Perspectives on family resilience in the face of unemployment: a case study on unemployed City of Johannesburg families

Abstract

Unemployment is a global phenomenon that is affecting many individuals and families negatively, in particular, their functioning, well-being, and coping mechanisms. Unemployment is thus regarded as a risk factor that places many families in adverse situations. While literature extensively describes family resilience in the face of diverse adversities, little research documents family resilience in the face of unemployment, especially in South Africa. It is within this context that we set out to explore the adversity of unemployment from a resilience perspective with the intention to unmask the embedded protective processes in affected families. This was approached through the loose application of Walsh’s family resilience perspective as a theoretical lens. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants who were regarded as breadwinners or key family providers. Each participant engaged in two interviews that were four months apart to allow for reflection and member checking. Data were analysed through a hybrid process that incorporated both the inductive and the deductive logic of thematic analysis. Participants described several key protective processes, which aligned with what Walsh proposed. The practice of communicating, the ability to connect, and the use of spirituality were identified as particularly useful. Overall, the findings imply that despite the experienced adverse conditions of unemployment, South African families demonstrate thriving potential.

Introduction

Unemployment rates in South Africa are high, with a level of 32.7% being registered in the last quarter of 2022 (Statistics South Africa, 2022). This means that many families face adversity. Various factors contribute to the rising unemployment rate such as a poor economy, corruption, and skills mismatch (Department of Labour, 2019; Du Toit et al., 2018; Plagerson et al., 2019), resulting in a protracted social crisis. Several research studies have highlighted the negative impact of unemployment on families, which poses an immediate threat to their well-being and functioning (Izaks et al., 2018; Khumalo et al., 2012; Makiwane et al., 2017; Theron & Phasha, 2015). With the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic (World Health Organization, 2020), the situation worsened, resulting in many more people losing their jobs. The literature convincingly describes unemployment from a pathological perspective by looking at the negative effects on individuals and families (Du Toit et al., 2018; Magruder, 2012; Mahlangu, 2015; Makaringe & Khobai, 2018). We, however, explored the adversities of unemployment from a resilience perspective, specifically in the South African context with the intention to unmask the possible embedded protective factors, coping strategies, and thriving potential in affected families. We used Walsh’s family resilience perspective (Walsh, 1996, 1998, 2003a, 2003b, 2012, 2016a, 2016b) as a theoretical lens to explore families’ functioning in the face of unemployment. This perspective suggests that despite adversity and risk, a family can thrive through the collaborative efforts of its members.

The concept of family resilience

Despite many studies exploring family adjustments because of stress, the term family resilience only emerged late in the nineties. Currently, family resilience research is ongoing and promising, particularly within the field of positive psychology. Family Resilience Theory (Walsh, 1996), which stems from family systems theory, is only one of the many ways to understand the positive functioning of families who are facing hardships. More specifically, Walsh’s theory views family functions in relation to sociocultural contexts and multi-dimensional family life circles, making it especially relevant in the diverse South African context. This systemic approach echoes the later work on resilience, describing resilience as a process rather than a trait, incorporating dynamics rather than specific factors, and being fluid rather than being a fixed outcome (Masten, 2011; Ungar, 2018; Van Breda, 2018). From this perspective, families facing difficulties are seen as challenged rather than non-functioning, which affirms their reparative and growth potential (Walsh, 1996, 2003a). Walsh (2003a) proposes family resilience as a dynamic process of growth, in effect warning against the more simplistic view of only identifying specific strengths and coping mechanisms. Many other debates within the sphere of family resilience are acknowledged (for a thorough review, refer to Maurović et al., 2020), but these are outside the scope of this article.

Exploring family resilience from a systems perspective

Family members, through their family patterns and processes, can reconstruct adversity by contextualising it in a meaningful manner. Such families have the potential to identify and fortify key processes that enable them to surmount current disruptive challenges and persistent stresses, and they are, therefore, able to function optimally in the face of significant stress (Patterson, 2002a). Walsh’s framework includes factors relating to belief systems, organisational processes, and communication or problem-solving processes (Walsh, 1996, 2003b) that interact within a system (in this case, the family). According to Patterson (2002b), these processes are protective factors that moderate the relationship between a family’s exposure to significant risk and their ability to show competence in accomplishing family functions, thereby embedding family resilience in these protective factors. However, the assessment or exploration of family resilience (as attempted in this study) poses many challenges. These methodological challenges are mainly due to the inherent flexibility of the resilience construct and are contingent on the variables within different adverse situations and social and developmental contexts. In addition, the diversity and complexity of family households and significant kinship bonds require clear yet flexible and inclusive definitions of ‘the family’ under study. Family could be perceived differently in African contexts from how it is perceived in European or Western contexts. As noted by Roman et al. (2016), another challenge is the clarification of respondents’ role such as the mother, the stepfather, the child, and the grandparent. In addition, researchers, both qualitative and quantitative, bring their own subjectivity and assumptive maps, which are embedded in cultural norms, professional orientations, and personal experience, into every evaluation (Walsh, 2016a). Although it is not feasible to assess directly or to control all variables, it is advisable to focus on those that are most relevant to the type of adversity (in this case, unemployment), the target population (in this case, breadwinners), and the social and temporal contexts (in this case, the South African labour landscape) studied, as well as the study aims.

Unemployment as a risk factor

The rise in unemployment statistics in South Africa over the past decade is of concern and can be seen as a national crisis that feeds socioeconomic challenges (Ebrahim et al., 2017). The goal of the South African National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 was to reduce unemployment rates to 14% by 2020 and to 6% by 2030 (Department of Labour, 2019); however, the current projections have worsened. The reasons offered are the lack of investor confidence in the South African economy (due to social and political instability) and the perceived level of corruption (Makaringe & Khobai, 2018). When considering the 32.7% of unemployed people in South Africa, we are referring to people aged between 15 and 64 years who are able and available to work but who are without the opportunity to do so (Statistics South Africa, 2020). As mentioned, the COVID-19 pandemic and its related national lockdowns further prevented people from looking for employment or being as economically active as before.

In addition to the social and economic effects, unemployment negatively affects individuals’ and families’ psychological well-being. Yamben and Asaah’s (2020) study on the effects of unemployment on health in sub-Saharan Africa found higher negative emotions, greater loss of self-esteem, and less life satisfaction in unemployed individuals than in their employed counterparts. In a study on unemployment in rural villages of the Eastern Cape (Kheswa, 2017), families were found to resort to drug and alcohol abuse as a way of feeling connected and dealing with boredom. The research of Graham and Mlatsheni (2015) concurs with the above-mentioned prolonged effects of unemployment and negative labour market experiences, which include decreasing self-esteem levels and increasing depression rates. Given this, the plea is out for policymakers to review the implementation of macro-economic policies (e.g., fiscal and monetary policies) to reduce the growing unemployment and its adverse effects.

South African families, unemployment, and resilience

The South African government developed and revised the White Paper on Families (Department of Social Development, 2021) with the aim of promoting healthy family life, family strengthening, and family preservation. However, unemployment is a risk factor affecting many South African families. Resilience studies in South Africa have helped us to make sense of how families are coping. Mhongera and Lombard (2020) explored pathways of resilience for children facing socioeconomic adversities and found that despite extremely difficult situations, children can, through personal agency, supportive relationships, and community programmes, develop pathways of resilience that lead to them producing better-than-expected outcomes. In 2016, Roman et al. asked, How well are South African families doing? Their findings indicated low-to-average levels of family resilience and, more specifically, indicated that family connectedness on the Family Resilience Assessment Scale had the lowest score while the ability to make meaning of adversity had the highest score. The participants in their study indicated that of all the dimensions of family resilience, they could make meaning of adversity, although the score was not high. Many other studies have explored, assessed, measured, and described South African families and their resilience tendencies (Bhana & Bachoo, 2011; Botha et al., 2018; Greeff, 2013; Isaacs et al., 2020; Raniga & Mthembu, 2017). In this study, however, we wanted to explore the processes at play when (a) a South African family faces unemployment specifically and (b) how these processes relate back to Walsh’s family resilience framework. By addressing this specific gap in the literature, we hoped to uncover and offer useful information for understanding a very real risk and how to navigate it better as a family.

Method

Participants

Nine participants (eight females and one male) from unemployed families residing within the City of Johannesburg participated in this study. To take part in the study, the individual had to identify as one of the key (financial) providers (breadwinners) of their family. This was explained as being a member of the family who, among others, takes charge and responsibility for the functioning of the family. The ages of the participants ranged between 25 and 40 years at the time of data collection. Seven of the participants self-identified as black African persons and two as coloured individuals. All participants were from child-dependent families. Five participants were married and four were single parents. The minimum level of education was Grade 11, with a National Diploma being the highest qualification. All participants were experiencing unemployment, ranging from a minimum of 7 months to a maximum of 14 years.

Interviews

Data were collected through face-to-face, semi-structured interviews. Each participant engaged in two interviews that were 4 months apart, generating 18 interview data sets in total. This two-set interview process allowed participants the opportunity to reflect on their situations. Our aim with the interviews was to gain perspective on family resilience in the face of unemployment, covering questions specifically about family functioning and interacting processes amid unemployment. The following are examples of the questions posed to the interviewees. (a) Describe your family’s experiences of being unemployed. (b) How does your family cope with the unemployment status? (c) Are there any positives for your family that you think or predict may result from this unemployment status? (d) How have you experienced the effects (both negative and positive) of unemployment?

Procedure

Purposive and snowball sampling (Creswell, 2014) was used to recruit participants who were unemployed. In addition to the characteristics of the participants outlined above, they had to be fluent in English. This decision was made based on budget constraints (for translation) and the researchers’ language competencies. The participants were identified, invited, and informed about the study. We encouraged them to discuss their participation with their family members before consenting to take part. The interviews were scheduled at private nearby venues (to ensure confidentiality) and at convenient times. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The researchers applied a multiple case study cross-analysis and audit, as outlined by Yin (2018), to validate initial responses and to confirm the correct interpretation of participants’ responses. After careful translation and member checking, the analysis of the data commenced. Most of the questions formulated for the second interview were based on the information shared in the first interview. Possibly due to intentional reflection and awareness of the study, participants were able to provide more in-depth and rich data in their follow-up interviews.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance was obtained from the Scientific Committee and General Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of the Free State, South Africa (UFS-HSD2019/1463/1103) and from the City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality. Participants provided written informed consent for participation, the recording of the interviews, and the publication of results. Data were anonymised and stored securely. Pseudonyms were allocated to protect identities. A risk management plan was implemented to ensure that participants received the necessary psychological support should they experience emotional distress as a result of participation.

Data analysis

Hybrid thematic analysis was used to analyse the data by incorporating the inductive and the deductive approaches as outlined by Boyatzis (1998) and Crabtree and Miller (1999). First, data were analysed inductively, meaning that no pre-determined coding register was used. During this process, codes were directly generated from the raw data. From this analysis, a coding register was compiled based on the components as coined in Walsh’s family resilience framework. Codes and themes that could not be allocated to the specific theory of family resilience were still considered for further analysis and discussion. It was important for the researchers first to give voice to the participants and second to consider these voices within a theoretical framework. By using a hybrid approach of thematic analysis carefully, the trustworthiness of the findings was enhanced. From the hybrid analysis process, the three dynamics of Walsh’s theory were appropriate in staying true and close to the data. The results are discussed within the superordinate processes of Walsh’s theory: (a) family belief systems, (b) organisational patterns or processes, and (c) communication processes. Walsh (1996) proposed these processes to be at play within and across a variety of levels or systems (biological, individual, familial, communal, and sociocultural). In this article, we report on three sub-themes that represent each main theme. In line with Walsh’s theory, the findings indicated that the interactional resilience processes (coping and functioning) were dynamic in nature and helped families to strengthen their bonds while developing more resources and competencies.

Results

Walsh’s family resilience conceptualisation refers to several dynamic, recursive processes in resilience, operating both within and across system levels in a specific context (in this case, South African families) and over time. The theory acknowledges the stressors (in this case, unemployment) operating across multiple levels (biological, individual, family, community and sociocultural).

Furthermore, the resilience factors are divided into three main categories: belief systems, communication processes, and organisational processes. We present our results in the order of significance, based on both the quantity of codes and the quality of the data within the themes. First, communication processes were identified as most prominent in achieving family resilience, followed by connectedness (in Walsh’s theory, this forms part of the organisational processes) and spirituality (in Walsh’s theory, this forms part of the belief systems). We acknowledge that there is a dynamic interplay between these three components, but they are presented individually in our results.

Theme 1: the power of talking and sharing

Most of the participants indicated how communication played a significant role in them being resilient, enabling them to share both information and emotions and to work together to make things better. The simplicity yet significance of talking is illustrated:

We talk about it as a family. My mom will sit us down and talk about our disagreements. We resolve them and move on . . . . (Lerato)

Frustrations come . . . after shouting, then you realise what I did was not right. We sit down; then we have a meeting; then we talk about it. (Lydia)

Uh, we just talk it through like you have . . . if one of us doesn’t understand, like, we don’t rush to make decisions . . . if one of us doesn’t understand or want[s] to take their own way, like, we have to talk and talk until we are all on the same page. (Rethabile)

Communication also allows for the sharing of emotions, which not only enables understanding but also assists in finding ways to deal with the emotional effects of unemployment. Grace explained how she gained more empathy and understanding after her children expressed their feelings towards the current situation:

I think we have grown . . . much closer because . . . I don’t shout at my children anymore. I feel bad for them. I understand that they want the life that they used to have, and they can’t have it now. So I try to be more understanding . . . .

She continued,

Uhm, it really depresses me. Yah, it is really sad. We uhm, I talk to them; we talk. I tell them that when I get a job, we will go back to living the life that we used to live. I tried to explain a lot to them so that they understand but is hard you know. Children, they don’t really get it. (Grace)

As indicated by Walsh (1996), a resilient family can collaboratively engage in an amicable manner to resolve problems. The participants in this study shared how they managed their disagreements to move forward. Rebecca explained her family’s proactive approach in addressing possible issues:

Yeah, sometimes I try to be quiet when we have conflicts and the following day, I call them [the family] and we talk about our issues. Sometimes, I call in my brothers who are not staying far from here and we involve them in addressing our issues. . .. It was much better; it was much smoother because you know you split responsibilities in the house, and maybe I’ll say I buy groceries and you [the husband] pay the debts because you have to pay policies, also burial policies. . . .

Still referring to collaborative problem-solving through communication, Mpho revealed the following:

Usually, we are – whoever has a problem, we call each other and sit and solve the problem.

Lerato added:

Yah, you see, when there is no one who is employed, most of the time we argue, but as a family, we end up making up. Yah, we give each other support. Yah, we talk and resolve our issues.

Theme 2: through connection, we are one

Walsh (1996, 2003a, 2016b) and Patterson (2002a) argue that families with diverse structures and resources can organise themselves in various ways to function optimally and that the balance between closeness and distance in families remains important, with cohesiveness acting as a protective factor. Participants indicated how their resilience is strengthened when their family structure is flexible and when there is a level of cohesion among its members. They also stated that their ability to mobilise external social, emotional, and economic support strengthens their resilience:

Yeah, there is a lot of good because, for example, [it] is winter now [and] sometimes they [sister and brother-in-law] do buy my kid some clothes for winter. At least, they meet me halfway because I have no income. (Mpho)

Lerato concurred that an increased level of talking about their differences resulted in the ability to move beyond them:

We talk about it as a family. My mom will sit us down and talk about our disagreements. We resolve them and move on.

Theme 3: by the grace of God

The findings significantly indicate the spiritual aspect in the families’ attempts to make meaning of their situation. Spiritual practices and beliefs provided families with strength, comfort, and guidance during troubled times. The following excerpts illustrate the beliefs and practices of family members as values that provide meaning and purpose in overcoming adversity pertaining to unemployment. Lydia, living in a family of 10 people, believes that seeking divine guidance assists all of them in coping with the challenges of unemployment:

[T]here is a lot of negativity . . .. I am a spiritual person. What I do in the morning is that every day I wake up, I pray to God. The reason is that you got to be wake up and got to be mentally there, and the only reason I am mentally there is that I wake up and pray. He is the one that helps. I pray for my children; I pray for my family, especially in the days that we are living in now. We’ve got corona, all other things, the violence that is going on. You got up, uhm, I concentrate in the morning and say Lord please let me have . . . carry me through this thing. So the only way to cope – be focus and rely on Almighty.

Both Mpho and Mmaphutsi acknowledge God’s goodwill in helping with specific needs:

Yes, it is, because for now I don’t have money to pay for my kid`s school transport. Uh, she has an eczema, and I don’t have money to buy her medicine, and [it’s] just God’s grace [that] we are fine. (Mpho)

Oh, through God’s grace . . . I’m just surviving hey. Uhm, my daughter is at least trying hey, and I thank God for that. And I’ve got one family friend – I even got flour from her . . . it’s all [a] godsend. (Mmaphutsi)

In trying to gain a sense of meaning through her spiritual beliefs, Rebecca expressed the following:

Eh, yah, I believe changes will be there as time goes as I believe in God. God is also watching us, and this situation cannot really be our destiny. The status that I am in tomorrow will be different as life evolves.

Discussion

The results indicate that despite the adverse effects of unemployment, families still identify processes linked to resilience and growth. The participants freely offered information on how their adverse unemployment situations are perceived as manageable. Their thriving and coping potentials were evident in at least three key transactional processes into which they tapped and which played a protective role in the functioning of the family.

The results of this study highlight three universal yet unique processes. The first is the family’s ability to talk and share and the protective value that this may hold. Most participants indicated communication to be a problem-solving technique, an essential technique to convey clear information, to share their emotions openly, and to collaborate in solving problems. These findings concur with those of Isaacs et al. (2018), who adapted and validated the Family Resilience Assessment Scale in an Afrikaans rural community in South Africa and found communication to be the underlying component of all domains of family resilience. In addition, Roman et al. (2016) found communication to be a strong predictor of family adaptation since it enhances problem-solving abilities during a family crisis. In line with these findings, Lewis (2018) argues that consistent parenting with clear communication serves as a protective factor for children across cultures, mainly because it nurtures and creates a responsive environment. Mampane (2014) suggests that families are better able to foster meaning when there is clear information regarding the adverse situation. Through communication, families also give themselves the opportunity to map a way forward (to craft plans), which contrasts with coping mechanisms such as avoidance, denial, and foreclosure.

In describing South African families, the humanitarian concept of ubuntu naturally arises. Ubuntu implies togetherness, bonding, and sharing. In most African cultural groups, a sense of sharing and helping others signifies altruism, cohesion, and warmth. The ability to connect was identified as key in families rebounding despite facing unemployment. Participants demonstrated how their families seek connections that render perceived support and protection against the negative effects of unemployment. The opposite is explained by participants whose families disintegrated in the presence of stressful situations. A South African study by Danhouse and Erasmus (2020) exploring connectedness in families dealing with adolescents who are in conflict with the law, recommended family connectedness as an effective tool that purposefully addresses the behavioural challenges faced by such adolescents. Its findings confirm that weak family bonds rendered parents powerless to help or to provide the necessary support for their children. A study on family functioning, life satisfaction, and happiness in South African households by Botha and Booysen (2014) also found greater levels of attachment to be related positively to optimal family functioning. We argue that within families facing unemployment, better functioning is more likely if social connectedness is present.

In understanding the impact of spirituality on resilience, Raniga and Mthembu (2017) found in a sample of families from low-income communities that spiritual beliefs pertaining to rituals hold the potential for positive life adaptation. This was also indicated in the findings of the current study. Raniga and Mthembu (2017) specifically mention traditional practices such as worshipping at a church and praying to God as sources of strength and hope in coping with adversity. Since unemployment can be associated with being unemployable, lacking qualifications or skills, and possibly as a punishment because of sin, the corrective and gracious nature that spirituality holds may be experienced as nurturing and a positive re-assurance of the self. Other South African studies confirmed spiritual practices as the source of resilience in low -and middle–income communities (Van Breda, 2016), enhancing beliefs that safeguard families from the harmful effects of exposure to violence (Isaacs et al., 2020). Izaks et al. (2018) also provide a focus on families using spiritual strengths and prayers to cope with the negative effects of seasonal unemployment. Very recent literature demonstrates the renewed use of spirituality as a coping mechanism since the COVID-19 pandemic by people facing possible employment changes and adversity (Burton et al., 2023; O’Connor et al., 2021).

In conclusion, this study only provided a snapshot of the how of family resilience within the context of unemployment. To add to the discussion, more studies are needed on the positive dynamics at play when a family system is confronted with unemployment. Equally important to minimising the negative impact of unemployment on families is maximising and unlocking the resilience potential within families affected by unemployment. Health practitioners, especially those working with families, should be encouraged to engage with the resilience dynamics across systems and help facilitate these identified processes. The findings support the idea of conducting assessments from a strengths perspective, such as seeking to identify spiritual assets or assessing the levels of shared emotions, which, in turn, may lead to more effective case planning.

This study was not without limitations. First, the sample size comprised only nine participants, which makes it difficult to apply the findings to a broader population. In addition, eight of the nine participants were female, which may result in a skewed narrative due to unbalanced gender representation. The purposive sampling method also limits generalisability, and internal validity cannot be established in qualitative research. The findings do not suggest that all or even most families will experience resilience through these processes. Considering more nuanced variables such as duration of unemployment, family size, socioeconomic status, and other familial risk factors would have resulted in more specific findings in regard to each family.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the results of this study highlighted how a group of families in the City of Johannesburg function in the face of unemployment. It was revealed that these families’ functioning was connected to the resilience processes that were employed, the most prominent being communicating, connecting, and practising spirituality. The findings of this study draw attention to the dynamics that affirm reparative and growth potential under stressful conditions. Furthermore, they show the relevance of using a systems approach in trying to understand family resilience, especially within the South African context.