies to develop, implement and evaluate action plans based on the needs they identify.

Evidence to action Over three years, the “About Families” partners are gathering feedback from services and service users to better understand which aspects of parenting are of most concern to families. Using this feedback, five key parenting and disability topics will be identified for investigation.

20 To further illustrate the project implementation, the “Evidence to Action Cycle” is depicted as below:

As one of the key topics for investigation, “Parenting Teenagers” was identified based on the hotline service statistics of the “Parentline”. The action plan was being developed with key stakeholders based on issues arising from the Parenting Teenagers: relationships and behaviour issues. The major findings could be referred to the topic briefing in Appendix 2. b. Implication and Reflection From the British experience in the linkage among family research, policy and practice, some implications and reflections are observed for the development of local knowledge transfer in the sector.

Knowledge transfer is not linear Much of the research on knowledge transfer points out that while policy-makers assume that knowledge transfer works by giving the knowledge to the group that needs it, this is not the best approach. Knowledge transfer works better through processes that encourage discussion, problem solving and joint development among researchers, practitioners and policy-makers. Thus, knowledge transfer should not be a linear process.

Different agenda among different stakeholders Practitioners and researchers might have fundamentally different interests, which may overlap or coincide at times. Researchers may be interested in seeking knowledge in accordance with the rules of scientific enquiry, while the practitioners may be concerned more about the knowledge that has practical use. Such discrepancy in expectation should be addressed in order to facilitate effective knowledge transfer.

Research comes after policy The logic of the evidence-based policy approach suggests that researchers should advise policy-makers about a particular problem on the basis of the evidence, a programme is then designed to address it and is subsequently implemented. However, the reality is usually that programmes or policy initiatives are designed by policy-makers on the basis of what they want done, and may only involve researchers in the implementation phase.

Practitioner’s role in knowledge transfer As a matter of fact, evidence-based policy and practice do not quite recognize practitioners’ role in knowledge transfer. Indeed practical experience, craft knowledge and professional judgement may be even interpreted as barriers to transfer. Practitioners seem to be recipients of research, rather than interpreters or producers of actionable knowledge. To ensure effective knowledge transfer, practitioners should be engaged to take up more proactive role in the whole

21 process.

22 VII. Concluding Remarks

If the family forms and practices mentioned above are not new, we perhaps can say that these prevailing forms and practices can be looked at in new ways. We would like to conclude by pointing out some of such findings from the conference and visitation. a. While some practices did exist in the past, those practices are now much more prevalent in our era. A new normalization is found that different forms or practices of families are increasing being seen as normal, and that they are increasingly quicker to be accepted as normal. b. As the family changes, the ways people perceive it also changes. Some dimensions of looking at the family, eg. family composition and structure, may not be as important as before. As forms and practices of the family get proliferated, the intrinsic qualities of the family are seen as more important than the outlook. So, for example, for many in the West, step-parents are no longer seen as less desirable. What’s more important is how the step parents relate with their children. Likewise, parental separation is not in itself causative of negative outcomes for children and young people. Rather it is the interaction between risk and protective variables which play the key role in shaping the wellbeing of children. c. Because of what is said above, the family is now under a new regime of management. Management of risk becomes a primary objective in maintaining families, not just for those traditionally disadvantaged forms but also for those typical forms. d. As information is more accessible to lay persons, advices from helping professionals are both resisted and needed. They are resisted because they are no longer the knowledge authority as information gets proliferated and everybody has access to those professional wisdoms. Web-based relationship or personal support helpdesk is more accessible to people (e.g. www.familieschange.ca ). Advices are resisted also because there are competing discourses about the same concern or issue. People get indifferent about these advices. Yet, they are needed because risks are all over the places and everybody is looking for effective ways to manage their families. Helping professionals do relieve their anxiety in this risky society. e. The family is used to be the private sphere, governed by a set of discourses of personal and interpersonal relationships, of familial hierarchy and norms. In this era, however, the family gets more and more “publicized.” Private practices in the households required more and more public regulatory measures. Familial relationships demand values, norms or even regulations which are previously applicable in the public sphere. In families, we now speak of children’s participation not just in their own development, but also in parental marital relationship. Children demand more participation, and more transparency, which is the prerequisite for their participation. f. In addition to being “publicized”, families and relationships are getting more and more marketized /commodified. Commodification of care is prevalent in many

23 parts of the world. Commodification of relationship is also common. Relationship goes beyond natural familial bonds or social mating, but is increasingly on sale and purchase. One can pay to get a baby, or to get a mother to give birth to a baby, or to pay a father for his sperm. One can also pay to design his/her own family or set of relationships. All these commodified options are now more and more available and acceptable. g. As the family gets more and more publicized and commodified, the biological and cultural gives way to the social, economic and political in the organization of the families and relationships. For children born socially and economically more advantageous but biological less well, their social and economical advantages can compensate for their biological disadvantage. Children born socially and economically disadvantageous have no to adequate post-natal care even though they are born biologically well. h. All these point to the increasing importance of public policies which are aimed at regulating the social, economical and political domains of our lives. Leaving the families on their own seems less and less an option for any advanced societies who claim to care about families.

24 Appendix 1: Visitation Schedule

21 June Visits in Edinburgh 10:00 – 11:30 Sue Robertson Director One Parent Families Scotland, 13 Gayfield Square, Edinburgh EH1 3NX 0131-557-7891 email: [email protected]

3:00pm Alison Clancy Project Officer Parenting Across Scotland 1 Boroughloch Square Edinburgh EH8 9NJ Tele: 0131 319 8071 email: [email protected]

22 June Visits in London 10:30am Jill Kirby Director Centre for Policy Studies 57 Tufton Street London SW1P 3QL +44 (0)207 222 4488 07879 647 784 Email: [email protected]

2:30pm Clem Henricson Director of Research Family and Parenting Institute 430 Highgate Studios 53-79 Highgate Road London NW5 1TL 0207 424 3460 Email: [email protected]

25 Appendix 2: Findings Brief of the Project of “About Families”

26 Appendix 3: Report on Individual Organization Visit

******

1. Date of Visit/Meeting: 21 June 2010 2. Name of Agency: One Parent Families Scotland 3. Address/Meeting Venue: 13 Gayfield Square, Edinburgh EH1 3NX 4. Contact Person: Sue Robertson, Director 5. Description of Agency, including type of services provided, target served, programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities: One Parent Families Scotland (OPFS), established in 1944, works to ensure that all families, particularly those headed by a lone parent, have the support, information and confidence needed to play a full part in Scotland's economic and social life. OPFS encourage and enable lone parents to believe in themselves, enter education, training or employment and take up new opportunities. OPFS believes that lone parents as a group are unique in having sole responsibility for the combined roles of breadwinner and main carer. She thus delivers vital childcare services that allowing parents to work, learn, and take part in training. Each year, OPFS influences the lives of over 5,000 families and 12,000 children through provision of information, vital tailor-made childcare services as well as training and employment opportunities from nine projects such as the 101 Project Dundee. Three levels of service including national, local and childcare services are provided. She remains the biggest at home childcare provider in Scotland reaching out to 2,300 families each year and thus enabling 1,500 parents to find new confidence and enter training, education or employment. The Marks & Start return to work programme offers lone parents in Edinburgh the pre-employment training and work placement in conjunction with Marks and Spencer. Moreover, information and advice are given to 3,000 families through its Lone Parent Helpline and publication. At policy level, OPFS responds to government consultations to influence and shape the policies that will improve the lives of one parent families. OPFS also conduct research on areas which are relevant to one parent families and which have the potential to influence public policy and increase understanding of the crucial issues facing lone parents and their children. OPFS works closely with other partners such as Gingerbread and Parenting Across Scotland. In regard to the national services, OPFS receives grants from the Scottish Government towards the core costs of Helpline, information and employability services. These have been supplemented with other grants from private sector

27 funding and National Lottery. In regard to local services, OPFS also receives local authority grants such as from the city of Edinburgh. She also receives donations and help in kind from a number of individuals. 6. Content of Meeting: i. Briefing of service provision of OPFS: the types of national and local services were introduced with highlights on tailor-made services rendering to lone parents who choose to stay at home and look after their children during their vital early years or during the family crisis, as well as services for young parent in Edinburgh. Annual Review 2009 and publications were given. ii. Rationale behind the services of OPFS: service provision was closely related to National Policy that lone parents are encouraged to enter the mainstream of economic and social activity through either part-time or full-time employment. Parents are matched depending on their decisions to be either the part-time assistants in crèches or full time employees. Their financial capability is enhanced through flexible job opportunities, home based childcare services, flexible crèches, tailor-made services for children with additional needs. iii. Challenges facing by OPFS: the rate of lone parents increase to 25% in Scotland. They face complex and interrelated challenges. Firstly, they are the only one potential "breadwinner" and one carer to share the load of family responsibilities. Secondly, the majority of lone parents are women, averaging 36 years of age, face with inequality and disadvantages many women face in the workplace. They are vulnerable to poverty triggered by certain life events or transitions such as separation, divorce, pregnancy, ill health, homelessness and into/out of employment. Moreover, being financially supported by Scottish Government, changed government policy and the budget cut are also the challenges faced by OPFS.

7. Observation: (e.g. stimulation / implications for Hong Kong) OPFS is one of the main service agency rendering services to lone parents at both national and local levels. It seems that the website and Helpline are widely used by the potential families for advice and service matching. It also provides a nation-wide platform for lone parents to unite together for joint effort at policy advocacy. Specialized service for families of single parents, prisoners, substance abuse in Hong Kong may make reference from OPFS in service designs and delivery modes. Moreover, the idea of flexible job and corporate collaborations are good to meet the particular needs of parents. It may be applicable to Hong

28 Kong as well. For example, the ‘return to work’ programme offers a time schedule of training and placement which fit within school hours. Thus, the parents are enabled to learn and work while retaining responsibility of childrearing. Besides, corporate social responsibility is emphasized in offering work opportunity, other than donations only, that are essential to support the needy parents. 8. Recommendations: (e.g. whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again?) It is worthwhile for specialized service teams to visit the agency again. Next time, the team may visit other project centres and/or talk to service users to have deeper understanding on the local service provision. ******

1. Date of Visit/Meeting : 22 June 2010 2:30pm to 4:30pm 2. Name of Agency: Family and Parenting Institute 3. Address/Meeting venue: Registered Address: 430 Highgate Studios, 53-79 Highgate Road, London, NW5 1TL, U.K. 4. Contact Person: Ms Clem Henricson, Director of Research 5. Description of Agency including type of services provided, target served, programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities:

This agency is the operating name of the National Family and Parenting Institute (NFPI). It is an NGO being subvented by the Government and an independent charity guided by a board of trustees working to champion families. The organization draws on research and evidence to influence policy and it offers practical solutions to make society more family friendly. Its goal is to work for a family friendly society which values families in all diversity, promotes conditions which enable families to thrive. The organization aims:  to get to know families and to involve families in work;  to have evidence-based practice and work in collaboration with families and others which work with families to result change;  to work to improve family life;  to find new ways of working to get good results.

The organization has delivered a lot of programs through school and is similar to the Family Life Education operating agencies in Hong Kong, but on the whole more conscious on putting their service with evidence-based research.

6. Content of Meeting: In the meeting, the delegates were received by two other staff of the agency apart from Ms Clem Henricson, the director of research. They introduced to us the goals and work of the Family and Parenting Institute. They also shared the key working focus of the agency in the meeting. Upon our enquiries, they shared their advocacy for family friendly policy. They advocate for paternal leave and

29 flexible working time. Since April 2010, husband can share part of the maternity leave with his wife.

They also work for social care for the disabled children which results on extending direct payment of subsidy to the parents, expanding community support to the disabled children and to increase respite care for the disabled children. Besides, they work hard to support the separated and divorced families as well as drawing public attention to the impact of TV advertisement on shaping the children. In the meeting, discussion on family impact assessment was also held.

The agency has a lot of publication on families and family-related themes. In the meeting, the books being published by the agency were displayed.

7. Observation This agency is similar to some Family Life Education operating agencies in Hong Kong. It is appreciated that the agency puts much effort on having evidence- based practice and will conduct research to influence policy and advocate for more family-friendly society. The agency has completed research on "Family trends: British families since the 1950s”, “Family Well-being”, etc. , and is currently with the following researches at hand:  “Knowing families”  “Parental engagement in early home learning”  “Relationship support”  “Learning from older couples and carers about care needs” The rich publications of the agency are also of reference value to our social work practice on promoting family and parenting work in Hong Kong.

8. Recommendations: (eg. Whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again) This agency is worth visiting and is recommended to have further networking in future.

****** 1. Date of Visit/Meeting: 21 June 2010 2. Name of Agency: Parenting across Scotland 3. Address/Meeting Venue: 1 Boroughloch Square Edinburgh EH8 9NJ 4. Contact Person: Alison Clancy, Project Officer 5. Description of Agency, including type of services provided, target served, programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities: Parenting across Scotland is a partnership of charities which offers support to children and families in Scotland. The charities work together to focus on parenting issues and to help realize agency’s vision: "A Scotland where all parents and families are valued and supported to give children the best possible start in life." Parenting across Scotland supports parents and families through its information service and partners' help lines. The agency finds out what matters to parents

30 and families and what they need, and get this across to politicians. The agency also shares research, policy and good practice with people who work with families. The agency’s partners are organizations that support thousands of parents and families in Scotland. They are Aberlour Childcare Trust, Capability Scotland, CHILDREN 1st, One Parent Families Scotland, Relationships Scotland, SMC, Scottish Adoption, and Stepfamily Scotland. Parenting across Scotland is funded by the Scottish Government.

6. Content of Meeting:  Introduction of the Parenting across Scotland  Sharing how families were changing in Scotland  Introduction of the Scottish Government National Performance Framework  Introduction of families in Scotland Government policies  Introduction of the workflow of policy work taken up by the agency  Exchanging of Scotland and Hong Kong’s situation among delegates

7. Observation: (e.g. stimulation / implications for Hong Kong)  The work focus of the Parenting across Scotland was clear.  The agency was endeavored to conduct evidence-based practice family research.  By identifying NGOs which shared common value and concern, the agency built up strategic alliance in order to achieve her vision.

8. Recommendations: (e.g. whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again?) Parenting across Scotland is surely worthwhile to visit again, especially to see in detail how they conduct family research and how they apply findings into practice.

******

1. Date of Visit/Meeting: 22 June 2010 2. Name of Agency: Centre for Policy Studies 3. Address/Meeting Venue: 57 Tufton Street London SW1P 3QL 4. Contact Person: Prof Jill Kirby, Director

5. Description of Agency, including type of services provided, target served, programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities:

The Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) is a think tank established since Margaret Thatcher’s government. Its aim is to develop and promote policies that provide freedom and encouragement for individuals to pursue the aspirations they have for themselves and their families, within the security and obligations of a stable and law-abiding nation.

6. Content of Meeting: Major agenda covered in the visitation are listed as below:

31  Latest situation of the development of think tank in UK  New direction for family policy adopted by the new Conservative government  Strategies in making influence for policy formulation, e.g. conducting evidence-based policy study and lobbying politicians  Specific issues - such as the impact of family breakdown in UK

7. Observation: (e.g. stimulation / implications for Hong Kong) The experience of CPS is not only a research institute, but also to provide a platform to link up the NGOs and politician, say through seminar. The idea of “putting the right people together” is inspiring for the reflection on the development of think tank in Hong Kong, or in wider extent the effective model of policy advocacy.

8. Recommendations: (e.g. whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again?) It is worthwhile to visit other similar agencies in the future, since it does not only provide insights for conducting policy studies, but also to demonstrate how to apply the evidence generated for the purpose of policy advocacy. Even though the political environment is different between Hong Kong and other countries, it can provide stimulation for our own reflection.

32 Reference

Hochschild, Arlie R (2003). The commercialization of intimate life : notes from home and work. Berkeley, Calif. : University of California Press,

Other citations appeared in the above text can be found in the Book of Abstracts attached.