Main Article Content
Conflict in Nigeria family system: causative and strategic management factors
Abstract
Many scholars have discussed issues relating to conflicts particularly gender violence as they affect the home. The family system in African culture bestows certain rights to women gender. Women inherited the life style of pampering but subjected to men domination particularly in political, social, economical and psychological controls. These have caused a lot of confusion and perhaps conflicts to the identity of women and the society. The women have right of keeping the home and the children. However in the primitive economic buoyancy these rights were managed in a balance between men and women. As the political, social and economical situations grow, this behaviour dwindles in terms of conflicts. Women suddenly became aware of their rights which are been eroded among spouses which posed crisis to the family. These routes of gender conflicts against women and children are increasing and are unbearable to peaceful coexistence. This study examined both the causative and strategic factors of crisis management in Nigeria family system. Rahim (1985) conflict causative and management scale was adapted for the study. With this instrument, six hundred households were surveyed in towns and villages of Ondo state. Three hundred and twenty four questionnaires were found to be suitable for analysis and were subjected to t-test for independent groups and Pearson Product Moment Correlation analysis. Psychological and political factors were found to be the most two causative factors of conflicts in the family while integrating and obliging factors were found to be most effective strategies of crisis management in the family. Significant sex differences were observed in the levels of both the causative and the strategic management factors. Results were discussed in line with the existing previous findings and the current socio-economic and prevailing cultural values in Nigeria family system.
IFE PsychologIA Vol. 14(1) 2006: 211-221
IFE PsychologIA Vol. 14(1) 2006: 211-221