Scopus

How to Cite:

Maksymova, N. Y., Hrys, A., Maksymov, M. V., Krasilova, Y. M., & Udovenko, J. M. (2021).

Causes and criteria of disharmonies in family system functioning. Linguistics and Culture

Review, 5(S4), 300-310. https://doi.org/10.37028/lingcure.v5nS4.1578

Corresponding author: Maksymova, N. Y.; Email: nat.maksymova7350@lund-univer.eu

Manuscript submitted: 27 June 2021, Manuscript revised: 09 Sept 2021, Accepted for publication: 18 Oct 2021

300

Causes and Criteria of Disharmonies in Family

System Functioning

Nataliia Yu. Maksymova

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Antonina Hrys

G.S. Kostiuk Institute of Psychology of the National Academy of Educational

Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine

Mykola V. Maksymov

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Yuliia M. Krasilova

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Julia M. Udovenko

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine

Abstract---The article highlights the problem of finding the causes of

disharmonies in marital relations and the criteria for the normal

functioning of a family system. Dysfunction or disturbances of family

functioning are such features of family life that complicate or hinder

execution of family functions. A dysfunctional family in a broad sense

means a system determining distortions of personal development and,

therefore, maladaptive, deviant behaviour or neurotic disorders at one

or more of the family members. The aim of the study is to identify the

causes of disharmony in marital relations and the criteria for normal

functioning of a family as a system. The empirical part of this study

was devoted to determining the causes of such disharmonies in

marital relationships that subsequently led to divorce. The study was

conducted during the family counselling of married men, women and

married couples who were in the process of divorce. The next criteria

for normal family functioning have been determined: respect for

differences; sincerity in expressing thoughts and feelings; dynamic

relationships; role sharing; observance of personal boundaries; family

openness; emotional and spiritual intimacy.

Keywords---destruction, diagnostic system, marital relations,

personality, psychological counseling.

301

Introduction

One of the important tasks of the state social policy is family support. Numerous

state and non-state organisations (social services for children, families and youth,

special children's services, etc.) focus their efforts on helping families in difficult

living conditions. Practice shows that it is especially difficult to work with the

families not recognizing existence of some problems, not wanting to come into

contact with specialists, refusing psychological help. In this case, social

intervention is needed, with a subsequent decision on the fate of such families:

deprivation of parental rights or social support with recovery prospects.

Addressing of this issue is impossible without determining the family re-

socialization potential, i.e. a degree of closeness to the family system with normal

functioning. The problem is that, despite existence of numerous studies on the

issues of socio-psychological support of families, the criteria for family normal

functioning have not yet been determined. In turn, these criteria are closely linked

to the causes of disharmonies in family system functioning. Thus, absence of

such disharmonies testifies to the normal family functioning. The aim of the study

is to identify the causes of disharmony in marital relations and the criteria for

normal functioning of a family as a system (Richard, 2019; Narendran et al.,

2021; Crowley, 2019; El-Sheikh et al., 2019).

Analysis of recent researches and publications. The works of Satir et al. (1991);

Rogers (2002); Whitaker & Ryan (1989), lead to the idea that a properly

functioning family is a family fulfilling responsibly its function, so the needs for

growth and development of both the family as a whole, and each of its members

are satisfied. Failure or improper performance of the family functions leads to the

situation when the family becomes disharmonious (with problems), and further

dysfunctional. Dysfunction or disturbances of family functioning are such

features of family life that complicate or hinder execution of family functions. A

dysfunctional family in a broad sense means a system determining distortions of

personal development and, therefore, maladaptive, deviant behaviour or neurotic

disorders at one or more of the family members. In modern Ukraine, a number of

both objective and subjective factors influence families’ powers to fulfil their

functions. The economic factor should be noted as the first among the objective

factors. The income level of the most population does not allow them to meet fully

the material needs of their families.

The next factor is social instability. There were many changes in the social order

in a relatively short period of time, Ukraine gained its independence as a state,

the ideological orientation of society was radically changed, and so on. The parent

generation was brought up under the influence of the Soviet ideology, but the

generation of modern youth and adolescents is at the intersection of two (and

sometimes more) cultural and ideological influences. First of all, it is the influence

of the Western culture (cartoons, video films, advertising and informational

products, etc.). The idea about an unregistered marriage was borrowed from there

as an attempt to avoid liability – legal, financial, etc; this idea influences

significantly on family relationships. Under the influence of various “progressive”

public organizations, in particular feminists, the ideas have become popular that

family is outdated and should be replaced with a “trial” marriage, free

relationships, or even life in a common “commune”, homosexual families, etc. The

302

objective causes for marital disharmony include also the crisis of relation

development that occurs during transition from one to the next stage of family

life. Among the subjective factors of dysfunctions, first of all, it is necessary to

note existing stereotypes and biases that can be in a conflict with the present

realities of life. One of the main sources of stereotypes about spouses’ hierarchy

and their role in a marriage are the elements of patriarchal consciousness in the

modern society. The subjective factors of family dysfunctions include also the

problems of interpersonal relationships and a family’s role structure, peculiarities

of personalities of family members, interrelationships of generations in the family,

etc. (Johnsen et al., 2018; García-Mendoza et al., 2020; Yan et al., 2018; Badawy

& Schieman, 2020).

Materials and Methods

Taking into account the objective and subjective factors of family dysfunctions

mentioned above, the empirical part of this study was devoted to determining the

causes of such disharmonies in marital relationships that subsequently led to

divorce. The study was conducted during the family counselling of married men,

women and married couples who were in the process of divorce. The sample

consisted of 167 people aged 20 to 37 years old; men were 63 and women were

104. It should be noted that 62 persons from the sample were married couples

who came to the consultation together. In accordance with the study aim, the

information concerning the causes of the marital disharmonies that led to the

divorce will be presented (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Сoncerning the causes of the marital disharmonies

 Value orientations and basic life principles of the spouses are opposite, and

therefore incompatible. For example, one spouse believes that raising

children is the most important thing in life, and the other does not want to

have children at all. In the period of love, the couple did not concentrate

seriously on this issue, and during marital life it turned out that the

303

expectations of a certain style of behaviour from the partner were unrealistic

(15%).

 Incomplete relationship with the parent's family. There are two possible

types of disorders:

 too frequent appeal for advice to parents instead of solving family

problems between spouses;

 refusal to seek advice from parents or other relatives for help in solving

problems through fear of their disrespect, shame because of problems in

the family life.

In this case, a wife or a husband tries to prove to everyone and to convince

themselves that everything is wonderful, so existing contradictions are covered

“inside” instead of being resolved (11%).

 False feelings. The couples thought that they married for love, but the

feeling of happiness passed quickly. Passion, a stick of love seemed to have

the greatest value, but this feeling was misleading. There were

hypertrophied sexual fantasies in their relationship, but with development

of habitude and natural passion decreasing, such relationships lose

meaning (12%).

 Fear of differences. This phenomenon is based on the fact that spouses

consider differences in their views and interests as the reason for quarrels

and divorce. At the same time, people do not understand that because of

educational styles of their parents and their growth in a particular society,

they have certain ideas of what their marital life should be. They know how

they should behave, but these ideas may not coincide with the ideas of their

partners. During “relationship romanticization”, each of the spouses seeks

to prove their resemblance to each other, the newlyweds are afraid of

revealed differences and make every effort to avoid disputes. However, their

newly born children add new problems (Vrijmoeth et al., 2012; Kaygusuz,

2012). At this stage, called “working out of a family’s own rules”,

contradictions appear necessarily and they require an open discussion. This

stage is psychologically very difficult for such a marriage (14%).

 Problems of communication, when the partners are not able to negotiate all

the problems of their lives. Open, true communication becomes impossible,

which sooner or later destroys their relationship (19%).

 Negative personality formations or personality immaturity. For example, the

need to dominate one of the partners, determined by his/her internal

conflicts or other personality traits. This leads to appearance of guilty

feelings at an oppressed partner or feelings of his/her secondary

importance. In this case, the oppressed partner provokes even higher level

of domination over him/her, leading to domestic violence, and phobias and

even mental disorders appears at the victims of such violence. If the partner

resists dominance, the marriage collapses. The personality immaturity of

partners can be manifested in the avoidance of responsibility (Lehto et al.,

2009; Javanmard & Garegozlo, 2013). One of the proofs of the expediency

and importance of official registration of the family relationships is the fact

that this procedure requires a man and a woman to declare their readiness

for mutual responsibility and, most importantly, responsibility for the life of

their future child (6%).

304

 Inconsistency of a motive to marry with family functions. The motives for

marriage do not match the family functions, for example, when a person

marries in order to raise his/her social status, improve material well-being,

or if young people consider marriage as an opportunity to escape from their

parents or are forced to marry because of pregnancy. Such a marriage from

the very beginning is problematic. According to results, this cause was the

most important for those who failed to create a happy family (23%). Let us

consider what motives people had when they decided to marry (Figure 2).

Figure 2. The reasons for entering a marriage that do not correspond to the family

functions

The “independence” motive means the desire to become independent and often

caused by a protest against the parents’ authority. Making a marriage because of

“duty” almost always means that a woman is pregnant or premarital sexual

relations have caused a sense of guilt. The “loneliness” motive is the result of the

experience of existential emptiness, that is, the marriage was based on a

deficiency of love, and not because of the desire to be with this very person. The

“revenge” motive is in general contrary to the family concept, but it also took

place. It was about the fact that a person was married to avenge a beloved, with

whom he/she quarrelled. It is often necessary in the work of a psychologist and a

social worker to determine whether a particular family is harmonious,

disharmonious or dysfunctional. To do this, the specialist should rely on the

criteria for the normally functioning family (Silva et al., 2018).

Results and Discussion

Basing on the result of this study and authors` previous studies (Maksymova,

2011; 2017), the following criteria were identified:

 Respect for differences. Each family is a union of two cultures that exists in

parent's families of the spouses. If one partner tries to impose a culture of

relationships existing in his/her parent's family in the new family, that is to

re-educate his/her spouse, it is a sign of dysfunction. In a normally

functioning family, spouses are aware of the fact that each of them has the

right to have own vision of the world. Family members must respect the

differences, and not be afraid of them. Fear of differences in views on

relationships, traditions, and stereotypes of behaviour leads to

305

misunderstandings. Communion does not mean uniformity. The way to

harmonize family is to discuss openly issues, reconcile them in mutual

concessions, and is not in aspirations for dominance. If the style of one

parent's family becomes dominant, then both spouses will lose. It is best to

eliminate approaches “My-culture”, “His/her-culture” and to work out “Our-

culture”, to understand that “we” is a new, common culture of the family

(Banovcinova et al., 2014; Adams et al., 1994).

 Sincerity in expressing thoughts and feelings. It is about the peculiarities of

communications. If communications are impaired, then this is a

dysfunction. If spouses believe that love is incompatible with contradictions,

then they avoid expressing sincerely their wishes, assessing events, etc. Bad

bias – “love means consent to all manifestations of a partner” – leads to a

breach of relationship. For example, the phenomenon of waiting for

“thought reading”: “You must understand me without words”, “I love you,

therefore, I know what you need”, “If you do not understand why I'm

offended, then it's better for us to break in”, “I wish you good, therefore,

trust me and do what I say”. In this case, the natural differences in views

are not discussed openly, and the spouses use manipulations: reference to

authority, tradition, tears. The manifestation of this dysfunction is

incongruence. This dysfunction is manifested mostly in those areas that are

“closed topics” for the couple. In a normally functioning family, people are

not afraid to express their thoughts and feelings openly, they do not have

closed topics. Erosion of communication points not so much to the mistakes

of people, but to problems of a family system as a whole. It is often easier

for spouses to blame one another for the problem than to search for real

causes in wrong means of communication, for which both are responsible.

Applying the systematic approach, it is worth focusing not on changing of

people, but on changing of the ways of their interactions, studying the

factors that affect the communication problem (Absatova et al., 2021;

Bocheliuk et al., 2021).

 Dynamic relationships. Marriage is a process. Normally, a family system is

always dynamic: rules, stereotypes are changed, and the personality of each

spouse is always in development (professional, personal growth). If a person

stops in his/her development, if relationships become rigid, then their

stagnation occurs. Stagnation of relationships is a sign of dysfunction. If

development has been stopped, rules became dogmas, everything is known

in advance, then life becomes boring. An obstacle on the way of a family’s

harmonious relationships is a misconception of youth that a good choice for

a partner is enough to guarantee a happy family life. That is, if a person has

found exactly that person he/she needs, “his/her second half”, everything

will be okay, and if he/she has made a mistake, he/she should look for

another partner. Of course, the choice of a partner is important, but much

more depends on how relationships are developed during married life.

Consequently, marriage can be regarded as a line of processes in which

people interact (Kawiana et al., 2018; Widana et al., 2020). Each spouse

initiates these changes, takes part in them and is responsible for all areas of

the family's functioning: sexual life, child upbringing, mutual economic

obligations, joint accommodation, etc. The main thing here is the feeling

and understanding that marriage is a dynamic process that is created by

each participant and is continuously renewed.

306

 The idea on marriage as a happy crown, a reward for lovers united despite

all the obstacles is just a fabulous allegory. The well-known phrase “after

their wedding they lived long and happily”, unfortunately, does not

correspond to reality. Harmonious relationships between men and women

require hard work; they must be constantly built and rebuilt, renewed due

to mutual personal growth. This is applied to both partners. When

development happens only with one partner, is not encouraged and

cultivated by the other, then the distance between the spouses only

increases and becomes unbridgeable. Therefore, each spouse must

understand the importance of this movement, approve it, rejoice for

him/herself and for the other, for each step made by both of them. This is

the family function called emotional support that ensures creation of

conditions for personal growth of each spouse. A particularly dramatic

situation is when one of the spouses is developing, and the other is not, it

leads often to marital infidelity. If, however, a person developed actively

resists to development of his/her partner, it means a psychological abuse

(Cook et al., 2018).

 Role sharing. The criterion for the normal family functioning is flexibility of

their roles. This means that, if necessary, family members can easily replace

each other, carry out activities that are inherent to the other. For example, a

father always plays chess with his son in evenings or solves crosswords,

logical tasks, and therefore acts as the one who develops his son

intellectually. The mother prepares dinner at this time. However, when the

father is on a business trip, father’s role takes on the mother, and later she

prepare dinner together with their son. Families with flexible roles never

raise the question who is the main one: the dominant role is either

situational (today, in a particular situation, one spouse is the main one,

tomorrow it can be the other) or depends of spheres of family life. For

example, if a family decides what kind of food processors is best to buy,

then the decisive word remains for the mother, because she dominates in

this area. If the family chooses a colour of new wallpapers in the room of

their son, then the decisive word will be for their son. In a normally

functioning family, parents do not need to prove their authority all the time,

to demand obedience and subjugation of children only because they are

children. On the contrary, if a four-year-old son wins his father in puzzles,

then his father sincerely congratulates him without fear of losing his

credibility because of the loss. In such families, family members like to play

games where everyone has equal opportunities to win, or in games where

roles need to be exchanged. For example, parents play the role of children

on weekends, and their children do the parents’ roles. The children wake up

earlier, cook breakfast, remind their parents that they need to do morning

gymnastics, brush their teeth, and the parents do not want to get up, begin

to play, behave like naughty children (Kupka et al., 2003; Singh & Parmar,

2016). Such games help children understand better their parents, think

about what an adult is, and accept a reflexive position. In such families,

behaviour is regulated by commonly worked out rules, and not by just a

dominant will. These rules are obeyed by all family. For example, if the

family rules demand warnings when a family member is late, then parents

will follow this rule as well as children. In families where the “role sharing”

criterion is absent, the dominant position for many years and in all

307

situations is preserved for one family member. This power role is defined

either by social stereotypes (the husband is the family head), or by religious

concepts, or by personality traits. Roles in such families are tight and fixed.

For example, if cooking is the wife’s area, the husband coming from his job

before his wife will sit hungry and wait for her, but will not cook dinner

himself.

 Observance of personal boundaries. This criterion regulates the balance of

unity and freedom. In the case of normal functioning, family members

respect the personal space of everyone. This is applied to everyone, ranging

from toy cube towers, which a mother will not touch without her son's

permission (although this castle prevents her from washing the floor), and

to the inadmissibility of reading SMS-messages in a wife's phone or

checking her email. Each member of such family feels free, independent and

has the right to regulate the degree of proximity to others at a certain time.

In such families, family ties are highly appreciated, family members tend to

spend their leisure time with the family, but they accept quite easily

existence of personal friends, favourite occupations, belonging to certain

communities (sports clubs, religious and community organizations) outside

the family. In dysfunctional families, unity and freedom are perceived as

antagonists. Here is the polarization: either the desire for a complete

merger, symbiosis, control, or dissociation and indifference. In the case of a

symbiotic relationship, the partner is treated as property, hence jealousy

appears. In such married couples, one family member controls and does not

let the other go, and the other merges emotionally with him/her, identifies

him/herself with his/her partner, dissolves in the partner and actually

loses own personality, ceases to live own life. Interestingly, such an option

of emotional merging is prised in literature and songs. In reality, such

relationships are called “toxic love”, or neurotic ligament. The danger of

symbiotic relationships is that all behavioural manifestations of a partner

are perceived as own, that is, the person automatically feels anger if

someone criticizes his/her partner without even understanding the reasons

for criticism. All requirements and offers of the partner are unconditionally

fulfilled (because they are already perceived as own), even if they objectively

harm the person (Epstein-Lubow et al., 2009; Nikolaev et al., 2016).

 Family openness. In the case of a normally functioning family, it is an open

social organism. Such family is part of a wider social system; it is always

open to others. Friends, neighbours, relatives, colleagues, friends of

children are accepted happily in the family space, taken with joy, without

strain and suspicion. Friendly relationships with their social environment,

the ability to sympathize, help and receive help, a sense of unity with people

give a very valuable experience for children socialization. If problems arise

in such families, they are not ashamed to “take garbage out of the house”,

but sincerely seek advice from people in their environment, from whom they

trust, or from specialists (psychologists, social workers). Therefore, with the

help of these people, they can successfully implement their powers, which

allow them to solve virtually any problems. On the contrary, closed families

avoid communicating with anyone. They may have a lot of friends, business

partners, but all these are “necessary people”, which are important as a

means to achieve goals, but completely indifferent themselves. In these

families, the attitude towards people is cautious, mistrustful; disdain or

308

envy, rivalry, hostility prevail. Families with such dysfunction can indeed be

presented as closed systems. Because of this, they have very limited

resources and, at the same time, are not capable of solving their own

problems.

 Emotional and spiritual intimacy. This criterion reflects the essence of love,

when the desire to be together is determined not by the fact that this

proximity gives some benefits (a status, material benefits, sexual pleasure),

but that love is most important idea for a person. In this case, needs and

aspirations of a beloved person are equal with own needs and aspirations:

not higher, as in the case of toxic love, and not lower, as in the case of

consumer attitudes. True intimacy and openness do not arise immediately;

this is the result of long and laborious work of the spouses over themselves,

on their relationships, the result of common experiences, successes,

difficulties, joys and grief, divided into two. Such life experience creates a

lasting sense of tenderness, caring, trust, and support. The family is the

centre of security, with love and appreciation, where no one will offend and

a person is always understood. On the contrary, dysfunctional families are

characterized by dominance of distrust, fear, feelings of loneliness, being

unnecessary, neglected and misunderstood, and sometimes hated

(Tynyshbayeva & Makhadiyeva, 2014; Rückert, 2015).

Conclusion

Each family is a union of two cultures that exists in parent's families of the

spouses. In a normally functioning family, spouses are aware of the fact that each

of them has the right to have own vision of the world. In a normally functioning

family, people are not afraid to express their thoughts and feelings openly, they do

not have closed topics. Erosion of communication points not so much to the

mistakes of people, but to problems of a family system as a whole. An obstacle on

the way of a family’s harmonious relationships is a misconception of youth that a

good choice for a partner is enough to guarantee a happy family life. The choice of

a partner is important, but much more depends on how relationships are

developed during married life. Consequently, marriage can be regarded as a line

of processes in which people interact. Each spouse initiates these changes, takes

part in them and is responsible for all areas of the family's functioning: sexual

life, child upbringing, mutual economic obligations, joint accommodation, etc.

Harmonious relationships between men and women require hard work; they must

be constantly built and rebuilt, renewed due to mutual personal growth. The

criterion for normal family functioning is also the flexibility of their roles. In the

case of normal functioning, family members respect the personal space of

everyone, it is an open social organism, needs, and aspirations of a beloved

person are equal with own needs and aspirations. On the basis of the revealed

criteria of the normal functioning of a family system, it is possible to determine its

resource potential. Prospects for the study are to develop a diagnostic system

based on these criteria.

References

Absatova, M., Aituarova, A., Ospanbekova, M., Azhgaliyev, M., Uanbayev, E., &

Doshybekov, A. (2021). Experimental research of motivational and reflexive

309

components of students’ reading culture. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S1),

670-683. https://doi.org/10.37028/lingcure.v5nS1.1451

Adams, D. M., Overholser, J. C., & Lehnert, K. L. (1994). Perceived family

functioning and adolescent suicidal behavior. Journal of the American Academy

of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 33(4), 498-507.

https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199405000-00008

Badawy, P. J., & Schieman, S. (2020). When family calls: How gender, money,

and care shape the relationship between family contact and family-to-work

conflict. Journal of Family Issues, 41(8), 1188-1213.

Banovcinova, A., Levicka, J., & Veres, M. (2014). The impact of poverty on the

family system functioning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 132, 148-

153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.291

Bocheliuk, V. Y., Nechyporenko, V. V., Pozdniakova-Kyrbiatieva, E. H.,

Pozdniakova, O. L., & Siliavina, Y. S. (2021). Psychological and pedagogical

aspects of consolidation of social capital of higher education

institutions. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S2), 342-353.

https://doi.org/10.37028/lingcure.v5nS2.1357

Cook, W. L., Dezangré, M., & De Mol, J. (2018). Sources of perceived

responsiveness in family relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 32(6),

743.

Crowley, J. E. (2019). Gray divorce: Explaining midlife marital splits. Journal of

women & aging, 31(1), 49-72.

El-Sheikh, M., Shimizu, M., Erath, S. A., Philbrook, L. E., & Hinnant, J. B.

(2019). Dynamic patterns of marital conflict: Relations to trajectories of

adolescent adjustment. Developmental psychology, 55(8), 1720.

Epstein-Lubow, G. P., Beevers, C. G., Bishop, D. S., & Miller, I. W. (2009). Family

functioning is associated with depressive symptoms in caregivers of acute

stroke survivors. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 90(6), 947-

955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.12.014

García‐Mendoza, M. D. C., Parra, Á., Sánchez‐Queija, I., & Arranz Freijo, E. B.

(2020). Emotional autonomy and adjustment among emerging adults: The

moderating role of family relationships. Scandinavian journal of

psychology, 61(3), 380-387.

Javanmard, G. H., & Garegozlo, R. M. (2013). The study of relationship between

marital satisfaction and personality characteristics in Iranian

families. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 84, 396-399.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.573

Johnsen, A., Sundet, R., & Torsteinsson, V. W. (Eds.). (2018). Self in relationships:

Perspectives on family therapy from developmental psychology. Routledge.

Kawiana, I. G. P., Dewi, L. K. C., Martini, L. K. B., & Suardana, I. B. R. (2018).

The influence of organizational culture, employee satisfaction, personality, and

organizational commitment towards employee performance. International

research journal of management, IT and social sciences, 5(3), 35-45.

Kaygusuz, C. (2012). Psychological counselling within the context of globalization

and multiculturalism. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 895-902.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.753

Kupka, M. S., Dorn, C., Richter, O., Schmutzler, A., van der Ven, H., & Kulczycki,

A. (2003). Stress relief after infertility treatment—spontaneous conception,

adoption and psychological counselling. European Journal of Obstetrics &

310

Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 110(2), 190-195.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-2115(03)00280-X

Lehto, X. Y., Choi, S., Lin, Y. C., & MacDermid, S. M. (2009). Vacation and family

functioning. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(3), 459-479.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2009.04.003

Maksymova, N. Y. (2017). Psychological diagnostics of predisposition to addictive

behaviour. Likarsʹka sprava, (7), 162-167.

Maksymova, NY (2011). Family counseling: a textbook. Kiev: Personal .

Narendran, D. J., Abilash, R., & Charulatha, B. S. (2021). Exploration of

Classification Algorithms for Divorce Prediction. In Proceedings of International

Conference on Recent Trends in Machine Learning, IoT, Smart Cities and

Applications (pp. 291-303). Springer, Singapore.

Nikolaev, E. L., Baranova, E. A., & Petunova, S. A. (2016). Mental health problems

in young children: the role of mothers’ coping and parenting styles and

characteristics of family functioning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 233, 94-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.152

Richard, M. J. (2019). Supporting the fragile equilibrium of the family

relationship. Soins. Psychiatrie, 40(320), 14-17.

Rogers, C. (2002). Psychology of marital relations. Moscow: Eksmo.

Rückert, H. W. (2015). Students׳ mental health and psychological counselling in

Europe. Mental Health & Prevention, 3(1-2), 34-40.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhp.2015.04.006v

Satir, V., Banmen, J., Gomori, M., & Gerber, J. (1991). The Satir model: Family

therapy and beyond. Palo Alto, Calif.: Science and Behavior Books.

Silva, L. A., Scorsolini-Comin, F., & Santos, M. A. (2018). Motivations for the

maintenance of marriage. Psicologia em Estudo, 23, e41155.

Singh, A., & Parmar, D. S. (2016). A comparative study of psychological factor

among female athletes. International research journal of engineering, IT &

scientific research, 2(1), 8-21.

Tynyshbayeva, A., & Makhadiyeva, A. (2014). Self-destructive Behavior of the

Condemned Criminally-Correctional Facilities in Structure of Psychological

Consultation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 114, 482-488.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.733

Vrijmoeth, C., Monbaliu, E., Lagast, E., & Prinzie, P. (2012). Behavioral problems

in children with motor and intellectual disabilities: Prevalence and associations

with maladaptive personality and marital relationship. Research in

developmental disabilities, 33(4), 1027-1038.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.01.010

Whitaker, C. A., & Ryan, M. O. (1989). Midnight musings of a family therapist.

Widana, I.K., Dewi, G.A.O.C., Suryasa, W. (2020). Ergonomics approach to

improve student concentration on learning process of professional ethics.

Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 12(7), 429-

445.

Yan, J., Olsavsky, A., Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., & Kamp Dush, C. M. (2018).

Coparenting in the family of origin and new parents’ couple relationship

functioning. Journal of Family Psychology, 32(2), 206.