Small family units or living alone are increasingly becoming the preference for people in big cities instead of larger, extended households in several nations nowadays. This shift has been a critical issue, attracting the attention of people globally whether it is positive or negative trend. However, every phenomenon has its positive and negative facets, and this problem is not an exception. While there are valid arguments on both sides, a comprehensive analysis is necessary to determine its overall impact.
On the one hand, living alone or in small family provide individuals the convinient and comfortable. The number of members in household is about 1 to 5 members, which means more independence as living alone or in small household encourage people make decision by themselves and control their lives as well. For example, instead of consulting and requesting members in family, individuals living alone or in small family can make decision quickly. Additionally, this shift declines the conflict among members in households, which results in greater harmony.
On the other hand, this shift leads to the lack of supportive network since extended family provides members a network of reliable support, both sentimental and material values. For instance, if any member have problem, they have several reliable support from other members, which does not appear in single household or small family. Moreover, extended family plays an important role in preserving cultural custom and habit via passing down by the elderly in family.
In conclusion, the positive and negative aspects of this problem coexist, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach. Acknowledging both sides fosters a nuanced understanding of the overall impact.