. ‘ t 115% ‘3: ,i ‘1“ ‘H 1‘191“ 155111. w u " I .3312: ‘ ' y. .. -.0 “re "1"“ .. ~— “war.” 5 .‘ .' “fl. - "*3“ 3:...- --' " ~‘ ‘1!" o“. .— -——3‘~,‘ ‘ - "- 9"“. .-::.':‘. W ‘ .. sz “c" -'. fl- “O... W M. . .. .. u“ ’4:- m- - kw.” w."‘“ ‘ ,_, “90‘“ » l. - s“... .32.... ‘. «.132. ‘71-'19"? .1 ‘1 1 ”£ ‘1 ‘ 111913111 2 111; 1 '2' . '1‘ “11".1‘ I‘M-11‘3b1r ‘ 1113“ " ““ ‘1‘“‘1' “ TI 1 2 ‘ 22 1...! ‘;;;.;“"' La‘,‘ ‘;1““g5‘§‘1‘;“1 1 ‘ {1.5.511 V'. 5 1.5 ,5: 1.5.1.1312,” .11 ’11; 11‘; 11 . 1. 1511;; 1155,5351; ,1.- ; .11; 111;“ .1. s1 11111111 1.13: 1 -. 1‘1 111 1111111. 1 111 1'1“: ‘ "11":‘1111 “ 1111111111. 11111111. 11111 ' 11:11 . : 1‘ 1* .12. « 1111111111111 1111111111111 1111.: = 1 r. 1 11:11.1.1.11112. 11111‘1' ‘3‘ - 11111111111111 1%; If..1111¥ ='t¢\‘QM ., .1}12$ “ fifififlfigg‘ .‘f- . 1-11 ~".“'1"1‘:: 1'1"“ ‘1 :4;§v":5‘{. . '1 35,-; ‘3" .‘ ~ - ‘3‘!" ““fihC 1:31;: *3.- Eu ‘2!" id 11111.12 , 1.1.. 111111.231 11.1111 11.1141. ‘.. 1*“; ~ :1:- - 11111111111. 111.1"111112 ‘1 ‘11“,1 ‘1 211‘ 11‘5‘1113‘ 131111?" 1 : “S; 1 3 ’ ‘1“11“ . N1“? ,. ‘1731‘1%"11‘11§11: 7:3:"1'. : ». !‘ :.-'- :--.:‘o:~ afiv .mflmw %%U “"4“: : -1‘1!"1~1‘:.‘:‘:‘.'l‘2’1 1 i.;.‘.: 1“‘115:111z111"““§‘?v‘ 1 ,1' ' “.2}‘]1:':1“I1“ '1‘1' “111‘511‘.-"".':g' “.1111 2. .. 5.1.11- , 3 1.; ‘;5«1 ““ “1.11 5%,! 13:55.. .7111“ ‘13.; . ‘1':;1,11‘1‘~«§" 1 11‘ .3311 ‘1‘1‘1111‘1«.‘-5=" “1‘; ‘L‘hh‘ 111;,‘1‘m11111 .‘:;5;‘. .. ., 11 1 -.‘ . . . .. 11.15,; . .1 5153‘ 415355555? 1.11mi,“ lé'o {£111 ‘5 ‘3 35] {555; 5:55;}? ‘33:; 5;;5‘fi” .4. 41“!“ . .; “‘1" “‘3 5:1 '.: 111 ‘5‘" ‘3 1‘11" 111014“ ‘1‘ ““‘ 113.1117} "‘ “‘ «“‘ 1‘.“ 11']; 1‘1. -. f ‘ ;'v . . 1. 11.11 ‘1 ‘1}; “‘ ‘33:“ ----- 31“" “1115;“ ‘0‘“ 12-11 1.' "5;. 1‘1; 11 “1:1; fi‘E‘I‘: “‘1': -"' 1' “1111“?1‘41‘51‘,11‘.£‘1,;1.. ‘;‘1;5“"“ HI “‘ :5“; 1,1 “31 1; 5 I“: .' .5“ ; 5 :5 . 1““‘1“.PWW“ ““d “m ““1N1"1“1““"“535T.h511"¥1 23“ 3.91 "1.11111111111‘1*‘ “‘11 ‘1‘“‘1 11 1: «1111 1‘1 ‘ 11; ';1 45.1.5.5... 15;“.1 {2; 111111: "“1; I“ . . 1 1: I’ ..' "a o! . I ‘ 11%;;‘21bfiiio? «11111. 11151111111111 1111111111 111 “5 11 ‘1‘21 “ “'1"““"i ‘ M ‘i’v‘d‘hoiot 11h I‘JMJ 1.1 11 .‘11 313W ‘5; ' 1111111111111 1.11111" ‘1 11 11 11 .._::11111‘1111111:11111111.11.11111.n 11111 1111-1313;; 111 'Q‘gszu 6"“. .Z—LMC': 4'33:- ”v.” 7:45.; ‘70s. éu-O 2—“? J; a...» ' ' g ‘5‘... 3“. 11T"'1.-:j1“"‘ 1' 1 1. 1‘: ‘ ~ ' .‘: ‘ ' 5‘1:;‘1‘1‘1‘fi‘1éigfi111idd“ W11 “111‘ 111;“, ‘11“;‘11 .1. ~ :3. _ 4| w‘f H q... 1'; ‘ n - "‘E'IMI-v“ I. .4 'a-u-t _‘ .1 ~ 5;! y.- ""T w—Q .— o». ” >( OW. :é‘ .- A W“ -D a —< ‘1. ""‘ "'"nT ' .. '0?- "E. .23.? m 1 I?“ :. w MV‘ 1 M“ ‘ "“M “1"“! “‘ fl“ “‘ I“ ‘gt‘.1151”! 111‘“. ‘H‘:““ ‘g‘:-‘ V 3.1%MWL7%1fi1§kfivdyfimfi5駣h$éfismfi%fi1km “%%W‘ 'l ‘ ‘ "' “‘ 1‘1“ 1 111‘&1§11131‘1‘*“‘3‘3 ‘1‘; ‘1" M]; 111111‘ “ 11159 ‘1 .1111“‘ ‘.“‘1111.i“‘;“;‘11 1 1 ~ 1tfinudg1fi. @“H'J 111$ “111141” W},,flii “1 . -' =“3‘.:"‘1“‘,h§1“1j' :1? 1‘111‘11‘ 11“ ‘1“"‘ ‘1‘1111‘111 1911,1511” W111; 111 .. .H‘MH‘ " 5‘“ 311111153}:.111111.,‘1-11.1;11~,11,1"...111 “‘1“.‘ .111‘.1‘11;111’11;" 11' "‘1‘. 11111“. ‘ 11111111111111111. 11111 1.11.111111,111111111111111d 1111:11'M11111‘11’11 ‘1:111:”1.111111111111111...1. 111111111111111111111.1111111;1111111111111.~ I//I/////l W W / Mil/WWI '— I- .T, .3- .. — ‘.r"_ -29..-— c'fi-J'g bu-Jkfljl. 21¢! $uuh- U l5i1iii 3:2. This is to certify that the dissertation entitled INTERFACES OF FAMILY AND WORK: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY presented by SISTER RITA RAE SCHNEIDER, R.S.M. has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D . degree in MCGY M M Major professor Date 3 Fe‘bruén/ I? No MS U it an Aflirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from LIBRARIES Agslxgll-L. your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date “‘*excarw . stamped below. fif'ft’tagl .4 F: ,5“. - i~~ccs7 ©1986 RITA RAE SCHNEIDER All Rights Reserved L )‘U‘ C: J 1 1_~v, - l INTERFACES OF FAMILY AND WORK: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY By Sister Rita Rae Schneider, R.S.M. AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family and Child Ecology 1986 ABSTRACT INTERFACES OF FAMILY AND WORK: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY by Sister Rita Rae Schneider, R.S.M. The purpose of this study was to gain understanding about conjunctions between family and work. The ethnographic method was employed to explore meanings of work and purposes that a three-generational working-class family attached to their work experiences. An objective of the study was the development of grounded theory according to the methodology outlined by Glaser and Strauss (1967). Four research questions guided the observation, participant observations and interviews throughout the study: 1. What do family members do that they consider work? 2. What meanings and purposes do family members attach to their work experiences? 3. How is work experienced by family members? 4. Is work a sphere of human activity separate from the rest of family life? Based on analyses of data, three work concepts emerged and were identified: 1) work and self-fulfillment; 2) work and gender roles; and 3) work avoidance behaviors. Propositions were formulated in relation to each of the work concepts. DEDICATED To Our Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, whose life and teachings urge all nations to respect the dignity of the human worker and'to foster an economy conducive to supporting and strengthening human family life, the prime community for development of person. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my deepest gratitude to the many people who provided inspiration, guidance, support, encouragement and honest critique during the progressive phases of planning, developing and completing this study. In particular, I wish to thank Dr. Linda Nelson, my major professor, adviser and friend, for her tireless patience, assistance and direction, for teaching me fearlessness in travelling a road less taken in order to explore new ideas, and for opening pathways whereby this search could evolve creatively. My sincere appreciation also goes to my other Committee members, Dr. Margaret Bubolz, Dr. Lawrence Schiamberg and Dr. June Thomas who provided support and valuable insights not only in their review of the dissertation draft, but also in the courses they taught. To my Religious Superiors, Mother Mary Quentin Sheridan, R.S.M., Mother Mary McGeevy, R.S.M., and to my Religious Community, I extend loving gratitude for their belief in me and encouragement to pursue a graduate degree in order to become more fully the person I am called to be and thereby be most fully at the service of others. I likewise wish to express special gratitude to Sister Mary Honora Kroger, R.S.M., Community Director of Education, who iii never let me settle for less than the highest professional excellence and has remained faithfully at my side through the years it has taken me to complete this degree. Finally, I express deep gratitude to the family who made it possible for me to observe and interact with them, who shared openly and in trust their history, their life and their insights regarding family and work. Because of this family's willingness to engage in the research project, this study has been made possible and, best of all, we have become close friends. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ......................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................ viii CHAPTER . I. INTRODUCTION .................................... 1 Statement of Need ................................ 1 Scope of the Problem ............................ 2 Planning and Family Work- Related Issues ..... 5 Purpose of the Study ............................. 7 Research Questions ........................... 9 Definition of Terms ........................ 10 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ... ........................... 12 The "Myth of Separate Worlds" ............ . ...... 13 Bridging the "Myth of Separate Worlds" .......... 17 Women's Movement Into the Work Place ..... ...17 Women's Working Conditions .................. 23 Concerns Related to Women Working ........... 25 Summary and Policy Implications ............. 27 III. METHODOLOGY .................................... 30 The Ethnographic Method ......................... 30 Reliability and Validity .................... 32 The Grounded Theory Method ...................... 37 An Ecological Perspective ................... 40 The Ethnographic Research Procedure ............. 61 Criteria for Selection of Family ............ 41 Selection of the Family ..................... 44 Agreements Between Family and Researcher ..... 49 Collection and Recording of Data ............ 53 Strategy Implementation ......................... 54 Observer Effects ............................ 63 Ethical Considerations ...................... 64 Development of Grounded Theory .............. 66 Methodological Limitations .................. 68 IV. CITY, NEIGHBORHOOD, AND SCHULZBERG HOME AND FAMILY DESCRIPTIONS .......................... 70 Profile of the City of Mountain Call and Schulzberg Neighborhood ....................... 72 The Schulzberg Home ............................. 81 Histories of John and Hannah Schulzberg . ....... .82 History of John Schulzberg .................. 82 History of Hannah Schulzberg ................ 87 Introduction to the Schulzbergs: Three Generations ............................. 90 John Schulzberg ............................. 90 Hannah Schulzberg ........................... 94 Jacquelyn ................................... 97 Michael ..................................... 99 Jim ........................................ 100 Betsy ...................................... 102 Sarah ...................................... 103 Ann .............................. . ......... 105 Judy and Paul .............................. 105 Charles and Diane .......... ....... ......... 108 V. ANALYSIS OF DATA ... ......... . ................. 111 Perceptions and Definitions of Work ......... ...112 Meanings and Purposes of Work .................. 119 Work as Self-Fulfillment ................. ..120 Work, identity and society .... ........ .120 Participation in work processes ........ 133 Service-oriented work ..... ........... ..140 Work, education and personal advancement.. ..... ....... ..... . ....... 148 Work and Gender Roles ...................... 154 Work role expectations ................. 155 Household work as a tool for socialization ........................ 162 Child care ............................. 166 Work Avoidance Behaviors ................... 171 Connections Between Family and Work .......... ..178 Work Schedules ............................. 178 Work and Family Integration ................ 180 VI. EMERGING THEORY ............................. ..189 Propositions Related to Work ................... 189 Emerging Theory Integrated with Literature ..... 191 The Work Concept .......................... 191 Work and self fulfillment ............. 197 Work and gender roles ................. 205 Work avoidance behaviors .............. 209 Further Development of Emerging Theory ......... 210 VII. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS ..... .....211 Summary ........................................ 211 Discussion ..................................... 215 Implications ..... . ............................. 219 For Practice ............................... 219 For Further Research ....................... 221 Conclusion ..... .... .......................... ..224 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................... 226 APPENDICES ............ . ....................... .......236 APPENDIX A: Consent Form ...................... 237 APPENDIX B: Observation - Interview Schedule ..239 APPENDIX C: Letter to the Fire Chief .......... 242 APPENDIX D: Fieldnote Format .................. 243 vi TABLE 1: TABLE 2: TABLE 3: LIST OF TABLES Criteria for Selection of Family for Study and Indication of How Each Potential Family Fulfilled These Criteria at Time of Contact ..... 46 Population Characteristics by Age and Race of the City of Mountain Call and the Schulzberg Neighborhood (Designated by Census Tract).......73 Marital Status of All Males and Females in Mountain Call and the Schulzberg Neighborhood .......... ........................ 78 vii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. Kinship Chart of Schulzberg Family: Three Generations ........................... 71 FIGURE 2. Floorplan of the Schulzberg Family Home ....... 83 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of Need One feature of current research dealing with work is that linear perspectives locate problems in the world of work without considering relationships from family to work. Underlying most of these studies is a major, although often implicit, assumption reflective of American industrial society that work is equivalent to occupation for pay and work life and family life are separate from one another (Dubin, 1976; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1976; Kanter, 1977; Piotrkowski, 1978; Miller, 1980; Yankelovich, Zetterberg, Strumpel, Shanks, Immerwahr, Noelle-Neumann, Sengoku, and Yuchtman—Yaar, 1983). Because of the compartmentalization of family and work, connections between these two aspects of life have not been a focus for serious scholarly study in the past. Therefore, little is known about "specific interactions and transactions between family and work" (Kanter, 1977, p. 8). Furthermore, work itself appears to be one of the least understood of human activities (Napier, 1984). Defining work as occupation, as most researchers have done, has eliminated from consideration forms of work from which no income is derived. This includes such things as housework and other activities which family members could consider as work, but which do not fit within the restrictive parameters of a work as occupation definition. Researchers have also 2 identified work places restrictively as those settings where occupations are performed or from which workers, such as truckers and salespersons, go forth to carry on work for pay. Today, a revolution is occurring in the workplace. Work patterns are shifting and types of work to be done are changing. These trends are profoundly affecting the lives of many individuals and families. Under the impact of these changes, traditional views about the separation of family and work are being called into question. At the same time, a search is underway for new and broader definitions of work which include nonoccupational forms and understandings are sought about the meaning that work has for individuals and family life (Kanter, 1977; Yankelovich, 1981). Although a great deal has been written about work, no theoretical study has been found which can contribute to an understanding of the ways in which individuals and families define work for themselves or of the meanings and purposes they attach to their work experiences. The present study is intended to begin bridging this gap. Scope of the Problem Work holds a central place in the lives of the majority of American families. It occupies most of the waking hours, shapes their domestic lives, and influences their choices about ways in which they spend their leisure hours. Work helps individuals establish their identity, build self— esteem, and realize their life goals (The State of Families 3 1984-85, 1984, p. 60). In the 19803, political, economic, technological, social and cultural forces, operating from both within and outside the nation, are transforming the American work place and deeply affecting the lives of most individuals and families. So rapid and complete is the transformation taking place that societal dislocations are being created which, according to Ginzberg (1981) and Portner and Etkin (1984), are comparable in extent only to those experienced at the time of the first Industrial Revolution. Included among the revolutionary forces creating these dislocations are such things as: 1) rapidly increasing urbanization, an escalating rate of growth in urban centers, and the tendency of cities to form super agglomerations, like Megalopolis, with populations exceeding 50 million (Gunn, 1978, p. 6); 2) a competing world market that has caused greater international interdependencies and made industrialized nations, including the U.S., much more vulnerable to foreign competition than they once were because now "a host of developing economies can make more products with greater cost—effectiveness" (Yankelovich, et a1., 1983, p.4); 3) a U.S. economy that is shifting away from one that is based on extensive use of fossil fuel to one that is information-based with accompanying demands for new types of jobs and the demise of the old (Hald, 1981; Hamrin, 1981b; Yankelovich, et al., 1983); 4) mechanization and robotization that are taking place in businesses and A industries with labor-saving effects (Engelberger, 1980; Evans, 1980); 5) the unprecedented influx of women into the labor force and predictions that by 1990 about 68.3 percent of all women will be working for pay outside of the home (Leavitt, 1983, p. 55); 6) the changing roles of men and women in American society with respect to wage-earning, housework, and child care (Derr, 1980; Families and Work: Traditions and Transitions, 1983; Harris, 1983); and 7) a growing entrepreneurship of individuals earning a living from home-based industries which include crafts, carpentry work, and the designing of computer software (The State of Families 1984-85, 1984, p. 65). The effects of these revolutionary forces diffusing throughout the workplace and into the home and from the home back to the marketplace are expected to continue well into the twenty-first century (Levitan and Belous, 1981a; Harris, l983;~Yankelovich, et a1., 1983; The State of Families 1984— 8;, 1984). Family-work issues arising in relation to these forces will require new policies and practices. Formulation of such policies must emerge out of an understanding of both the forces at work in the marketplace and of the meanings and purposes individuals and families attach to work and work experiences. Connections between family and work would then be perceived in relation to the larger contexts of world and national economic, occupational, political, social, and cultural environments within which individuals and families live and act. Policies so formulated and then 5 implemented could begin closing the gap that now exists between families and the workplace. This gives rise to a need for planning. Planning and Family Work-Related Issues Urban planning educators appear to stand in a unique position to help develop a policy and practice agenda that effectively addresses family-work issues. Traditionally, as Checkoway (1983b, p.3) points out, the generally accepted view of planning has been "a type of urban engineering and applied social science characterized by objective fact- finding." Implementation of a plan has been "largely a matter of choice among technical alternatives." The role of planners has been "akin to technical experts who advised decision-makers without promoting particular policy positions." There is increasing evidence that planning_theory as practiced in the past is no longer adequate to meet the needs of today's changing society. Dyckman (1983), deNeufville (1983), Leavitt (1983), Hayden (1984) and Michelson (1984) are among a growing number of urban planners who are providing new perspectives for planning practice. They define their role, not as rational-technical planners, but as social planners politically active in society and leaders in the community living with and helping people find and implement solutions to the urban problems which beset them. The approach these planners stress is the development of planning theory that is grounded in the 6 experiences of people. They argue that such theory when applied to practice would make planning much more relevant and responsive to the needs of today's complex society. 'Dyckman (1983, p. 11) emphasizes the obligation that planners have to address the issues of "new scenarios of the post-industrial society, with its implications for the definition of work." deNeufville (1983, p. 43) contends that planning is intended to help a community prepare for the future and that theorizing "must be grounded in empirical study and the perceptions of the actors." Leavitt (1983) stresses the effect that demographic, employment, income, and other factors are having upon urban areas and cites problems that these factors are causing for women in particular. Both Leavitt (1983) and Hayden (1984) indicate that women are experiencing problems with other aspects of urban life such as access to public transportation, day care centers, security, education, and other services. Leavitt and Hayden both attribute these problems to highway planners and suburban developers who, without the input of those affected by planning decisions, created environments in which even doing idealized tasks identified with mothers and housewives has been difficult. With respect to maternal employment outside the home, the situation becomes even more clear if in such planning one considers the contextual and logistical aspects of child care. Michelson states that: ...the location and hours of child care facilities are aspects of community infrastructure whose 7 planning and arrangement may serve to facilitate or hinder the pursuit of everyday activities by employed women. While it is clear that they exist for a client group of employed mothers, it is a more open question how well the functional and logistical needs of this group are considered in the siting and organization of the various child care facilities.(1984, p. 9) ' In dealing with any of the family—work issues facing contemporary society, Leavitt (1983) stresses the importance of beginning with an understanding about the ways in which people organize their lives around their home, family relations, and work, and the need there is to analyze the spatial consequences of this organization. Leavitt asserts that planning policies ought to be formulated which could promote a whole range of choices for family members beyond those they now have. Leavitt's suggestion is one that accents an interdisciplinary approach to family-work issues. The approach is not new as Leavitt points out: The interdisciplinary nature of planning education is traced to its beginnings at a time when architecture, landscape architecture, and engineering exerted a major influence. Now, as perhaps no time since the thirties, that physical imprint needs to be expanded to understand not only economic and social implications but implicitly to incorporate issues about women, the dramatic shifts in women's roles, and its [sic] attendant consequences for men and children deserve no less. (1983, p. 56) Purpose of the Study As a professional trained in areas of family ecological studies and urban planning, the researcher undertook the present study to develop theory which could contribute an understanding of family and work to studies of both family ecology, and urban planning. The researcher's choice of an 8 urban working-class family partly reflects the desire to integrate and cross—fertilize the two areas through an interdisciplinary approach to family—work issues. On the whole, research about work has been confined by the narrow parameters of the definition of work as occupation. Linkages between work and family have been made primarily in terms of workplace. There is a need for research which takes a more holistic approach and places the concept of work within a much broader context than that currently held. By defining work from family members' perspectives and explaining work from an understanding of the meanings and purposes they attach to their work experiences, it is possible to make linkages not only with their places of paid employment, but also with other settings designated by them as places where they perform work. Conceivably, work places could include such settings as school and church. This researcher explored linkages between family and work for the purpose of discovering family members' perceptions of work and meanings and purposes they attached to work and their work experiences. An objective of the study was the discovery of grounded theory, i.e., theory discovered from the data collected during the process of the study (Glaser and Strauss, 1967), which could contribute to an understanding of family and work. The discovery of such theory is perceived as a necessary first step to approaching understanding of family work-related issues. 9 To aid in the discovery of grounded theory, the ethnographic method was used to provide detailed description and accounts about how one family feels and acts within various work contexts. The intent of presenting ethnographic material was not to render a complete ethnography but only those excerpts which served to show how categories emerged and saturated from the data, thus supporting the development of grounded theory. Research Questions Categories and hypotheses emerge out of the ethnographic data as they are collected, analyzed and compared. The researcher, therefore, did not anticipate what these would be prior to the beginning of the study. The study began with the researcher having in mind a particular focus and broad, general questions which guided the ethnographic interviews and observations. These questions were as follows: C 1. What do family members do that they consider work? 2. What meanings and purposes do family members' attach to their work and work experiences? 3. How is work experienced by family members? 4. Is work a sphere of human activity separate from the rest of family life? Emphasis in the study was placed on the family as a unit and upon family members interacting with each other and in their work environments. 10 The approach to the study was ecological because it was assumed that phenomena must be examined in their interaction and interdependence of parts rather than in simple linear cause-effect relationships (Buckley, 1965; Kantor and Lehr, 1975). Definition of Terms Family, as used in the context of this research, is understood according to a definition of Bivens, Newkirk, Paolucci, Riggs, St. Marie, and Vaughn, (1975, p.26). Family is defined by this group as a "unit of intimate, transacting and interdependent persons who share some goals, values, resources, responsibility for decisions, and have commitment to one another over time." Although the family as a unit is the prime focus for this study, it must be acknowledged that the unit is composed of individual family members each of whom must be respected in his/her uniqueness of being and expression. The term family/family members is used from this point on in the research to deliberately accent respect for the individuality of the person within the family unit. The term emphasizes, therefore, the differences of perspective with respect to work that may exist between the family as a unit and its individual members and that such differences will be acknowledged and accounted for within this study. The term family/family members also emphasizes the thrust of the study in trying to get at those patterns of perception 11 which are shared by both the family as a unit and its individual family members with respect to work. The family in this study is referred to as "urban". This designation means that the particular family selected for study resides within a city as distinguished from a family living in the countryside or rural district. As Gibson points out there is no one definition of a city that suffices: One can talk of the urban, built—up area as a city, or the political boundaries can be used. One can use the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) of the U.S. census or the region of urban economic influence, the so-called service area. One conventional population definition is as follows: the cordon that encloses the area in 'which the density is 2500 people per square mile. ... There is wide latitude for argument about various specific definitions of urban agglomerations based on size. (1977, pp. 4-5) Gibson concludes that one must adopt a definition commonly accepted for the purpose to which he wishes to put it. For the purposes of this study, therefore, city will be understood according to the U.S. definition of city as a municipal corporation occupying a definite area, a creation of one of the fifty states from which it derives its powers (Abrams, 1971, p. 44). Use will be made of the 1980 SMSA census tracts. Work will be defined by participating research family members and work environments will be identified as those places where work is performed. Linkages are defined as overlaps where family and work interface with each other. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW The literature review in this study is divided into two sections. The first part appears in this chapter and the second part in Chapter VI where emerging theory is integrated with the literature. The reason for this division follows the suggestion of Glaser and Strauss (1967, p. 37) that an effective strategy in developing grounded theory is to ignore initially "the literature of theory and fact in the area under study." The reason given for this approach is "to assure that the emergence of categories will not be contaminated by concepts more suited to different areas." The literature reviewed in this chapter, therefore, is not intended to be exhaustive of what has been written on the subject of work. Rather, it is meant to provide background for the present study by introducing the topic of relationship between family and work. An overview is presented and includes the following: 1) the "myth of separate worlds" (Kanter, 1977); 2) the bridging of the separate worlds of family and work by reason of women's involvement in the work place; and 3) policy implications flowing from the changes in work place and home which affect one another. Piotrkowski (1978), who investigated the effects of work on the emotional life of families, found that research 12 13 on the topic of family and work traditionally considered these as separate areas of human activity, especially with respect to working-class families. By mapping the interface regions between paid work and the family system through the experiences of a working class father, a policeman, Piotrkowski was able to begin making linkages between family and work in her ethnographic study. The present researcher's approach to family and work is closely aligned with that of Piotrkowski. The approach taken by both Piotrkowski and this researcher departs from the traditional focus on the paid worker in the work place and the separation of family and work. The "Myth of Separate Worlds" Reasons for emphasis on the work place and the lack of family involvement by researchers in work studies becomes clear when one considers that in most writings about work there is an underlying assumption that work is equivalent to occupation from which income is derived and that home and work are separate from each other. Dubin (1976), for example, reported that sociological theory has long embodied the notion that an individual lives a work life and a home life and that separation is necessary for the smooth functioning of the social order. Kanter (1977), echoing Dubin's observation about the separation of work and family life, claimed that, "If any one statement can be said to define the most prevalent sociological position on work and 14 the family, it is the 'myth of separate worlds'." Kanter went on to describe the "myth" as follows: In a modern industrial society, work life and family life constitute two separate and non- overlapping worlds, with their own functions, territories and behavioral rules.. Each operates by its own laws and can be studied separately. If events or decisions in one world (such as wages awarded a worker) enter the other, they enter in the guise of external (and hence, often extraneous) variables but are not an intrinsic part of the operations of that world. They help shape a construct, but little more. (1977, p. 8) In her ethnographic study on work-related factors which influence the emotional dynamics of a family, Piotrkowski (1978, p. 12) noted that "research literature that connects the specifics of work and family life is sparse." Miller (1980, p. 381), in a study dealing with various meanings associated with work in a modern society, found that much contemporary analysis of work equated it with occupation and that "most sociological attention has been directed toward the social roles that are publicly recognized as jobs from which income is derived." Furthermore, Miller claimed that defining work from the occupational perspective has blinded sociologists to many nonoccupational forms of work and to roles that are not organized around pay, such as the role of the housewife. Slaugh (1982, p. 1), who dealt with family interaction and human resource development in the housework context, is in agreement with Miller's point of view and states that, "Historically the subject of housework has been ignored by most academic disciplines as a topic of serious study." And, finally, Ferman (1983), in a research study 15 dealing with industrial relations, critically analyzed the work ethic applied in the American work place. Regarding work, Ferman made the following observation: It seems clear from current and past discussions that the work ethic is closely associated with engagement in conventional categories of work, whether salaried, wage, or self-employment. The strength of the work ethic could be tested only if the individual were employed or seeking employment in one of these categories. The notion that informal work is also an arena to test the work ethic has not been considered, or has been ignored. (1983, p. 215) Thus, a definition of work as occupation effectively eliminates from consideration nonremunerative forms of work, such as housework as well as other forms of activity which family/family members could consider as work but which do not fit within the narrow parameters of the traditional concept of work. Conceptualization of work in terms of the marketplace has restricted the focus of concern to the indiVidual within the context of the job setting making the world of work "psychologically and physically remote from home life" (Piotrkowski, 1978, p. 6). Where linkages are made between work and family in literature, these linkages are usually occupationally-related factors. For example, The White House Conference on Families (1980) identified inflation, un- employment, and low pay as primary factors correlating with family well—being. Members of the Conference pointed out that when family members are unable to find employment, receive insufficient wages, or are threatened by devaluation of the dollar to the extent that they are unable to provide 16 adequately for the needs of their members, research shows that family stability can be seriously jeopardized. The "myth of separate worlds" has its roots in the .historico-sociocultural context of the American nation. Historians trace the separation of work and family back to the time of the Industrial Revolution in this country when the American economy shifted rapidly from an agricultural to an industrial one. By the early twentieth century, most of the productive processes performed in the home prior to the Industrial Revolution had been moved to industries outside the home. Rapoport and Rapoport (1965) observed that before people went to work in the factories work and family life were much more integrated than they are today. Although the "myth of separate worlds" has predominated most of the research and studies related to family and work, some studies have begun to suggest the opposite. Rapoport and Rapoport (1965), for instance, indicated that work roles and life-cycle factors may be important in understanding home and work interdependencies. Meissner (1971) and Yankelovich (1974) pointed to possible interrelationships between work and leisure activities which can shed light on the meanings and importance of leisure as compensatory activity for work which is found to be dull or boring. Gecas and Nye (1974) examined the relationships of occupation to intrafamilial, especially socialization, practices. Blood and Wolfe (1960) and Scanzoni (1970) investigated occupation and intrafamilial relationships with 17 respect to marital integration. But the emphasis of all these studies is still on the employed male member of the family; the family is not the unit of analysis. Piotrkowski's research (1978) on work and family focused on the family as a unit rather than on the male employed member. Her research viewed the organization of productive life as important in understanding people's life experiences. As a psychologist interested in relationships between work and mental health, Piotrkowski investigated possible connections between psychologically significant familial processes and what occurred at familymembers' places of employment. Her study describes the dynamic processes linking work systems, including the household, and the emotional life in families whose wage-earning members were employed primarily in working-class and lower-class occupations. The participating families contributed insights which provided new thinking about work-home relationships. Piotrkowski's conceptualization of the family as a social system implied interdependence of system parts permitting her to view the worker as intimately connected with others. Thus, she was able to show how work place stressors impinging on the worker could affect other family members. Bridging the "Myth of Separate Worlds" Women's Movement Into The Work Place The trend in American society in the 1980's that is forcing researchers to begin acknowledging that a 18 relationship exists between the family and the work place is the phenomenon of women's movement into the labor force and all the worker—related issues that have emerged with this movement. Prior to the Second World War, the mythical, ideal family in industrial society was portrayed as nuclear in form with labor divided strictly along sexual lines. The husband worked outside the home and with his wages supported wife and children. Unless compelled to do otherwise because of unusual economic circumstances, the wife remained in the home rearing children, cooking, and taking care of household tasks. Cultural norms led women to believe that fulfillment was commensurate with being full-time wife and mother and that the working woman was an oddity. Between the woman's domain of the home and the man's place of work was a clear and definite division (Nye, 1974). The movement of women into the work force was greatly accelerated by World War II. It became necessary for women to go to work in industry and other businesses, replacing men who were drafted into service. When the war was over, it was expected that women would return to their places in the home. But, that is not what happened. On the contrary, since post World War II, there has been a subtle and gradual increase in the number of women working outside the home. It is anticipated that more women will continue to enter the work place and that this upward trend will continue to escalate. It is projected that by 1990 two-thirds of all 19 mothers with children under age six will be working outside the home (Leavitt, 1983, p. 55). Cultural norms with respect to women working outside the home have been almost completely reversed from what they were prior to World War II. As Nye points out, women traditionally have been associated with the home and the raising of children has been a major responsibility of the mother of the family. Nye said: The inference was that either she should personally care for the home and such children as there were, or she should personally supervise servants in their duties. The employment of women away from the home for any considerable time was believed to be incompatible with good care of the home and children. Therefore, it was believed wrong for mothers to be employed outside of the home. (1974 p. 11) To show how the trend has reversed itself, Levitan and Belous (1981a, p. 78) point out that five out of seven adults approve the entrance of married women into the labor force even if the husband can support her and the family financially. The unfulfilled woman is frequently presented now as the woman who lacks a career outside the home. There appear to be a variety of reasons for which women opt to work outside the home today. Nadler (1980, pp. 53— 54) cautions that it is important to view each of these reasons within a broader context of life-style because the way people live "always influences how they work". According to Nadler the most commonly proposed reasons for working include the following: 1) changes in the American family's consumption patterns; 2) the growing number of 20 women who head households and must work out of economic necessity; and 3) choice of work as a career. Yankelovich, et a1, (1983, pp. 46-58) would add a fourth reason to this list, i.e., the need for self—fulfillment. Since World War II, according to Nadler (1980), consumption patterns of the American family have moved in a consistent upward direction. The growing proclivity for more goods and services, coupled with the rising rates of inflation since the 1970's, have outstripped, in most cases, a single wage earner's capacity to maintain the high standard of living for which a family has opted. In an effort to meet the increase in cost demanded by a high standard of living, many wives have entered the labor force to become second wage earners in a family. In many cases, the decision by the wife to enter the labor force has been coupled with a second decision -- to limit the number of children she will bear, to postpone the bearing of children, or to forego the bearing of children completely. Decisions regarding the bearing or not bearing of children are frequently based upon the experience of incompatibility between work and child-rearing (Moore and Hofferth, 1979, p. 132; Families and Work: Traditions and Transitions, (1983). The second reason proposed by Nadler for which women frequently enter the labor force is found in the growing number of women who are sole supporters heading their own households. As Levitan and Belous point out: At the start of the 1970's, nearly one of ten families was headed by a woman; this ratio rose to 21 one of seven families a decade later, when more than 8 million women headed families. Altogether, these families accounted for 26 million persons, including 12 million children. Today, 17 percent of all American children are being raised in a family headed by a woman, compared with 10 percent in 1970. (1981b, p. 28) ' Levitan and Belous conclude that 11 percent of the work force expansion since 1950 is due to never-married, divorced, or single-parent women. Single parent mothers are in a particularly difficult situation. Almost all single-parent mothers are forced into the work place out of economic need. Many of these mothers face labor market discrimination and many are unable to remain out of poverty without government help. Being mother, head of home, and wage-earner all at the same time poses a threatening challenge to many women who are single parents and working (Leavitt, 1983; Families and Work: Traditions and Transitions, 1983). 'The White House Conference on Families (1980, p. 32) pointed out that one of every three families headed by women lives in poverty. Female heads of households depend heavily upon transfer payments for support. Commenting on this issue, Levitan and Belous state that: About 16 percent of all white female heads and 48 percent of black female heads receive public welfare payments. More than 23 percent of the white women who headed families and 19 percent of the black women received social security or disability payments. One—third of the poor black female heads received at least half of their household income from public income transfer programs. On average, earnings by a female head provided only about one-third of household income for families living in poverty and about three- 22 fifths for those above the poverty line. (1981b, pp. 29-30) For most female heads of households, work is not a matter of choice, but an economic necessity. The unfortunate part of the situation is, however, that in many cases jobs are practically non-existent for these mothers. Furthermore, public employment services established to help locate jobs for these mothers are unable to help them because jobs are not that available in the non-skilled areas of work (Chrissinger, 1980, p. 55). A third reason for which women choose to enter the labor force, according to Nadler (1980), is that they wish to make work a career. Part of this seems to be due to the women's liberation movement begun in the 1970s. Dobelstein and Farel (1980, p. 36) pointed out that many women work because they wish to express their independence and self- determination. In addition to this, Pifer (1979, p. 16) asserted that women work not simply for income like men who are breadwinners of the family, but "because of their desire for achievement and the satisfaction that comes from using their skills and being recognized for it." Yankelovitch, et a1. (1983), suggest that the need to be recognized and the desire for self-fulfillment in the job is the fourth reason why many people work today. Women's participation in work beyond the home has created for many a feeling of relief and exhilaration. For others, however, the movement has created feelings of "malaise, dislocation and alienation" because "our basic 23 social structure is in transition; social institutions, values, and ascribed roles are being questioned and alternatives are being tested" (Dobelstein and Farel, 1980, p. 36). With women's movement out of the home and into the work place, other work-related issues have arisen. Both families and employers have been forced, by reason of the interconnectedness of family and work place, to address such concerns as single-parent families, provision for child care, dual career couples, divorce, pregnancy, wage parity of women with men, occupational segregation and role stereotyping (Levitan and Belous, 1981a; Families and Work: Traditions and Transitions, 1983; Yankelovich et a1., 1983; Michelson, 1984). Women's Workinngonditions Despite the fact that contemporary cultural norms affirm women's movement into the labor force, sex discrimination continues to stand as a barrier to women gaining equal status with men in the work place. With respect to this problem, Hesse states the following: ....while the volume and composition of women in the labor force has changed dramatically, there are other aspects that remain stubbornly resistant to change: the clustering of women in sex-typed jobs, the disproportionate number of women in low- ranking positions and their comparatively low earnings in relation to men with the same training and experience. (1979, p 54) At the same time that women in increasing numbers are applying for jobs in the labor force, the rising unemployment rate for all groups has become a major national 24 concern. Because there is the notion still pervasive in the American mentality that women can depend upon men for financial support, the seriousness of female unemployment has not been accepted even though the gap between the unemployment rate of women has risen two points beyond men within the last decade (Yankelovich, et a1., 1983). Lack of occupational experience, training, and/or education, as well as occupational segregation along sexual lines and occupational crowding all contribute to female unemployment. In general, labor market practices, often discriminatory in nature, have succeeded in concentrating women in relatively low-skilled, low-paying jobs. Federal laws have been passed to prohibit sex discrimination in labor practices. To date, however, implementation of these laws has not been very successful. Laws cannot remove the deeply ingrained negative attitudes toward women held by many employers who regard women as inferior to men and as capable of only certain types of jobs which women have traditionally performed. Included in these traditional jobs are clerical, health services, teaching, library work, and waitressing. Women themselves help to promote these traditional attitudes by the depreciating feelings they frequently have toward themselves and their own capabilities. Many existing organizational structures and practices also promote these negative attitudes by the ways they recruit, select, train, assign and promote employees. In this way, women are subtly 25 but continuously precluded from many positions ordinarily assigned to men (Yankelovich, et a1., 1983). The wage differential that exists between women's and men's pay is another indication of discrimination against working women. Despite the passage of the Equal Pay Act of 1963, women's earnings are often found to be below those of men. What also helps perpetuate the wage gap is the assignment of women to work traditionally regarded as female, and the assignment of men to work traditionally regarded as male. Male work frequently requires specialized skills to be learned on the job or is an assignment to a supervisory position. The practice of segregating jobs by sex is discriminatory in that it restricts opportunities for women to advance while it offers men the possibility of career-laddering. In these circumstances, women find themselves in dead-end jobs with possibility for only incidental salary increments while men find themselves in open-ended situations with possibilities for career advancement and higher pay increases. Stencel (1981, p. 143) says that women in managerial and administrative positions earn only sixty percent of what their male counterparts earn in these same positions. Concerns Related to Women Working As women continue to flow into the labor market and become more economically independent, concern is being expressed about the possible feedback effect this may have upon family life, especially with respect to marriage, 26 divorce, and child rearing. The concern is that work outside the home and the economic independence women experience may result in declining rates of marriage, escalation of divorce and neglect of children at home (Levitan and Belous, 1981a). Although some studies have been done on the relationship between the increase of women entering the labor force and the incidence of marriage, the data are inconclusive (Sawhill, et a1., 1975, p. 3). Actually, it would seem that marriages could be encouraged rather than discouraged in cases where two persons contemplating marriage are each working and are wage-earners. Most men and women desire some assurance of financial security before entering into a marriage relationship. In cases where the two persons are working, each could provide for the other partner some degree of relief from financial worry. The impact of women's work upon the divorce rate is just as obscure as it is for that of marriage. There are no studies that show any clear, direct relationship between the two (Nye, 1974). While conflicts certainly do arise out of financial problems and may play into the decision to divorce, Nye pointed out that these conflicts in themselves cannot be cited as a major cause of divorce. A crucial question that is associated with women working is that of what happens to the children while the mother is away at the work place. Various child care arrangements employed by working mothers include sharing 27 responsibility with the husband for child care and home responsibilities, leaving children with relatives or friends, hiring baby-sitters, putting children in pre- school, paying for private or publicly supported day-care facilities. In cases where children are a little older and are in school most of the day, parent(s) usually depend upon after-school baby-sitters. Where baby-sitters are scarce, as they are after school, parents frequently have no alternative but to give the child or children the front door key. For many working mothers, unavailability of affordable child care remains a chronic and worrisome problem. This fact may well influence a mother's decision about whether she will or will not work. Summary and Policy Implications It is clear that a need for expansion of affordable child care facilities exists. Child care centers are often beyond the financial reach of parents. For this reason, many working mothers may depend upon relatives or friends to care for their children while they are at work. Based on a 544 family study which was carried out in metropolitan Toronto in 1980, designed to document daily conditions and logistical constraints faced by women and children using child care arrangements, Michelson (1980) concluded the need for child care facilities where women live and work. Urban planners appear to be in a prime position to assist in the establishment of child care centers, close to home, close to work, and close to transportation nodes since, as Leavitt 28 (1983, p. 51) points out, they are in a position to analyze what women do and how they organize themselves around this need. Women's movement into the work place is having a revolutionary effect upon labor markets. Concerns have been raised about job opportunities and advancement for women, wage differentials for women as compared to men, job segregation along lines of gender, and discriminatory practices against women and minority groups, including blacks. At the same time, women's movement into the work place is changing traditional family life-styles and structural patterns. Workers and employers need to find ways to reconcile conflicting family and work responsibilities. New policies are needed to meet the emerging needs of the changing work force. That women bear a dual responsibility for work in the home as well as work in the labor force once they have opted to enter the work place needs to be recognized and appreciated by employers. Employers need to be sensitive to the pressures that women are under. Experimenting with part—time work or with arrangements for working hours that provide some flexibility in the hours of the work day could provide a better balance between home and work place for working mothers or working parents. This would also be a way of eliminating discriminatory practices against women who wish to work a full schedule but find their loyalties at home demand that they must be present in the home at 29 precisely the same time they should be in their places of work. Flex-time scheduling could be a solution to the problem. Where flex-time has already been initiated to some degree, the response on the part of the employer and employee has been positive. For example, as Polit points out: ' The four-day workweek (or'in some cases, the three-day work-week) has attracted considerable publicity in the United States. A typical four- day arrangement reschedules work hours from five eight—hour days to four ten-hour days. Firms which began experimenting with compressed schedules in the late 1960's and early 1970's were mainly small, non-union manufacturing, retail and service companies, but more recently the innovation has spread to larger, more urban centered organizations such as insurance companies, hospitals, and municipal agencies. Several thousand U.S. firms have adopted a form of shortened week-end schedules for at least some of their employees. (1979, p. 197) Policies and practices affecting family worklife need to be formulated out of an understanding of the connections between family and work as seen within the economic, occupational, social and cultural environments within which families are immersed and must survive. The work of planners is precisely that of looking at, recognizing, attempting to understand and analyze existing realities in order to formulate alternative choices and then reformulate these choices into occupational terms. Planners, therefore, potentially could bridge incompatibilities which now exist in family work-life. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Ethnographic methodology was employed in this study for developing a grounded theory of family and work. A family ecosystem framework was used to 1) establish parameters for researcher observations and interviews, 2) describe and analyze family members' perceptions of work and work experiences, 3) explore conjunctions of interrelationship and interdependence between family members, work and work environments. Data for the study were obtained through observation, participant observation and ethnographic interviewing. All interviews were recorded and fully transcribed. In the sections which follow, the research approach, procedures selected, and techniques utilized for the study are clarified and explained. The Ethnographic Method The work of ethnographers is that of describing a culture. The central aim of ethnography is the understanding of a culture by learning from its native people their manner of thinking and acting, their vision of 'the world, and their relationship to life. According to Spradley (1979, p.3), fieldwork for the ethnographer, "involves the disciplined study of what the world is like to people who have learned to see, hear, speak, think, and act in ways that are different [from one's own]". Instead of 30 31 imposing theories a priori on a people being studied, the ethnographic researcher begins by going to that people and participating with them in the daily round of activities in order to discover how they define the world and its events for themselves. Theories formulated by the ethnographer are those which emerge out of the shared life experience with the people. The choice to use the ethnographic method for the present study (focusing on linkages between family and work) flowed from the fact that the method allows for as few assumptions as possible while providing for the inclusion of as much information as can be managed within the parameters of the study. The method maintains integrity of participants' real life experiences and allows the researcher to follow leads of the participants in pursuing what is of importance to them. This researcher focused on family members' perceptions of work and on patterns of their work in order to discover purposes and meanings they attached to their work experiences. Collection of ethnographic data is initiated with broad descriptive observations of the social situation -- people, events, activities, environments. Analysis of data, concurrent with collection leads to narrowing of the research parameters and a more careful focusing in subsequent observations. Repeated observations and analyses continue to limit the scope of the investigation until observations become increasingly selective. The task of the 32 ethnographer is precisely to "seek relationships among entities that are conceptually meaningful to the people under investigation" (Black and Metzger, 1964, p. 144). For the ethnographic researcher, therefore, data collection and analysis act as a compass indicating what to look for in ensuing periods of participant observation and what kinds of questions need yet to be asked and pursued with those participating in the study. Ethnographic research may begin without specific hypotheses or theoretical formulation. The purpose of the research is precisely to generate theory to explain the data. Because of the distinctive characteristics of ethnographic research designs, the way problems of reliability and validity are approached differs from that of experimental research. Strategies used in ethnographic research to increase reliability and validity are discussed in the section that follows. Reliability and Validity Questions related to reliability and validity must be asked of any study in order to establish credibility of the research design. Reliability in ethnographic methodology depends upon the resolution of both external and internal design problems (Hansen, 1979). Reliability addresses the question of whether research findings can be replicated. According to LeCompte and Goetz (1982, p. 32), reliability can be established if independent researchers could discover the "same phenomena or generate the same constructs in the 33 same or similar settings. The authors state further that internal reliability can be affirmed to the degree that "other researchers, given a set of previously generated constructs, would match them with data in the same way as did the original researchers." Validity in a study design is concerned with the accuracy of research findings. Validity necessitates establishing the degree to which conclusions parallel the empirical reality. Validity also requires assessment of the constructs used in the study to represent or measure categories of human experience which occur (Hansen, 1979). Just as there is external and internal reliability, so too there is external and internal validity. External validity addresses the issue of how accurately representations of reality can be compared legitimately across groups. Internal validity refers to the extent to which scientific observations and representations are true replications of some reality (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982, p.32). The problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research were clearly delineated by LeCompte and Goetz (1982). Strategies to reduce threats to research credibility were also discussed by them. These strategies have been employed throughout the present study, and are described in more detail in the following sections of this chapter. Because the nature of each ethnographic situation is unique, LeCompte and Goetz (1982) believe that no situation 34 under study can be replicated exactly. As a result, ethnographic research approaches but does not attain external reliability. Threats to external reliability, however, can be reduced if, according to LeCompte and Goetz, the researcher does several things: i 1. Provides a clear description of the researchers' role and status within the group(s) studied; 2. Provides detail about respondents who provided information; 3. Describes the social situation and conditions under which the information was gathered; 4. Identifies the underlying premises and categories of analysis; 5. Furnishes a research plan and methodology. Following the recommendations of LeCompte and Goetz, the researcher chose to do the following in order to ensure approaching external reliability in the present study: 1. Provide a clear description of the researcher's role and status within the family observed; 2. Provide detailed descriptions of each of the respondents who provided information; 3. Describe the social situation and conditions under which the information was gathered; 4. Identify underlying premises and categories of analysis selected for the study; 5. Present a research plan and methodology. 35 For internal reliability, according to LeCompte and Goetz, multiple observers could be used in a study in order to attain verification of the description of events. LaCompte and Goetz further suggest a presentation of excerpts of verbatim accounts by the researcher, and mechanical recording of data. Again, following the suggestions of LeCompte and Goetz (1982 Pp. 41-43), the present researcher decided upon the following strategies as a way to ensure as much internal reliability in this study as possible: 1. Solicit from study participants their perceptions and meanings of work and compare these with perceptions of the researcher. (This will be done in view of the fact that the researcher is sole observer in the study and lacks access to other observers who could help verify perceptions and descriptions of events); 2. Analyze categorical information and then verify the analysis by submitting written portions of the study to study participants for verification of description. (This will be done in view of the fact that the researcher lacks other observers for the study and seeks verification for the events she has recorded); 3. Collect data through minimally structured interviews with each of the participants in the study who is seven years old or older. All interviews will be taped and later fully transcribed by the researcher; 36 4. Write fieldnotes documenting data observed. Give detailed descriptions of observed data and verbatim accounts of what study participants said in given situations. Detail observations of behavior in work activities; 5. Add in fieldnote margins, interpretative comments regarding documented data to help in recall of actual event. LeCompte and Goetz state that attainment of absolute validity is an impossible goal for any research model. For ethnographic methodology, however, validity may be a major strength of ethnographic data collection and analysis techniques which tend to enhance credibility. One of these techniques is the collection of data through minimally structured interviews in a natural setting because this closely matches realities of the participants in the study. Internal validity is further strengthened by the researcher who sought to involve the study participants in critiquing her research findings. Following suggestions fOr internal validity as presented by LeCompte and Goetz (1982), the researcher decided on the following procedures to insure as much internal validity as possible in this study: 1. Spread out site visits with the family chosen for study in order to allow the recurrence of work patterns to emerge in a broad range of work situations over a given period of time thus validating previous interpretation of work patterns; 2. Record speech and work behavior in detail and submit this for check on accuracy to study participants; 37 3. Verify documentation of perceptions and meanings of work as stated by participants with them; 4. Enter into participant observations with minimal preconceptions about meanings and perceptions that the work situations may hold for the family being studied. External validity is verified through statistical generalization. Ethnographic studies, however, often have as their purpose initial description of a little known or singular phenomenon, the generation of social constructs, or the explication of meanings of microsocial processes. This being the case, statistical sampling and analysis is inappropriate. The Grounded Theory Method Ethnography yields empirical data about the lives of people in specific situations. The method is geared to discovery, and because it is, Spradley (1980) believes that theethnographic method offers an excellent strategy for discovering grounded theory. Since an objective of the researcher was to generate theory, the method and procedures outlined by Glaser and Strauss (1967) for the development of grounded theory were employed in the present study. The purpose of grounded theory is not the verification of hypotheses, but the development of theory from data collected in a systematic way and submitted to comparative analysis. Glaser and Strauss (1967, p.6) state that "generating a theory from data means that most hypotheses and concepts not only come from data, but are systematically 38 worked out in relation to the data during the course of the research". The product of this research process, according to Glaser and Strauss, is theory which fits the empirical situations it is intended to describe. The process of arriving at a grounded theory usually begins with the researcher having a particular focus in mind along with some orienting ideas, but without theoretical preconceptions. Many research questions do not usually emerge except in the course of the study, and these constantly give re-direction to the study. The most meaningful events and settings cannot be predicted prior to data collection since these are dependent on study participants' perceptions and experience. Theory emerges out of the data as do categories and properties which are elements of the theory. A category stands by itself as a conceptual element of the theory. A property is an element or a conceptual aspect of a category. Both categories and properties vary in degree of conceptual abstraction. Lower level categories emerge relatively quickly during the early stages of data collection. Higher level categories, which are overriding and integrating, and the properties which elucidate them, usually do not appear until such time as the data are jointly collected, coded and analyzed. When the researcher begins seeing patterns of similar instances repeated over and over again, then categories are regarded as saturated. Categorical saturation provides an adequate sample, comparable to statistical sampling. Although 39 categories may be borrowed from existing theories, the data must be studied continually in order to be sure that the categories fit. Review of research has shown that emergent categories, rather than those borrowed from existing theories, usually prove to be the most relevant and best fitted to existing data. This is affirmed by Glaser and Strauss who said that: When we try to fit a category from another theory to the situation under study, we can have much trouble in finding indicators and in getting agreement among colleagues on them. The result is that our forcing of "round data" into "square categories" is buttressed between the two. Forcing data to apply to categories or properties is sure to arouse the disbelief of both colleagues and laymen from the start. (1967, p. 37) Joint collection and analysis of qualitative data leads to the generation of hypotheses. Though at first seemingly unrelated, integration of these hypotheses takes place and a central theoretical framework forms as categories and properties emerge, develop in abstraction, and become cumulatively interrelated. The core of the emerging theory acts as a guide to further collection and analysis of data, to continuously emerging perspectives that will further alter and help develop that theory. Forced theory is not grounded. Integration is best when it emerges like the concepts. The truly emergent integrating framework is always open-ended, capable of receiving and adapting to new categories and properties generated and related to that theory. Glaser and Strauss (1967, p.41) suggest that, "For substantive theory, the analyst is very likely to discover 40 an integrating scheme within his data, since the data and the interrelations of his theory lie so close together". The generation of theory, coupled with the idea of theory as a process, necessitates that the three operations of collection, coding and analysis of data be done together since it is this procedure which reveals to the researcher what data are to be collected next. If the focus were on one operation at a time neglecting or slighting the other two, the generation of new theory could be seriously hampered. If data were being coded, for example, and a new idea emerged, the new idea could be stifled because of the routine separation of operations. If the new idea were stifled, so too would be the moment of theory generation. Crucial to the process of generating grounded theory is the intertwining of all three operations. An Ecological Perspective Emphasis in the study is placed on the family as a unit and upon family members interacting with each other and in their work environments. This approach to the study of family and work is ecological assuming that phenomena must be examined in their wholeness of interaction and interdependence of parts rather than in simple linear cause— effect relationships (Buckley, 1965; Kantor and Lehr, 1975). A second assumption of the ecosystem perspective is that family processes cannot be understood except within the environmental context within which these unfold. Observation, participant observation, and ethnographic 41 unstructured interviewing were used as data sources for gathering information. Not having decided a priori what was important to the family with respect to work, the researcher followed the lead of the participants by simply beginning the interview session with an open-ended question such as "What do you consider work?" Then, as the participants spoke, the researcher followed where their meanderings led. In like manner, the researcher, trying to assume as little as possible about the interrelationships of family and work, used observation and participant observation to discover what meanings and value work held for those participating in the study. The ecological approach to the study provided the means for discovering the overlaps where family and work interfaced with each other. The Ethnographic Research Procedure Criteria for Selection of Family In research that aims at generating descriptive theory and hypotheses for further study, random sampling is not an issue and does not apply. A single case, chosen for its relevance in revealing what is under consideration, is sufficient to make clear the fact that a phenomenon can occur. Important in the choice of the single case for study is that the case meet essential criteria specified by the researcher. In this study, it was decided that the criteria essential for selection of the participating family would include the following: 42 1. An intact family with at least two children. (The presence of at least two children in the family chosen for research was important to the researcher who was interested in the generational transmission of work habits as part of this study. A family having no children and without concerns about teaching work habits and values to others would render data different from that which the researcher wished to include in this study. The presence of at least two children and not only one affords the researcher opportunity to compare ways in which each embodies and expresses habits and values taught by the parents. No upper limit for number of children was specified because the more children there were, the greater the basis of comparison among them; 2. The marriage relationship could be characterized as stable, i.e., the family was considered secure in their relationships with each other. (Were a family chosen for the study dealing with an unstable marriage or encountering other major marital problems, this reality could color the findings of the study. What might be interpreted by the researcher in terms of worklife satisfaction could, in fact, be related to the marital problem or unstable marriage relationship and not be related to the meaning of work directly. Choice of an intact family, therefore, characterized by a stable marriage relationship was an attempt by the researcher to ensure validity to data interpretation of the study); 43 3. At least one of the two parents worked outside the home for wages in some form of employment; 4. An adequate income i.e., at least having enough income to cover necessities such as food, clothing, shelter, and utilities. (If income were not adequate, family work perceptions and the meanings they attached to work experiences could be influenced by the family's struggle to make ends meet. Once again, dealing with a family having at least adequate income to cover regular monthly bills protected against misinterpretation of family-work data); 5. Family members' work shifts must be such that at least some time was available for observing the family as a unit with members interacting with each other; 6. Some familiarity with the family on the part of the researcher who assumed that 1) easy access to the family might be assured, 2) excessive time and energy might not be invested in establishing trust with the family and family members, 3) the family might feel free and be open in sharing their perceptions of work and the meanings and purposes they attached to their work experiences and not try to say what they thought the researcher might want to hear, 4) working members of the family might feel comfortable in taking the researcher to their paid places of employment outside the home, 5) family members and family might go about their normal every day activities and not attempt to shape these according to the way the researcher was perceived by the family in the process of data collection; 44 7. Access to at least one set of grandparents of the family so that attitudes, meanings, purposes and perceptions of work might be known and work patterns could emerge among at least three generations of the family in order that comparisons could be drawn among these generations of the family chosen for study for the purpose of gathering data and ideas for grounded theory; 8. Accessibility of the family to the researcher in terms of distance so that contacts with the family could be relatively frequent. Selection of the Family Having established the aforementioned criteria for selection of a family for the study, the researcher sought families who could fulfill the criteria. The nature of the study required that the family ultimately chosen for the research be familiar enough with the researcher that in her presence they would be comfortable enough to continue speaking and acting in a normal and usual fashion. Choice was limited from the outset of the search since the researcher had moved from another part of the country and knew few families in the area on more than a superficial basis. Gradually, however, three potential families were identified. Each of these families was contacted by phone. In all three cases, the researcher spoke with the wife first since she was the one to answer the phone. The researcher asked if the family might be interested in participating in a study dealing with family and work. The wife in one 45 family asked for time to talk it over with her family and then in a few days called back to give her consent. One wife answered affirmatively without consulting her husband. The third wife consulted her husband while the researcher was speaking to her on the phone and then gave her consent. The researcher has listed criteria (Table l) for family selection and indicated how each family contacted as a potential for the research fulfilled the stated criteria at the time of the contact. Of the three families analyzed in Table 1, the researcher chose Family A for the study. Reasons for this preference included the following: 1. The father, a firefighter/paramedic, has an occupation similar to that of the father chosen for the Piotrkowski (1978) study. (This is important since Piotrkowski's study most closely approaches the researcher's study. Using the same methodology as Piotrkowski and the same type service occupation of the father, it is the hope of the present researcher to contribute to the understandings of work and family which Piotrkowski presented in her study and to propose new insights on the subject as well); 2. The father's being at home several days in a row provided opportunity to observe his interactions with his wife regarding household tasks, child care, and family unit work experience in a way that the other two did not. (Although this is someway an atypical work schedule, the 46 Table 1: Criteria for Selection of Family for Study and Indication of How Each Potential Family Fulfilled These Criteria at Time of Contact CRITERIA FAMILY A FAMILY 8 FAMILY C Intact family with at leaSt two children Intact family having a stable marriage relationship At least one parent working fOr wages in a normally recognized work setting Other work experience Income adequate to cover regular monthly bills work shifts allow time for observation of family as a unit and of family interactions Access to place of work out51de home Access to at least one set of grandparents Accessibility in terms of distance to the researcher Husband (age 40) Wife (age 35); Six children -- Ages: 13, ll, 7, 4, 2 years; 6 months Yes Father works as firefighter/ paramedic Mother interning in nursing home and hospital, helps at day-care one morning a week. Yes Father works an alternating 3-day, 4-night, 4-day, 3-night shift. Yes Yes Yes Husband (age 42) Wife (late 30’s) fOur children -- Ages: 19, 16, 13 and 12 years Yes Father works as meat cutter No Yes Father works a regular 8-hour day shift five days a week. Unlikely Unlikely Yes HUSband and wife (in mid 30's) four children -- Ages: 7, S, 3,years and one week old Yes Father works in business administration Mother teaches art two days a week at local parochial school. Yes Father works a regular 8-hour day shift five days a week. Unlikely Unlikely Yes 47 provision is built in to allow for observation of father with family during the work week); 3. The husband assured access to his place of work for observational purposes. (Place of work included two fire stations, which in fact, provided two different environments for observation). Family B questioned access to workplace as a possibility due to workplace regulations. Family C thought access to workplace a possibility, however, the researcher could not go to the workplace before 4:30 p.m. because of her own full-time work, thus severely limiting time for observation; 4. The parents of the wife could possibly be included in the study. This was the only family meeting this criterion; 5. The range of ages among the children in the family provided a basis for comparison with regard to stages of development and response to family work. Family B expressed serious doubt that the researcher could gain access to grandparents on either side of the family, since they lived out of state. Inaccessibility to grandparents would have limited the study to two generations instead of three. In that same family, the nineteen year—old had already moved away from home and could not be included in the study. The sixteen year-old, although still at home, spent most of his free time involved in activities outside the home, and the researcher doubted that he would be readily available during periods of participant observation 48 in the home. The thirteen year—old was a handicapper and this family circumstance would have added a dimension to the study which the researcher did not envision including at the present time. Thus, the parameters of the study would have been altered considerably with the choice of Family B. In a follow—up contact with Family C, the researcher learned that the father of the family not only worked a regular eight-hour day shift at work but was also participating in night classes twice a week at a local university. In addition to the husband's course work during the week, the couple had committed themselves to full week— end participation working with engaged couples preparing for marriage in their local church. As the wife indicated to the researcher, there would be little time for extensive observation of the family at work. Since intensive periods of observation of the family were needed by the researcher for the study, Family C was not considered further for the proposed study. On September 18, 1984, the researcher telephoned the home of Family A. The mother answered the telephone and the researcher inquired if the family was still willing to participate in the study of family and work. When the mother answered in the affirmative, the researcher asked to set up a time to meet with all the members of the family in order to explain to them the requirements of the study and to seek their consent in writing. Since the father of the family was away and would not return for several days, the 49 mother asked the researcher to wait to meet until September 25. Tentatively, a time was set with the researcher for the family to meet on that day at 3:30 p.m. Because of complications with the father's schedule, however, the date for meeting had to be changed to October 4 at the same time in the afternoon. On that day, the researcher met with the family, explained their part-in the study, obtained their consent in writing to participate in the study (Appendix A), and expanded on aspects of the agreement with them. Agreements Between Family and Researcher Following the family's consent to participate in the study, the researcher worked out certain agreements and aspects of the study with them so that both family and researcher could be clear about the procedures that would take place in the days to follow. General areas to be worked out with the family included the following: 1. Arranging to set up a calendar with the family so that days for participant observation or interviews could be known and planned for in advance; 2. Determining how the researcher's presence would be explained to others to ensure confidentiality; 3. Deciding how to contact the grandparents to invite them into the study; 4. Deciding when and where tape recordings would be used for gathering pertinent data for the study; 5. Choosing how to make arrangements for the researcher to visit the family members' places of paid ‘ 50 employment and the children in their school work environments; 6. Deciding how to share with the family findings during the research process and providing the family with a copy of the study upon completion. The content of agreements and decisions worked out with the family concerning these aspects of the study were as follows: 1. Dates and times for participant observation to take place were to be decided upon at the beginning of each month when the father received his new work schedule. Dates and times agreed upon were written on calendars kept by both the family and the researcher and all days were subject to cancellation or change as the need arose. A copy of the calendar may be found in Appendix B; 2. Family members decided, if the situation warranted it, to share with friends coming into the home the fact that the family had agreed to participate with the researcher in a study project about work. No further explanations would be shared; 3. Only the wife's parents were accessible. It was decided that the wife would ask her mother if she and her husband (this was a second marriage) might agree to participate in the study. The mother was to be told that the study was about family and work and that the researcher was interested in three generations of the family. If the mother was amenable to inclusion in the study, then the 51 researcher was to make direct contact at a later date with the mother and her husband. It was also decided that the wife would make initial contact with her father and his wife (also a second marriage) and that a similar procedure would be followed if he agreed to the study; 4. When and where the tape recordings would be used during participant observation periods was left to the discretion of the researcher. It was agreed, however, that the researcher would exclude family members under age six from taped interviews; 5. The husband took responsibility for arranging times for the researcher to visit his place of employment. The husband requested that the researcher write a short letter to the fire chief explaining the nature of the study and thus eliminate any fear that the researcher was doing more than observing the husband in his place of work (Appendix C). The wife decided simply to speak with the appropriate individual regarding the researcher's visit to the nursing home where the wife was interning once a week. The researcher, it was decided, would herself make contact directly with the principal of the school to visit the classes of the older children; 6. Upon conclusion of the study, the researcher was to provide the family with a copy of the study. Throughout the course of data collection and analysis, the researcher would share some of the findings with family members to check 52 accuracy of observation data as well as interpretation of data for integrity of the final draft of the study. Sensitivity to the potential risk of family privacy invasion, and the need to diminish inconvenience as much as possible, motivated the researcher's choice to observe in the kitchen, living room and play areas of the home. These were also, as it turned out, the areas where most of the family activity took place. On occasion, the researcher participated with the family or family members outside the home in the yard, accompanied family members on short shopping trips, or went to watch the children participate in sports activities. Participation with the family in work projects done away from home did not hold the same risk potential or inconvenience problem. To protect anonymity of the family, the researcher asked the family to choose fictitious names for each of its members as well as a fictitious surname. This the family did together with each member choosing his or her own pretend name. The family together assigned a name to the new baby. The researcher chose fictitious names for grandparents and their spouses, friends, neighbors, and other individuals entering into the sphere of the family at times when the periods of participant observation were being conducted. Names of schools, places of work, and the city where the family lived were all fictionalized by the researcher for protection of the identity of the family. 53 Collection and Recording of Data Prior to fieldwork, techniques for gathering and recording of data were selected by the researcher. Data gathering techniques for the ethnographic study included the use of observations, participant observations, unstructured interviews, and the use of sketch maps to detail family activities. Drawings by family members, especially by the children, were also intended for use in acquiring data about how members of the family perceived their activities and their working together with other members of their family. Drawings, however, proved to be a frustrating and fruitless endeavor. After an unsuccessful attempt to implement the strategy, the researcher eliminated it from her research plan. To help clarify and organize historical family data, a kinship chart was developed (Chapter IV. p. 71). And, as mentioned earlier in this study, a simple floorplan (Chapter IV.p. 83) of the common activity areas of the home was drawn. Historical and descriptive information of the family was recorded in an effort to animate the family for readers and is presented in the following chapter of this study. Throughout the time that fieldwork was conducted by the researcher, an ethnographic record was kept. This record consisted of observational, theoretical, and methodological field notes. The observational material, in keeping with the belief of Schatzman and Strauss (1973) that such material should have as little interpretation as possible, was recorded as factually as possible. This material 54 included all non-verbal behavior and only such oral comments by the study participants as could be transcribed verbatim. All interviews with family members were tape recorded and later transcribed fully by the researcher. A fieldnote format was developed and used by the researcher during each of the participant observation sessions (Appendix D). Theoretical material was derived from the observational field notes and included the researcher's interpretations, reflections, insights and linkages to previously gathered material as recommended by Schatzman and Strauss (1973). Although the researcher recorded theoretical insights and linkages throughout the study, a more concerted effort to perceive and exhaust possible linkages was made in the later stages of research analysis. Methodological material reflected the sequencing of operational decisions planned, changed, or brought to completion (Schatzman and Strauss, 1973) during the process of the study. I In the section following, the manner in which the research strategies were implemented for studying the family is described. Strategy Implementation A strategy of ethnographic research is that the researcher is the "major research instrument" (Spradley, 1979) in the data collection process. The researcher may become involved anywhere from complete to no direct participation, depending upon the need at the moment. In the present study, the researcher fulfilled the full range 55 of the participation continuum. The most difficult part of the study was having to keep oneself apart from family activities at times in order to attend to events or interactions of family members in work settings, when, in fact, the children wanted to draw the researcher into active participation. Some of the most important information the researcher learned about the family and work happened in the context of these unexpected and unplanned activities with family members. For the most part, however, the researcher, when she planned to do so, was able to assume the role of a formal observer. This meant that the researcher was not actively involved in the activity taking place, but was known to those being observed. At such times, the researcher would arrive at the setting with a notebook and seat herself in a chair or on a stool (usually at the breakfast bar in the kitchen from which most family activity in the common rooms could be viewed) and record what was occurring. When the children sometimes tried to engage the researcher in conversation, she found it best to be brief and factual so as not to ignore them but also not to encourage continued or prolonged interruptions by them. During the first five visits to the home of the family participating in the study, the goal of the researcher was to note as much activity and interaction as possible. The rationale for writing during the observational periods was to increase reliability of the observational record. No distinctions were made between what was more or less 56 important. Actually, at these times the researcher was not aware of any difference between the two and this lack of awareness reduced the effects of bias in the data collection. Although the researcher tried to maintain a similar objectivity during the rest of the study, the emergence of certain work patterns began to become apparent as did their relative importance to the study. Thus, objectivity on the part of the researcher was affected by the growing awareness of these emerging work patterns. Contamination of results may have been reduced, however, since the researcher deliberately chose not to advert to these patterns once she became aware of them. One difficulty the researcher found in trying to record the full sequencing of events over long periods of time was mental fatigue from holding herself open to the full influx of stimuli bombarding her from many directions all at the same time. Although she tried to make a complete observational record, the researcher is aware that much went on that she was unable to perceive or record. A problem also faced the researcher at those times when she participated with the family in their work activities. Unable to take notes at the time of the participation, the researcher had to reconstruct these settings after reaching home. When the period of participation was relatively short, the researcher was able to do the reconstruction quite easily. But, when the period of participation lasted for a long time, such as a day, then reconstruction of the 57 participant observation activity became a much more difficult task and room for error, bias, or passing over important aspects of the experience was increased. Yet, the important benefits of participating with the family in work activities included the fact that family members volunteered work-related information. For example, when helping to prepare dinner one evening, the researcher was told about the responsibility husband and wife share in this area of work. On another occasion, when the researcher was helping to clear dishes from the table after dinner, she was told about the children's shared responsibility in doing this work and performing other tasks around the house. On still another occasion, when the researcher was helping one of the children with a homework assignment, the researcher was informed by the mother about the school performance of all the children. Each of these subjects was introduced by the participants in the study in natural contexts over which they had full control. Information was freely volunteered and the researcher listened attentively without asking any questions. Participants were thus free to share the kind and extent of information they wished in a comfortable manner. Without their being aware of it, much data gathering was carried on in this way. In addition to periods of participant observation spent with the family, the researcher also interviewed both parents and the older children in the family individually about their perceptions of work and meanings work held for 58 them. Interviews with family members were conducted in natural settings away from the home because the immediate context of the home offered no privacy or place of quiet for the interviewing process. Grandparents were interviewed with their spouses in their homes. All interviews were tape recorded and then fully transcribed by the researcher who conducted the interviews. During the interviews, the researcher took no notes leaving herself free to attend more fully to what was being said by the informants. Permission for use of the tape recorder seemed to pose no problem to family members or grandparents and their spouses. The researcher did not decide beforehand what was important to the interviewee. She simply began with an open-ended question such as, "What do you do that you consider work?" Then as the interviewee responded and moved into areas of personal importance, the researcher followed asking questions pertinent to that particular individual's interest and response. Thus, each interview followed its own course. However, since the researcher was interested in work, the interviews were kept within the parameters of this topic for discussion. At times, although the interview was primarily non-directive, it was necessary for the interviewer to probe for ideas. Throughout the interview sessions, the researcher found participants willing and free to express their feelings as well as their thoughts about work and work activities in their lives. Since the goal of the research was depth of understanding, rapport was aimed 59 at knowing each individual "face—to—face" in the interview. Such rapport, according to Gutmann (1969), is the "true" standard condition between researcher and informant in the study. As the trust level increased during the interview sessions, particularly with the adults, easy talk was interspersed with answering questions that the researcher asked. This interspersion of easy talk built and strengthened an atmosphere of friendliness between researcher and interviewees that paid dividends in rapport which yielded data for the study which otherwise might not have been shared with the interviewer. This experience affirmed for the researcher Spradley's view regarding the ethnographic interview. He stated that, It is best to think of ethnographic interviews as a series of friendly conversations into which the interviewer slowly introduces new elements to assist informants to respond as informants. Exclusive use of these new ethnographic elements, or introducing them too quickly, will make interviews become like a formal interrogation. Rapport will evaporate, and informants may discontinue their cooperation. (1979, p.58) The three most important ethnographic elements used by the researcher in conducting interviews, according to Spradley (1979), are 1) making clear to the interviewee the explicit purpose of the interview and giving it direction, 2) clarifying for the informant the general purpose of the study project and explaining why a tape recorder is used or conversations are written down, and 3) using ethnographic questions to discover the interviewee's cultural knowledge, 60 purposes and meanings. The researcher incorporated into the present study each of these elements in the following ways: 1. At the initial meeting with the family when each member gave consent for inclusion in the study, the researcher explained to all that part of their involvement would be sharing their reflections about work through taped interviews. At the time of the actual interview with individual family members as well as with grandparents and their spouses, the researcher explained again the purpose of the interview as a way for them to share information about the kinds of work they do, where they do work, and how they feel about the work that they do. Although questions for interview were not prepared ahead of time, the interviewer gave the interview direction by asking an initial question about work such as, "What kinds of work do you do?" or "What are the kinds of things you consider work?" Then, as respondents led the way, the researcher kept the interview on target by asking the interviewee other questions about work which suggested themselves out of the information which the individual was sharing at the time; 2. Prior to beginning with the first interview question, the researcher restated to each individual being interviewed, or to the set of grandparents being interviewed, the purpose for which the study was being conducted, i.e., to explore the kinds of things that families do which are work, where they work, and how they feel about work. The researcher also eXplained that the use 61 of the tape recorder was so that she could more easily listen to them during the interview session and also be able to go over what was said at a later time. The interviewer also asked the participants again if they minded that she taped what they said. No one objected to this being done; 3. Ethnographic questions aimed at discovering the study participants' cultural knowledge about work, its purposes in their lives, and their feelings about work were not prepared by the researcher prior to interview with family members or grandparents and their spouses. The researcher simply began with a question about work to set the direction of the interview so that each respondent could easily then pick up the lead and take the interviewer into those areas important to the respondent. Throughout the interview, the researcher asked questions which suggested themselves out of the information which the participants were sharing with the researcher about their work. These questions were at times descriptive in nature, such as, "Can you tell me what you do at the fire station during the time that you are not out on call?" or "Could you describe what you do at a 'run review'?" To the children the question asked was, "Can you describe things you do in your physical education class?" At other times, the ethnographic questions asked by the researcher were structural in nature such as, "What are the different phases of your nursing program?" or "Can you think of any other kinds of activities you do as a paramedic?" The children were asked, "How is work at school 62 different from work you do at home?" And, finally, some of the questions asked by the researcher were meant to clarify what an individual meant by use of the various terms unique to the work setting such as, "What's the difference between a health care plan and a dietetic plan?" or to one of the children who differentiated between things that you do for work that are "think" kinds of work and "do" kinds of work, the question about what he meant by "think" work was posed. The interviewing process turned out to be beneficial not only to the researcher, but also to members participating in the study. The father, for example, commented after the interview that he had never taken the time to reflect so intensely on the value that work held for him or on the meanings that he attached to the different kinds of work he did. He told the researcher that she would "have a job" transcribing the tape, but that it felt "good" to be able to have the opportunity to reflect as he did. In like manner, the mother told the researcher after the interview was finished that she had been "thinking about some of these things for a long time" but had never had the opportunity to express them in an organized way. She said that the interview helped her to "sort out" the meanings and values she attached to some of the work experiences she had. The grandfather, too, expressed value that he found in the interview experience for himself when he commented after the interview, "My gosh, I've-never even thought about some of the things you asked but now that you have, I want to think 63 ' The unstructured nature of the about them some more.' interviewing process seemed to provide, as Vidich (1956) has noted, an opportunity for research participants to use the experience positively for their own private purposes. Perhaps this awareness on the part of those being interviewed also contributed to their willingness to share so Openly and freely with the researcher during the review process. Observer Effects A question which faced the researcher throughout the study was the effect she had on the people and the settings where she observed, did participant observations, and conducted taped interviews. Since the researcher was already somewhat known by the family prior to the study, this fact of familiarity may have diminished reactive effects because as Henry (1965) indicates, habituation to observer allows study participants the freedom to act and be themselves. While it is assumed that the observer effects to some extent do take place regardless of the type of research carried on, Piotrkowski (1978) pointed out that ethnographic research done on home and workplace may be less seriously affected. The reasons she gave were in relation to her own study at the time: The nature of naturalistic observations precludes a rigorous determination of the extent to which a system is functioning entirely in habitual ways. Even with observer effects, however, we can assume forces that pull systems into their private, habitual manner of Operating. One such force in both home and workplace settings arises from the fact that work must be accomplished. To change a 64 household routine in order to attend to me meant that beds would not be made, children would remain unfed,... Similarly, the purposes of the employment settings pulled participants into their regular modes of operation. When the setting allowed freedom from work requirements...more attention focused on my presence. (Piotrkowski, 1978, p. 305) Henry (1965) also noted that the presence of children "exerts pressures" toward habitual behaviors because their inner needs are not controlled. The forces of children and the routine of daily work seemed to contribute toward the family ignoring the presence of this researcher in the home and work environments. Ethical Considerations In order to assure that the use of ethnographic methods to obtain data was as unobtrusive as possible, the researcher observed the following guidelines throughout the ethnographic study: 1. The researcher arranged all visits to the home prior to the time of arrival by contacting the mother or father by phone to ensure that her coming was not intrusive. This allowed the family to cancel any scheduled visit at any time without explanation. As it turned out, no visits were cancelled by the family without explanation, and when a visit had to be cancelled by the family due to unforeseen circumstances, the family immediately requested setting up another appointment to take its place. When one of the children became ill and was scheduled for emergency major surgery, which the parents had been trying to forestall until later, the researcher insisted that a change of 65 schedule be made since there was a visit planned to the home the day before surgery was to take place. The parents asked the researcher not to change the day of the visit since the scheduled surgery was simply part of "those things that happen in a family"; 2. Observations by the researcher were limited to common family activity areas of kitchen, living room and children's playroom. On one occasion, the mother invited the researcher into the bedroom area of the two boys. On a second occasion, the mother asked the researcher to come into the bedroom of the two girls where she was sorting clothes.‘ And on a third occasion, the researcher was invited into the bathroom by the mother while she bathed the baby; 3. All participation in family activities followed upon invitation by family members. The researcher did not initiate participation in activities but did on occasion offer to assist the mother with children or household tasks when the researcher saw that there was a need to do so. An example of this kind of offer on the part of the researcher was a day when the mother had to take one of the children who had taken ill unexpectedly to the doctor's. The father was at work and there was no one to watch the two youngest children. The researcher offered to take care of the two little children; 4. The researcher met with the parents in the research family on two occasions to share those chapters of the study 66 dealing with family description and analysis of data. The parents were asked to delete information which they felt they really did not want included in the study, and to make any needed corrections where data or interpretation of data were inaccurately presented. No deletibns were made by the parents and they affirmed the accuracy of data presented saying that they were pleased with what was written; 5. Family members including grandparents were always given the freedom to withdraw from participation in the study at any time since the dignity and privacy of each individual was of first concern to the researcher. At no time, however, throughout the study, did any participant indicate a desire to terminate relationship with the researcher. On the contrary, each member participating in the study exhibited trust and willingness to cooperate fully in whatever ways possible in order that the study be successful. - Development of Grounded Theory Glaser and Strauss (1967) maintain that the practical application of any grounded theory requires developing a theory which has at least four highly interrelated properties. The requisite properties are as follows: 1. Theory must closely fit the substantive area where used; 2. Lay persons involved with this area must be able to understand the theory clearly; 67 3. Application of the theory must be general enough to relate to many diverse daily situations within the substantive area; 4. As change occurs over time in daily situations, the user must have partial control over these changing situations; By following the constant comparative method of analyzing qualitative data, as developed by Glaser and Strauss (1967), this researcher has tried to fulfill the four requisite properties for developing grounded theory. The process the researcher followed included the following components: 1. Comparing incidents applicable to each category The researcher coded each incident in the margins of her fieldnotes. Each coded incident was then compared to previously coded incidents in the category. Theoretical properties of the category as they began to emerge, piqued the analytical thinking of the researcher who then began to note one category's relation to other categories, and how categories are characterized by different types within them. After coding a category three or four times, coding was terminated. A memo was written on ideas using illustrations as much as possible in order to further concretize the ideas. 2. Integrating categories and their properties The researcher continued coding with comparison of incidents changing to comparison of incident with properties 68 of the category that resulted from initial comparison of incident with incident. 3. Delimiting the theory Delimiting occurred at two levels: the theory and the categories. The researcher continued to compare and reduce terminology in order to discover underlying uniformities in the original set of categories. By this process, she hoped to achieve applicability of theory to a wide range of situations; 4. Writing the theory Using coded data to validate information and memos to provide content behind the categories, the researcher documented the results of her work regarding family and work. In the written presentation, the researcher attempted to give specific examples and details of situations and events which could demonstrate the meaningfulness of categories to those individuals who participated in the study. Methodological Limitations The methodological limitations of this study are clear: 1) The single family chosen for study makes data specific to that one case. Data cannot be generalized to a larger population. However, the conjunctions found between family and work in this small scale study may also be found in other urban, working-class families; 2) All of the fieldwork was completed over a two-month period of time. The study might have benefited by a longer period of time for data 69 collection, as was originally planned by the researcher. For example, more categories may have emerged and saturated. On the other hand, the shorter period of time compelled the researcher to complete the research in such a way as required her presence with the family more frequently during a week's time than originally designed. This may have provided a more accurate insight into daily family work activities than if she visited the family less frequently over a longer stretch of time; 3) The researcher was the research instrument in this ethnographic study. The research, therefore, was conditioned by all the limitations of the researcher personally-and culturally. Yet, by observing, participating, and interviewing family members conditioned in the same culture as her own, the researcher believes, as Wolcott (1981) does, that she most likely was able to understand most of what was going on. In this chapter on methodology, the researcher has presented and explained the research approach and procedures used in the present study. In the chapter which follows, the family chosen for study, its history, descriptions of its members, home, neighborhood and city are presented. Chapter IV CITY, NEIGHBORHOOD, AND SCHULZBERG HOME AND FAMILY DESCRIPTIONS In order to preserve anonymity of the family members in this study, each chose a fictitious name for self, designated a name for the baby, and together chose the surname for the family. The surname Schulzberg was selected because the family said that they wished to stress the father's Dutch heritage of which he is very proud. The father gave himself the name John and his wife chose Hannah. The oldest child wished to be called Jacquelyn and the oldest boy, Michael. Jim is the name selected by the youngest boy, and Betsy and Sarah were the names the two younger girls designated for themselves. The name Ann was agreed upon for the baby by family consensus. The researcher named the grandfather and his wife, Charles and Diane Owen, and called the grandmother and her husband Judy and Paul Clear. Charles and Judy are Hannah's parents, both of whom remarried. A kinship chart shows more in detail the relationships among family members (Figure l). The Schulzbergs, Owens and Clears all live in the city of Mountain Call and are within a 10-15 minute drive from one another. In order to understand the Schulzberg family within the context of the city and neighborhood environments where they live, the present chapter begins by outlining the profile characteristics of both Mountain Call and the Schulzberg neighborhood. Next, a brief history of John and 70 71 Charl 1:! Over. Judy Grand- Grand- !athcr ficther 1929 1929 Diane 943- Paul Clear O=Aic>=A -A -O ”AGAIN-AAA Hannah John Schulzberg 1951 194‘ Jacquelyn Michael Beta Y August, 1971 June, 1973 June, 1977 August,l930 April, 1962 P fn2984 $255223 Male AZZEE‘ Female Married ...I, Divorce ‘éqE3 FIGURE 1: Kinship Chart of Schulzberg Family: Three Generations 72 Hannah Schulzberg is presented. Finally, the reader is introduced to the Schulzberg family including the maternal grandparents with their spouses who participate in this study. Profile of the City of Mountain Call and Schulzberg Neighborhood The Schulzberg home borders the north end of Mountain Call, a city located in the far northwestern region of the United States. The neighborhood, designated in this study as a census tract within which the family lives, has a population of about 5,000. The city, numbering nearly 500,000 inhabitants, fulfills the population definition of city given earlier in this study. The largest segment of the population in both the city and in the Schulzberg neighborhood is white and between the ages of 25-34 years of age. The city's smallest segment of population is between theages of five and nine, and for the Schulzberg neighborhood, the smallest segment is those individuals who are 75 or older. Table 2 presents further information concerning the characteristics by age and race for the City of Mountain Call and the Schulzberg neighborhood. The Schulzberg family lives approximately six miles from the city's central business district which has recently undergone major renovation and reconstruction. Many new buildings have been erected and the city is commonly recognized among urban planners as among the best for its design and coordination of architectural style. 73 The central business district has a wide selection of large department stores, specialty shops, restaurants, entertainment centers, hotels, banks and travel services. A large city library, a seaquarium, a public market, and a waterfront peppered with variety shops, gift shops and places to eat attracts hundreds of tourists as well as local residents every year. Table 2. Population Characteristics by Age and Race of the City of Mountain Call and the Schulzberg Neighborhood (Designated by Census Tract). City Neighborhood Population: Age Under 5 years 5.0% 6.1% 5 to 9 years 4.3% 7.1% 10 to 14 years 4.8% 7.1% 15 to 19 years 7.1% 9.4% 20 to 24 years 12.1% 9.2% 25 to 34 years 21.6% 18.1% 35 to 44 years 10.0% 12.1% 45 to 54 years 8.7% 12.1% 55 to 64 years 11.1% 12.1% 65 to 74 years 8.8% 5.2% 75 years and over 6.5% 1.5% Total 100.0% 100.0% Race White 79.5% 89.2% Black 9.5% 1.5% American Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, Asian, Pacific Islander 8.7% 8.2% Other 2.3% l.1% Total 100.0% 100.0% 74 Tables used throughout this chapter of the study to indicate demographic or profile characteristics of the city of Mountain Call and/or the Schulzberg neighborhood are presented for general usefulness for the reader. However, in order to preserve the anonymity of the study participants as much as possible, all numbers from census data have been converted to percentages and‘not all data from a category are displayed. Only data which seem to be most helpful for comparative purposes have been selected. All data, as well as terms defined, unless otherwise indicated, have been derived from the Census of Population and Housigg, 1980 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1983). Easy access to this central business district is provided by two major thoroughfares. The first is an interstate highway which runs alongside the downtown district, and the second is a business corridor which runs diagonal to the state highway and is lined along either side with businesses and small scale industrial shops from the north to the south end of the city. During rush hour traffic, the corridor offers an alternative to congested interstate travel from the central part of the city. The Schulzberg family members frequently shop in the downtown area travelling there by car most of the time. Sometimes, however, family members travel by means of bus since public transportation service is easily accessible and direct to all locations in the central business district. An alternative to shopping downtown for the Schulzbergs is 75 shopping at one of the city's malls beside the interstate highway midway between their home and the central business district. The Schulzberg home is conveniently located two blocks from the business corridor thoroughfare and six blocks from the interstate highway. Transportation for them is not a difficulty, nor is shopping a problem since a large supermarket, drugstore, hardware store and a few variety stores are clustered together in an area located two blocks from their home. In addition, across the business corridor road from this cluster of stores is located another constellation of small variety stores as well as a major department store. Transportation and location are two urban design elements which can hinder or promote a family's mobility and accessibility to things they need. In the case of the Schulzberg family, neither of these elements were problematic. Given another set of family circumstances and a not quite so convenient location, however, other families could experience frustration because of lack of transportation accessibility to places for purchasing life's necessities. Locations of schools, places of worship and workplaces are other aspects of urban design which are important to the Schulzberg family. The father works at two fire stations. One is located about a mile from his home. The other is about a mile and a half away. Both are accessible by car, 76 by bicycle, or by foot. John uses all three modes of transportation, but riding a bicycle is most frequent so that Hannah can use the car for transporting children to and from school and running errands. For John, transportation to and from work is easy and accessible. On days that Hannah has the car at home, she does not experience transportation as a difficulty. She drives the children to their school or to church on Sunday. Both school and church are about a mile from their home. While the three older children are permitted at times to ride bicycles to school, Hannah worries about the fact that they must cross a major and secondary thoroughfare to get to school. She does not permit the two smaller girls to go to school alone. At times, Hannah carpools with other mothers whose children attend the same school as her own and this resolves the transportation issue. In this case, neighborhood interrelationships, networking and shared responsibility are important to all families involved. It is the way they manage the elements of urban design, transportation and location, which otherwise could be problematic for them. Both Hannah and John attend classes at the local community college. The children have after school sports and also need transportation to practices and games. Here again they face the issues of location and transportation. In situations where the car is not available, several alternatives for resolving the situation are employed. 77 Hannah sometimes rides with a friend who attends the same class and lives in the same neighborhood as herself. Occasionally, she borrows her father's car or he drops her off at school while John picks her up after class. With respect to the children's games or practice for games, Hannah sometimes allows them to ride their bicycles to the field or gym. At other times she depends on carpooling with other mothers in the neighborhood or area. In these instances, transportation problems are resolved by working out solutions with family friends and relatives. Of all families in the city of Mountain Call, 77.5 percent are married-couple families. Thirty-five percent of these families have children 18 years of age or under living with them as do the Schulzbergs themselves. In the city, 17.5 percent of all families are female-headed with no husband present. Of these families, 58.3 percent have children 18 years of age or younger. In the area where the Schulzbergs live, only 10.8 percent of all families are female-headed with no husband present. But of these families, 67.0 percent include children 18 years of age or younger. The marital status of all males and females in Mountain Call and in the Schulzberg neighborhood is presented (Table 3). In the Schulzberg neighborhood, there are no children the age of the three youngest girls. The two boys have a common friend who lives next door and frequently comes over 78 Table 3. Marital Status of All Males and Females in Mountain Call and the Schulzberg Neighborhood. C1ty Neighborhood MARITAL STATUS: MALE, 15 YEARS AND OVER Single 39.4% 30.5% Now married, not Separated 46.0% 61.2% Separated 2.1% .6% Widowed 2.7% 1.1% Divorced 9.8% 6.6% Total 100.0% 100.0% FEMALE, 15 YEARS AND OVER Single 29.6% 24.4% Now married, not Separated 42.1% 59.0% Separated 2.2% 1.9% Widowed 14.0% 6.4% Divorced 12.1% 8.3% Total ' 100.0% 100.0% to the Schulzberg's home to play. The oldest girl has a friend who lives directly behind the Schulzberg's house on the opposite side of the street. This friend visits the Schulzberg home often. All the Schulzberg children have school friends whose mothers bring them occasionally to play at the Schulzberg home. Hannah sometimes takes one or more of her children to play at the homes of one of these friends. Jacquelyn's friend, Lisa, who lives behind the Schulzbergs is the only older girl in the immediate environs of the Schulzberg family. Sometimes Hannah asks Lisa, 79 Jacquelyn or Lisa and Jacquelyn together to babysit the younger children if John is at work and she has to go to class, shopping or take one of the children for an appointment. When Lisa and Jacquelyn are not available to babysit, Hannah sometimes finds it very difficult to get someone to babysit for her. In the locality where Hannah lives, there are no day care centers available. On occasion, Hannah is able to have her mother or a friend stay with the children, but neither the mother nor the friend is within walking distance. Absence of day care centers is an element of urban design missing in the Schulzberg neighborhood. Hannah experiences the frustration of this situation. She attempts to cope with the problem, but sometimes ends up having to dress all the children and take them with her or not go at all. In her given situation, Hannah lacks a neighborhood network within her own local area which might provide the kind of child care service she needs to free her to do other things. The most predominant ancestry groups in both the city of Mountain Call and in the particular neighborhood of the Schulzbergs are the English, German, Irish and Norwegian. The Schulzbergs are Dutch on the father's side of the family and, although this is not one of the predominant groups where they live, the Schulzbergs, especially the father, take pride in the lineage which is theirs. 80 Of all persons 25 years old and over, 79.7 percent in Mountain Call have graduated from high school and 84.8 percent in the Schulzberg area. In addition, in Mountain Call, 21.7% have completed one to three years of college and 28.1% have finished four years or more of college. In the Schulzberg neighborhood, 25% of those 25 years and ever have completed one to three years or college, while 19.3% have finished four years or more. Mountain Call has excellent elementary and high schools both public and private. A large major university and several high quality community colleges are located in the city. Acquiring a good education seems to be an important goal in the lives of many of the residents, as with John, Hannah and their family. The five major occupations and industries in Mountain Call include technical sales and administrative support occupations, managerial and specialty occupations, professional and related services, wholesale and trade, and service occupations including clerical. Lacking in Mountain Call is a coordinated network of services. This creates duplication of services in some areas and a void of services in other areas of need. An employee in the State Department of Social Security, told the researcher that this was an area under research and that ways to humanize existing resources were also being studied (Informal phone conversation, October 16, 1984). 81 The majority of workers living in Mountain Call work within that city. A total of 13.2% work within the central business district, 72.1 percent work in the remainder of the city. Only 14.7 percent work outside the city limits. The Schulzberg Home The Schulzbergs purchased their present two-story, full-basement home eleven years ago and are still paying on the mortgage. John and Hannah have remodelled their kitchen, added a large deck to the back of their home off the kitchen, incorporated two bedrooms into the basement area, and utilized attic space upstairs for storage as the family has increased in size. Large, fenced—in yards both in front and back of the home afford ample outside play areas for the children, although the parents worry that the two youngest girls may someday open the front gate at the walkway and run into the busy street. The oldest girls and two boys have their bedrooms on the second floor of the Schulzberg home. The parents' room is in the basement adjoining the room of the baby and two youngest girls. The first floor includes a large kitchen with a breakfast bar and a large open area for eating, a living room, a playroom for the children, a bathroom with bath/shower combination, and a back bedroom which serves alternately as a family room for watching T.V. or as a bedroom for guests (See Figure 2). The first floor areas of kitchen, living room, and playroom are where most of the Schulzberg family activity takes place, and are also the 82 areas to which the researcher confined her focus for observation. The Schulzberg home is conveniently located three blocks from a local super market and small shopping plaza. The Schulzbergs are Catholic and have chosen to send their children to a local Catholic school. The location of this local private school is not convenient. The school is situated about a mile from their home and the children must cross a major thoroughfare and two highly travelled streets to get there. On occasion, Hannah and John will let them travel by bike but usually the children are driven to and from the school. John and Hannah said that they wish their home was closer to the school. On the whole, however, the Schulzbergs said they are quite satisfied with the location of their home. Histories of John and Hannah Schulzberg History of John Schulzbegg John Schulzberg, the first child of six in the family of Peter and Gretel Schulzberg, was born in Ames, Iowa in 1943. John's mother had miscarried part way through the pregnancy, losing a fraternal twin to John. When John was two years old, his sister, Katrina, was born into the family without undue difficulty for the mother. On his father's side of the family, John's heritage was Dutch and the family had moved from a Dutch settlement in Pennsylvania at some unknown date. In 1949, John's 83 E 8 Ft: Front Yard VU‘C' VVv— ——. Front Yard FIGURE 2: Floorplan of the Schulzberg Family Home 84 grandfather, who had moved to the far northwestern part of the United States, came back to Iowa to convince Peter, John's father, to move with him to that part of the country because of better work opportunities. At the time, the grandfather was working at an airplane assembly plant earning good pay while Peter was driving a truck delivering soda pop at much lower wages. Peter agreed to move, but needed time to accomplish the process. As a way of beginning the move, John Schulzberg was sent back with his grandfather to the Northwest. They travelled together by train in December, 1949. John lived with his grandparents for about three months before his father and mother arrived from Iowa. After they arrived, both families continued to live together for a few months until Peter was able to find accommodations for his family. In the early spring, Peter moved his family to_a place which John remembers as a "shack with outhouse facilities, about a mile or so away from his grandfather's house" (Fieldnotes, January 31, 1985). Peter secured a well-paying job at the same airplane plant where his father worked and John attended first grade. John does not recall what his father did originally at the plant, but he recalls his father spending nights at home working on accounting courses which eventually won him an accounting position in the company where he is still employed today. In the late summer of 1950, John's family moved into the city where he currently lives. John attended a Catholic 85 grade school from which he graduated in 1957. In the summer of this same year, John's family moved away from the city to the southern part of the county where new homes were being built. In the meantime, in 1952, John's baby brother, Patrick, had been born into the family. Prior to beginning high school, John and his sister, Katrina, travelled with their grandfather back to Iowa to visit their relatives. John recalls nothing outstanding about the visit except that he stayed in Iowa for two weeks. Upon his return from vacation, John entered high school. While in high school, he played varsity football and lettered in basketball. John worked part-time while in high school. His first job entailed washing trucks for a lumber company on Saturdays. During his junior and senior years, John worked in a drive-in theater where he performed a variety of jobs. Late in his senior year, John signed up with the Navy for a program which involved six months active duty for training and eight years of reserve duty. In the summer of 1961, following graduation, John spent a six-month training period in Tennessee as an aviation electronics technician specializing in radar. He was then assigned to an air anti-submarine squadron stationed back in the state where he lived. He was required to spend one weekend a month in duty for the next eight years. John's next few years of life were erratic and uneven as he searched for his niche in life. He began first as a bank bookkeeper in 1962, from which he "got fired in less 86 than a year" (Fieldnotes, January 31, 1985). In 1962, he entered a community college but dropped out halfway through the first quarter. At the same time he was attending community college, John was working as a manager of drive-in theater, but was fired. From 1964—65, John worked for the drive—in theater where he had been hired during high school. In 1965, he quit his job choosing one for more money as a general laborer in a carton manufacturing company. In this same year, John was married for the first time, to a girl of his own age with whom he had attended high school. In 1966, John quit the carton company to accept training and a position as a maintenance repairman of another company. He terminated the job in the following year and returned to his old position in the drive-in theater. In the meantime, John had stopped attending Reserve Training and knew he would receive orders to active duty. These orders arrived in 1967. Upon receipt of these orders, John spent two years' active duty with the Navy aboard an aircraft carrier. Returning from active duty in the winter of 1969, John returned to his former position as drive-in theater manager when the position was offered him. That same Year, his wife "irreconcilable differences" decided to leave because of (Fieldnotes, January 31, 1985). Divorce was completed a few months later. John's reflection on this marriage was that neither he nor his wife knew what marriage was all about at the time they were first married. 87 At the same time John's divorce was finalized, Hannah began working for him at the drive-in theater. John and Hannah grew to love one another and were married in 1971. John began looking for work that would offer a salary more in keeping with raising a family. In 1974, he accepted a position as director of advertising. After a week, he knew the job was not for him and began looking for another position. In 1975, John went to work as theater manager with advertising responsibilities for an indoor theater chain which was new in the area in which he lived. He was totally unhappy with the position. Finally, in 1976, John found the work for which he had been waiting. He tested with 1,755 other individuals for the position of paramedic. He was accepted and started as an employee in October, with the obligation of attending school to be certified in the field. John complied and graduated in September, 1977. He has been employed as a firefighter/paramedic since that time. In addition to his work as firefighter/paramedic, John has also begun to further his education. He returned to a local community college in 1980 with the intent of transferring to a state university in the area to complete a degree in computer science. At present, he has accrued almost enough credits to make this possibility a reality. History of Hannah Schulzbggg Unlike her husband John, Hannah was born in the far northwestern part of the United States. Born in 1951, 88 Hannah is eight years younger than John and comes from a family of two other sisters and two brothers. In 1959, Hannah's family moved to another country where her father was employed as an electronics technician for a major industry. Hannah's mother did not work but stayed in the home with the children. In January, 1962, Hannah returned to the United States with her family. Until the father found work in the far northwest along the coast, Hannah's mother and the rest of her brothers and sisters stayed with Hannah's paternal grandparents in the midwest. In the summer of 1962, Hannah's father sent for his family after he found work as an electronics technician for a major industry along the coast. The family moved again in 1965. This time, the move was back to the place of Hannah's birth. Her father worked at a major aircraft plant as a communication and navigation check—out person for equipment on new planes. As a way of helping earn money during the winter months, Hannah worked at baby-sitting jobs. During the spring and summer months, she harvested produce from the fields in the area. In 1966, Hannah's father quit the airplane plant because he was hired for an opening at the city water waste plant. At the time of the study, he still worked there as Facilities Projects Chief. Hannah began working at a concession stand at a drive- in theater in the Fall of 1968. While continuing to work at 89 the concession stand at night, Hannah also accepted a position as a secretary after school in the fall of 1969. She graduated from high school the following June. In 1971, Hannah married John and that same year they had their first child, Jacquelyn, who was 14 years of age at the time of the study. Michael, the first son, arrived in 1973 when Hannah spent most of her time at home and, from time to time, baby- sat for neighborhood children. Hannah's parents (Charles and Judy) separated in 1976. Judy, Hannah's mother, went to work for a doughnut company, decorating and selling bakery products. Charles continued working for the water waste plant. In 1977, Hannah bore a second son, Jim, one year before Charles and Judy finalized their separation through legal divorce in 1978. Hannah, in this same year, began taking college courses as background to pursuing a nursing profession. In the fall of 1978, Charles remarried and Hannah's paternal grandmother came from the midwest to live with Hannah and John. After her fourth child was born in 1980, Hannah began working as a certified nursing assistant in a local hospital. In this same year, John became a firefighter/paramedic. By 1981, Hannah made the decision to quit her job as a certified nursing assistant due to pressures at home with the small children and the school courses she still needed'to complete to enter nursing school. 90 John and Hannah's fifth child was born in 1982. Hannah's grandmother died while living at their home in 1983, and Ann, the sixth child was born in 1984. With the arrival of Ann, Hannah also completed her prerequisites for acceptance into a nursing program. Currently, Hannah is pursuing this program at a local college. Introduction to the Schulzbergs: Three Generations John Schulzberg John, age 41, is a physically strong man. He is tall, has large blue eyes, and wavy light-brown hair interspersed with sprinklings of grey. John enjoys being with his children but struggles with the tension between disciplining them and playing with them. He has a natural sense of play which invites the children to wrestle, romp and roll with him. Hannah, aware of John's strength, frequently cautions John to be careful not to play too roughly with the children. John's rapport with his children seems generally to be open, candid and sincere as was manifested throughout the observation time the researcher spent with the Schulzberg family. Interactions between John and the children seemed to reveal that they liked being with their father, visiting him at the fire station, or having him come to their sports and school activities. Jim, for example, on a given morning, asked his father if he was going to the soccer game with him and, then, jumped up and down when John assured Jim that he was indeed going to the game (Fieldnotes, October 91 20, 1984). On another occasion, when John was teaching his children how to make homemade candles, the children solicited his help, followed his instructions, and asked questions freely and spontaneously as they participated in the candle making process with him (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984). Hannah spoke of her husband as intellectually acute. She described how John had designed and written programs for the computer and characterized him as someone who is always thinking. Hannah said she is grateful that John is taking classes at the university because, if he were not, his energy could go into other channels less beneficial to himself, and perhaps to the family as well. Hannah said that John always needs to be challenged to greater knowledge because this is key to his own growth as a person (Fieldnotes, February 17, 1985). Hannah's description of John as intellectually acute appeared to be verified on several occasions when the researcher was observing in the Schulzberg home and John was either programming the home computer (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984), studying (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984), or on his way to school for evening class (Fieldnotes, October 18, 1984). Not only did John seem to manifest mental acuity, he also demonstrated a capacity for performance of unusually difficult manual work as well. On one occasion, when John was preparing to take things to the dump, the researcher observed him carrying debris, machinery and implements 92 almost as heavy as himself. Yet, he did not appear to tire under the weight or to be exhausted when the job was done (Fieldnotes, October 11, 1984). On another occasion, when John was engaged in rolling logs to a wood splitter, he lifted by himself pieces of tree trunk that would ordinarily have required the efforts of two men his size (October 14, 1984). Hannah described John as being serious most of the time, but said that he also had a lighter side to him that enjoys fun and teasing. This seemed to be borne out by the fact that it was not uncommon during an observation period to find the Schulzberg children and John teasing and playing with one another. For example, during one observation period, Michael playfully attacked John from behind and jumped on his back. Amidst laughing and squeals of delight on Michael's part, John wrestled and romped with him on the living room floor (Fieldnotes, October 18, 1984). On another occasion, when Sarah was running back and forth from kitchen to living room, John intercepted her, picked her up, and swung her high in the air. As Sarah laughed and John continued to swing her in the air, Michael sneaked up from behind and grabbed his father around the waist. Still holding Sarah, John began wrestling with Michael and soon all three were on the kitchen floor, wrestling, laughing and playing together (Fieldnotes, December 6, 1984). Not only with his children, but also with his co— workers at the fire station, John seemed to enjoy fun and 93 teasing. On both occasions when the researcher observed John at the fire station, interchange between John and his fellow workers made it clear that teasing and fun kinds of things go on much of the time. For instance, during one of the observer's visits to the fire station, some of the paramedics went out on the court behind the station to play basketball during their work break. When they came in, they told the researcher about a time when they had been summoned to a call just after finishing playing such a game. They recalled themselves riding the rig while perspiration rolled into their eyes, over their ears and down onto their necks. They joked about the windows in the rig steaming up and themselves appearing with wet hair, when in fact, there was not a drop of rain in the air. Amidst laughter, the men re- enacted comical details about one another in that situation (Fieldnotes, November 15, 1984). With respect to his work as a firefighter/paramedic, John indicated that he liked the job, especially that of being a paramedic. One of the concerns he expressed, however, was whether or not there would be opportunity for personal advancement in the fire department as the years go on. He said that part of his reason for taking courses in computer science at the present time is to prepare himself for the possibility of such advancement in the near future (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Although John indicated that he is finding it difficult to adjust to taking over some of the household work and 94 child care tasks at home since Hannah returned to school to complete her certification in nursing, he said that he wanted Hannah to finish school and supports her move toward greater independence from the confines of the home (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Hannah Schulzberg Hannah is a short, large-boned woman with sandy-colored hair which frames her small, rather round, face. Her eyes are blue, and Hannah has a way of holding with her eyes anyone with whom she engages in conversation. She is candid in speech and when she is determined to accomplish a goal will not be easily deterred. Hannah works hard to keep her grades up in nursing school. She said of herself that she is not the student John is, but that once she learns something she retains it forever. In order to get to class on time, Hannah said she needs to take the baby to the sitter and the two little girls to nursery school by 7:00 a.m. Hannah is relieved that the two girls like nursery school so much, and on the days when John is off from work, he takes the girls himself to free Hannah from this responsibility. Hannah said that John supports her efforts at school and really helps her with her need for study when he takes care of children and does things around the house on his days off from work (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). Hannah's movement out of the home and into society has changed her thinking in many areas. One of the most 95 important of these is parenting. Hannah said that until she began going to school and interning in the nursing home, she parented in the style and manner of her own parents. But, as her own life began to expand and change, so too did her ideas about parenting. Some of the old patterns she has kept; others she has discarded. In speaking about this issue Hannah commented that:. I'm really aware of patterns that have come through our family, that by having other alternatives and new awarenesses, of changing those patterns. And then there's also those I can look at and say 'Yeah, I'll keep them. They're exactly what I would want for my family'. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) One of the greatest influences in Hannah's life was her grandmother. With fondness, Hannah recalled aspects of the relationship she had with her paternal grandparents, but most especially with her grandmother, whom Hannah said loved her more than any of the other grandchildren. After her grandfather died and grandma required more care, Hannah invited her to come live with her family. Grandma accepted Hannah's invitation; she arrived in 1978 and remained with the family until her death in 1983. Hannah remarked that her grandmother had taught her many of life's real values by the way she lived. Hannah called grandma "a sharp lady" and expressed gratitude that most of her own children had had the chance to be with grandma while they were growing up. Hannah also believed that grandma's presence in the home was a real opportunity for the children to learn respect for older people although, as Hannah admitted, at times it was 96 hard because grandma was old and needed quiet and rest and the children were young and naturally noisy (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984). One of Hannah's strong points seemed to be her sense of humor in the face of frustrating circumstances. Rarely was there a time, when the researcher was in the Schulzberg home, that Hannah did not share some humorous story about something one of the children or John had done. She recalled for instance, a shopping trip with her oldest son to buy him a winter coat. She spoke about how exasperated she was with him because nothing they looked at pleased him. She said that it was foolish to buy him something that he did not like because it was like throwing money away. He simply would refuse to wear it. She told about how at times during the shopping tour she saw what she thought were some very nice coats but Michael had other thoughts and refused to try them on, pressing his arms against his sides so Hannah could not get him to put the coat on. Finally, after hours of looking, Michael finally found a coat he liked and tried it on. The coat fit perfectly and Hannah was delighted. The blow fell, however, when Michael took the coat off and decided that he did not like the lining. Hannah said she threw her hands up in despair and ended the shopping trip there. Hannah, though frustrated with Michael, laughed and seemed able to enjoy the incongruity of her son (Fieldnotes, December 18, 1984). 97 The Schulzberg children also seem to appreciate their mother's sense of humor and frequently relayed stories or told jokes to make her laugh. On one occasion, Jacquelyn brought into the kitchen a long list of funny sayings, typed on a piece of paper. Jacquelyn followed her mother from stove to sink, from counter to table, reading the funny sayings. Hannah laughed at each one Jacquelyn read and sometimes asked to have them repeated (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984). Rapport between Hannah and the Schulzberg children appeared to be warm and, at times, openly affectionate with the younger children. Hannah would frequently bend over to hug or kiss one of the younger children who was talking to her. With Michael and Jacquelyn, the display of affection was not usually so overt. This perhaps could be because the older children are in puberty and it is not unusual for young people in that stage of development to shy away from displays of affection from their parents. Jacquelyn Of all their children, John and Hannah Schulzberg said that they worry most about their teen-age daughter, Jacquelyn, age 14. Jacquelyn has been tested and found to rank among the upper ninety-nine percentile in scholastic aptitude. Because she is so intelligent, learning comes easily to Jacquelyn and she frequently complains about being bored in school. Her parents have tried to divert Jacquelyn's energies into creative expression by allowing 98 her to take both ballet and modern dance when she expressed a desire to do so. These, however, did not suffice to meet the drive within her, and Jacquelyn eventually stopped attending classes. John has enticed Jacquelyn to work on their home computer and design her own programs. Jacquelyn, however, seems to find the greatest value of the computer in being able to type her assignments for school (Fieldnotes, October 18, 1984). Jacquelyn appeared to have a special way of relating to her younger brothers and sisters. This seemed to be most’ clearly apparent following kidney surgery which Betsy had to undergo in mid-December. Calling the researcher one day to tell her that she had just returned from the hospital where Jacquelyn had stayed with Betsy during the previous night, Hannah said that the nurses, one after the other, complimented Hannah on her lovely daughter. The nurses said they had never seen a teen—age girl so adept in caring for a child. Jacquelyn knew just what to do to ease Betsy's pain by distracting her through story telling or playing with her (Fieldnotes, December 11, 1984). Jacquelyn has few close friends except Lisa, who lives on the block behind the Schulzberg home. Lisa spends much of her time at the Schulzberg home, sometimes eating meals with the family, and frequently helping Jacquelyn with care of the smaller children. Jacquelyn, in like manner, goes to Lisa's house and sometimes spends the night with her friend. Hannah indicated that good rapport exists between the 99 parents of the two girls and so the coming and going of the two friends does not seem to be a problem for either family (Fieldnotes, November 29, 1984). Michael Michael, unlike his sister, has a difficult time with learning at school. He does not hide his dislike of going to school and fights homework to the extent that he leaves his books at school so he cannot finish the work. Then, in response, his parents have begun a system of making Michael return to the school to get the books if he appears at home without them. Hannah and John complain that they feel frustrated with the child and that he literally wears them out (Fieldnotes, October 18, 1984). Michael says that he does not do a lot of his homework "because it's just too hard. I just don't feel like doing it right then and I just think, 'I'll go play right now and I'll do it later.' But then later, I never do it" (Interview with Michael, December 2, 1984). Michael appears to be a sports' lover. He plays soccer, basketball and football at school. He is faithful about practice times and never wants to miss a game. Both Hannah and John encourage their son to play and frequently go to watch him practice or play in a game. Hannah said she feels it is very important to Michael to support him in this way (Fieldnotes, October.20, 1984). Michael, a rotund child, has a consistent problem with being overweight. The problem is partially due to his low 100 metabolism and aggravated by his eating habits. His parents expressed their worry about Michael's weight and told about the many ways in which they have tried to help their son lose weight. The thing that concerned the parents most was that Michael was not motivated to have this happen. As much as the parents tried to control his diet and watch Michael's in-take of calories, he counteracted their efforts by eating fattening foods with his friends. Hannah and John said that they have finally decided not to fight Michael any more on this issue. Instead, they have set up a voluntary program which he can choose either to follow or not. If Michael chooses to follow the program, the parents have built in attractive rewards for him. If he chooses not to follow the program, the parents said that they are no longer going to push him because Michael has to want this for himself (Fieldnotes, December 4, 1984). Michael appears to relate well with his brothers and sisters. He plays with them and shares his toys, although he has certain ones which he keeps away from the little girls. Michael is particularly good at watching Betsy and Sarah for his mother when she is shopping, busy, or at school. Hannah commented that Michael is really good with the little girls and that she can trust him with them when she is away (Fieldnotes, October 21, 1984). Jim Jim, unlike his brother Michael, is excited about going to school. He said that be particularly likes math and 101 reading, and he does not seem to mind having homework to do at night. Hannah commented that she had gone down to the school for parent conference recently and that Jim's teacher told her how much she enjoyed having Jim in class. The teacher said that if she were to have a son, she would want him to be just like Jim (Fieldnotes, December 5, 1984). Jim is a strong, wiry, active child with a vivid imagination. He frequently dresses himself in costume simulating his favorite story characters and acts out their parts. Jim, although he plays on a soccer team at school, is not as inclined toward sports as his brother Michael. Hannah commented that part of this may be because Jim is not as well coordinated as his brother. Hannah and John, however, go to watch Jim play and cheer him on. Hannah and the other team members' mothers take turns preparing orange slices for the boys to suck on at half-time. Jim said that he likes it when it is his mother's turn to bring the orange slices to the game (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984). Jim tussles and wrestles with his brother Michael as brothers usually do. Jim enjoys being with Michael and plays with him and his friends as often as he plays with his own. The little girls are also the object of Jim's affection and he plays with Betsy and Sarah as easily as he plays with Michael. Betsy, however, frequently wants his toys when he is playing with them, and this sometimes upsets Jim who goes to Hannah or John to resolve the problem. John 102 and Hannah said that of all their children, Jim seems to be the most even-tempered and easy-going (Fieldnotes, October 18, 1984). £83.61 Betsy, age four, is, according to her parents, the most determined child in the family. Hannah remarked that when Betsy has her mind made up, nothing will deter her. Hannah used an example to illustrate the point. She told of how Betsy likes things that feel silky. She has a favorite silky blanket that her teacher requires that she leave at the nursery. When Hannah went to the store to buy material one day, Betsy was with her and found some silky material. "Nothing would do," Hannah said, "until I bought some material to make her another blanket. But, then, when we went home, Betsy drove me and everyone else crazy begging me to make the blanket. Hannah said that it got so bad that the other children came to her saying, "Please, Mommy, make Betsy's blanket so she'll stop pestering. We can't stand it" (Fieldnotes, February 10, 1985). For the sanity of everyone concerned, Hannah said that she made the blanket. Hannah said that Betsy is into everything, and you never know what the next thing is going to be. Hannah told about a time when the children asked her to make cookies and she agreed. She took the eggs out of the refrigerator and put them on the counter, left the kitchen for not more than half a minute, and when she returned to the kitchen, found all the eggs, with shells, in the bowl, plus flour and sugar 103 Betsy had taken from the cupboard shelf (Fieldnotes, November, 19, 1984). Hannah stated that even at her young age, Betsy knew what she did and did not want to do. Incidents of this were clearly visible during the time of observation with the family. At one point, Hannah asked Betsy to help her older sister empty the dishwasher and Betsy replied, "I don't want to. I always have to do things I don't want to do." When Hannah insisted that Betsy do the work, Betsy retaliated with comments about not knowing where things went. Hannah held firm, saying that she would check after Betsy had put things away (Fieldnotes, October 11, 1984). At another time, Betsy was outside playing and Hannah called her in to put on a warmer jacket because it was so cold outdoors. Betsy went on playing and did not heed her mother's call. Hannah called again and this time insisted that Betsy come into the house to change her jacket. Betsy came, but refused to put on a heavier jacket. Instead, Betsy put the light jacket over her face, leaned over the back of the couch, and cried aloud at the top of her voice. When this did not get a response from Hannah, Betsy yelled at the top of her voice that she would "never be her daughter again." Hannah's response was a calm, "That makes me very sad," and the incident came to an end (Fieldnotes, December 4, 1984). .5221: Sarah, born in 1982, is a blonde, curly-headed, blue- eyed child with a happy disposition and a winsome smile. 104 She is much quieter than Betsy, her sister. Her mother described her as a "watcher", taking in everything the other children are doing and then trying to do it herself. Hannah said that Sarah keeps up with the other children and, sometimes when they are arguing about things, Sarah just quietly moves in and takes what they are arguing over. Then Sarah just wears that smile of triumph and the other children don't know what to do (Fieldnotes, December 2, 1984). Hannah described Sarah as always wanting to do things the other children do. Frequently, when Hannah worked in the kitchen, Sarah was right beside her asking to help. When Hannah asked Jim to run downstairs and bring up potatoes for dinner one day, Sarah ran down the steps ahead of him to get the potatoes. Yelling to her that the bag was too heavy for her to carry, Jim let her take two potatoes and carry them upstairs. Once upstairs, Sarah insisted that she help her mother peel the potatoes. Hannah gave Sarah one potato and a peeler and tried to teach her how to use it. After a few strokes, Sarah jumped down from the stool near the sink and turned her attention to some other activity going on in the kitchen at the same time (Fieldnotes, December 6, 1984). On the whole, Hannah said that the older children tried to include Sarah in their activities. Lisa, Jacquelyn's friend, seemed to be especially fond of this child, since she was observed playing with her, picking her up, hugging 105 her (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984). According to Hannah, Sarah is the kind of child one cannot resist. 522 Ann, the baby in the family, is loved, held and cuddled by all members of the Schulzberg family. They all share in the care that the baby requires. None of the children manifested any resentment, from what the researcher could observe, when asked to stay with the baby, feed the baby, or play with the baby when the need arose. In fact, when interviewed by the researcher in the course of this study, this was the one area most of the children cited as an area of work they liked to do. Judy and Paul Hannah's mother, Judy, has been married to her present husband, Paul, since 1981. Judy is a vibrant, attractive woman who described herself as "people—oriented" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). She is the youngest of nine children and said that she "got off pretty easy" at home because the older girls often did things for her. Judy indicated that she spends quite a bit of time baby—sitting and working as a volunteer at the bingo hall near her home. She says that she likes to do both things because they keep her in touch with people. Judy spoke of having worked at a bakery which she liked particularly well because of the flow of people in and out all day long. She said that many of those who came into the bakery were regular customers and she learned to know them on a first 106 name basis. Judy revealed that it was while she was working at the bakery that she met and married Paul. Judy declared that she is the type of person who has to be constantly on-the-go. She said that she cannot just sit around all day long. Judy stated that she raised her own children to be ambitious and active as she is herself. Judy described how at one time she had taken her children to pick berries during a six-week summer period. During that time, they had to be in the fields by six o'clock in the morning and pick all day long. The reason that Judy gave for doing this was that her children should learn what kind of work farmers do because most children never have the opportunity to have that kind of an experience. Judy also stated that Oshe wanted her children to know that things do not come easily and that an individual must work for what is wanted (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Loneliness in old people is of particular concern to Judy who works at a bingo hall concession stand three days a week. She spoke about how many of the older people who come to bingo do so not so much to play the game as to be around other people. Judy said she likes preparing and serving the food because it gives her a a chance to talk to these older people and maybe help remove some of the loneliness from their lives (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Paul, a small, thin man, grew up as an orphan. He said that he and his brother lived on a farm where they raised 107 most of their own animals, cultivated fruit trees, and planted and harvested potatoes. Paul said they had a chicken house which was 100 feet long with windows on both sides. Periodically he had to wash the windows on both sides. Paul described how every once in awhile when a window pane would break "a little piece of cardboard would go up." To this day, Paul said he hates washing windows (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). For four years, Paul was in the army. He said that he would have made a career out of it except that there was no advancement for him. He said that while in the army he had to train and care for 31 dogs, take charge of rescue work, and run the hobby and maintenance shops. In addition, he was a corporal in the communications development division. He described himself as busy twenty—four hours of the day and night and said that he learned a great deal in the army, but without advancement, he did not want to remain in the service (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). After leaving the army, Paul said that he worked for an aircraft corporation. He said that he liked the work but could not adjust to the demands for "punching the clock" every time he finished a job and began another one. He also felt that there was no chance for advancement and so, finally, left work there to begin working in a cabinet shop. There he remained until a few years ago when he began his own business in carpentry (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). 108 Charles and Diane Charles, Hannah's father, has been married to Diane, his second wife, since 1978. He is a man in his late fifties, has a keen sense of humor, and described himself as having been "born with a bottomless curiosity" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). He stated that he has an attraction to anything that calls for a solution. For example, he said, "The paper's got little jumbles, you know, I take five or ten minutes every day and run through them just because I like successes, you know, fill out the jumbles" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). Charles claimed that his real interest lies in the area of electronics. He said, "The first day I wound my first coil it just interested and fascinated me" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). For a hobby, Charles operates and maintains a ham radio with which he said he hoped to be able to spend more time after he retires in a few years. Born in the mid-west, Charles was an only child who lived with his mother whom he remembers as always working away from home. He does not recall having very many heavy responsibilities as he grew up except taking care of himself. He said he believes that when children are brought into the world, parents should try to educate them and prepare them to go out on their own in the world after they reach 18 years of age. He said that he went out on his own 109 when he reached that age and raised his own children to do the same. Charles emphasized the need that he feels that young people have to assume responsibility in order to be able to face the world. He recalled with humor an incident where his older son had asked Charles to work with him on the son's car. Charles said that he crawled under the car and before he knew it, the son had returned to the house to watch T.V. After awhile, the young man came out because he had to go to work and asked Charles how soon he was going to be finished working on the car. At this point, Charles crawled out from under the car and said to his son, "Let me have a little talk with you. Now here's some consulting service I'm going to give you." Charles said that he used the incident to teach his son a graphic lesson about personal responsibility. From the union with his first wife, Judy, Charles had four children, three girls and one boy. A fifth child, a boy, he and Judy adopted a few days after birth. Since the time of Charles' separation from Judy, this youngest son has lived primarily with Judy. Diane, Charles' present wife, is a tall, soft-spoken, attractive woman. She came from a family where her father died when she was young and her younger brother assumed much of his father's responsibilities around the home. Diane recalled that when she was about 10 years old, her mother broke her back and was laid up for a year. Following that 110 episode, her mother went through another period of illness with cancer. Diane said that during those years, "I was more like her mother than she was my mother" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). Although she had to fill in for her mother during this period of time at home, Diane said that she never felt that she bore total responsibility because her mother was always there and gave her directions on how to do the things that needed to be done. Diane had one girl and three boys from the union of her first marriage. She said her concern for them as she raised them was that they would be able to take their place in society as responsible people when they grew up. As she looks at her children now, grown up and married, Diane said that she is surprised at how they have changed. Many of the things they did not like to do as children are the very things they like to do now. Her daughter, for example, never liked working in the yard and now, Diane said, she is out there all of the time. Diane declared that it makes her feel proud to see her children with their own families growing up. III pue Airiua aieiedas e se uotisanb pitqi aq1 aieutmtta 01 asoqa iaqaieasai aqi ‘uoseai stqi 105 “end notisanb mox; paietiuaiajgtp Attsea aq iou pInoa pue IBBIDUH sen uotisanb pitqi aqi ieqi iaqaieasai aqi 01 1uaiedde ameoaq it ‘sasAreue pue notiaarroa eiep go asxnoa aqi Surinq Leitt firiwe; JO 1881 an: m01; aieiedas Airnriae uemnq }O arequ e xion sI '7 LSJaqmam Arrme; Aq paauariadxa xion st noH °g gsaauatiadxa xion pue xioM itaqi 01 uaeiie Siaqmam Artme; op sasodind pue sButueam ieqm 'z LHJOM iaptsuoa Aaqi ieqi 0p Siaqmam Artme; 0p 19w“ '1 :SMOIIO; se are suotisanb asaql 'Apnis aqa 01 1noq8noxq1 uotiaaitp aABS qotqn suotisanb qaieasai aq1 punore paztu9810 st iaideqa an; 'saauariadxa xion iraqi go sixaiuoa aqi ut Siaqmam Artme; Suome pue uaaniaq suotiaeiaiut uo paaetd st stseqdma pus ‘antiaadSJad IearBotoaa ue m01; panatn st Atrmeg 'passnastp pus paiou aie xion pue Artme; Siaqztnqag aqi uaaniaq suotiaauuog °paiuasaid st snatniaiur pue saiouptat; mor; paidiaaxa aauaptna Suriioddns pue paqtiasap st AJOSaiea qaeg °patjt1uapt are ‘paieinies pue paBrama qatqn suotitsodOJd pue ‘sidaauoa 10 ‘5911083199 {eatiaioaql 'Aioaqi papun018 SutSJama aqi siuasaid iaideqo stqi ‘suotieniasqo 1uedtatiied pue ‘suot1eniasqo ‘snatniaiut atquJSquia mor; UMBID 919p jo stsfireue us no paseg VIVG HO SISATVNV A HHIdVHO 112 consider it as part of question two. The present chapter, therefore, organizes around three areas: 1. Ways in which the Schulzberg family members perceived and defined work; 2. Meanings and purposes family members attached to work and work experiences; 3. Connections between family and work. Based on analysis of data within the context of the research questions, three major categories, or concepts, regarding work emerged and saturated. The concepts were identified by the researcher as follows: 1. Work as self—fulfillment; 2. Work and sex roles; 3. Work avoidance behaviors. The first concept, work as self-fulfillment, was also recognized by adult participants in the study. The other two categories remained at what Spradley (1979, p. 188) calls the "tacit level", i.e., at a level of unawareness. Spradley states that the ethnographer "will have to make inferences about principles that exist since "most cultural themes are at the tacit level of knowledge." Perceptions and Definitions of Work The first part of analysis addresses the research question: What do family members do that they consider work? In answering this question, the term "work" was not confined to a simple definition. Rather, the word "work" took on varying meanings according to the associative ideas 113 that family members and grandparents attached to the word in the particular contexts-in which it was used. Hannah, for "work" to describe her household example, used the word chores, a kind of activity that has to be done over and over and has a certain time frame to it, such as doing dishes, laundry, or vacuuming the rug. She said: Work is usually something that needs to be done to accomplish something else. So if you want your house organized, you have to pick up things to keep it organized. If you want clean clothes, then you have to do laundry. These would be things I would consider work. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah stated further that something like cleaning the house was work because she knew that it was going to get dirty right away again. Painting a wall, however, she did not consider work because it would be a long time before she would have to paint the wall again, and when she did, she could choose another color. Re-arranging the furniture, or buying a desk for the front room, Hannah did not consider as work either, because it involved change. These kinds of things created a "whole new look" to the room for Hannah and she considered the doing of it "almost like an art", not work. Study, on the other hand, Hannah thought of as work in the same sense as a house chore because of the deadlines she has to make in terms of papers due, everyday hand—ins, and tests. She said that: ‘ All those things, anytime you have to make a deadline, then it's work because... basically it goes back to the same things in the home. When there is a deadline to make, then you have to... 114 it has to come through. It has to be there. And, you're actually being judged,at that point in time. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah spoke of work in yet another context clearly differentiating work done in the home from work outside the home, which, according to Hannah, had to be more than "an exchange of money for service". Work, in this case, according to Hannah, had to have pride, dignity and love about it and it had to be "stimulating". Thus, Hannah equated certain qualities she believed ought to attend the doing of work with "work" itself (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). For the most part, Hannah's husband, John Schulzberg, defined work in terms of his participation in a wide range of work activities. He cited as work his job as a firefighter/paramedic and his involvement in housework (including house repairs), child care, carpentry, study, and outdoor things he does on Center Island, a place where the family goes once a month to work on the land. John said that work "is not the only thing I'm about, but it's a lot of what I'm about as a person, as an individual." John called work the "essence" of who he is as a person. As John spoke about what work 13, he spoke about dgigg work. He referred to such things as changing oil in cars, stacking wood, changing diapers, and "doing the kinds of things firefighter/paramedics do" (Interview with John, October 22, . 1984). 115 The Schulzberg children, Jacquelyn, Michael and Jim all defined work in terms of school, housework, child care, yardwork and work on Center Island. Their work consisted of doing hands-on things, such as dishes, feeding and changing the baby, homework and working in the yard or on the land. Only Michael drew a distinction between work as study —- "things you have to think about" -— and hands—on kinds of things like stacking wood. Michael said that he did not like to do the "think kinds of things" (Interviews with Jacquelyn, Michael and Jim, December 2, 1984). All the children, except Jacquelyn who said she does not like to work outside, expressed positive responses to work on Center Island. Hannah, in referring to the children's experiences of work on Center Island, said that part of the children's positive response to work there could have to do with the fact that it is a "change of pace from the everyday routine." However, Hannah believed that it is very important for her children to be involved in both the routine work at home and work she considered to be "more creative" on Center Island. She offered the following rationale for her observation: I think it's important to have both kinds. It's absolutely important because I think the one everyday nitty—gritty sort of thing is a stability sort of thing you have to do and you have to get done. I think the other is a creative sort of work, and not only creative in terms of different kinds of work, but also it's a real experiment sort of thing. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) 116 Hannah's distinguishing between "everyday nitty-gritty sorts of things" and a "creative sort of work" seemed to exemplify and support her definition of work which included the doing of laundry, cleaning the house or performing any of the household chores and the "creative" kinds of things done outside the realm of everyday routine. Judy, Hannah's mother, described work in several ways. First, she included things she does around the house, such as vacuuming, dusting, washing clothes, cooking, doing "all those things necessary to keeping a house dishes, and clean." Judy said she liked work and did not mind any kind of job except washing windows. "For some reason", she said laughingly, "they aren't my thing" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). A second activity Judy defined as work is her job at a bingo hall where she goes three days a week to serve sandwiches and snacks to the older people who attend the game. Judy said she really enjoys this work because she is in contact with people. "I like anything that deals with people. I'm real people—oriented... That's what I enjoy doing" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Lastly, Judy described her work as taking care of children which she said she likes to do. Judy commented in this regard, saying: Oh, I like kids. And it's really funny. They probably mind me better than they do their parents... I just tell them, you know, 'O.K., it's time to do this or that'. I don't know if it's the tone of my voice, or what it‘is. but they do 117 it. (Laughs) That's all that matters. It works. (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984) Paul, Judy's husband, related that his work is "plumbing, mica work, carpenter work, a little electrical, a little mechanical work, just almost anything" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Paul said that he has his own business and likes working for himself. He stated that he does quite a bit of remodeling work on houses and enjoys watching the faces of his customers when the work is done. One thing about what he does compared to other workers is that his trade is not confined to one type of work only. The variety of work Paul said he particularly likes, and reflected on this fact in the following manner: They'll do carpet, vinyl, or formica, ceramic tile, or parquet floors. I do them all. It's really neat because you don't know from one day to the next what you're going to do, and some of the job you get on...I load the truck up to where I know it's against the law to take it that loaded, but I take it. I put everything in there from formica to slate, to sand, to cement, and the whole bit and can be down there for three days. (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984) Charles, Hannah's father, described a wide gamut of activities as work that he performs. At home, Charles indicated that he did household chores, cut the grass, and worked on cars. For his salaried work away from home, Charles said laughingly, "I work in sewers." He then proceeded to explain that he was worked for a sewage plant for twenty years and is in charge of a two million dollar project there. His work includes overseeing the construction and coordinating the work, the consultants, the 118 contract managers, operational maintenance, and engineers. Of himself, Charles said: Well now, I like to work. I uh...kind of like running the ship. You know, you have a hand in operations. I also enjoy the treatment of sewage that comes into the plant. And you get a good effluent outflow effectively and efficiently. My whole work is geared toward that end. And now that the plant's being expanded, it's somewhat different. But the goal now is to get the plant completed, and on time, and on budget, and then go back to treating sewage, which I'm treating all the time, but with increased capabilities of the expanded plant. (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 26, 1984) Charles said that he likes his job, but what he does not like is having to get up and go to work because he has other things he would rather do around the house, particularly working with his ham radio. He also stated that he works in electronics which he prefers to the work at the sewage plant. Charles said that he would like to continue to work in electronics, except for the fact that sewage treatment pays more money. When he retires, Charles anticipates doing work as a "trouble shooter" in electronics. Charles described the work as taking care of unique problems for which no one else can find the answer. Charles' wife, Diane, said that she did not consider anything she does at home as work. Her work she described as the activities which take place at the real estate office where she is employed. These activities include selling houses, doing research work on properties, putting up signs and key boxes, advertising and holding open houses. The only part of her real estate job she said she dislikes is 119 figuring out the financial part of her sales and not having enough time to do other things she would like to do. In lieu of a wage increase, Diane said she would rather have time off so she could do whatever things she would like to do (Interview with Diane and Charles, December 16, 1984). Meanings and Purposes of Work This part of the analysis addresses the second research question: What meanings and purposes do family members attach to their work and work experiences? According to Spradley (1980, p. 7), behavior and artifacts which people have are easily able to be seen, but "they represent only the thin surface of a deep lake. Beneath the surface, hidden from view, lies a vast reservoir of cultural knowledge." Cultural knowledge is critically important, because, as Spradley goes on to say, "we all use it constantly to generate behavior and interpret our experience." Because, however, people are often unaware or rarely find need to express the cultural knowledge they have acquired and use to organize their behavior and interpret their experience, Spradley states that the ethnographer will have to analyze the data and make inferences about the principles that exist. Analysis of data in this section of the study was used to reveal meanings and purposes the Schulzberg family and grandparents attached to their work and work experiences, and to indicate linkages between these purposes and their definitions and perceptions of work as presented in the previous section of this study. In the 120 process of data analysis, three work concepts emerged and saturated. These work concepts included work as self- fulfillment, work gender roles, and work avoidance behaviors. In responding to the second research question, supporting evidence is presented for each of these work concepts. Work as Self-Fulfillment The idea that work is meant to be self-fulfilling appears as a highly important concept to the adult participants in this study. This concept more frequently than either of the other two emerged and saturated from analysis of data. Work that is self-fulfilling was defined by study participants primarily through the use of associative ideas or in relation to kinds of work performed. Definitions included such things as giving one a sense of personal identity, helping an individual find a place in society, acting as a medium of self-expression and enhancing self— image, providing opportunities for advancement, and opening avenues for engaging in service to others. Work, identity and society. John and Hannah Schulzberg interpreted work to be very important in achieving self— fulfillment. In order to attain this goal, they believed that one has to know who one is, the place one holds within society, and how one is in relation to the larger world. He stated that "how you work and how you relate to work that you're either doing or think that what you want to do... 121 reflects back to you in some way who you are as an individual" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). John stated that: It's the way...to know yourself. It's a way to be involved with other people and, probably in the larger context, to have a sense of purpose in relationship to humanity as a whole...some way of participating in something beyond yourself, some way of participating in a larger vision. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) Referring to his work as a firefighter/paramedic, John said that his work does provide some opportunity for this kind of discovery for himself, but that his work on Center Island, where he goes to work on the land, was a more practical work matrix "of preparing for, or Opening up, at least in part, what a larger vision" could be. John commented about his work on Center Island in the following manner: It's a whole different reality although it's the same kind of work. Um...the work there...is mostly physical, although in a much larger degree than...I do either at the fire station or at home for the most part. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) In describing the kind of work he did on the island, John said that it consisted primarily Of felling dead trees, clearing the land of brush and fallen branches, splitting and stacking wood, and digging ditches to allow accumulations of water from rainfalls to run free. More than anything else, John felt that his work there has engendered in him a greater respect for the land and for the people with whom he works. He emphasized that: 122 You don't just cut trees down to cut trees down. The tree has a purpose and needs to be recycled somehow. So there is a sense of keeping the land clean, of beginning to develop the land and clear it, and move some of the fallen logs off...It's the beginning stage for me...it would be the beginning stage of the land being made attractive...and attractive in terms of the land being available to open up to relationships with who knows....with people and with visions and with other plans for the land. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) Achieving self-fulfillment through work depends not only on participation in a larger vision for John, but also upon achieving one's own identity. According to John, work helps people attain self—identity by providing them with opportunities to recognize and express their uniqueness as individuals. In speaking of his work as a firefighter/ paramedic, John stressed that on the whole: I think that the job lends itself very well to what I would consider to be my giftedness as an individual. And, that's a rare opportunity. I don't think there are a lot of people who have it. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984)- In terms of the paramedic work particularly, John said: It demands, I think, it demands a certain something in terms of working in that environment. You don't have...nice lighting or a lot of people there helping you, nor the benefit of a large array of scientific values in order to help you make a decision. It's more your instinctual response. It has to be objectified and I think that was what our training was all about-- objectifying the instinctual response. I really think that's what a paramedic depends on more than anything else—-a gut level instinctual response to know when somebody is sick and if they're sick. And, so all our training was making help objectify that which we already knew...instinctually. So I think in that regard, it gives me the opportunity to again function in a way that...that comes natural. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) 123 John stated that he works about eighty percent of the time as a paramedic and only about twenty percent of the time as a firefighter. John did not feel that his work as a firefighter Offered the same kind of opportunity for self- discovery as does his paramedic work. -Although he claimed that he loved a good fire, John said that "there was a lot of mickey mouse stuff" that he had to do as a firefighter that he found frustrating because it was routine and "relatively boring". He also acknowledged that he found the environment to be restrictive in terms of offering the possibility of a personal choice to do anything else. John summarized his feelings in these words: You know, working for the fire department is kind of frustrating in a lot of ways. There's a lot of training I'm involved with as a firefighter--a lot of duties around the station that are necessary and good but nonetheless relatively boring. He continued by saying: There's just a lot of...maintenance kinds of things-—painting axes, and washing walls, and repairing walls, and, let's see, all the clean up and maintenance kinds of stuff that, you know....mostly physical sorts of things that need to be done. And they're important as house chores. The other, I suppose, is the environment. In one way, the environment at a fire department is very good in terms of...the individuals there are, very talented -- basically a very bright group of men. And, on the other hand, I think that where I work at the fire station, is very limited by tradition in a lot of ways and it's frustrating...there's just not much ability to change things or to do things differently. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) John seemed to tie the importance of the kind of work he did as a firefighter/paramedic to the means the work provided for self-discovery and self-expression of himself 124 as an individual. Routine kinds of things required of him, as a firefighter, such as washing and waxing fire engines and doing house chores around the station, were perceived as lacking in these values and were described by him as "frustrating." The frustration for John appeared to come from the monotony of doing tasks over and over without much purpose. He said, "because when they ask you to wax the fire engine, it sits in the same place and uses the same kind of wax, and there's not much to know about that" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). John also acknowledged his need to work in order to earn money to pay the bills, to provide a place for his family to live, and to pay for the education of his children. In his discussion of the issue, however, money did not appear to hold primary importance in his evaluation of benefits accruing from work he performed. John reflected that he thought a lot of people worked at jobs in order to provide for the needs of their families "at whatever cost [to themselves] because... survival gets to be a pretty high priority." But, said John, "I don't think anyone participates in work without wanting the other thing to happen too. And the other thing is to be fulfilled" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Hannah, like John, believed that work ought to help individuals achieve selfoulfillment and can do so if the work provides opportunity for self-expression.- Work that is conducive to self—expression Hannah perceived as work that 125 helps to build within individuals a positive self-image and a sense of personhood both of which she stated as critical to finding one's place in society and ultimately experiencing self—fulfillment. Hannah criticized society's attitude of low regard toward some types of work for which minimal pay is given. Hannah stated that this attitude militates against building self—esteem in people. She stated: The American society looks down on certain jobs as a whole. ...I would say that society looks down on certain jobs that people do, and they don't see the value. And they just basically write them off as peons. ...I think that a real good example is in nursing homes where I've spent time. There's what is called "nursing assistant", or "certified nursing assistants", nurse's aides ...these people are great. They do most of all the hard physical labor in terms of caring for the patients. They also do almost all of the moral support that these people get, and they get paid peanuts for their work. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) John's perception about society agreed with Hannah's in this regard. He made the following observation: I think that particularly in this country.. anyway in this society —- that the kind of work you do, and how successful you are at that work, at least in part, says something about you in terms of the society, about your value as a person. It seems like that's ...one of the first questions men ask each other —- "Where do you work?" "What kind of work do you do?" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984 In speaking about his own experience of growing into adulthood, John said that he was plagued with the question of how he "fit into society." He claimed that be judged part of his value as a person first of all in being able to secure a job, then in being able to maintain relationships 126 with other people well enough to perform the work because that was inherent in the work. John commented that, "It's not just the work itself, it's also having to enter into relationship with other people in terms of work. SO it's one way of beginning to reflect back On yourself" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). He further expressed his belief that "culturally and traditionally" society taught men to equate their identity and place in society with the work that they did. John said that he could only speak for men because, "I don't know what to think of it in terms of women yet" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Judging from the interviews that the researcher had with John and Hannah Schulzberg, it seemed that both of them perceived work not only as important to an individual's perceptions of self and place within society, but also that society, to a great extent, determined the norms against which these perceptions were shaped, measured and confirmed. With respect to housework and child care which Hannah listed as two kinds of work she performed, she described these as too restrictive for herself in providing the proper medium for self-fulfillment to occur. Hannah graphically described her own response to working in the home all day and gave as a reason for going back to nursing school the following: One thing I felt, you know, that if I had to talk to one more child all day long, I would go crazy. I needed to have an adult conversation. And, you know, certainly speaking with John...but he was only there, you know, part of the time. I mean he's not there all of the time. He's gone to work 127 twenty-four hours one day; he's home the next day, and certainly there's neighbors in the neighborhood, but you're limited. When you have a lot of little children at home, you're limited between naps and getting work done...(lnterview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah acknowledged that there are probably many housewives who stay at home and care for the children and that this is fulfilling for both the women and their husbands. But, she admitted that for herself, something more needed to happen. She said, "I felt like I needed to be fulfilled in my work. I felt like... my work at home was not fulfilling in terms of making John happy, for one. And, the other...I mean growth within myself" (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). Although Hannah did not find housework fulfilling for herself, she and John expressed the belief that housework done by the children was an important means for them to build feelings of self—worth in themselves.. Throughout the observation period with the Schulzberg family, it seemed that Hannah and John bore out this belief by investing a great deal of time and energy in finding ways to use the doing of household tasks as a medium for helping their children learn and develop strong identities and feelings of self-worth. On one occasion, for instance, while Hannah was at school studying for a test, John readied the dinner for the family. As he was in the process of preparing the meatloaf, he stopped and went to get Sarah. Bringing her back to the kitchen, he placed her on a stool and proceeded to show her how to crumble crackers to be mixed with the 128 meat. He watched her and helped her throughout the process. When Sarah was finished with her work, John thanked her and told her what a good job she had done. From the smile on her face as she looked at her father, it seemed that he had created in Sarah good feelings about herself. That she was proud of herself and had good feelings about what she had done was supported by the fact that when Hannah came home for dinner, Sarah, with excitement in her voice, told her mother about "putting crackers in the meat for Daddy." 'At this point, John asked Sarah to come and pour ketchup on the meat that was cooking in the oven. She readily complied and John helped her so that she would not burn herself on the hot roaster (Fieldnotes, December 13, 1984). Analysis of data showed that the parents tried to build feelings of self worth particularly through complimenting their children when a task was well done. On one occasion, when the researcher was in the Schulzberg home, the mother asked Betsy and Jim to bring in wood for the stove and told the children how large the pieces of wood needed to be. The children brought in the wood and Hannah told them how well they had done. Though enough wood had been brought in for the wood stove, Betsy returned outside and came back in with more wood. She sought Hannah out and asked her mother twice if the wood was the right size. When Hannah again told her how well she had done, Betsy put the wood near the stove and then skipped out to play (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984). On' another occasion, when Michael and Betsy had polished the 129 . kitchen table, Hannah told them both they had done a nice job. Both children responded to their mother's praise with smiles (Fieldnotes, December 4, 1984). Although Hannah and John valued household work for their children, the Schulzberg children did not share their parents' enthusiasm. With respect to working in the yard, Jacquelyn said that she did not like it because it was "bla- a-a—a-a—h!" And, doing other kinds of housework, she claimed "depended on what mood I'm in and how much I have to clean, and what I'm cleaning" (Interview with Jacquelyn, December 2, 1984). Michael stated his feelings about household work negatively by saying, "I don't like to do the dishes. I don't like to take out the garbage" I don't like to clean the house. I don't like to make my bed. I don't like to clean my bedroom" (Interview with Michael, December 2, 1984). Although Michael said that he liked to mow the lawn, he contradicted this claim one afternoOn when his mother asked him to mow the lawn and he responded to her request with "I hate to mow the lawn!" stormed out of the house and slammed the door (Fieldnotes, October 18, 1984). Jim's response to household work was the he "kind of" liked to do it, but did not like "to work in the yard" (Interview with Jim, December 2, 1984). Obviously, the children did not value house work as enhancing their self-worth or contributing to feelings of self-fulfillment. In speaking about work, Paul, like John and Hannah, indicated how important work is for feelings of self-worth. 130 For Paul, feelings of self-worth came from good job performance. He said that doing a good job makes him feel good inside whereas doing a job that does not measure up to his standards makes him feel uneasy and unable to be at peace until he goes back and corrects it. He asserted that: I can tell when I leave a job at night whether it's good or not the way my stomach feels. Like if there's something wrong, it bothers me till I go back and fix it. If the job went real good, just like today - it went real good —- I can walk away with a clear conscience. As a matter of fact, I can't even tell you the address. I forget the house (laughs). You know, if ...I go out and do one and something goes wrong, I can see that job; I can see that house; I can see the road, even how to get there; I don't even need the address to get there. (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984) Paul said that when he walks away from a job he likes to be able to say, "I know I did a good job of it". Unlike Paul, her husband, Judy did not speak of work in terms of its being important for self-worth. Rather, Judy seemed to perceive work as an opportunity to acquire some of the good things of life and that she had to exert effort to acquire these things. Judy stated that: I feel that I personally want quite a few things out of life and I don't expect anyone to give them to me. So, I figure the best way to get what I want is to work for it. And, uh, that's the way we were brought up..that if you want something, you work for it. That's all. And you're willing to work and then work is not hard for me. I've done it all my life, and I enjoy it. (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984) Judy's comment, "I don't expect anyone to give them to H me seemed to make a statement about her relationship to society and society's relationship to her in terms of work. 131 Unlike Hannah and John who seemed to view work as important to perceptions of self and to finding one's place in society, Judy seemed simply to be saying, "You get from society whatever you put into it in terms of work." Paul's reflections about work and society appear to be closer to those of Hannah and John. Paul clearly indicated the relationship he sees between doing good work and feeling good about himself. Furthermore, he also cited an experience had had in being caught in a system where he was unable to advance any further in a corporation for which he worked. When he realized that he would probably remain forever at the level he had attained and never be able to advance, Paul chose to leave the corporation. He recalled the incident as follows: But I could also vision ahead. You could only go so far. Well, they got seniority. So when you got up to a "B" man, that's it. That's where I got, and no way you could even be an "A" man until enough people retired, until jobs opened up. And, I mean, to do that, you're going to have to be at least a 15-20 year man. Well, I had no intentions of staying 15 or 20 years just to make B, or make A, 'cause I could see other fields where you could. Well, it's like the field I'm in now, I wouldn't trade it for anything. (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984) Charles, like Paul, seemed to indicate the importance of work in generating feelings of self-worth. Charles reflected this when speaking about the water treatment plant for which he works: One criteria I use for jobs is the importance of what you're doing. If you disappeared from the scene, is anyone going to miss you? You know, (laughs), 'Well, what happened to him?' He's gone and nothing happens. It's a plant of 75 people 132 and I want to be part of it. You know, I like to keep the place coordinated and running. (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984) Charles further indicated that he believed people were happy when they did work that they liked. He said that he believed that if one is hired for a job, then that individual can be expected to come to work on time everyday and be competent in job performance. Whereas Judy appeared to be saying, "You'll get from society what you put into it," Charles appeared to be saying the converse, "You put back into society through work what society gave you when you were hired for the job." Diane, Charles' wife, did not directly say anything in the interview about work enhancing her feelings of self- worth. However, in speaking about raising the children, this idea appeared as important to her. For example, in recalling how she required her children to do certain things around the house, Diane said: I always told them that...when you get something done and see that you've done it, it makes you feel good. They didn't always believe me; sometimes they didn't, sometimes they did. Then they'd say, 'You know, Mom, I really did feel good when I got that done and could see that I did it.' (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984) Thus, as with Hannah and John, interpretation of the data seemed to indicate that Paul and Judy, Charles and Diane believed that work is important for building self- worth. Unlike Hannah and John, the grandparents and their spouses did not seem to stress the importance of work for self-identity, however. While the grandparents did not 133 indicate that society determined one's position in life, Paul did seem to feel that practices in the corporation where he worked at one time could have prevented him from advancing to a higher position within it. Diane made no comments relative to society. Participation in work_processes. John emphasized that work helps an individual arrive at self—identity and self- expression and know his/her place in society only if it provides freedom for a worker to explore various kinds of work through participation in different work processes. John used as an example his own involvement with work at a sawmill on Center Island which he said provided him with just such an opportunity. He declared that the mill was "an exciting place" for him to work because: It's not often, I guess...that when a person works that you have the opportunity to enjoy the fruit of your work in the way you do when you get logs out of the forest, take them down to the mill, have them cut boards out of them, and in turn being able to participate in the same work by going back and using the boards to build something. I think that's a unique opportunity. I think it's one many people should have. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) John stressed the value of being involved in various work processes as a way of arriving at the kind of work one would ultimately want to do. He said: Whether you think that you want to be an accountant, or a pilot, or whatever it may be, as you begin to do what you are fit to do, it's a very concrete reality to participate in, and in trying to do it as a way of living. It helps discern, at least in part, whether or not that's true. It helps you [reflect] on...how you work and how you relate to the work that you are doing 134 or think that you want to do. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) John felt that those coming into the firefighter/ paramedic field had such an opportunity, at least initially, but he was not sure that many work areas outside his own operated in this way. He also reflected that once one comes into the firefighter/paramedic field, there is not much opportunity beyond the initial stages to do anything else. John expressed a need within the system for opportunities to continuously intensify what in the beginning was a fulfilling work experience. He lamented the current situation where: Firefighters, if they want to be firefighters, they do that for twenty years. After ten years, they're tired of being a firefighter. They just sort of hang on for the last ten years so they can retire and do what they really want to do. In that sense...I'd like to have the opportunity to do something more intense and do it better, I mean within the structure of the fire department. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) What John seemed to be saying is that self—fulfillment is not totally achieved when an individual has acquired a sense of identity and has found a niche in the work world. Rather, self-fulfillment is a process dependent upon continuous opportunities to deepen one's personhood and expand one's horizons. It is a matter of growth. If possibilities for growth are lacking in a work situation, as seemed to be the case in the firefighters cited above, apathy may result. Such was John's indication in reflecting on this work scene. Hannah concurred with the appraisal, but she also believed that other things even more 135 serious might occur. She cited things such as depression, stress, anxiety, family problems, alcoholism, drugs, crime and violence, child abuse and suicide as potential problems because someone "who is unfulfilled in their work is probably going to seek toward fulfilling that in a more negative way" (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). Hannah, in speaking of the need to be involved in the work process, stressed the idea that John had presented about the need to help one grow as a person. She stated her position in these words: Your work has got to make you grow as a person. ...I think that when a person is at a place where they are no longer growing, it's a standstill. Then it's just...um...it's no longer fulfilling. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah believed that growth happened when an individual experienced work as stimulating and as having pride and dignity about it. Work that lacked dignity or stimulation Hannah referred to as work where individuals "never had to think about what they were doing". Even in a case where one was hired to wash dishes, Hannah felt that growth was possible because: If they're washing dishes within that kitchen, they're thinking of new ways of doing it. ...Or, if they've got people, if they're looking forward to people coming in that they can talk to and they can share with, and they can be with, when they're stimulated as a person and they're growing. Maybe they're not growing in terms of actually sitting and washing dishes, but the people coming in are...bringing new ideas, or new thoughts or something to make the person grow as a person. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) 136 Charles, Hannah's father, believed that work is stimulating only when an individual becomes involved in the "right kind" of work. In speaking about the employees under him at the sewage plant, Charles indicated that he looks for satisfaction in his workers. When Charles finds that the work is not fulfilling for certain individuals, he said that he has a lot to do with their "leaving" because "they don't follow out the job. They're not motivated to. They don't do anything other than what you tell them to do. Doesn't work out" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). Charles expressed his own preference for work in electronics over work he is doing at the sewage plant. However, he stated several times during the interview that the reason he has stayed with work at the sewage plant is because it "pays better than work in electronics". As Charles spoke about electronics, it seemed that this could be an area of work where he finds his greatest satisfaction. He made the following observations: I kind of have a second vocation. I can make a living in electronics. I've got a pretty good background in math and I'm on my way there. But, unfortunately, sewage pays better. But, I worked a couple years in Australia in the research and development electronics and I reallv liked that. That was, we were doing the missile telemetry work for missiles, developing two-way radios when they first came out. I like to do research and development, or problems, puzzles and solutions. (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984) Diane seemed to support the idea that Charles may be more fulfilled working in electronics than by working at the 137 sewage plant when she said, "Yeah, you're in seventh heaven if you've got to do a little problem fixing." Then, Diane proceeded to tell the researcher that, "He even goes down to Radio Shack and buys broken radios so he can fix them. And, he's found some of them that could never possibly have worked" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). Unlike John Schulzberg who appeared to regard advancement possibility within his work situation as a means of self-fulfillment, Charles seemed to be looking more at the kind of work being done. However, Charles had already achieved promotion to the position of plant supervisor and was "in charge of plant operations". This position seemed important to Charles because when the researcher asked him whether he liked plant operation/management better than actually working on the project, Charles replied, "If I'd been given a choice, I'd still like to run the ship, you know, turn the knobs, and call the shots, and run things there" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16,1984). From this response on the part of Charles, it seemed that advancement may have been a contributing factor to the satisfaction he felt with his work and because he had already achieved it, did not give conscious attention to advancement as contributing to his feelings of self— fulfillment at the time of the interview. Judy's husband, Paul, on the other hand, clearly included the possibility of advancement at work as part of 138 self-fulfillment. He cited three instances in his life where the lack of such opportunity motivated him to quit a job and seek work elsewhere. The first situation was with the army where Paul served a four-year term. He seriously considered making the army his career and then decided against it because the office in charge of the platoon, according to Paul, blocked his opportunity for promotion. Paul presented the situation in these words: There were a lot of parts of the service I really, I really did like.. . But what really took the cake was when...the sargeant who was head of our platoon -- he was ticked off because I didn't have to stand inspections and I didn't have to do this and that with the platoon. But then again, I was on twenty-four hour call, too, and plus I ran all the other things. -- And so, he never did put in the promotion for me. Yeah, he was the stumbling block. Paul continued: When I got ready to discharge, they wanted to make me Master Sargeant. could do with it. of staying in, but Well, I told them what they I mean, I really was thinking that.... I don't like that. I feel this way. You earned it. You're entitled to it. They don't want to give it to you, then forget it and go on to something else. (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984) A second experience where Paul said he could not attain advancement was his work at an aircraft factory. Paul spoke of the work there being was at level of what he got seniority. So when Paul said that he could was a large company and "great", but that he quit because he called a "8" man and, "Well, they you got up to a "B" man, that's it." understand that the aircraft plant that "you've got to have your levels 139 for different people, but it just wasn't for me" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). A third work situation which Paul talked about as not having promotional opportunity was at a small shop where he made cupboards after leaving the aircraft factory. Paul said that initially he began by doing the machine cabinet work there, that is, cutting out the pieces by following a set of blue prints. After a time of doing this kind of work, Paul said that he asked to go on the assembly job putting the cabinets together. Paul stated that he assembled between 200-300 cabinets, then knew he could not stay forever doing that kind of work. For a short time after leaving the cabinet shop, Paul said that he did formica work. Then, finally, he went into business for himself, which he indicated, "makes me feel good. I think it's terrific. I look forward to it. Each day I can hardly wait to get to the job to see what I've got to do" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Part of the excitement of the work is due to the variety of jobs he is able to do because of his expertise. Paul commented on this by saying, "Well, one thing about what I'm doing compared to most of the guys in my trade, for example, they do one thing....I do them all" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). From data interpretation throughout the interview, it appeared that Paul, in similar fashion to Charles, experienced satisfaction by being in charge of the work he 140 performed. And, like Charles, it also seemed that Paul demanded of himself high quality work and was satisfied with himself only when the work he did matched his expectations. Like Paul, her husband, Judy believed that individuals should have the opportunity from time to time to work at different things and learn different work processes. Otherwise, she asked, "How are you going to know what kind of work is really fun and.. for you? And you don't know unless you...you do a little bit of trial and error sometimes" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Judy felt that playing the field of work was important in order for an individual to find a personal place in the work world and be fulfilled through the work performed. Service-oriented work. Another factor which both Hannah and John perceived as important to work which is self— fulfilling is that the work be service-oriented. Quite likely, this perception flows from the fact that both Hannah and John are working within the service-oriented field of medicine. John said that he had "always wanted to be of service to other people" and that his work as a firefighter/ paramedic allows him to do just that. A visit to the fire station provided the researcher opportunity to witness John in action as a call came into the station for medical assistance. Upon his return to the station, John explained to the researcher that he had had three calls since noon (it was 3:15 p.m. at the time John was recounting his day) and that he had not had time to 141 complete any of his reports but that he liked being busy. John then made several telephone calls to the hospital where he had taken patients earlier in the day to check with the doctors who had cared for those patients. He returned to the table when finished telephoning and looked up a medical term in the dictionary in order to determine the side effects of a certain kind of medication. John spoke at length with the medic supervisor at the station relative to a patient picked up earlier that day who seemed to be growing increasingly worse as the afternoon wore on. Upon completing his reports, John took the researcher out to the medic unit and explained details of operating the medicar. He opened cases containing medications, instruments, and other implements necessary for emergency care of patients. John explained the use of the clam stretcher for those with back injuries, the use of back boards, and showed how oxygen was administered if needed. John recalled the case of a little boy who had fallen from a tree and later died. John said that this death bothered him because he had not expected the child to die. He expressed his desire to have been able to do more for the child and his feeling of helplessness at being unable to do so (Observation at the fire station, November 15, 1984). Hannah, like John, stressed the sense of accomplishment that is hers when she works in the hospital and nursing homes and is able to bring "something to somebody else". Hannah stated that her desire for self-fulfillment and her 142 desire to be of service to others were among the motivating factors in her decision to return to school to pursue a nursing career. She reasoned that by developing her own skills at nursing and working outside the home "attending to people's medical and psychological needs,' she could contribute more to "society as a whole" while becoming more of a person herself. Hannah described her feelings in the following manner: I can feel like I'm able to contribute something to society as a whole. And certainly being with the children would be a prime something because as they move out into society, they will bring something to society. But also, personally being outside of the home and working, being able to bring something to society within me, also... in the sense of intellectual growth, the sense of being able to create things, being able to take information and put it into new situations and create new, maybe new ways of doing things, maybe things other people haven't thought of, easing pain for people in realistic ways, bringing families...into more awareness of, of their own families, and that is certainly a part of nursing, being able to do that. It's not just doing physical tasks, but it's actually being able to work with people in terms of helping them psychologically get through things. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) The type of work Hannah chose to perform outside the home as a nurse was directly linked to the benefits she perceived as accruing to herslef in terms of self- fulfillment and to society in terms of service to those in need of medical and psychological help. this relates directly to Hannah's and John's perception that for work to be fulfilling, it is important that it be service-oriented. In this instance, then, interpretation of data seemed to show clear linkage between those perceptions that Hannah and 143 John had about work and the meanings and purposes they attached to their own work and work experiences. John and Hannah Schulzberg, in articulating their perceptions about the need to serve other peOple, emphasized the importance of relationships with other people that are formed in the work context. Center Island seemed to provide a work situation where this was actualized. John, for example, in speaking about his work on the island, stated that without the people with whom he works there, nothing would be the same. He acknowledged that it is "the people" who make a difference. And, John described his place in relation to the other people with whom he worked as being service—oriented, "available in terms of helping to lift logs and nail nails, and do a lot of heavy work that needs to be done" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). In other words, John saw his position in the work context as being available for helping other people in the work site. Hannah, like John, also stressed that Center Island is important because of the relationships possible in the context of work being done and opportunities offered for serving people. Hannah spoke about her perceptions particularly in relation to the children. She said that the children responded very well to the work on Center Island and worked hard. Hannah believed that: They work very hard because they know they're not the only ones benefitting. There's many, many people benefitting from them going up there and working. And, that's a real sense of...um ... giving of oneself. And they probably won't even 144 know how many people benefit or who those people are. But they know other people will benefit from the things they've done. Hannah continued to reflect further on this idea of service to others in relation to the Children: They ...um...clear away brush. ’They stack wood. They pick apples. They spread gravel, carry sand to fill in holes. Um... they dig clams. They dig clams for people to eat and that's fun (laughs) because it's a real community sort of thing when everybody gets together and, of course, they're so excited because it was their clams. So they're really excited to share those. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) In reflecting on their own experiences on Center Island, Jim and Michael Schulzberg expressed positive attitudes toward the island and the people with whom they worked. Jim said that he likes to go to Center Island because he helps his Dad split wood for people. Jim explained how is able to run the wood splitting machine by operating the handle that sends the shaft back and forth as the logs are placed on it. Jim said that he liked cutting the wood because of the sound the wood makes when it splits and then he imitated the sound, "eeh-—r, eeh--r." Jim also said he liked it when his Dad or one of the family's friends up there take him for a ride on the moped (Interview with Jim, December 2, 1984). Michael stated that be particularly liked going up to "working with my Center Island with the family because of Dad and the people I know up there". Michael said that the work he does makes him feel "good inside" because: Many people come up there and if we...didn't work up there, they wouldn't want to come up there 145 again. But if they like how it looks and everything, then they would come up again. (Interview with Michael, December 2, 1984) Michael also declared that he liked going on the ferry in the dump truck to another island to get gravel with his father. "I like...to go with him to dump it and spread it out for people" (Interview with Michael, December 2, 1984). Like John and Hannah, Diane also believed that work to be fulfilling must be oriented to the service of others. However, Diane said that this was not the initial motivation for her choice to work outside the home. In the beginning, it was simply that she, like Hannah, had not found housework or child care a fulfilling experience. She stated that she began working outside the home when her children were small. After a short while, Diane said that she felt quilty and quit work to be at home with the children and do things at home which being at work prevented. However, after remaining at home for two or three months, Diane claimed that she realized how important working outside the home was for her own self-fulfillment. The reasons for feeling this way she presented as follows: All of my friends were working and I felt like the world was passing me by, sort of. Things were happening and I wasn't learning anything. I wasn't ...I was just kind of a vegetable. I was staying in one place. Diane continued, making observations about women like herself: Sometimes I think a lot of women work just so they can learn more and more as a challenge. So sometimes I think a lot of women work, not for the money of it, they don't have to, ...but they do it 146 so they can be out with people and learn what's going on. (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984) Diane conveyed the fact that she will be retiring in a few years and expressed fears that at that time she will slip said: back into a life pattern at home which is "blah". She I think I'm going to have to find something happening. And, I'm going to have to be involved in something that does something—- that helps somebody, or learn something. (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16,1984) Diane's comment that she will need to be involved in something that helps somebody else seemed to reflect that service to others is an aspect of the kind of work which, for her, is fulfilling. This is also borne out with respect to her current work as a real estate agent. Diane claimed that she finds her present work both satisfying and fulfilling because it's filling a need people have. Diane emphasized that: Buying or selling a house is really an emotional thing...The people that we work with are really at an emotional time. And, sometimes they're transferred; they have to sell a house. If they don't sell a house, they don't have enough money to live on, and they have to go. Or, they're coming into town and they have to find a place to live. And, it's really nice to find them the right house. You know, so they're happy and have what they need. (Interview with Charles and Diane, .December 16, 1984) from Although Diane's service to people is very different that given by Hannah and John, nonetheless Diane acknowledged, as they had done, that she feels good when able to help people. Thus, service—oriented work for Diane. 147 seemed to be a criterion for judging self-fulfillment as it was for John and Hannah. At no time during the interview session did Charles indicate directly that his self-fulfillment came through service to other people. Rather, he spoke more in terms of the work itself, liking the kind of work he was doing. "I kind of like running the ship. You know, you have a hand in the operations. I also enjoy treatment of the sewage that comes into the plant." Although the effluent outflow of the sewage treatment benefits thousands of people in the city where Charles works, he did not indicate that his satisfaction or self-fulfillment came from knowledge of serving others in this way. What Charles said did satisfy him was knowing he achieved a "good effluent outflow effectively" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). Paul's concern for doing a good job seemed to be similar to Charles' concern about attaining "a good effluent outflow effectively and efficiently" at the sewage plant. For both Paul and Charles, it appeared that part of job satisfaction and feeling good inside oneself came from the awareness that one had performed high quality work rather than from the fact that the work they did was beneficial to other people. In this respect the two men differed from John and Hannah Schulzberg, and from Diane who all seemed to indicate service to others as important to job satisfaction and feelings of personal self-fulfillment. 148 Judy indicated that personal fulfillment for her comes from both a job well done and serving others. She said that she had not had a whole lot of work experience, but that she liked "anything that deals with people" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). Judy declared that she enjoys babysitting and housework as well. Basically, there is not any work, except washing windows, that Judy indicated disliking. Unlike Hannah and Diane, Judy did not reject housework as a potential way to find self-fulfillment. On the contrary, she spoke about liking to work in the house doing dishes, floors, washing clothes, vacuuming, and doing other things. She commented that she is not a person who sits around but rather has incredible energy and so is "always on the go" (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). She said that she has always worked and, when her own children were growing up, always had neighbor children at the house along with her own. It is just something she has grown used to. Work, education and personal advancement. Hannah and John shared a further perception about work. They stated their belief that formal education and opportunity for personal fulfillment go hand—in-hand. According to Hannah, lacking the fOrmal education necessary for certification or a degree in some professional area eliminates the possibility for advancement or recognition in any field of 149 knowledge regardless of how much personal experience one may have in that field. She presented her view in these words: If you're not educated, you're probably not going to get an opportunity. In today's society, within the American society, you need a good. education. I could stand up and say, 'I have six children; and if you don't know how to parent, I could probably tell you a lot. I certainly couldn't tell you, you know, everything, and you could certainly teach me a lot.' But I would have a good background. But, if I stood up and said, 'I have a master's in nursing and we're going to talk on parenting,' I'm going to have a lot more people attend my lecture. But that's the way it is. Education is valued in today's society. And...it has to be formal education. It cannot be an experiment sort of education. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah's concern about doing well herself in nursing school reinforced the view she expressed. Several times when the researcher visited the Schulzberg home, Hannah spoke with her about nursing school, about tests and projects she was doing for her class. On one such occasion, Hannah had just returned from taking a test and had already received her score. Hannah had passed but the score was low. She had just handed in an assignment which had taken her eight hours to complete. She had also submitted a community project which had taken her three hours. Hannah said that she had studied for the test, but that with everything else she just did not have enough time. She said, "If I miss and fail, that's it. There's no second chance." Hannah reflected then on the implications for the family and herself if this should happen. One of the things that bothered her most was the fact that she would not be certified and could not work in the hospital or nursing home 150 as she was already doing as part of her training (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984). On another occasion when the researcher was again at the Schulzberg home, Hannah showed the researcher her nursing care plan which she had just received back in class that day with an excellent grade on it. Hannah shared her joy and also said that she had received a "B" grade on a test she had taken that same day. Hannah said she felt relieved because this score and her paper would help to raise her average in the class (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984). John, like Hannah, recognized the need for formal education if on-going growth, development and fulfillment were to take place in his life. He spoke of working currently toward a degree in computer science. He said that he was not sure whether his education would ultimately lead him to a better position within the fire station where he now works, or whether it would lead to something else related to firefighter/paramedic work. What John saw as important was not where he would use the education once he had acquired the degree, but that he could use it to enhance 'himself through opportunities for alternatives to the way he is now engaged in the working situation. John stated that: It's the opportunity to say, 'No. I don't have to do this the rest of my life. I can do...I can move on. I can move on to some higher range of what I am doing.‘ And whatever that is, is always going to be integral to the fact that I was a paramedic/firefighter. ...It definitely is a way to say, 'I have a choice'. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) 151 On several occasions when the researcher visited the Schulzberg home, she found John studying for class. On one of these occasions, John was also watching the children because Hannah had gone to school to discuss her health care plan with the professor. Betsy, Sarah and Jim were sitting together on the floor in the living room where John had them watching a "Tom and Jerry" cartoon on T.V. Every so often a question would be asked of John by one of the children, and John, without interrupting his studies, would answer. Then, the baby awakened from her nap downstairs and John went to get her. When he brought the baby upstairs, he commented that the week had been terrible. He said that he was behind in his economics class and was going to have a test next class. He was scheduled to work the following day and had no time to study. John also confided that Hannah was upset because of doing poorly on a test that she had taken, and he was worried about her. The tension that seemed to pervade the household on this particular occasion with respect to school conveyed a strong message about the importance the Schulzbergs placed on education (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984). vHannah and John demonstrated concern also about the education of their children. During the time that the researcher was with the family, the parents frequently discussed school with their children or asked them if they had homework. Several times the children were sent to do their homework during the observation period. The following 152 incident serves to illustrate the parents' interest in their children's educational welfare: Setting: It is Monday just after school, 3:00 in the afternoon. Mr. Schulzberg, Michael and Jim are at the kitchen table. John is helping the boys with their homework. Jim has a math problem and needs to know how much an item weighs. He comes to the kitchen cupboard and takes out the postage scale. John asks Jim what he is doing and when he discovers Jim's need, comes over to the countertop and gives Jim a lesson in how to measure water and a tin cup in grams. John puts water into the cup and places it on the scale. John: How many grams does this weigh? Jim: 160 John: (Pours water from tin into a plastic sandwich bag and puts the bag with water on the scale) How much does this weigh? Jim: (Jim considers, looking at the scale) 100! John: How much did the measuring cup weigh? Jim: 60 grams. (Jim then runs into the front room to play with the cat) John then returned to the kitchen table where Michael is coloring a map of Africa. John asked Michael to tell him about the amount of rainfall in that country., Michael mumbles a short answer and continues with his map. (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984) The Schulzberg family appeared to perceive education as the key which could open the door of opportunity, allowing them to be able to do things in the work world which they would like to do. For the most part, Charles' interest in education has confined itself to courses in electronics. Most of what he has learned, Charles said he learned by reading books, 153 experimenting and asking questions. When working in Australia on the telemetry communications, Charles stated that much of the work he did was research and development on his own. He reflected on how he liked to carry on research. "I always like to get a hypothesis, and take a few tests, and see what happens, and then change it and work on it. And then I'll tell you 'that's the bad component right " (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, there' 1984). Education for Charles, according to the data analysis, has not been important for him in terms of seeking promotion at work. Charles spoke about the importance of educating his children to go out and take their place in life at 18 years of age. Thus, finishing high school seems to be what Charles felt was ample for this task. In this respect, Charles is unlike Hannah and John who themselves are seeking training at the university and college levels in order to be accredited and and licensed for assuming professionally advanced working roles in society. They are, likewise, preparing to send their own children to college after graduation from high school. Diane, Judy and Paul did not speak about education as important for themselves in relation to work. Any references they made to learning had to do with non-formal everyday kinds of things. It seemed they were more concerned about expansion of awareness than intellectual pursuit of knowledge. For example, Diane referred to going 154 to work "to learn what was going on around her" (Interview with Charles and Diane, December 16, 1984). The Schulzberg children, Jacquelyn, Michael, Jim and Betsy all made references to school during the time the researcher was with them observing and also during interviews with the three older children. Analysis of data revealed that at no time did any of the children connect going to school with thoughts of future work, however. Only Michael spoke about being a firefighter/paramedic like his Dad but that reference was in relation to visiting the fire station where John works rather than in terms of studying to grow up and be able to be hired for the work (Interviews with Jacquelyn, Michael and Jim, December 2, 1984). It seemed that at this point in their lives, the children had simply not done any serious thinking about possible future work and the need for education for themselves. Clearly, the children were not focused in terms of what they want to do for work when they grow up. John himself had gone through many work roles as an adult before he finally settled into the firefighter/paramedics area. One wonders if perhaps the reason why the children are not clear about their future work and the need for education is because John did not see it as'a priority in his own life as a child. Work and Gender Roles Division of labor according to gender appears to be a work concept highly operative within the Schulzberg family, including the families of Hannah's mother and father. An 155 analysis of data suggests that role expectations on the part of Hannah and John with respect to each other may have been one of the primary sources of conflict between them. Work done by the children and the work role expectations the parents had for their children also Suggest the strong presence of gender work role differentiation in the Schulzberg home. Work role expectations. Analyses indicated that Hannah's return to school and the required time she must spend outside the home working in hospitals and nursing homes have caused John and Hannah to question traditional ways in which they have been viewing their respective roles as husband/father and wife/mother in the home. Analyses also revealed that this may be an area of unresolved tension in the Schulzberg family. John's perceptions about work appeared-to be restricted almost exclusively to observations about men. He indicated that this was so because he "did not yet know what to think about work in terms of women." He said that his upbringing as a child had been oriented to his becoming like the traditional male image of father-worker responsible for the financial support of the family. Housework and child care belonged to the mother (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). John has no objection to Hannah's return to school to earn her nursing certification. He even looks forward to the day when she will be working and they will have added 156 income to support the family. John indicated that his struggle has been with role changes in the family and the effects that these have had upon the male image he has had of himself. Two changes within the home that seemed to be affecting John the most with respect to role changes were in the areas of work around the house and child care responsibilities. John said that when he thinks of the kind of work he has most identified with around the house, it has been "the traditional sort of thing you think of as the man's to do -- hammer and nails sorts of things." Changing oil in cars, building cabinets, and doing other "hands-on things with tools," John considered to be "inherent in the gift of masculinity in general." That John believed this to be true is supported by comments he made about his oldest boy: Michael, of course, as my oldest son and as a boy, you know, I try to get involved in any of the projects we do around the house. I got him a work bench and gave him his own vise, and tried to get him his own tools, and get him, you know, because that seems to be something he likes to do. He has the natural gift to be able to do that kind of thing, put things together, nail things together and build them. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) When Michael did not respond to John's attempts to involve him in the building kinds of things around the house, John was troubled by this and said he had to ask the question, "'Why not?‘ because he obviously has the gift." John stated that he also used to think that the yard "was kind of man's work to do," but that Hannah and the children were now taking care of it because he "wasn't very 157 diligent about it and really didn't always do it" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Child care, John admitted, was something that he had always considered as "women's work." Housework fell into the same category. He said that his view of women had been that they "kind of look after the kids and raise the family." And so, John acknowledged, the house and the children were, "for the most part, left almost entirely to Hannah." But John said that all that has begun to change, and he cited in particular, a recent two-week period during which Hannah was in the hospital for kidney surgery and he had total care of both house and the two little girls, Betsy and Sarah. John called the experience for himself both "interesting" and "satisfying" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Fieldnotes taken during one of the observation periods (December 6, 1984) illustrate to some degree the extent to \vhich John's role within the home had changed with respect tc> his involvement in household work and child care: Seatting: It is 3:45 p.m. on a Thursday afternoon. Hannah has just returned from picking up the children from school. She tells the researcher that she must take Betsy down to the doctor's for blood tests. Hannah informs the researcher that John will be home any minute and asks the researcher to have him supervise the cleaning of the kitchen with the children when he comes in. Hannah then leaves with Betsy for the doctor's office. Jacquelyn finishes building a fire in the woodstove located in the living room, and then goes to the couch to read the paper. Sarah runs back and forth from front room to kitchen without any particular purpose. After a few minutes John 158 arrives home, greets me, goes through the kitchen and walks downstairs. Michael follows his father. John returns and goes to the woodstove, checks it, goes outside to get wood, comes back to the front room and plays with Sarah who laughs with delight as her father picks her up, swings her around and puts her down. The researcher gives him Hannah's message. - John asks Jacquelyn who is still reading to go to the kitchen, empty the dishwasher, put all the clean dishes away, and then put all the dirty dishes on the table into the sink. John then calls Michael from downstairs and Jim, who has been in the back bedroom all this time, and asks them to come to the kitchen and clean off the countertops and sweep the floor. Although many things have yet to be worked out within the family, John ventured that perceptions about himself, work and child care have begun to change radically. He attributed the greatest part of this change to his conversations and communication with Hannah. No longer, he admitted, can he come home from work and expect Hannah to have taken care of everything. Rather, he said that he needed to assume more responsibility with Hannah for what happens at home and with the children (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Hannah, like John, has experienced radical role changes with respect to her position within the home. But, unlike John, Hannah said she found her new role change to be freeing and fulfilling. She stated that: When we were first married, it was like I was always home. Everything was always done. I didn't have a piece of fluff on the carpet (laughs). And basically, he didn't participate. He would cook once in awhile, but I cleaned up the mess. It was really...he went out to work and I stayed home and did the work (laughs). And I think the thing that changed that was when, when I 159 felt like I needed to be fulfilled in my work. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah perceived that the changes which have occurred in the work roles for herself and John within the home have benefitted John particularly as father. She observed that: It's given John a lot more time with the family by himself, where I was the one that was spending all of the time with the family by myself. And he has a greater appreciation for the family because those times when I think, you know, when I'd see the baby walk for the first time and I'd think, 'I'm sorry John could not be here to see this.‘ But now, he has the chance. See, he sees these things too. I'm not the only one seeing these things and...uh, it's great. Hannah said about herself that: I get a feel for what he goes through when he goes...gets up and he goes to work, and he comes home, and some of the things he goes through in terms of relating to other adults which sometimes (laughs) you do. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Interpretation of data collected in the Schulzberg home through observation and participative observation seemed to indicate that Hannah had clear expectations about what John's role was to be in the home. Her expectations appeared to emphasize availability on an equal basis with herself to care for the children and to share the tasks of household work. Although each time the researcher was with the family and the father was present, analysis of research notes revealed that the father was participating in such activities as cooking, shopping, feeding and caring for the children, and fixing things around the house, Hannah sometimes expressed frustration that he was not more involved. On one occasion, when Hannah was discussing with 160 the researcher the father's place in the home, Hannah used an example of her friend who has eight children under eleven years of age. Hannah spoke of her friend's husband as being ‘"great" because he was "always taking care of the children, dressing them, feeding them" (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984). The role expectations as Hannah perceived them for John could be part of his struggle to come to a new role description for himself as father within the family. Analysis indicated that this might be the case because while Hannah's views of the father's role seem to be closely tied to taking care of the children, dressing them and feeding them, John is asking if there is not more besides. Reflecting on the question of what it means to be "father," John asked: Does that mean changing the diapers? Does that mean getting up at 3:00 in the morning to feed the baby? Does that mean doing the laundry? You know, what does it mean? And it probably means participating in all those things to some degree, you know. It may mean that, and does mean that, at least in part. But, that's not all it means. As much as anything, it means...um...you know, constant dialogue of some kind within the family of what it does mean. You know, I really don't know. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) Although John clearly identified his role as father with his work as firefighter/paramedic, up to this point he had been unable to integrate housework and child care into that identity in the same way. Another interpretation of this scenario with respect to Hannah's spelling out John's role in the home could be that because she does not feel fulfilled in her own role as 161 housewife or homemaker as discussed earlier, this could be her way of escape from the role if John is made to do it. Diane and Charles share household tasks in their own home, but do not help out with household tasks in the Schulzberg home. Charles spoke about doing household work as a regular part of what he considers work for himself. For Charles, according to Hannah, this has developed only since his marriage to Diane. Hannah said that when she was growing up her father worked three jobs. He was the typical kind of man who went out to work while her mother, Judy, stayed at home with the children and took care of the house (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). Currently, the pattern remains unchanged for Hannah's mother. Judy takes care of the house and Paul works outside the home. Household tasks are not shared by Judy and Paul as they are by Diane and Charles (Interview with Judy and Paul, October 22, 1984). As Hannah was growing up, she experienced the traditional division of labor roles between her mother and father. Charles was the breadwinner of the family and Judy the homemaker and mother who cared for the children. Hannah indicated that this role pattern was the same one she repeated with John the first years of their marriage when "he went out to work and I stayed home and 91g the work" (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). It has only been since Hannah returned to school to complete studies for' nursing certification that the pattern of shared household 162 chores and child care has begun to be operative between them (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). This would seem to indicate, then, that the traditional pattern of husband- wife, father-mother of Charles and Judy may have influenced initially the manner in which Hannah and John patterned their own relationship with each other as husband-wife, father-mother. The pattern appears to be carried on in the training of the children with respect to work in the home. Household work as a tool for socialization. John and Hannah Schulzberg said that they felt that housework is important for their children because it contributed to a sense of responsibility and discipline, and also provided a means for teaching skills and independence. Hannah commented that working with the children was a taxing sort of work, but worth it because "they're able to do things" for themselves as they grow older instead of expecting parents to do it for them. She said that this made the trouble worth it because "you know it pays off in the end" (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984). And, John stated that: There are certain things that the kids need to learn in work and be involved in -- taking care of their own rooms, helping with the dishes, helping vacuum the floors, and do all those kinds of things around the house that need to be done, you know, for the sake of doing them....for the sake of learning some form of organization. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) The following incident serves to show one way Hannah used housework as a means for teaching her daughter cleaning skills. The incident also reflects division of labor by 163 gender since kitchen work has been considered traditionally to be women's work: Setting. It is a Saturday afternoon. Hannah is working with Jacquelyn in the kitchen, showing her how to clean the refrigerator. Hannah shows Jacquelyn how to take out all the things on the shelves and then teaches her to remove the shelves themselves, carry them to the sink and wash them with warm, soapy water. Then Hannah begins to wash the inside of the refrigerator, showing Jvauelyn the process of first washing and then rinsing the inside walls. Finally, Hannah lets Jacquelyn take over the job and watches. Jacquelyn finishes washing the refrigerator and begins to put things back. Jacquelyn: Mom, what do I do with this? (Jacquelyn holds up an item of food?) Hannah: Put it in a baggie. (Jacquelyn does what her mother tells her to do. Hannah continues to watch Jacquelyn work. After a minute or so, Hannah leaves the kitchen and lets Jacquelyn finish the job alone. Later, when Hannah returns to the kitchen, she checks the refrigerator and comments, 'Good job, Jacquelynl'), (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984) The Schulzberg children, both boys and girls, appeared to share equally in doing household tasks. John said that each child in the family, "when old enough to develop motor skills and understand directions and functions of things," was involved in doing household tasks (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). As Hannah outlined what some of the responsibilities of the children were in the home, division of labor was clearly manifest: Michael's responsible for the garbage, making sure the garbage gets taken out. Jim's responsible for making sure garbage gets brought into a central place. He brings all the garbage cans down to the kitchen. And, Jacquelyn's pretty much responsible for taking care of the kitchen.‘ And that would be... um... she doesn't have to do all the work herself, because that's a lot more work; but she 164 has to delegate these jobs and she has to check up to see whether or not these jobs are done. And then, she comes to John or I to check over when they're done. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) When the researcher asked Hannah if Betsy also had specific responsibility around the house, Hannah replied that she did. Hannah stated that: Betsy takes the laundry from the bedrooms or wherever. They're supposed to be put in laundry hampers, but, of course, they never are (laughs). So, she takes the laundry and she has to make sure the laundry is in the hampers. Then, she pulls the hampers to the back porch. Then, the older kids take them down and put them in the laundry room. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Although Sarah is considered by both Hannah and John to be too young to have any "assigned job," both parents said that they try to teach her to pick up after herself. John used the following example to show how this happens: Like today, when she got the cards out and was playing cards, and was playing with them and got tired playing with them and dumped them on the floor and was about to walk away from them. If I'm present when that happens, then I try to call her back and get her to think, to pick up after herself a little better, to do those kinds of things. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) In addition to those areas of responsibility which John and Hannah described as belonging to each of their respective children, interpretation of data showed that the children shared responsibility for other household work as well. On every visit to the Schulzbergs, the researcher noted that the children were asked to participate to some degree in the meal preparation or clean up activities after a meal. Involvement included such things as table setting, 165 helping to cook the meal or prepare a salad, carrying dishes from the table after the meal, stacking the dishwasher, cleaning countertops or sweeping the floor. Involvement in household activities also frequently included such things as dusting and vacuuming the house, putting away toys and other things that had been scattered about the house, making beds and cleaning bedrooms, working in the yard, and shopping with one or the other parent for groceries and other items needed in the home. Division of labor by gender was not so sharply defined with respect to these tasks except for mowing the lawn which seemed to be specifically Michael's task (Fieldnotes, October 22, 1984). Hannah stressed that the children are always free to come to her or John for help if they are working and find they do not know how to do something. But Hannah also emphasized that neither she nor John would do something for the children that they had neglected or forgotten to do themselves. She said: If they come and ask for help at that time, we'll give them the help. But, they can't ask us to bring their lunch to school when they left it home because that was their responsibility to do that. And, they have to get their homework done. And, if we get notes coming back that their homework isn't done, then we have...um...everything has a reward or punishment...(Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) And Hannah indicated that the punishment could be simply a lack of getting a reward, or it could mean not having a friend over after school on a particular day, or 166 not getting to watch T.V. when a special program was being shown. Child care. Analysis of data showed that the most time and the greatest amount of energy may have been spent on care of the children, especially Ann, the baby. This demand and the cooperation required between and among family members to meet needs of younger members may have served to strengthen family unification. Hannah reflected this when speaking about the times that John was working and she was alone at home with the children. She said of the older children: When he's away, the children have a real sense that they need to help me hold the house together, that they're really prime in doing that because there's three little children and they take a lot of time and a lot of demanding. And the children are good. They're great! They'll either play with the little children and free me up to do other things, or I will attend to their needs and they'll hold the other end. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Although all family members shared child care responsibilities to some degree, analysis of data revealed that Hannah depended on Jacquelyn more than any other family member in this regard. It appeared that Hannah expected Jacquelyn to assume this responsibility and that Jacquelyn accepted this to be her duty. The following example is used to illustrate this dynamic at work in the Schulzberg home: Setting: Jim has been begging Hannah all afternoon to decorate the Christmas tree. Hannah is busy taking care of the baby, trying to prepare dinner, and seeing to it that Michael has his work finished in time to go to basketball practice at school. She tells Jim that he and the other children may decorate the tree if Jacquelyn is 167 willing to work on the tree with them. Hannah tells Jim to ask Jacquelyn. When Jacquelyn arrives home with her friend, Lisa, after having been shopping for Christmas all afternoon, Jim immediately asks her if she will help decorate the tree. Jacquelyn says that she will help and then asks Hannah if her friend Lisa may stay for supper and help with the tree. Hannah agrees and Lisa calls her mother for permission. Lisa's mother says she may stay. All the Schulzberg children manifest their joy. As the children eat, Hannah prepares a coffeecake which the children will eat after they finish the tree. Jim: (Running downstairs, calls to Lisa) Help bring up Christmas tree things! (Lisa goes downstairs only to return with Jim, Betsy, and Jacquelyn. All are carrying boxes of Christmas tree lights and ornaments.) Betsy: (Runs to Hannah, holding a cardboard manger) Mom, I found the cradle for Baby Jesus. (Hannah comments that this is nice, but thinks it would be good if the children would make one out of wood. Betsy puts the cradle on the table and runs back downstairs. She pauses midway and calls to the researcher.) You can help decorate the tree if you want to. Setting: The scene goes on with the children excitedly , opening box after box of ornaments and lights. The children have "favorite" ornaments which they take out and place on the tree. Hannah, all the while, is making the coffeecake and doing other house chores. She listens to comments the children make about the tree, the ornaments and lights. Hannah lets Jacquelyn work with the children and make all the decisions about the tree decorating. When the tree is finished, Jim says he wants all the lights off except the Christmas tree and runs excitedly to turn all the lights off. Finally, the children sit down with Hannah and the researcher and each eats a piece of coffeecake. (Fieldnotes, November 29, 1984) Without the support and help of Jacquelyn, it is unlikely that Hannah could have met the enthusiastic request of Jim to decorate the tree. The willingness of Jacquelyn to work with Jim and the younger children freed Hannah to 168 care for other household needs, made the tree decorating an exciting experience for the children, and allowed the eating of coffeecake together as a special occasion for shared enjoyment as a family. John and Hannah Schulzberg frequently asked Jacquelyn to look after or do something for another child in the family even though Michael and Jim were present and could have helped in the situation. On one occasion when the family was at dinner, Betsy told her mother that she had to go to the bathroom. Hannah sent Betsy to the bathroom and, after some time when she did not return to the table, sent Jacquelyn to the bathroom to help Betsy. After a few minutes, Jacquelyn returned with Betsy who now had no clothes on. Hannah asked where the clothes were and Betsy replied, "In the hamper." Hannah then asked Jacquelyn to go downstairs to the little girls' room and get clothes for her. Jacquelyn went and brought back a warm nightgown which Hannah put on Betsy. As Hannah dressed Betsy, Jacquelyn told her mother that the baby was crying. Hannah asked Jacquelyn to go downstairs and bring the baby upstairs. This Jacquelyn did and while Hannah prepared food for the baby, Jacquelyn put her in her high chair and readied her to eat (Fieldnotes, November 29, 1984). On another occasion, Betsy and Sarah approached Hannah telling her that they wanted to take a bath. Hannah consented and then asked Jacquelyn to go into the bathroom to help them and watch them. Jacquelyn went with the two 169 girls only to return to the kitchen a few minutes later. Hannah asked Jacquelyn if she were watching the two little girls and Jacquelyn said she was. Hannah asked what she was doing in the kitchen then and sent her back into the bathroom (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984). One evening after dinner, John called the children to the breakfast bar in the kitchen. He told them that he was going to help them make candles and decorate them. After melting the wax, he showed the children how to pour the wax into forms. When hardened, John had the children take the candles and spatula onto each the wax he had whipped. This gave the candles a rough outside drip-look. John them showed the children how to sprinkle glitter onto the candles so they had a "Christmas" effect. Jacquelyn worked closely with her father watching and helping the two little girls, Betsy and Sarah, and also Jim. At times the two girls became frustrated because they could not do some of the things John was showing them to do. Jacquelyn's patience in explaining and helping them made the event successful and happy for them. Had she not been there, frustration could have swayed the event in a more negative direction because John could not give the help that was needed and watch the wax heating all at the same time (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984). Although care of the younger children appeared to be primarily the responsibility delegated by Hannah to Jacquelyn, the other children did participate in this work 170 also. For example, one day when Hannah was feeding the baby in her high chair, Betsy came into the kitchen. Hannah asked her to "run downstairs and get the baby's booties off the desk". Betsy went downstairs and after a few minutes called to her mother that she could not find the booties. Hannah told her to look again because they were there. UnsuccesSful in her search, Betsy returned to the kitchen, picked up the baby's dish and tried to feed her. Hannah, who had walked over to the kitchen sink, turned around, saw what Betsy was doing and removed the dish from her hand (Fieldnotes, December 4, 1984). On another occasion when John was staying with the children while Hannah was away from the house, he had to leave to go to the store. Before leaving, he asked Michael and Jim to watch the two little girls until he returned. John cautioned the boys, "Don't let the little girls go outside, play with the stereo or go into the woodstove" (Fieldnotes, November 19, 1984). Twice during the researcher's time with the family, Betsy became seriously ill with a kidney infection and had to be taken to the hospital in the middle of the night. This illness ended with her having surgery to correct the problem. Interactive behavior on the part of the family as they helped Betsy get ready to go to the hospital for surgery indicated one way in which family members cooperated to meet the needs of this younger child. This also seemed to reveal family unity and integration. Jacquelyn, for 171 example, took Betsy and helped her find "her little blue suitcase". John helped Betsy find colored paper and pens to pack in her suitcase. Hannah helped her pack her clothes. And Jim gave Betsy his teddy hear so she would not be "lonesome" (Fieldnotes, December 6, 1984). During the week Betsy was in the hospital, Hannah called the researcher almost every day to tell her how Betsy was progressing. Hannah said that someone from the family was staying with Betsy everyday and during the night if need be. Betsy recovered well. Work Avoidance Behaviors The third work concept, work avoidance behaviors, emerged from analysis of data in relation to the second research question: What meanings and purposes do family members attach to their work and work experiences? From the ways in which members of the Schulzberg family frequently resorted to expressions of behavior aimed at escaping from some task or work at hand, dislike of certain kinds of work or dislike of work in general was seemingly manifested. Analysis of data revealed that some of the avoidance tactice employed by members of the Schulzberg family were pretending not to hear, arguing with their parents, complaining, engaging in other activities, stalling, disappearing from their parents' sight, finding reasons why they should not do the work, picking arguments with their brothers or sisters, doing only part of the assigned task and leaving the rest unfinished, saying the 172 parent was unfair, deflecting parents' attention to something other than the task at hand. The following examples are presented to illustrate some of the work avoidance tactics: Setting. It is Thursday afternoon at 3:15 p.m. The children have just arrived home from school with their father. Jim sits down in front of the T.V. to watch a cartoon. John tells Jim to go to his room and clean it. Jim continues to sit watching T.V. After a few minutes, John comes back to the living room and says to Jim, "Go to your bedroom NOW!" (Fieldnotes, December 13, 1984) In this example, it seemed that Jim heard and understood his father when first asked by him to go and clean the bedroom, but stalled to avoid doing the work. In the work situation cited earlier in this study where Hannah was teaching Jacquelyn how to clean the refrigerator, Jacquelyn used tactics to avoid work in several ways. Although in the end Jacquelyn did clean the refrigerator, it took much patience on the part of Hannah who was trying to engage Jacquelyn in this household work: Setting. It is noontime on Saturday. Jacquelyn is eating lunch. Hannah tells her that after lunch she has to clean the refrigerator. Jacquelyn replies to her mother's directive with "Yuck!" Hannah says "I know, it's pretty gross". Hannah opens the refrigerator and briefly shows Jacquelyn what she is to do. Jacquelyn sits at the table after lunch and reads. Hannah remembers that she has to take orange slices to the soccer field where Jim's team is playing. She and the researcher leave for the field with the orange slices. When we return to the Schulzberg home, Jacquelyn is on the phone with a friend and the refrigerator has not been started. Hannah sets the timer so Jacquelyn has only so long to finish the conversation. When she finishes on the phone, Hannah asks her to bring up the baby who has awakened from her nap. Jacquelyn does this. When she returns with the baby, Jacquelyn asks her 173 mother to take her shopping. Hannah says "NO!" Then, after a short pause, Jacquelyn asks her mother to take her to the library. Hannah says "No, because you have to clean the refrigerator." (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984) Work avoidance tactics which Jacquelyn seemed to employ in this instance included stalling, ignoring her mother's request that the work be done, and deflecting her mother's attention away from the work by requesting that Hannah take her to the store and library. Hannah, however, would not let Jacquelyn avoid what she was being told to do. The following event describes work avoidance behaviors of several of the Schulzberg family members at the same time. The event manifested the confusion in the situation and the difficulty of one parent in holding the children to completion of the tasks assigned to them: Setting. Hannah asks Michael to clean out the wood stove. Then Hannah begins to make tacos for dinner. Michael begins to clean the stove, putting the ashes into a container. Hannah asks Michael to put the ashes outside where there will not be danger of a fire. Michael does so and returns to the woodstove to build a fire. Hannah asks Michael how the fire is going. In the meantime, Betsy has gone to the broom closet and pulled all the brown paper bags onto the floor and left them lying there. Sarah has gone to the cupboard and taken out a box of raisins which she has begun to eat. Hannah says that she hopes Betsy has put away the brown bags. Betsy says that she has, but the bags are still lying on the floor. Hannah tells Betsy to put away all the stuffed animals which she and Sarah have strewn on the living room floor. Hannah tells Sarah to help Betsy. Sarah replied to Hannah, "1 am eating my raisins right now!" Hannah picks Sarah up, and with raisins in hand, sends her to the front room. Jacquelyn comes into the fron room and tells her mother she is going swimming at the community indoor poor. Betsy cries and insists on going swimming with Jacquelyn. Hannah tells Betsy that tonight only big children can go. In the 174 meantime, Michael still has not lit the fire in the wood stove. Upon investigation, Hannah discovers that Michael really has not done what she asked him to do. Hannah: Michael, you didn't clean out the ashes! Michael: (Whines) How could 1? Hannah: The paper and wood are absolutely useless! (In apparent frustration, Hannah cleans out the stove and builds the fire. When the fire is built, Hannah turns her attention to Betsy and Sarah who have not yet put the stuffed toys away.) Hannah: (Admonishing Betsy) Betsy, these stuffed animals are not put away! Now get them put away! Betsy: (Responds by yelling at Sarah) Sarah, you're not doing what you're supposed to be doing! (Fieldnotes, November 5, 1984) In this complex event, work avoidance was being practiced by several of the children simultaneously. This made it very difficult for Hannah to keep up with the children. Seemingly unable to do so completely, Hannah gave in and ended up doing Michael's assigned task of cleaning out the wood stove and building the fire. Betsy's response to her mother's admonition to put away the stuffed toys was to pass the blame to her younger sister, Sarah. Prior to this, Betsy had tried to deflect her mother's attention from the work assigned to her by crying and creating a scene about wanting to go swimming with her older sister. Work avoidance behaviors usually created tension in the family and caused delay in accomplishing tasks that were assigned. At times, as in the case of the wood stove, where Hannah did the job herself, the parents became frustrated by the children's refusal to work and simply did the work 175 themselves. More often, however, when the children employed tactics to avoid work the parents responded with a curt command to get the task done, as in the following incident: Setting. Michael is asked by Hannah to set the table. He is reading the newspaper and continues to do so. Hannah asks Michael a second time to set the table. Michael says 'Wait a minute' and continues to read. Hannah asks Michael to bring her the papers and he replies, 'I can't walk.‘ Hannah's response is a firm 'NOW!' (Fieldnotes, December 4, 1984) In teaching the children to do housework, the parents were not only teaching them skills and processes, they were also teaching them responsibility to carry a task through to completion whether the job was to their liking or not. Hannah and John also seemed to be teaching their children that family goals often rank ahead of whatever personal goals individuals in the family may have. But, data analysis revealed that work avoidance was not the prerogative of the Schulzberg children alone. In both word and action, John and Hannah overtly or covertly manifested work avoidance also. Already in John's background history there are clues to indicate that he at times avoided work. John's movement from one job to another and unwillingness to settle down to one thing for any length of time revealed a propensity to avoid work that he found distasteful. On one occasion when Hannah took all the children into the yard to work in the garden, and the researcher was with them, John returned from a trip to the dump to find the family working in the yard. John looked around to see what 176 everyone was doing. He noticed a football lying on the grass, picked it up, and tossed it to Michael who was picking up fruit which had fallen from trees to the ground. As John tossed the ball, he called Michael's name and ran. Michael pursued John to tackle him. 'Jim, seeing Michael and John playing tackle, also left his work in the garden to join in the play. Jacquelyn dropped her tools and ran into the house saying she had to bake cookies. Hannah and the researcher continued to dig and pull weeds while John played with the children until Hannah finally called everyone into the house for dinner (Fieldnotes, October 11, 1984). Interpretation of this event seems to indicate that John used play to avoid participating in the family work session, and also involved the children in his avoidance pattern by engaging them in play at a time they were scheduled to work with Hannah on the yard project.‘ On another occasion, a Saturday, when all the children were home from school, John and Hannah were organizing work tasks for the children. Michael was asked to clean the front room, the little girls were to clean their room, and Jim was going to a soccer game. Hannah and Jacquelyn were working in the kitchen and John was to go to the store, do house repairs, and monitor Michael while he was working in the living room. Michael began vacuuming the front room, grew tired, flipped on the T.V. to a UCLA football game, and sat down to watch it. John, who had been outside repairing a door, came 177 into the front room, sat down beside Michael and watched the football game. After a short while, John stood up, walked to the kitchen, picked up his tape recorder, and returned to the front room. Sitting down, John turned on the tape recorder to listen to a lecture while still watching the UCLA football game. Michael's friend came to the door to take him over to his house for the rest of the afternoon to play. Although the work was unfinished, Michael left the house. John had not asked about or checked to see if the assigned work was finished. All the while, Hannah, who had gone to the basement to work, thought John was supervising Michael's activities and working on house repairs (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984). In this case of work avoidance, John did not engage directly in active play. Nonetheless, watching a football game and listening to a lecture on tape distracted him from the task at hand. Michael successfully avoided completing his task while John never returned to his outdoor tasks, although he did later supervise the oldest girl as she completed her assigned work in the kitchen. On a third occasion when John was home alone watching the children, he gave his attention to some paperwork he was doing. Meanwhile, the children were engaged in various activities arOund him. Jacquelyn was dancing to loud rock music in the living room. The two boys were chasing one another back and forth through the house and in and out of the kitchen. Sarah was standing by the dishwasher forcibly 178 pushing and pulling the carrier filled with dishes. And, then, in the midst of all that was happening, John stood up, picked up his sweater and announced his departure to the store to buy a hi-liter pen (Fieldnotes, December 6, 1984). In this situation, work of caring for the childfen was clearly being avoided. Hannah, on the other hand, had openly declared her dislike of the monotony of housework. In order to avoid it, Hannah chose to return to school to acquire her nursing certificate. Hannah also appeared to have an expectation that John should take over the housework and child care she left behind as she pursued her nursing career. Connections Between Family and Work The third part of this analysis addresses the research question: Is work a sphere of human activity separate from the rest of family life? Analysis of data reveals that work is not separate from, but inextricably bound up with, the rest of family life. The discussion which follows regarding work schedules and family integration illustrates ways in which this is true for the Schulzberg family. Work Schedules One of the ways in which the family interfaced with work was the management of work schedules. Including classes he attends at the university, and run reviews he is required to go to regularly at the fire station, John works about fifty hours a week outside the home. Hannah spends between twenty-five to thirty hours away from home either in 179 class or studying for class, working part—time in a nursing home or local hospital, and participating once a week in activities at the preschool where Betsy and Sarah are enrolled for the morning session. Because of the nature of John's work as a firefighter/ paramedic, he does not work a regular eight-hour-a-day schedule. Instead, John usually works twenty-four hour shifts alternating with twenty-four hours at home. His schedule also ordinarily includes working on a Saturday or Sunday each week. Occasionally during a month, John said that he accumulates extra work hours and then he has several days in a row off work. On the days that John works at the fire station, he said he is required to be at the station by eight o'clock in the morning. Hannah has to be at nursing school by seven o'clock and the three older children need to be at school by nine o'clock (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). On a typical week-day morning, Hannah said that she gets up first, about five a.m. She showers, dresses, and then awakens Betsy and Sarah. While the two girls are dressing, Hannah gets the baby up, gives her a bottle and then dresses her also. Since the two little girls have breakfast at the daycare center on campus where Hannah attends classes, she does not have to feed them before they all leave the house. Hannah said that just before leaving the house, she calls John who gets up to take over the responsibility of getting the three older children up and 180 ready for school. On mornings when John is at work, Hannah said that she calls Jacquelyn to get up and take over the job of getting Jim and Michael ready for school. Hannah stated that before going to class she takes Ann, the baby, to the baby-sitter's home and Betsy and Sarah to the daycare center on the school campus. Hannah said that she picks up the two girls and the baby when she has finished classes at noon. Hannah expressed gratitude that Betsy and Sarah enjoy attending the daycare so much because "it makes it so much easier all the way around" (Fieldnotes, October 20, 1984). Work and Family Integration On the whole, Hannah and John both expressed positive responses to John's work schedule at the fire station. Although Hannah spoke of John's schedule as "ideal" for their family in some ways, she also felt that in other ways it was difficult. The difficulty she expressed had to do with the distance that John's work sometimes created between himself and the children with respect to their activities. Regarding this, Hannah stated that, In some areas it's hard. When he wants to coach the basketball team, it's hard because he can't. ... They absolutely have to be there on a scheduled time and he can't do that. Those kinds of things are hard. When Jacquelyn has her ballet recital and he's working and can't get away, that's hard. (Interview with Hannah November 28, 1984) Hannah stated that John is very conscious of the family while he is at work. She said he will call the children 181 from work to find out if they are carrying out their responsibilities at home. Hannah described John as being, really good about that ... because he'll call them up and say, "Did you guys help Mommy today? Did you take care of this or that or the other thing? Don't forget to bring in wood. Don't let the fire go out." All those sorts of things, so it's really good. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) It seemed from what Hannah said about John that his telephoning the family from the fire station may have been a pattern with him. Both times the researcher visited him at the fire station, John made calls to his home. As John himself indicated he "wanted to find out how everything was with Hannah and the children" (Observations at the fire station on November 15, 1984 and December 10, 1984). John indicated that the fire chief is conscious of the need of the men to have contact with their families on holidays when some of them are working at the station. On Thanksgiving, for example, a turkey dinner is served at the station and the wives and children of the employees are invited. The firefighter/paramedics, John said, prepare the meal so that their wives will not have to do the cooking at home. In this instance, the workplace is linked to the homes of the firefighter/paramedics at a time when ordinarily they would be separated from their families during work hours. Another way in which the firefighter/paramedics are allowed to have contact with their families during work hours is that their wives and children are free to visit them at the fire station. Hannah said that she frequently 182 takes the children to the station when John is at the station for a twenty-four hour period. While John stated that he likes the children and Hannah coming to the station, John also indicated some reservations about their coming. John's reservations stemmed from a fear that false impressions were being created in their minds. He commented as follows regarding the children: They like playing on the fire trucks. And they like it if I leave for a call when they're in there and they get to see the red lights flashing and stuff. And they really don't, you know, necessarily understand that much about all that really happens, especially the small children. I don't expect them to understand that. It's ...a thing I enjoy in one way, but it's also a thing ... in which it is limited and needs to change, you know, because as much as I would have a vision of what I want the kids to become, there's also a way in which I think they have a vision of what I am as a firefighter/paramedic that is unrealistic. ... They need to be more exposed to the reality of the work situation...because I'm their father, and because these two things are one. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) One of the ways in which John claimed that his work at the station interfered with family life is that he is unable to be present in the family as certain problems build up within it. He said that all too often when a crisis arises it is all but impossible to deal with it because he misses the things that went into creating the crisis in the first place. John expressed particular concern about his lack of availability on a daily basis to his oldest teen-age daughter, Jacquelyn. He said that he felt that Jacquelyn, at times, manipulated Hannah and that he needed to be present in situations where he could "call it" and say, 183 "This is what is going on" (Interview with John, October 22, 1984). Despite some limiting aspects of his work schedule with respect to the family, however, John expressed belief that his work schedule made it possible for him to enter into the family more fully than perhaps most men who work a regular eight to five o'clock job everyday. John acknowledged that: A lot of men don't have the time free to spend at home that I have. You know, a lot of men, I think, have a more regular routine. And the kind of work that you do, too, I think, lends itself too... My observation would be it's kind of hard when you work five days a week in the current work world situation. ...When you work five days a week, it seems like the tendency is to be pretty tired when you come home and to think you deserve Saturday and Sunday as a way to try and get enough energy together to go back to work for the next five days. At least that was my experience when I did that first. So this is a little different now and I have a lot more time to spend at home. (Interview with John, October 22, 1984) Hannah agreed with John's observation that he is free to enter the family more fully and intimately. She described John as being "really there" when he is off work and at home. She said: And yet, when he's home, then he's there. He has prime time to spend with the children because he can get most of his stuff done during the day while they're at school. So when... he's home in the evening, he's pretty much with them and, like tonight, now tonight, I could come over here to talk to you and he is at home making dinner and ...um...staying with the children. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) Hannah told of some of the things that John does with the children during the time that he is off work and how these things create a clOseness between himself and the 184 children. She said that John always does "fun things" with them, but the things he does always teach them something new at the same time. Hannah listed such things as helping them fly kites, playing catch, going swimming with them at the community indoor pool, helping them build things with wood, working with them on art projects, creating home computer games and helping the children create their own programs, taking them to the Zoo and Science Center, and going with them on camping trips to the ocean and into the mountains. Hannah said that John, in making himself available to his children during his days off work, strengthened his relationship with his children. This observation by Hannah is supported by the fact that not once during the time of observation or during interviews did any of the family members react in a negative way to the father's absence from home during his work hours. Even with Hannah's return to nursing school, John's schedule did not appear to add stress to the family. Hannah attributed this to the fact that John is available to be with the children much of the time when she cannot be there. Hannah reflected on this fact saying, I know a lot of people have said that because husband and wife are on different time schedules, it's husband or wife, not both. It's hard for them to get by, but I think you need to adjust. You can... you need to adjust to whatever is available. And... um... for us it's worked out very well, very well. (Interview with Hannah, November 28, 1984) John's intimacy with the family seemed not only to be expressed in the recreational things he did with his 185 children, but also in the ways that he appeared to enter more deeply into the family by assuming responsibility for much of the household work and child care. Hannah said that John's sharing in the household tasks and child care with her was very important now that she herself has returned to nursing school. The following incident from an observation period (October 11, 1984) illustrates one manner in which Hannah and John used time and space for attaining intimacy with their children and at the same time for accomplishing together with their children tasks that needed to be done around the home. Setting: Hannah is sitting on the couch feeding the baby. Sarah and Betsy are sitting next to her. Pearl, a neighborhood child, age four, is standing in front of Hannah as she feeds Ann. Jasper, Pearl's brother, age eight, is outside in the front yard playing with Jim and Michael. Jacquelyn is in the kitchen making popcorn. John is downstairs in the basement drilling a hole for the sewing machine plug. Jim runs in from outside and Hannah notices that he has no shoes on. Hannah: (To Jim) Put your shoes on. (Jim runs to get shoes.) John: (Coming into front room from basement) I'm going to the dump. (John rummages around looking for something on the shelf in the front room). Jim: (Yelling at the top of his voice) I want to go to the dump with Dad! (No one pays attention to Jim, and Sarah wanders into the kitchen from the front room). Hannah: (Speaking to Sarah) Go find Betsy to do her share of the dishes. (Sarah leaves kitchen and does not return. Nor does Betsy come to do her share of the dishes. Hannah notices that Jim, though he went to get his 186 shoes when she sent him earlier, has not put his shoes on. Hannah sends him back to get his shoes from his bedroom. Jacquelyn tells her mother that she wants to go to the store to get ingredients to make brownies. Hannah tells her to make a list of everything she needs. Jim returns to the kitchen and still has not put his shoes on. "Hannah sends him back a third time to get his shoes. Mother tells Jacquelyn to finish emptying the dishwasher and tells Betsy who has just arrived in the kitchen to help.) Betsy: I don't want to. I always have to do things I don't want to. Hannah: I know. Betsy: (Goes to dishwasher and looks at dishes) I don't know where to put the big ones (She points to the forks). Hannah: The smaller go here (she points to silverware tray in the drawer) The larger go there. Betsy: (Ignoring what her mother said to her about the forks) I'm telling you I don't! Hannah: Yes, you do. Betsy: (With voice becoming a whine) Mommie, I just don't know the little ones and the big ones! Hannah: I'll check it when you're done. Sarah: (Has just returned to kitchen) Where's Daddy? Hannah: He's loading up the truck to go to the dump. (Sarah runs back to the playroom). (In the meantime, John has gone downstairs. He comes up from the basement and Hannah stops him as he comes through the kitchen.) The boys have opted to help load the car for the dump. Be sure they help you. John: (To Michael who has just walked into the kitchen) Go find Jim and report to the basement please. But before John walks 187 downstairs, Michael has already gone outside and returned with Jim. (To Michael) Go collect garbage and things to go to the dump from the front of the house. (Michael and Jim both leave without a word and go out the front door.) In the foregoing incident, there are several examples of ways in which Hannah used time and space to share intimacy with her children. The first was was the fact that while she was feeding the baby, Sarah and Betsy sat next to her and Pearl stood in front of her. Hannah, by sharing physical space with her children, was allowing them, as well as Pearl, the possibility of fulfilling the need they seemed to have to be near her and make bodily contact with her. Although nothing was said to this effect, both Sarah and Betsy appeared content just to be with and near their mother. Secondly, Hannah showed affection for her children by the way in which she participated in the children's task of putting the dishes that were in the dishwasher away. Betsy objected and said that she did not know how to sort the forks. Hannah patiently responded to her objections with firm but gentle encouragement. Hannah thus used time to teach her children, and particularly Betsy, to complete a task which needed to be done. At the same time, she allowed space for expression of feelings of dislike for the task and did not display anger or impatience with Betsy's verbalized objections to the work required. 188 A third way in which family integration seemed to be strengthened in this situation was in relation to Jim. Although no one seemed to notice him or respond when he yelled, "I want to go to the dump with Dad!", Hannah included him in John's plan to go to the dump. Hannah commented to John, "The boys have opted to help load the car for the dump. Be sure they help you." In this manner, Hannah seemed to display sensitivity to her young son and respect for his desire to go with John to the dump. In this way, Hannah seemed to be strengthening their family integration. CHAPTER VI EMERGING THEORY Glaser (1979), in his methodology for discovery of grounded theory, suggests that the researcher write the emerging theory prior to exploring material which may have been written on the topic. Upon completing the initial draft and during the reworking of that material, the researcher is then encouraged by Glaser to become familiar with the extant literature on the topic and to look for connections between the literature and the emerging theory. Where connections are found, Glaser urges the researcher to insert the emerging theory into its proper place in the literature. This is the objective of the present chapter. Propositions Related to Work Three major concepts emerged from the study of the Schulzberg family regarding work: 1) work and self- fulfillment; 2) work and gender roles; and 3) work avoidance behaviors. Based on analyses of data presented in this chapter, propositions related to each of the concepts were formulated and are summarized in this section. The first major concept that emerged from the study of the Schulzberg family is that the primary purpose of work is self-fulfillment. The four propositions formulated in relation to this concept are: 1. Work is self-fulfilling if it gives one a sense of identity; 189 190 2. Work is self-fulfilling if it provides for self- expression; 3. Work is self—fulfilling if it is service-oriented; 4. Education is seen as a means to increase the opportunity to engage in self-fulfilling work. The second major concept emerging from analyses of data is that of work and gender roles. The propositions formulated in relation to this concept are: 1. Household work and child care are considered the responsibility of mother and father in the family; 2. Changing work roles within the family are related to perceptions of self in terms of traditionally accepted images of what it means to be wife/mother, father/husband; 3. Gender role stereotyping is present in the assignment of work. The third major concept that emerged from data analyses is that of work avoidance behaviors. Propositons formulated in relation to this concept are: 1. Family members seek escape from work that is monotonous or distasteful; 2. Work avoidance behaviors create tension in the family. Each of the above concepts and attending propositions is integrated into the literature review presented in the following section of this chapter. 191 Emerging Theory Integrated with Literature Following a brief discussion about the work concept and a short presentation of the historical evolution of its meaning, the literature review in this chapter is organized around the three work concepts which emerged in the study of the Schulzberg family. The concepts are: 1) work and self- fulfillment; 2) work and gender roles; and 3) work avoidance behaviors. Throughout the review, the researcher integrated propositions that were formulated in relation to each of the concepts with the literature where appropriate. The Work Concept To ask the question, "What is work?" is a deceivingly simple one to which there is no simple answer. Tilgher (1958), Neff, (1968), Yankelovich (1974) and Yankelovich, et a1., (1983) point out that historical and cultural changes have wrought evolutions in the meaning of this concept which are embedded in these perceptions. Tilgher (1958), through historical analysis, traced the concept of work from the time of the Greeks to modern times. He explained how the idea of work changed through the ages depending upon factors of place, development of society, and the level of culture at different epochs. Tilgher indicated how the Greek word for work, pgggg, has the same root as the latin, 22223, meaning sorrow. He said that for both Greeks and Romans alike work connoted drudgery and this applied to all kinds of physical work. 192 Tilgher went on to say that the Hebrews, like the Greeks and Romans, thought of work as heavy and burdensome. Added to this concept, however, was the Hebrew belief that work was both punishment and expiation for the sin of disobeying God. Through expiation, the Hebrews believed that they were participating in mankind's duty "to lead the world, troubled and disturbed by man's abuse of liberty, back to the cosmic unit and harmony which reigned when man was first brought into being by divine activity" (pp. 12- 13). Thus, in Hebrew thought, work acquired dignity and value since the labor of man continued and prolonged "the divine energy which overflowed in the act of creation" (p. 13). Early Christian civilization accepted the Hebrew notion of work but added to it the idea that work is a kind of charity, a way of actively caring for one another. Later, in the Christian framework, the idea of work became separated from the idea of religion. Instead, St. Thomas Aquinas integrated the concept of work with Christian justice, profit-making, and ownership. Work was enhanced and dignified by the Sabbath as a day of rest from the ordinary work activities of everyday. At the time of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther proclaimed that work well done was a way of serving God. Calvinism reinforced the Protestant view of work and strengthened the moral implications by preaching that wealth was a tangible sign that work was pleasing to God, and 193 refusal to work was tantamount to damnation (Yankelovich, 1974, p. 21). Although in later centuries, work lost explicit religious conotations, it retained much of the moral content with which Protestantism endowed it.' Analysts like Max Weber (1947), for example, demonstrated how American ideas of work have been influenced and the American work ethic developed out of the Protestant Reformation and its impact upon the nature of economic activity and occupational life in western capitalistic societies. In the era prior to the advent of the Industrial Revolution, in this country, family, community, and religious activities were expected to give meaning to work which was perceived as an integrated part of everyday American life. With the coming of the Industrial Revolution, however, much of the work formerly performed in the home was transferred to work places separate from the home. It was at this time, that people began to perceive work as separate from other human spheres of life, as occupation from which income could derive, and as something which could give meaning to other areas of life (Nosow and Form (1962), Yankelovich (1981), and Ginzberg (1981). Because they created jobs and produced the wealth and growth that kept the economy rolling, economic institutions gradually became the central focus of all human activity. Where and how people lived, where and how children were educated, how and with whom people associated all became 194 regulated by the economic status people held (Nosow and Form, 1962; Conant, 1974; Miller, 1980). A survey of basic American values conducted in the mid- 1960s by Yankelovich, Inc. showed that a majority of the adult population at that time associated four cultural themes with work all of which were found to be rooted in the Protestant tradition. Yankelovich listed the themes as follows: The Good Provider theme -- The breadwinner -- the man who provides for his family -- is the real man. Here is the link between making a living and society's definition of masculinity. Masculinity has little to do with sexual prowess or physical strength, aggressiveness or a virile appearance. For almost 80 percent of the adult population to be a man in our society has meant being a good provider for the family. The concept of masculinity here at issue also conveys overtones of adulthood, responsibility, intensity and of care of others. The Independence Theme —- To make a living by working is to "stand on one's own two feet" and avoid dependence on others. Work equals autOnomy. To work and be paid for it means one has gained -— and earned -- freedom and independence. The Success Theme -- °Hard work always pays off.‘ Hard work leads to success, its form dependent on one's abilities, background and level of education. For the majority, "a payoff" comes in the form of a home of one's own, an ever rising standard of living, and a solid position in the community. The Self-Respect Theme -- Hard work of any type has dignity whether it be menial or exalted. A man's inherent worth is reflected in the act of working. To work hard at something and to do it well: A person can feel good about himself if he keeps faith in this precept. (1974, p.22) In the context of these four themes, neither housework nor child care within the home were considered to be work. The man only was regarded as the family breadwinner and the 195 four themes revolved around him. The woman was in the home; she did not receive pay; and the activities she performed were not considered as work. The fact that Hannah, John, Charles, Judy and the three oldest Schulzberg children all identified child care and household tasks as part of their work pattern indicates that their definition of work was not bound by limitations of a work as remunerated occupation definition. Other indications which appeared to add credence to this observation were Hannah's work at the hospital and nursing home as an unpaid student nurse, Judy's involvement in work at the bingo hall as a volunteer three times a week, Charles' work with his ham radio, and the Schulzbergs' work together on Center Island. Like the Schulzbergs, some families are beginning to reevaluate traditional American work values.and the work ethic. For many, the concept of work is changing and this change is manifesting itself in an emergence of new values (Miller, 1980; Levitan and Belous, 1981a; Yankelovich, et a1., 1983). In a study by Yankelovich, et a1., (1983), the researchers suggest that new work values can perhaps best be understood by contrasting them to the traditional values that preceded them historically. The traditional values were divided into two groups: The Values of Sustenance: Sustenance values relate to the basic necessities for survival: food, clothing, lodging, and some security in the event of illness and old age. ... The key words are °survival' and 196 "security"; the values center on the need for daily bread and a full barn... The Values of Material Success: ... These values relate to the requisite elements for growing prosperity; among them, order, ambition and efficiency. These values have their roots in industrial society and in what Max Weber has called Instrumental Rationality. The key words are "standard of living" and "productivity", and values center on being part of the productive process in the creation of capital. The rewards of labor are great and subject to struggle. The symbols of material success include external signs such as money, automobiles, jewelry, expensive vacations, large homes, and fashionable clothing. (Yankelovich, et al., 1983, pp. 46-47) In contrast to the values of sustenance and material success, the study presents five values which the researchers called 'expressive" and which they believe constitute a new philosophy for America today. The five values are summarized as follows: 1. Expressive success: The emphasis is on inner growth rather than external signs of wealth. Success is defined by self rather than by others. Self- fulfillment is the most important personal goal. 2. Living in Harmony with Nature: The emphasis in on rejection of what is artificial or harmful to nature and to live in harmony with that which is natural; 3. Autonomy: Rejection of authority is emphasized in favor of one's need to express his/her own nature. Authority is perceived as interfering with individual autonomy; 4. Hedonism: Pleasure is the emphasis. The pursuit of sex and pleasurable activities have increased and rejection of moral prohibitions with respect to such things as divorce, extra-marital relations, having children out of wedlock, and other aspects of social morality have declined; 5. Community: Desire for closer bonds with others characterizes this value. The search is for greater union with friends and groups who share like values. (Yankelovich, et al., pp. 47-52) 197 The first Industrial Revolution in this country created a clash between the values of sustenance and those of material success. Today, the new revolution of a post— industrial nation is calling into opposition the values of material success and the values of expressive success. The concept of work now seems to involve on the part of those performing it the conscious expectation that they will derive more from work than income which simply provides a living. Any conceptualization of work, therefore, must also include an understanding of the meanings that work embodies for those who perform it. For the Schulzbergs, one of the primary meanings of work was self-fulfillment. Work and self—fulfillment. The first major concept that emerged from the study of the Schulzberg family is that the primary purpose of work is self—fulfillment. Propositions formulated in relation to this concept are as follows: 1. Work is fulfilling if it gives one a sense of identity; 2. Work is fulfilling if it provides for self— expression; 3. Work is fulfilling if it is service—oriented; 4. Education is seen as a means to increase the opportunity to engage in self-fulfilling work. Most contemporary studies dealing with conjunctions between work and family begin from an underlying assumption that work is occupation from which income is derived (Dubin, 1976; Kanter, 1977; Piotrkowski, 1978). While income has 198 always been an important reason for which individuals work, Nosow and Form (1962) and Feree (1976) in agreement with the findings of Yankelovich, et a1., (1983) found that the American society is now characterized by the conscious expectation of deriving from work not only money but meaning as well. Yankelovich defined this expectation as a powerful psychological drive for self—realization and self— expression. He stated that: Our research shows that what people mean by "meaningful, satisfying work" is closely related to the self-expressive needs of the individual. Work is seen as a source of personal challenge and opportunity for growth. (1981, p. 118) Work, then, is defined as a fundamental dimension of human existence not only because it is the usual way most individuals earn their living and provide for family needs, but also because work plays a central role in helping individuals achieve their deepest desire for self-expression and personal fulfillment (Maslow, 1954). This is clearly exemplified in a study of Morse and Weiss (1955). In a short "fixed question-free answer" interview of a random sample of 401 employed men in the United States, Morse and Weiss discovered that for most of these working men having a job served other functions than the one of earning a living. The researchers discovered the following about these working men: In fact, even if they had enough money to support themselves, they would still want to work. Working gives them a feeling of being tied into the larger society, of having something to do, of having a purpose in life. These other functions which working serves 199 are evidently not seen as available in nonwork activities. (1955, p. 29) Self-expression, which meaningful work provides, is defined as the need to impress oneself on the world and is seen as particularly important for achieving feelings of self-fulfillment, as the studies of Yankelovich (1981) and Yankelovich, et a1., (1983) show. Yankelovich (1981) makes an important distinction between work which is perceived as mere employment and work which is seen as meaningful for those who perform it. The findings of Yankelovich's survey on cultural trends reveals that work is meaningful for people today if that work serves the purpose of self-fulfillment for the individuals performing it. Self-fulfillment is identified by Yankelovich (1981, pp. 20—21) as a process of developing the "inner" person, of coming to the realization that one's own identity is unique in the universe. What emerges from the literature available relating to the meaning of work is that meaning is linked with people's life values. But as Nosow and Form (1962), in their collected works on Man, Work and Society, Neff (1968), in his book Work and Human Behavior, Yankelovich (1974, 1981), in his studies on changing work values in the U.S., and Ferman (1983) in his critical analysis of the work ethic in the world of informal work all indicate, these life values are influenced by cultural trends. What is unknown is the way in which this linkage exists because no studies have been made about the ways in which family members perceive 200 the meaning of work for themselves or the ways in which they attach values and purposes to their work experiences. The literature reviewed in the area of work as a means for self-fulfillment and self;expression supports the views that Hannah and John expressed about their need to be involved in work that was fulfilling for themselves. Both Hannah and John differentiated work according to that which is repetitive and that which is self—fulfilling. Repetitive work was identified by them as household chores that needed to be done over and over again. John indicated such things as waxing fire engines and doing other kinds of maintenance things at the station. Maintenance in this respect seemed to carry a meaning similar to the doing of household tasks. The other kind of work the Schulzbergs did was service to others through John's carrying out the firefighter/paramedic assignments and Hannah's working in the hospital, local nursing home and daycare center once a week. This work outside the home was identified by them as fulfilling work. The researcher did not find any studies specifically related to the belief that for work to be fulfilling it must be service-oriented. The area of household work was not explored in relation to being a source of self-fulfillment because John did not express that housework was this for him and Hannah expressly indicated that one reason for returning to school was to become a nurse so she could be fulfilled outside the home. She placed high priority on care of the family but did not find either housework or child care 201 fulfilling for herself. By fulfillment, Hannah meant personal growth for herself. This concept parallels Yankelovich's idea of fulfillment as a process of developing the "inner" person (Yankelovich, 1981, pp. 20-21). Both Hannah and John had expressed the belief that if work were not fulfilling for individuals, problems would appear in the lives of those-for whom work was not a source of growth. John spoke about apathy creeping in after a number of years working as a firefighter. Hannah referred to such things as individuals being addicted to alcohol, drugs, becoming involved in crime, or committing suicide. Hannah's and John's perceptions about the importance of meaningful work in the lives of people matched those articulated in the literature. When work lacks personal meaning, according to Geyer and Schweitzer (1976), in their collection of works on Theories of Alieniation, the activity becomes a foreign object in one's hands. When work fails to become a part of one's being, Aldous, Osmond and Hicks (1979) point out in their study of men's roles in the family, that the response is usually withdrawal of the self from personal involvement in performance of the work and denial of responsibility for it. These ideas are reinforced by the research of Palmore and Stone (1973) who found in their studies on longevity that those people who felt that work had been personally meaningful in their lives did, in fact, live longer than those who felt otherwise. Rainwater (1974) found absence of 202 meaningful work to be correlated with personal disturbance. Roszak in his book Person/Planet made the following observation regarding the importance of meaningful work: We are a meaning-seeking species, creatures who must have a purposeful identity in the universe as urgently as we must have air to breathe, food to eat. ...Many forces make history, but none makes more history than that which underlies and energizes all human motivations -- the hunger for meaning. For that people will kill and die, build and destroy. They will even face their own bad dreams and brave the terrors of rebirth. (1978, p. 28) Goodman (1977, p.52), an urban planner, reinforced Roszak's observation with his own insight that it is lack of meaning which entices "increasing numbers to drug abuse and alcohol addiction and leads to mental and physical breakdowns." Although neither Charles and Diane nor Judy and Paul spoke specifically about the aspect of self-fulfillment in their work, each individual did make references to such things as feeling good about what they were doing or enjoying the work they were doing. Furthermore, Diane expressed apprehension about falling into a pattern of boredom after she retires in a few years. The researcher determined from the interview data with Charles and Diane and Judy and Paul that, though they may not have used the word "self-fulfillment" directly, their expressions about work were synonymous with the meaning of the word. In this respect, then, it seemed that Diane and Charles and Paul and Judy were experiencing fulfillment in their work. 203 Both Hannah and John expressed belief that getting an education is a means of achieving self-fulfillment. Because of the growing necessity for broad and specialized training for new life patterns, education has become increasingly important in the workplace. The transition from an industrial to an informational society has created severe occupational upheavals. On an almost daily basis, traditional jobs are growing more obsolete as new technologies applied in business and industry demand new skills for new kinds of work using computers and microprocessors and other forms of technology. Excess demand and excess supply are occurring simultaneously in the labor market as jobs related to the new technologies are created and fewer individuals are prepared to fill them. Leepson observed that: Employee education has become a big and growing business within American industry. Large and medium-sized companies across the country underwrite or actively sponsor a vast range of programs, from formal on—the—job training to reimbursement of employees for college tuition. Corporate employers willingly do so in the belief that better trained and educated workers tend to be happier -- and more productive. There is another important reason too. Rapid changes in such highly technical fields as computerization, information processing and telecommunications have all but forced competing businesses to help their employees stay abreast of the latest advances. (1981, p. 91) Unemployment caused by factors, including those of inflation and technologY. escalates each month. Almost all groups are affected but especially minorities, such as women 204 heading households, blacks, hispanics, and youth feel the most impact (Levitan and Belous, 1981a). To date, the most important challenge of educational programs is that of developing human potential, not just for the sake of the business but first and foremost for the sake of the human persons involved. Fitz-ner (1981, p. 118) said that "the primary job of every human resource professional, and perhaps the only valid reason for the existence of the position, is the realization of employee potential." With this in mind, therefore, it will be necessary in the future to focus on individuals, and to build into their worklife and their personal life meaningful rewards. Career ladders and life-goal planning must be a part of on-the-job planning development and job training programs. In addition to the on—the-job programs for training and retraining of personnel, some businesses and industries have established college degree programs for their personnel. Some of these programs have been set up so that courses are offered on the work premises during work hours. In other instances, employees have been encouraged to pursue a systematic course of study at local universities in order to acquire a degree. Emphasis in all job training programs must continue to be on better utilization and development of human resources. As Schindler-Raiman points out: This includes opportunities to develop underutilized human resources, such as women, minority persons, emotionally and physically handicapped persons, newcomers to our shores, low- 205 status persons who have had a minimum of opportunities, and older citizens in our society. (1981, p. 16) The views of Hannah and John, that if you are educated, and only then, will you be able to advance and better yourself, and their view that their Own positions in the work world are directly related to the amount of education they attain, correspond to the findings in the literature reviewed regarding work and education. Without opportunity for advancement in work, John and Hannah believe that work would become dull and boring. 80 education and opportunity, as they see it, go hand in hand. And, since one is fulfilled through one's work, then for John and Hannah, education is a determinant in one's possibility for attaining that fulfillment. Work and gender roles. The second major concept which emerged from study of the Schulzberg family is that of work related to gender roles. Propositions formulated from analyses of data in relation to this concept are as follows: 1. Household work and child care are equally the responsibility of mother and father in the family; 2. Changing work roles within the family are related to perceptions of self in terms of traditionally accepted images of what it means to be wife/mother, father/husband; 3. Gender role stereotyping is present in assignment of work. As evidenced in this study John's and Hannah's roles as. father/worker, mother/worker were a source of tension in the 206 family. John was searching for what it meant to be father in the home since Hannah's return to school less than two years previously, at which time he assumed new responsibilities for sharing with Hannah household work and child care. Hannah, on the other hand, felt released and fulfilled in her new role as worker outside the home. At the same time, Hannah seemed to have clear ideas about what she believed John's role within the home should be. Exploration of the work-family role system is not new to theory. Pleck (1977) analyzed conceptually the male and female work and family roles as components of the work- family role system. He studied the links between the roles and the gender-segregated labor markets for both paid and family tasks. Pleck raised the question about how much the male can increase his role within the home without experiencing a strain. He also suggested that this role strain could be a source of personal instability for the male. This suggestion on the part of Pleck may help to explain the strain that John indicated he was experiencing in his change of role within the family. A study done by Thrall (1978) focused on the division of household work. His study utilized data from interviews with both husbands and wives in 99 urban, middle class families having school-age children. Thrall examined the expectations that one spouse had of the other with respect to certain household tasks. He referred to this expectation as role stereotypy. His study identified division of labor 207 among 25 household tasks serving the family as a whole rather than one individual within the family. Thrall found that variation did exist from task to task in the number of family members expected to do the task, but overall there existed a "typical" pattern of division of labor where the husband expected the wife to do women's work and the wife expected the husband to do men's work: Wives do things inside the house, taking care of meals, groceries, laundry and cleaning. The only three tasks wives are expected not to do are taking trash to the dump, mowing the lawn and fixing things around the house. ... (Husbands) are expected to do all the outdoor chores and also such indoor tasks as fixing things and changing light bulbs. Husbands are expected not to do cleaning or laundry or help with meals. (Thrall, 1978, p. 256) McDonald and McEntire (1981) did a study focusing on changing male roles in the family. Emphasis was placed on the range of roles normatively prescribed for the male in his family of procreation. Analysis of data indicated that expectations which a male has of himself while growing up affect his adult behavior in marriage and in the family. In examining single-provider blue-collar families, Rubin (1976) discovered that traditional gender-role expectations -— the husband as provider and the wife as mother/homemaker -- are central to blue-collar workers' perceptions about work, family, and division of labor. In keeping with these findings, John frequently referred to "man's kinds of things" like "changing oils" and "fixing 3 things around the house". His struggle at the time that this study was being completed was integration of his new 208 role as responsible participant in housework and child care in the home on an equal basis with his wife. Hannah, on the other hand, had expectations about what John's role ought to be. She expressed her belief that John ought to be there to help in the home with work and the children on his days off from his place of paid employment. Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek and Rosenthal (1964, p. 19) define role conflict as the "simultaneous occurrence of two (or more) sets of pressures such that compliance with one would make difficult compliance with the other." Kopelman, Greenhaus and Connolly (1983) point out that even though role conflict within the work situation has been the subject of considerable research, role conflict within the family has rarely been examined in organizational behavior research. In addition, Kahn, et a1., stress that role conflict can also exist as interrole conflict which he defines as: the role pressures associated with membership in one organization are in conflict with pressures stemming from membership in other groups. Demands...for overtime or take-home work may conflict with pressures from one's wife [or husband] to give individual attention to family affairs during evening hours. (1964, p.20) Role conflict, as specifically described by Kahn, did not seem to be a part of the Schulzberg family. Gender—role stereotyping was found operative in the assignment of tasks to children in the Schulzberg family. For example, Michael was assigned the job of cutting the grass and emptying the garbage. Jacquelyn said she did not 209 like to do outdoor work but preferred working in the house. The reason she gave for this preference was that work in the house is the kind of work girls do (Interview with Jacquelyn, December 2, 1984). Jacquelyn's observations correspond to what has been a typical view of women's work in this country. Thrall (1978, p. 256) sums this view up when he states that "Wives do things inside the house, taking care of meals, groceries, laundry, and cleaning." Work avoidance behaviors. The third major concept that emerged and saturated from analyses of data is work avoidance behaviors. Propositions formulated in relation to this concept are: 1. Family members generally seek escape from work that is monotonous or distasteful; 2. Work avoidance behaviors create tension in the family. The researcher is not aware of any studies extant on this topic. The one reference to work avoidance behaviors as such is found in the unpublished dissertation of Slaugh (1982). Slaugh's study on the topic of resource development in the context of household work discusses ways in which children, in particular, use behaviors to escape work which they do not like or find very monotonous. No mention was made of work avoidance behaviors by adults. Because work avoidance seems to be a common phenomenon in most families and yet has not been considered a topic for serious study is one of the reasons why the present researcher chose to 210 develop this concept rather than other possible concepts in her study. Further Development of Emerging Theory After review of the data analysis and integration of the work-related concepts and propositions with the literature, colleagues in family ecology formulated three general propositions concerning work. The researcher concurs with these propositions and presents them here as a further step in development of the emerging theory: 1. Work is not confined to paid occupation but also includes work in the home, school, and in other settings where family members carry out work activities; 2. Children learn work-related behaviors and skills for doing work through interaction with and observation of their parents; 3. Work is not considered apart from family life but is seen as an integral part of the family's life together. These propositions are discussed in the final chapter. Chapter VII SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The roots of compartmentalization of family life and work life in America can be traced to the Industrial Revolution in this country. "Because of this separation of these two aspects of human life, little is known about specific interactions and transactions between family and work." (Kanter, 1977, p.8). Work itself appears to be one of the least understood of human activities (Napier, 1984) and most research on work proceeds from the assumption that work is occupation from which income is derived (Dubin, 1977). Today, however, forces are at work transforming the American workplace. Work patterns are changing and types of work are shifting or disappearing altogether. Most individuals and families are profoundly affected by world, national and societal trends impacting upon the workplace. (Ginzberg, 1981; 1982; Families and Work: Traditions and Transition, 1983; The State of Families 1984-1985, 1984). At the same time, family life styles are changing and this is impacting back into the workplace. The rapid revolution that is occurring is provoking new ways of thinking about family and work (Hayden, 1984). The revolution is calling into question traditional views about separation of family and work and a search is underway for new and broader meanings and definitions of work (Kanter, 1977; Yankelovich, 211 212 1981). Although much has been written about the subject of work, the researcher is not aware of any theoretical work linking family and work from the family's perspective. The purpose of the present study was to begin bridging this gap by examining ways in which family and work meet, intersect, and overlap each other. Objectives of the study were: 1. To gain understanding of ways in which family members defined or perceived work; 2. To learn the meanings and purposes which family members attached to their work and work experiences; 3. To discover emerging grounded theory which could contribute to an understanding of family and work. Observation, participant observation, and ethnographic interviews were data sources used for gathering information about one three-generation urban family with respect to work. Observations included visits to the two fire stations where the father worked and to the school attended by the three older children. The family members were observed over two and a half months as they participated in work activities both inside and outside the home. The family ecological framework was used in studying the interaction patterns of family members in the context of their work experiences. Viewing the family from this perspective enabled the researcher to study the family as a unit and to identify sources of family unity and family integration. Four general questions which guided the ethnographic interviews and observations were formulated by the 213 researcher at the beginning of the study. These questions were as follows: 1. What do family members do that they consider work? 2. What meanings and purposes do family members attach to their work and work experiences? 3. How is work experienced by family members? 4. Is work a sphere of human activity separate from the rest of family life? During the course of data collection and analyses, it became apparent that the third question was unclear and could not be easily differentiated from question two. For this reason, the researcher chose to eliminate the third question as a separate entity and consider it part of question two. Based on analyses of data, three concepts or categories emerged and saturated with respect to work. These categories were identified as: 8 1. Work and self-fulfillment; 2. Work and gender roles; 3. Work avoidance behaviors. Propositions were formulated in relation to each of the work concepts. The first major concept that emerged from the study is that the primary purpose of work is self—fulfillment. Four propositions formulated in relation to this concept are: 214 1. Work is self—fulfilling if it gives one a sense of identity; 2. Work is self-fulfilling if it provides for self- expression; ' 3. Work is self-fulfilling if it is service-oriented; 4. Education is seen as a means to increase the opportunity to engage in self-fulfilling work. The second major concept emerging from analyses of data is that of gender roles with respect to work. Three propositions formulated in relation to this concept are: 1. Household work and child care are considered to be the responsibility of mother and father in the family; i 2. Changing work roles within the family are related to perceptions of self in terms of traditionally accepted images of what it means to be wife/mother, husband/father; 3. Gender role stereotyping is present in the assignment of work. The third major concept that emerged from data analyses is that of work avoidance behaviors. Propositions formulated in relation to this concept are: 1. Family members seek escape from work that is monotonous or distasteful; 2. Work avoidance behaviors create tension in the family. After review of the data analyses and integration of the work—related concepts and propositions, three additional propositions were formulated concerning work by colleagues 215 in family ecology. The researcher concurred with these propositions as a further step in the development of the emerging theory: 1. Work is not confined to paid occupation but also includes work in the home, in schoOl and in other settings where family members carry out work activities; 2. Children learn work-related behaviors and skills for doing work through interaction with and observation of their parents; 3. Work is not considered apart from family life but is seen as an integral part of the family's life together. Discussion Most research about family and work has been based on the assumption that family life and work life are separate from each other. Work has been defined as remunerated occupation. The unit of analysis has usually been the male wage earner in the family. At the time the present study was conducted, the researcher was unable to find any theoretical studies which could contribute to an understanding of the ways in which family members define work for themselves or of meanings and purposes they attach to work or work experiences. The purpose of the present ethnographic study was to begin bridging this gap through the discovery of grounded theory. The unit of analysis in the present study was one three-generational urban family. Through interviews, observation and participant observation, the researcher 216 sought to learn from the study participants their definitions of work and the meanings and purposes they attached to their work experiences. Although the Schulzberg family members and grandparents included in their definitions of work remunerated occupations, they also included non-remunerated activities such as child care, household tasks, school work, yard work and other kinds of work on the land like felling trees and splitting wood. The family member's definitions of work, therefore, expanded the traditional theoretical concept of work to include both remunerated and non-remunerated work activities. Members of the Schulzberg family and the grandparents defined self-fulfillment as the primary purpose for which work is performed. Self-fulfillment was achieved, according to study participants, if the work performed contributed to one's sense of identity, provided means for self-expression, was oriented to service for others, or offered opportunities for career-laddering. Study participants clearly differentiated between work they believed was self-fulfilling and work that was not. This differentiation revealed the importance of work that is self-fulfilling for the study participants. They indicated that if work fails to promote self-fulfillment then serious problems would probably occur. John spoke of the problem of apathy occurring; Hannah spoke more graphically in terms of problems like depression, stress, family problems, drugs, alcoholism, crime, violence, child abuse and suicide. 217 John, Hannah and their three older children identified the doing of household tasks as a non-fulfilling kind of work. John spoke about household work which included the washing and waxing of fire engines which he had to do at the fire station as being boring and monotonous. Hannah identified certain household tasks as uncreative and monotonous such as vacuuming, washing dishes and doing laundry -- things which have to be done over and over again. None of the three children found household work to their liking and expressed openly their disdain for household tasks. This attitude of dislike was further corroborated by work avoidance behaviors which each of the family members displayed with respect to doing or completing assigned household tasks. On the other hand, family members and grandparents identified work in service of Others as meaningful for themselves. John and Hannah spoke of their involvement in health care work as self-fulfilling. Judy identified her work at the bingo hall where she served snacks to the elderly as making her feel good because she is able to bring happiness to others. Paul stated that doing a good job for customers makes him feel good inside. Diane said that finding the right home for her customers makes her real estate work worth—while because she is fulfilling a need in others. Although John and Hannah did not value the doing of household tasks as a means for self-fulfillment, it was a 218 work that they saw as contributing to growth and development of family members and as helping to build family integration. John and Hannah interpreted work as a means for teaching their children discipline and work skills and, therefore, one or more parents almost always worked with a child or supervised the doing of a task once it was assigned. Thus, the children learned work related behaviors and skills for doing work through observation of or interaction with their parents. Child care seemed to be one of the most important family activities and seemed to require the most time and invested energy of family members, especially with respect to the baby, Ann. The cooperation required of all family members to meet the needs of the younger members of the family seemed to strengthen family unity and integration. Examples drawn from observations showed that without the support and attention given to the needs of younger siblings by older siblings, pressing needs of household maintenance, including the cooking of meals, could not have been attended to by Hannah of John. Although the doing of household work and child care responsibilities appeared to be the responsibility of both Hannah and John alike, this division of labor is relatively new within the Schulzberg family. Until Hannah returned to school a few years ago, the household work and responsibility for child care were considered by John to be the exclusive work of Hannah. The shift of responsibility 219 from Hannah alone to Hannah and John has been a difficulty for John who has had to struggle with redefining the traditional image he has had of himself as husband/father in the home. This shift in roles has also revealed that Hannah has expectations about who John ought to be as husband/father in the home. These expectations along with the shift in self-image John is experiencing are causing tensions in the Schulzberg family. The same tensions did not appear to be present in the home of Charles and Diane although Charles identified part of his work as doing household tasks. Although Hannah said her father never did household tasks while she was growing up and said his assuming this work is new since his marriage to Diane, it did not seem to pose a problem either for Charles or Diane who appeared to accept it as matter-of- fact. However, that tensions existed prior to establishing this pattern between them is something unknown to the researcher. Paul and Judy did not share household tasks but maintained the traditional framework of division of labor by role. Therefore, role conflict was not an issue with them. Implications For Practice The relationship between family and work is not well understood. Although much research has been done on the subject of work, the focus has been primarily on the workplace. There is need for research which places the 220 concept of work in a much broader context by defining work from family members' point of view. Places of work need to include not only places of paid employment but also other places designated by family members as environments where work is performed. Data from the present study indicate that ways in which work is perceived or defined by family members may influence their attitudes toward and preferences for certain kinds of work, manner of participation in the work process, and interaction with others within the contexts of the work experience. Because work is a fundamental dimension of life and concern about family and work issues are assuming national proportions, it is important for professionals who work with families to gain some understanding of how families perceive work and what meanings and purposes they attach to it. Professional effectiveness depends upon how.a problem is conceptualized and the adequacy of that conceptualization. There is need for grounded theory to explain interactions and interdependencies between and among various aspects of family and worklife. Planners stand in a unique position to begin closing the gap which exists between family and work at the present time. An entrance point for the planner could be the question of child care for working mothers. Because aspects of the build environment are not conducive to meeting the needs of working mothers, research on these aspects and planning based on the expressed needs of the people are 221 needed. Theory that is grounded in the needs of the people and applied to practice could make planning more relevant and responsive to the new scenarios of a society within which the majority of women will be working by the year 1990. Other areas for study by the planner could include those of population, unemployment, demographic shifts, income, and transportation which are factors impacting urban areas and creating problems for many family members. For Further Research Research findings and the propositions in the emerging theory in this study were derived from the observation of one family. The family was an intact, nuclear family with bOth preschool and school—age children. While the research findings and theoretical formulations may be valid for this one small family unit, they cannot be extended or applied to other populations. Further research is needed to learn about ways in which other types of families perceive work and attach meanings and purposes to the work that they do. Among other types of families worthy of study are single- parent families, families with an incapacitated father, mother or child, families with different racial or ethnic backgrounds, families with fewer or more children than were in the Schulzberg family, or families having no children. Further research is also needed to learn about interactive patterns within work contexts which differ from those of the family members in this study. What, for instance, happens in a family where the mother or father 222 perceives household work or child care as drudgery and has no outside work which could offer an alternative perception of what work is within a different context? Or, what might be the perceptions of the family where the husband or wife is desirous of working outside the heme, but could not secure employment because of lack of skills or higher education? Data for this study were gathered over a concentrated period of two and a half months, although check-backs and short visits were made to the Schulzberg home after the concentrated period of study with the family was completed. Continued research would be needed to learn if perceptions or definitions of work would change over time, or if meanings and purposes which family members attached to their work or work experiences would alter as parents and children grew older. How, for instance, would the doing of household work and child care be altered? A Research and theory in the field of child development and family relationships have contributed to the understanding of family interactive behaviors and the implications that these have for development of family members' skills and attributes, but there is little research which has been done with respect to contexts within which this interaction occurs. As indicated in the present study, work contexts played an important part in family members' definitions and perceptions of work and in the interactive behaviors which took place within these work contexts. 223 There is need for further study which focuses on the linkages between family behavior and work contexts within which the behavior takes place. What, for example, are family members' attitudes toward work avoidance and how does work avoidance affect family/work relationships? Data revealed that household work was used by the family under study as a context for communication with their children about things not directly related to the work at hand. Research needs to be done to show in what ways the doing of household work might be a context for strengthening communication between parents and their children. Work performed in cooperation with other individuals was perceived as a source of building a sense of community and family unity. Research is needed to study the meanings families attach to unity for themselves and community with other peOple with whom they work. The difficulties that the father in the present study had in defining his role as husband/father within the context of household work and child care indicate a need for further research about how men perceive their roles within their families and the ways in which they resolve role conflict within the home and within themselves. Throughout the study, it became apparent that self- fulfillment was viewed in this family as the primary purpose for which work was performed. Further research is needed to discover what meanings the concept "self-fulfillment" holds for family members and the ways they go about attempting to 224 achieve self-fulfillment in contexts other than work. Such research could relate to a similar kind of research being done in the area of leisure activities. Ethnographic studies could be done to reveal families' perceptions about leisure and to discover meanings they attach to various leisure activities. Studies about families"perceptions of work and reasons why they perform it could be done with families whose working members are involved in different kinds of occupations. For example, parents in professional occupations such as lawyers, doctors, teachers, business managers, computer programmers, or parents who are engaged in secretarial work, waitressing, volunteer work, might coincide with and thus strengthen the emerging grounded theory or provide alternate perceptions about work and family interfaces. Conclusion The purpose of this ethnographic research was to gain some understanding of how family members define work and what the meanings and purposes are that they attach to their work and work experiences. The research questions addressed in this study were: 1. What to family members do that they consider work? 2. What meanings and purposes do family members attach to their work and work experiences? 3. How is work experienced by family members? 225 4. Is work a sphere of human activity separate from the rest of family life? Because the third research question was unclear and could not be easily differentiated from question two, the third question was eliminated and cOnsidered as a part of question two. Analyses of data revealed that work for study participants included remunerated and non-remunerated work and that the word work was broadly defined to include both the concept of work as occupation as well as other activities such as household tasks, child care, yardwork, and school work. The primary purpose for work performance by the Schulzberg family was self-fulfillment. Work that lacked meaning or was monotonous was avoided by family members whenever possible. Work was seen to be an extricable part of the whole of family life and family integration and unity was strengthened through work family members performed together or with other people. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrams, C. (1971). The languagg of cities. New York: The Viking Press. Aldous, J. (1979, November). Occupational characteristics and males' role performance in the family, Journal of Marrigge and the Family, 31, 4, 707—712. Aldous, J., Osmond, M. and Hicks, M. (1979). Men's role and men's families, in Wesley R. Burr, et al., (Eds.), Contemporary theory about families, I. New York: Free Press. Andrisani, P.J., Barbash, J., Clarke, 0., Ferman, L.A., Hedges, J., Johnson, C.M.. Lampman, R.J., Levitan, S.A., McCoby, M., Parnes, H.S., Quinn, J.F., Siegel, I. H., Tyler, G. and Zuboff, S. (1983). The work ethic -- A critical analysis. Bloomington, Illinois: Pantograph Printing. Arensberg, C. (1962). Work and the changing American scene, in S. Nosow and W. Form (Eds.), Man, work and sociepy. New York: Basic Books. Becker, G. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago. Bell, D. (1976). The cultural contradiction of quitalism. New York: Basic Books. Bivens, G., Finch, G. Newkirk, P. Paolucci, E. Riggs, S. St. Marie, and G. Vaughn. (1975, May). Home economics: New directions II, Journal of Home Economics, 61, 3, 26-27 a Black, M., and Metzger D. (1964). Ethnographic description and the study of law, American Anthropologist, 61, 2, 141-165. Blood, R.O. and Wolfe, D.M. (1960). Husbands and wives. New York: Free Press. Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degredation of work in the twentieth century. New York: Monthly Review. 226 227 Brown, C. (1979). Women's contributions to the family, in R.E. Smith (Ed.), The subtle revolution: Women at work. Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute. Brown, D. (1982). Home production for use in a market economy, in B. Thorne (Ed.), Rethinking the family: some feministyquestions. New York: Longman. Buckley, W. (1965). Society as a complex adaptive system, in W. Buckley, (Ed.), Modern systems for the behavioral scientist: A sourcebook. Chicago: Adline. Campling, J. (1980, December). Social work for the out of work, Social Work Today, 33, 14, 11-12. Chekoway, B. (1983a, Summer). Forum on the future of planning practice, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 3, 1, 51. (1983b, Summer). New perspectives on planning practice: An introduction, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 3, 1, 3-4. Chrissinger, M. (1980 January). Factors affecting employment of welfare mothers. Social Work, 33, 52-55. Conant, R. (1974). The American odyssey. New York: William Morrow. deGrazia, S. (1962). Of time, work and leisure. New York: Twentieth Century. deNeufville, J. (1983, Summer). Planning theory and practice: Bridging the gap, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 3, 1, 35-45. Derr, C.B. (Ed.). (1980). Work, family and the career: New frontiers of theory and research. New York: Praeger. Dobelstein, A., and Farel, A. (1980 Spring/Summer). Welfare policy and the status of women, Social Perspectives, VII, 3, 36—40. Dubin, R. (1976). Work in modern society, in R. Dubin (Ed.), Handbook of work, organization and society. Chicago: Rand McNally. Dyckman, J. (1983, Summer). Reflections on Planning Practice for an age of reaction, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 3, 1, 5—12. 228 Engelberger, J. (1980). Robotics in practice: Management and applications of industrial robots. New York: World Future Society Book Service. Evans, C. (1980). The micro millennium. New York: Viking. Families and work: Traditions and transitions. (April, 1983). Washington D.C.: American Association of University Women. Family Service America. (1984). The state of families 1984— 33. New York. Feree, M. (1976, April). Working-class jobs: Housework and paid work as sources of satisfaction, Social Problems, 33, 4, 432-441. Ferman, L. (1983). The work ethic in the world of informal work, in Andrisani, P., et al. (Eds.), The work ethic -- a critical analysis. Industrial Relations Research Association. 221—229. Fitz-ner, J. (1981 February). Human resources: A different perspective, Personnel Journal, 39, 2, 118-120. Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury Press. Gecas, V. and Nye,F.I. (1974). Sex and class differences in parent-child reaction: .A test of kohn's hypothesis, Journal of Marriage and Family, 36; 742-49. Geyer, R. and Schweitzer, D.R. (Eds.). (1976). Theories of alienation. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division. Gibson, J.E. (1977). Designing the new city: A systematic approach. New York: Wiley. Gilchrist, B. and Shenkin, A. (1981, February). Disappearing jobs: The impact of computers on employment, The Futurist, 31, 1, 44-49. Ginzberg, E. (1981, March). The changing workforce and role of work in an era of constrained growth, Adherent, 3, 1, 25-38. Ginzberg, E., et a1., (1982). Work decisions in the 19805. Boston: Auburn House Publishing House. Glabb, C. (1963). The american city: A documentary history. Homewood, IL: Dorsey. 229 Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies foryqualitative research. New York: Adline. Glaser, B. G. (1979). Advances in the methodology of grounded theory: Theoretical sensitivity. San Francisco: Sociology Press. Goodman, P. (1977). The double E. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday. Gunn, A. M. (1978). Habitat: Human settlements in an urban age. New York: Pergammon Press. Gutmann, D. (1969). Psychological naturalism in cross- cultural studies: in H. Raush and E. Willems (Eds.), Naturalistic viewpoints in psychological research. New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston. Hald, A. P. (1981). Toward an information-rich society, Th Futurist, 3!, 4, 20—24. Hamrin, R. D. (August, 1981a). The information economy, Th (D Futurist, 3y, 4, 25-30. (November, 1981b). The information revolution: Changing employment trends in the information society, Adherenti 3, 3, 14-22. Hansen, J. F. (1979). Socioculturalypegspectives on human learning: An introduction to educational anthropology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Harris, C. (1983). The family and industrial society. London: Allen & Unwin. Harris, L. and Associates. (1981). Families at work. The General Mills American Report, 1980-81. Minnesota: General Mills. Haworth, L. and Orwell, M. (1984). The planning profession, and autonomy, Environments, 33, 2, 10-15. Hayden, D. (1984). Redesigning the american dream. New York: Norton. Hayman, C. (1980, November). Coping with the people factor, Management Today, 131-136. Henry, J. (1965). Culture against man. New York: Random House. 230 Hesse, S. J. (1979). Women working: Historical trends, in K. W. Feinstein, (Ed.), Working women and families. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. HEW (U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare). (1973). Work in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. » ' Hook, N. and Paolucci, B. (1970, May). Family as an ecosystem, Journal of Home Economics, 33, 5, 315-318. Hunt, J. G. and Hunt, L.L. (1977, April). Dilemmas and contradictions of status: The case of the dual career family, Social Problems, 33, 4, 407-416. Jenkins, C. and Sherman, B. (1979). The collapse of work. London: Eyre Metheun. Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D. and Rosenthal, R.A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley. Kahn-Hut, R. Daniels, A.K. and Colvard, R. (1982). Women and work: Problems and perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press. Kanter, R.M. (1977). Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Kantor, D. and Lehr, W. (1975). Inside the family. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kopelman, R. E., Greenhaus, J.H. and Connolly, T.F. (1983 October). A model of work, family, and interrole conflict: A construct validation study, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 2, (October) 198-215. Kuhn, A. (1975). Unified social science. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Publishing Co. Leavitt, J. (1983, Summer). The gender gap: Making planning education relevant, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 3, 1, 55-56. LeCompte, M. D. and Goetz, J.P. (1982, Spring). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research, Review of Educational Research, 33, 1, 31-60. 231 Leepson, M. (1981 June). The big business of employee education, in Work and life in the 1980's. Editorial Research Reports (Washington,D.C. Congressional Quarterly). Levitan, S. A.(Ed.) (1971). Blue colla£:workers: A symposium in middle America. New York: McGraw-Hill. Levitan, S. and Belous, R. (1981a). What's happening to the American family? Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. (1981b, September). Working wives and mothers: What happens to family life? Monthly Labor Review, 104, 9, 26-30 e Lopata, H.Z. (1971). Occupation: Housewife. New York: Oxford University Press. Management Review, 33, 4, (April, 1981), 54-55. Magnum, G. (1981). Training in hard times, Adherent, 3,(3), 6-13. Mannino, F. V. (1974). An Ecological approach to understanding family and community relationships, Journal of Home Economics, 33, 3, 9-13. Maslow, A.(1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper Brothers. McClenhan, J. S. (1982). Beyond the bottom line, Industry Week, 213, 3, 44-48. McDonald, G. and McEntire, B.L. (1981). The male glamour role: An exploration, in N. Stinnet, J. DeFraim, K. King, P. Knaub, G. Rowe, (Eds.), Family strengths Vol.3, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. McHale, J. (1972). World facts and trends. New York: MacMillan. Meissner, M. (1971). The long arm of the job, Industrial Relations, 10, 239-260. Michelson, W. (1984). Maternal employment, community context and Pressures: The case of child care, Women and Enviornments, 3, 3, 9-11. Miller, G. (1980). The interpretation of nonoccupational work in modern society: A preliminary discussion and typology, Social Problems, 33, 4, 381-391. 232 Moore, K. A.and Hofferth, S.L. (1979). Women and their children, in R. E. Smith, (Ed.), The subtle revolution: women at work, Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Morse, N. C. and Weiss, R. (1955). The function and meaning of work and the job, American Sociological Review, 33, 191-198. . Nadler, L. (1980). Looking at the horizon, Training and Develgpment Journal, 33, 9, 52-55. Napier, J. (1984). Corporate 1984: Big brother in the workplace? Environments, 33, 2, 16-26. Neff, W.S. (1968). Work and human behavior. New York: Atherton Press. Nosow, S. and Form, W.H. (Eds.). (1962). Man, work and society: A reader in the sociology of occupations. New York: Basic Books. Nye, F. I. (1974). Husband-wife relationships, in L. W. Hoffman and F. I. Nye (Eds.), Working mothers. San Francisco: Josey Bass. Oakley, A. (1974). The sociology of housework. New York, Pantheon Books. Oppenheimer, V.K. (1982). Work and the family: A stugy in social demogrpphy. New York: Academichress. Palmore, E.B. and Stone, V. (1973). Predictors of longevity: A follow-up of the aged in Chapel Hill, The Gerontologist, 33, 88-90. Patton, C. (1983). Citizen input and professional responsibility, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 3, 1, 46-50. Pifer, A. (1979). Women working: Toward a new society, in K.W. Feinstein (Ed.). Workipg women and families. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Piotrkowski, C. S. (1978). Work and the family system. New York: Free Press. Pleck, J. H. (1977). The work-family role system, Social Problems, 33, 4, 417-427. (1981). The work-family problem: Overloading the system, in B.L. Forisha and B.H. Goldman (Eds.), 233 Outsider on the inside: Women and organization. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Polit, D. J. (1979). Nontraditional work schedules for women, in K.W. Feinstein (Ed.), Working women and families. (Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage Publications. Pope John Paul II. (1981, September 14). Encyclical letter on human work. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference. Portner, J. and Etkin, L. (1984). The work/family connection in the year 2020, in L.A. Kirkendall and A.E. Gravatt, (Eds.), flgrriage apgjthe family in the year 2020. New York: Prometheus Books. Pursell, D. (1981). Planning for tomorrow's personnel problems. Personnel Journal, 33,(7), 559-561. Rainwater, L. (1974). Work, well-being and family life, in J. O'Toole (Ed.). Work and the quality of life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rapoport, R. and Rapoport, R. (1965). Work and family in contemporary society, American Sociological Review, 33, (1976). Dual-career families re-examined: New integrations of work and family. London: Martin, Robertson. Reichard, 8., Lawson, F. and Peterson, P. (1962). A in and personalipy. New York: Wiley. Renshaw, J.R. (1976). An Exploration of the dynamics of the overlapping worlds of work and family life, Family Process, 33, 143-165. Rozak, T. Person/Planet. (1978). New York: Anchor Press7Doubleday. Rubin, L. B. (1976). Worlds of pain. New York: Basic Books. Sawhill, I. V., et a1. (1975). Income transfers and family structures. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Scanzoni, J.(l970). Opportunipy and the family. New York: Free Press. Schindler-Raiman, E. (1981). Risks we must take, Training and Develgpment Journal, 33, 8, 12-18. 234 Schatzman, L. and Strauss, A. (1973). Field research grrategies for a natural society. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Skolnick, A. (1973). The intimate environment. Boston: Little, Brown. Slaugh, K. (1982). Family interaction andypggan resource development in the housework context. East Lansing, MI.: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University. Spradley, J.P. (1979). The ethnpgraphic interview. New York: Holt, Rhinehart, Winston. Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rhinehart, Winston. The state of families 1984-85. (1984). New York: Family Service America. Stencel, S. (1981, June). Equal pay fight, in Work life in the 1980's, Editorial Research Reports. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly. Stinnett, N., De Train, J., King, K., Knaub, P. and Rowe, G. (Eds.). (1981). Family strengths 3: Roots of well- being. Lincoln and London: Univ. of Nebraska Press. Susser, I. (1982). Norman street. New York: Oxford University Press. Thrall, C.A. (1978). Who does what: Role stereotypy, children's work and continuity between generations in the household division of labor, Human Relations, 3, 249-265. Tilgher, A. (1962). Work through the ages in S. Nosow and W. Form (Eds.), Man, society and work. New York: Basic Books. Towfighi, P. and Ramachandran, A. (1984). The quality of urban life, Environments, 33, 2,42-53. U.S. Committee on Labor and Welfare. (1974). American families: Trends and pressures. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. U.S. Department of Commerce. (1983). Census of population and housing 1980. Washington D.C.: Bureau of the Census. 235 Vidich, A. (1956). Methodological problems in the observation of husband-wife interaction, Marriage and Family Living, 33, 234-239. Walker, K.E. and Woods, M.E. (1976). Time use: A measure of household production of family_goods and services. Washington, D.C.: American Home Economics Association. Warr, P. and Wall, T. (1975). Work and wgll-being. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books. Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social_and economic organization. (A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons, Trans.). Glencoe: The Free Press. Wells, M. (1981). Alienation, work structure, and the quality of life: Can cooperatives make a difference? Social Problems, 33, 5, 548—562. Wescott, D. (1981). Employment in the first half of 1981 Monthly Labor Review, 33, 8, 3-8. The White House briefing paper on inflation. (1978). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. White House Conference on families: Families and economic well-being. (1980). Baltimore, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Washington,D.C.: Government Printing Office. Wilson, R.A. and Schulz, R. (1978). Urban sociology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Wolcott, H.F. (1981). Home and away: Personal contrasts in ethnographic style, in D.A. Messerschmidt (Ed.), Anthropologists at home in North America. New York: University Press. Worklife in the 1980's. (1981, June). Editorial Research Reports (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Yankelovich, D. (1974). The meaning of work, in the American assembly. In Columbia University (Ed.), 333 worker and the jpb: Copingfyith change. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. (1981). New rules: Searching for self-fulfillment in a world turned upside down. New York: Bantam. Yankelovich, D. Zetterberg, H., Strumpel, B., Shanks, M., Immerwahr, J., Noelle-Neumann, E., Sengoku, T. and Yuchtman—Yaar, E. (1983). Work and human values: An 236 international report on jobs in the 19805 and 1990s. New York: Appen Institute for Humanistic Studies. Zaretsky, E. (1976). Capitalism, the family and personal life. New York: Harper, Colophon Books. APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Consent Forms Michigan State University East Lansing College of Hanan Ecology Michigan August 6, 1984 mNSENI' FORM We, the undersigned, freely consent to participate in a scientific study being conducted by Sister Rita Rae Schneider, R.S.M. under the supervision of Dr, Linda Nelson, PTOfeSSOI‘, Department Of Family and Child Ecology, College of Humn Ecology, Michigan State University. The purposes of the project have been explained to us and we understand the explanation that has been given as well as what our participation will involve. We understand that we are free to discontinue participation in the Study at any time without penalty, or that we maywithdraw the partici- pation of our children. We understand that the results of the study will be treated in strict confidence and that we will remain anonymous. Final results of the study will be made available to us at our request. We understand that our participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to us. We are willing to participate in this research. We, as legal parents of the children whose signatures appear below, give our permission for our children to participate in the study to the extent that the children wish. . Signed: Wt Female Signature Date Adult Male STgnature Ifite UiiId‘ sTignature Date Child‘s Signature Date Ufild' 5 Signature Date Michigan State University East Lansing College of Hanan Ecology Michigan September 4, 1984 Consent Form We, the undersigned, freely consent to participate in a scientific study being conducted by Sister Rita Rae Schneider, R.S.M., under the supervision of Dr. Linda Nelson, Professor, Department of Family and Child Ecology, College of Hanan Ecology, Michigan State University. The purposes of the project have been explained to us and we understand the explanation that has been given as well as what our participation will involve. We understand that we are free to discontinue the study at any time without penalty. We understand that the results of the study will be kept in strict confidence and that we will remain anonymous. Final results of the study will be made available to us at our request. We understand that our participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to us. We are willing to participate in this research in the manner in which this participation has been outlined for us. Signed: Signature of Grandmother Date Signature of Grandfather Dite APPENDIX B: Observation Interview Schedule 722. «:32 e .9». ...... .n on S .... hi . .e idaAa ...: .... 2.2:... .... 1... 3:5 . cerveatwuao :23 3.23505.“ 1 will}, . . .F‘ ‘50.“ 8*.3 6% c.3153; Que tore s.“ a «N 11.:tevcH _.fl . .‘CflofiH ...... ..r....4 ”...... its .....a .. ......i .... {19.310'90 «.1? C.. 1.“... . deae.Lerd 34.3 ‘43....) . QCOL...J;5¢ 00 .3253830 “Mucus-Hue” -5380 +e6£7~$5dm ...u...........5..s .... a??? -..a... s 2 satin 2 flat... ......ss date.) 2.0:... 4. 9.754 no C£OC$53£° icons. -3...» Q 3 = 2 e u _. “jg: ”1.0““ P 4.25.3 ......» (0.32.5505 .13? .33 u in x. m N . 2333.3 :93 £025...» >3sz ammo-mo 73. 2.5x Ms .2. {2:03. .5: s. 3.54 t 335.8 .12... ....S n E‘Msu. IU~HG “zoo-.thlrfi Q“ .062. .3. .... are: 6.0 CWT-3382.0 dellllfi MN a .fl 2.‘ 1.6.2; -..a» 2 Few ... “......umw Nest: 2..» .218 ... (9.3.3.330 . +6 3.34 +1 62.3....» ::....:.£ .1 £5330 0. {1.3.3 uni!“- .£.¢.§8 ax h.‘ .3252...» 18..» xi «3183 {32 Q = “5......“ in...“ .3 3:; . .t a. cm £33330 “x... 3.4.. 3...? m mi N. » ...... 21.7.2.5 5 n N . 3331.... 23...... 50332.. 35.3233 533:» >329: >323. «$552 «so: 7+€ hadx m. m. 2‘ .... en 2“ R I 2 3.5. J.‘ «:59 $0.51Q :23 dd V“ 9‘ c. a. P. 2 a3.aso+€H . db 3”} . ...Whifiéw‘huw...” t as... 93:: z 1. 52+ch .aoZBSL‘xJO \Q E Q ......zs -....m Q = . airspésn _. ._._.__ .5530 at. “69‘... wet...“ *6 éfa... FJfljjow 1. ...ngdnac a... 30.3.3.5an0 311 354+. 3 33 k P fi'figuu 33.6 0 %£.~b~.0 I33. m. N a!J.:.-O#CH s :axarcm 33:: 2332: 393233 >333 23.65 3.523 15:55 APPENDIX C: Letter to the Fire Chief October 15, 1984 Firechief Any Street Maintain Call, State Dear : I am a doctoral student in the Department of Family and Child Ecology, College of Human Ecology, Michigan State University in East Lansing Michigan. I am doing dissertation research on family and work. Mr. X in your unit has agreed to participation in this study. As part of my study, I would like to visit Mr. X's place of occupation to observe him in the work settings away fran home. My observations would in no way be directed to other individuals in your unit although I might include in my data collections interactions between Mr. X and other unit members. If this were done, fictitious names so as to preserve anonimity would be used to protect those involved in these interactive processes. I would also appreciate it is I might be allowed to acccmpany Mr. X on his rounds if he should be called upon to drive the rig. I do not know what your policy may be in this regard but, if possible, this kind of participation would enhance the study I am doing. Please know that I am grateful to you for whatever privileges you may be able and willing to extend to me with respect to visiting Mr. X's places of work. If you approve of my visiting the station, the first tentative date is set for October 29 from 3:00 to. 7:30 p.m. If the date or the time are not convenient for you, please know that I shall be happy to renegotiate these with you. Thank you for your kind consideration of this request. Sincerely, Sister Rita Rae Schneider, R.S.M. "‘WillMW“