Family Medicine & Medical Science Research
Open Access

Bio-psychosocial Components of Family Health

Jon Ander Mendia^{* *}Correspondence: Jon Ander Mendia, Department of Nutrition, Missouri State University, Springfield, USA, Email:

Author info »

Description

Many of Campbell's conclusions are supported by Ell and Northen's study of the family health literature from 1990. Ell and Northen discover that the family system, as a result of the socialisation process, seems to shape family members' use of health services and their habits with regard to their health. Both the theoretical and empirical literature reported that the family has an impact on the psychological well-being of family members. Evidence indicating that family loss may be etiologically linked to the development of specific emotional issues is one example of how the family can have an impact on psychological health. Family members' type a behaviors are linked to their coping mechanisms. Other study supporting the link between family stress and the development of sickness are discovered by Ell and Northen's review of the literature. The literature generally comes to the conclusion that a happy family environment improves family members' overall health and capacity for stress management.

According to a content analysis study by Thompson and Pardeck, there are a lot of papers in the social work literature that address issues relating to family health. Despite the fact that the phrase "family health" is new to the field of social work, their survey of the social work literature turned up a tonne of studies on family health-related subjects. They used the earlier version of this chapter's definition of family health for their study. The following are included in this definition of family health: its physical, mental, emotional, social, economic, cultural, and spiritual elements. The family health dimension with the most papers was the mental dimension of family health, according to Thompson and Pardeck's analysis of these dimensions in the social work literature.

The limits of the biomedical approach have been extensively examined by McDaniel, Hepworth, and Doherty. According to their perspective, the aim of treatment for those who employ the biological model is to recognize the physical causes of sickness and treat them. By employing the biological approach, practitioners often ignore the psychosocial elements of sickness. The biomedical model has a history of separating the body and mind into distinct parts; this distinction has its roots in Descartes' dualism, a viewpoint that he developed. The biomedical approach pays little attention to how social structures, such the family, contribute to the development of sickness, therefore diagnosis and therapies are constrained.

A growing corpus of study indicates that the assessment and therapeutic process must take the psychological component of illness into account. Engel, for instance, used his study to show the value of psychosocial elements in diagnosing and treating physical and mental illness. Engel comes to the conclusion that the bio-medical model's understanding of sickness is constrained and disregards the significance of psychosocial elements in determining a person's health and illness. According to study, understanding the behavioral cues that are set off by stress and other circumstances may help explain the underlying causes of atherosclerosis and essential hypertension. In fact, a brand-new field of study called psychoneuroimmunology is developing that identifies psychosocial stressors including significant life changes, stressful jobs, and challenging families as being potential of causing immunological deficits that raise the risk of illness. According to this emerging field of study, illness both mental and physical should be seen not just in biological but also in psychosocial aspects. The practice of family health social work is theoretically supported by the field of psychoneuroimmunology.

The bio-psychosocial components of a presenting problem are fully integrated into family health social work practice using a holistic approach, increasing the likelihood that assessment and intervention will have a positive outcome. The family is seen in family health as a dynamic structure that influences health decisions, supports family members, and gives meaning to sickness. In conclusion, family members are seen as influencing and being influenced by the family system in a family health perspective.

This definition of family takes into accounts the family's makeup, organisation, and purpose. It also outlines the limits for determining what constitutes a family and what does not. For instance, a situation in which a live-in girlfriend boards with a father and his kids due of necessity for money but is not dedicated to a unity for the previously mentioned common goals would not be called a family. Each of the three aspects of nature, structure, and function are described here. To clarify what is meant by the term family, it is crucial to consider the nature of a family. The family, which serves as society's primary social structure, is distinguished by its unwavering dedication to the members' overall well-being. A family is made up of people who possess particular attributes, qualities, or traits. The invisible collection of functional requirements that organizes how family members interact is known as the family structure. A family functions by use of transactional procedures. Repeated interactions create patterns that support the family system's operation.

The ecological approach is unmistakably comprehensive in that it considers the individual, family, organizational context, and community as all important systems for assessment and intervention from the standpoint of family health. The ecological method is based on the ten fundamental presumptions listed below:

1. People think of transactions as on going, reciprocal exchanges that regulate behavior.

2. Within the context of the person-environment connection, which includes the family system, life stress can be viewed as either good or negative.

3. Coping is viewed as a step in the process of managing issues and controlling dysfunctional behavior. Individuals' coping mechanisms are significantly influenced by their family structures.

4. The social environment in which people and families reside is known as their habitat.