Examining Taiwan's Household Types and Their Functions from the Perspective of Parents' Living Arrangements

從父母的居住安排探討臺灣家戶類型及其功能

10.29629/TEFP.201110.0005

陳肇男(Chao-Nan Chen)；林惠玲(Hui-Lin Lin)

社會支持 ； 家庭 ； 家戶 ； Social support ； Family ； Household

臺灣經濟預測與政策

42卷1期（2011 / 10 / 01）

149 - 174

英文

依照Sussman的建議，本研究旨在探討家戶類型對代間支持交換之影響。居住安排與婚姻狀況被用來歸類家戶類型，與父母同住者被命名爲「與受訪者同住」，其餘被分類爲「與受訪者之已婚兄弟姊妹同住」及「其他」。臺灣社會變遷2006年調查資料顯示，50%左右的受訪者是與父母同住，「與受訪者之已婚兄弟姊妹同住」之父與母所佔比例分別爲16%及19%，「其他」一類對父與母而言都約佔33%。三種家戶類型之代間支持交換型態都不相同。不與父母同住的兩種家戶類型都比與父母同住者提供父母較多的金錢支持與關懷，但從父母那裡得到的金錢與關懷則較少。在家務方面，不與父母同住的兩類家戶比與父母同住者不但提供較少家務支持，也取得較少父母的家務支持。綜合而言，父母與子女一旦分開居住就得自立，但彼此並不孤立。不同住子女還是儘可能會提供父母所需支持。上述不同代間交換型態是受到社會規範，交換特性、交換方向，與家戶類型之影響所致。

Following Sussman's suggestion, this study aims to examine the impact of household separation on intergenerational support exchange. Living arrangements and marital status of respondent's siblings are used to classify household types. The respondents who live with their parents are referred to as ”co-residing with respondents”. The rest of the respondents are grouped as ”co-residing with respondent’s married siblings” and ”others”. The 2006 Taiwan Social Change Survey data show that about 50% of parents are living with the survey respondents. The shares of those co-residing with respondent's married siblings are 16% and 19% for fathers and mothers, respectively, while the share accounted for by ”others” is 33% for both fathers and mothers. The three types of household differ in terms of the pattern of intergenerational support exchange. Those co-residing with respondent's married siblings and ”others” provide more but receive less financial support and concern than the respondents who live with their parents. They, however, exchange less by way of household chores with parents than those living with parents. Generally speaking, children living in households separated from parents become autonomous but not isolated, or function well in providing support to parents. The differential support pattern is due to the influence of social norms, the task nature, exchange direction, and household type.

1. Parsons, T. (1944), "The Social Structure of the Family," in R. Anshen, (ed.), The Family: Its Function and Destiny, 191–192, New York: Harper.
2. Aldous, J.(1985).Parent-Adult Child Relations as Affected by the Grandparent Status.Grandparenthood,Beverly Hills, CA:
3. Bengtson, V. L.(2001).Beyond the Nuclear Family: The Increasing Importance of Multigenerational Bond.Journal of Marriage and Family,63(1),1-16.
4. Bengtson, V. L.,Rosenthal, C. J.,Burton, L. M.(1990).Families and Aging: Diversity and Heterogeneity.Handbook of Aging and the Social Science,San Diego, CA:
5. Bonvalet, C.(2003).The Neo-Extended Family Circle.Population: An English Selection,58(1),9-41.
6. Chen, C. N.(2007).The Impact of Household Distance on Intergenerational Support Exchanges.The Ninth Seminar of Taiwan Social Change Survey: Family Values, Behavior, and Attitudes Workshop Papers,Taipei:
7. Chen, C. N.,Lin, H.(2008).Examining Taiwan's Paradox of Family Decline with a Household-Based Convoy.Social Indicators Research,87,287-305.
8. Cherlin, A. J.(1981).Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage.Cambridge, MA:Harvard Uni-versity Press.
9. Chuang, Y. C.(1972)。The Adaptation of Family to Modernization in Rural Taiwan:A Case Study。Bulletin of the Institute of Ethnology，34，85-98。
10. Fu, Y. T.、Chang, C. F.(2007)。Taiwan Social Change Survey V/2。Taipei:The Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica。
11. Goldscheider, F.(1990).The Aging of the Gender Revolution.Research on Aging,12,531-545.
12. Hoyert, D. L.(1991).Financial and Household Exchanges between Generations.Re-search on Aging,13(2),205-225.
13. Hwang, K. K.(1987).Face and Favor: The Chinese Power Game.American Journal of Sociology,92(4),944-974.
14. Lee, Y. J.,Parish, W. L.,Willis, R. J.(1994).Sons, Daughters, and Intergenerational Support in Taiwan.American Journal of Sociology,99(4),1010-1041.
15. Litwak, E.(1985).Helping the Elderly: The Complementary Roles of Informal Network and Formal System.New York:Guilford Press.
16. Litwak, E.(1960).Geographic Mobility and Extended Family Cohesion.American Sociological Review,25(3),385-394.
17. Ministry of Interior(2005)。Report on the Old Status Survey。Taipei:Ministry of Inte-rior, Republic of China。
18. Morgan, J. N.(1982).The Redistribution of Income by Families and Institutions and Emergency Help Patterns.Five Thou-sand American Families: Patterns of Economic Progress,Ann Arbor, MI:
19. Popenoe, D.(1993).American Family Decline, 1960–1990: A Review and Appraisal.Journal of Marriage and the Family,55(3),527-542.
20. Rossi, A.,Rossi, P.(1990).Of Human Bonding: Parent-Child Relations across the Life Course.New York:Aldine de Gruyter.
21. Shi, L.(1993).Family Financial and Household Support Exchange between Generations: A Survey of Chinese Rural Elderly.Gerontologist,33(4),468-480.
22. Silverstein, M., S. Li, andW. Zhang(2002).Intergenerational Exchange in Rural Chinese Families.nternational Conference on Allocation of Social and Family Resources in Changing Societies Workshop Papers,Taipei:
23. Soldo, B. J.(1981).The Living Arrangements of the Elderly.Aging: Social Change,New York:
24. Stoller, E. P.(1983).Parental Caregiving by Adult Children.Journal of Marriage and the Family,45,851-858.
25. Sussman, M. B.(1965).Relationships of Adult Children with Their Parents in the United States.Social Structure and Family: Generational Relations,Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
26. Tung, A. C.,Chen, C. N.,Liu, P. K. C.(2006).The Emergence of the Neo-Extended Family in Contemporary Taiwan.Journal of Population Studies,32,123-152.
27. Yang, C. L.、Chen, K. J.(2002)。The Reasons and Schedules for Leaving the Parenta Home in Taiwan。Journal of Population Studies，25，120-144。

1. (2016).The Constitutionalization of Taiwanese Family Law.National Taiwan University law review,11(2),273-332.