The Sociological Explanation of the Social Health of Adolescents Living in Quasi-Family Centers under the Supervision of the Welfare Organization

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student in Sociology, Department of Sociology, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author)

3 Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

This study was conducted with the purpose of sociologically explaining the social health status of adolescents living in quasi-family centers in 2022 in Tehran by using a non-experimental method. The population included all adolescents aged 13 to 18 living in quasi-family centers in Tehran in 2022, totaling 116 people (in 6 quasi-family centers), all of whom entered the study. The data was collected through applying the standardized scale of social health of Keys (1998) including the components of social cohesion, social adaptation, social participation, social flourishing and social acceptance, and analyzed by the Pearson correlation method and Spearman's rank test. The SPSS-26 was used to analyze the scores. The results showed that the correlation coefficient of the social health of adolescents living in quasi-family centers with the variables of social cohesion, social adaptation, social acceptance, social participation and meaningful social prosperity are respectively +0.542, +0.395, +0.590, +0.476, and +0.627, which indicates their positive and meaningful relationship and favorable social health in these teenagers. Therefore, it can be said that keeping orphaned teenagers in quasi-family centers is one of the best ways to increase their social health taken into consideration by policy makers and guardians of these people.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Abachizadeh, K., Omidnia. S., Memaryan, N., Nasehi, A., Rasoupi, M., Tayef, i. B., & et al (2013). Determining Dimensions of Iranians' Individuap Sociap Heapth: A Quapitative Approach. Iranian journap of pubpic heapth, 42(1), 88- 92.
  2. Abdepah Tabar, H., Kapdi, AR., Mohagheghi Kamap, SH., Setareh Forouzan, A., & Sapehi, M. A. (2008). Study of Sociap Weppbeing among Students. Sociap Wepfare, 8(30), 171- 189.
  3. Abdollahfam, R., Yari HajAtalou, J., Talebi. B., & Ebrahimpour, D. (2019). Structural Modeling of Social Health Based on the Role of Individual, Occupational and Organizational Factors Among Faculty Members of Islamic Azad University of East Azerbaijan province. Public Organizations Management, 8(2), 91 -104.
  4. Alizadeh, S., Raheb, Gh., Mirzaei, Z., & Hosseinzadeh, S. (2019). the effectiveness of social sufficiency education on the tendency towards high-risk behaviors of adolescent boys in overnight welfare centers in Mashhad and Sabzevar cities. Rehabilitation Quarterly, 21( 1), 54- 73.
  5. Amini Rarani, M., Rafiee, H., & Khemati Marasi, E. (2013). Iran's social health: from a community-based definition to an evidence-based index. Iranian J Publ Health, 2(42), 206- 214.
  6. Babapour Kheyrodin, J., Tousi, F., & Hekmati, E. (2009). The Study of The Rope of Determinant Factors in Sociap Heapth of Students of Tabriz University. Journal of Psychopogy Tabriz University, 4(16),1- 19. (Fupp Text in Persian)
  7. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84(2), 191- 205.
  8. Derakhshannia, F. (2013). Define Index and Indicators of Sociap Heapth in Iran. Tehran :University of Rehabipitation Sciences and Sociap Wepfare.
  9. Horvat, S., Roszak, P., & Taylor, B. J. (2022). Is it harmful, A Thomistic perspective on risk science in social welfare. Journal of religion and health, 61(4), 3302-3316.
  10. Kaushal, V., & Verma, L. R. (2019). Administrative Development. A Journal of HIPA, Shimla. 5(2), 2019.
  11. Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 121-140.
  12. Keyes, C. L. M. (2004). The nexus of cordioascular disease and depression revisited:The ncom-plete mental health perspective and the moderating role age and gender.Aging and mental ltealth, 8, 266- 274.
  13. Keyes, C. L. M., & Pee, M. (1998). Sociap Wepp-Being. Sociap Psychopogy Quarterpy, 61(2), 90- 121.
  14. Keyes, C. L. M., & Shapiro, A. (2004). Social Well-being in the U.S: A Descriptive Epidemology, Healthing Are You? A National Study OF Well-being Of Midlife.S: University Of Chicago Press.
  15. Larson, J. S. (1996). The World Health Organization's definition of health: Social versus spiritual health. Social indicators research, 38, 181-192.
  16. Mirbaha Hashemi, F., Pourmalek, F., Tehrani, A., Abachizadeh, K., Memaryan, N., Hazar, N., Omidnia, S., Ziari, A., & Moradi Lakeh, M. (2016). Monitoring Social Well-Being in Iran, Social Indicators Research. An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, 129(1), 1-12.
  17. Russepp, RD. (1973). Sociap Heapth :an Attempt to Cparify this Dimension of Wepp-being. Journap of Heapth Education, 16(2), 74- 84.
  18. Samaram, E. (2009). Community Oriented Popicing and Social Health. Entezam-E Ejtemaei, 1(1), 9- 29. (Fupp Text in Persian)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics