Australians contemplating a partner visa application with Filipino’s should always investigate the parenting attitude that their prospective spouse may apply to the current children, in their care.
During a partner visa application from the Philippines to Australia ‘dependent family members’ may be included during or after a partner visa application has been granted, in each of its particular stage(s).
It may be in the best interest of any prospective Australian partner/sponsor to read the following and other articles/research such as Attributions and Attitudes of Mothers and Fathers in the Philippines written and compiled by Liane Peña Alampay and Rosanne M Jocson.
This will greatly assist in understanding cultural difference(s) between both the Filipino partner visa applicant and Australian sponsor, if you have a current or planned child.
Philippine Culture
The Philippines is an economically developing country with a low per capita Gross National Income and approximately 36.8% of the population, living below the national poverty line.
In basic health and education indices—for instance, an under-5 mortality rate of 2.8% and an adult literacy rate of 93%–the country fares comparatively better than other developing nations, but still falls short of its millennium development goals (United Nations Development Programme, 2007).
The country also ranks among the highest in Asia in inequalities between rich and poor individuals (Ney, 2007).
Economic growth and increased consumption are predominantly experienced by families living in urban areas and with a highly educated head of the household, but progress has lagged significantly for the lower income class.
Not unlike its Asian neighbours, Philippine society has been described as predominantly collectivist, and Filipinos as strongly valuing, prioritizing, and cultivating relational bonds, especially within the family (Chao & Tseng, 2002; Ho, 1993; Hofstede, 1980).
Unlike its Asian neighbours, however, where the principles of Confucianism and Buddhism are considered the foundation of familial attachments and obligations (Chao & Tseng, 2002; Ho, 1993), Filipinos’ collectivism is thought to be rooted in the pivotal value of “smooth interpersonal relations,” exemplified in desiring harmony and inclusiveness in relationships and the subjugation of individual interests for the sake of the in-group (Lynch, 1973).
Beyond smooth interpersonal relationships, indigenous psychology has proposed that a core of Filipino interpersonal behaviour is the concept of kapwa (Enriquez, 1994). Literally translated, kapwa refers to the “other” or “fellow-being.” In the Filipino psyche, it reflects a self that is shared with the other (Bulatao, 1992/1998).
It follows that the central value guiding Filipino social behaviour is a basic respect for another person’s being, which is rooted in a regard for the other as not different or as one’s equal. To think and act as if the self were separate from kapwa is to be individualistic, egotistic, and walang kapwa-tao (“without fellow-feeling”), a serious transgression in Filipino society.
- The family is the most important social group in Filipino culture; it is “the centre of their universe” (Jocano, 1998, p.11).
Filipino identity is typically and strongly defined by close-knit family ties (Medina, 2001; Wolf, 1997). As in other collectivist contexts, harmony, respect for elders, fulfilling duties and expectations, and deference to parental authority are valued.
Individual behaviours and achievements reflect on the family as a whole and bring about familial pride or shame (Chao & Tseng, 2002; Ho, 1993).
Thus, in the Filipino family it is imperative that one behaves with respect to the self and the family’s sense of hiya, which is a deeply held value that refers to honour, dignity, and propriety (Enriquez, 1994). Typical admonitions of the parent in response to a child’s undesirable behaviour remind the child to uphold his or her and the parent’s hiya.
Filipino children are likewise expected to obey parental authority and sacrifice individual interests to prioritize familial obligations (Medina, 2001; Peterson, 1993; Wolf, 1997). Such implicit expectations are encapsulated in the value of utang na loob (“debt of one’s being”) or the life-long “debt” owed to another person that exists not merely because of receipt of some favour, but because of deep respect and gratitude (Enriquez, 1994). Children are expected to possess a sense of utang na loob towards their parents for having reared them, which must be manifested in respectfulness and honouring of family obligations. Otherwise, the son or daughter will be known as without hiya or without utang na loob—no honour or gratitude—signifying that one is not a “good” child, much less a decent person.
Consistent with the foregoing interdependent values, researchers have extensively documented that Filipino youth place a high value on familism, expressed in higher endorsement of parental authority and influence in making decisions, lower disagreement with parents, and greater adherence to family obligations, than European and American youth (Cooper, Baker, Polichar, & Welsh, 1993; Darling, Cumsille, & Peña-Alampay, 2005; Fuligni, 1998; Fuligni, Tseng, & Lam, 1999).
Attitudes and Attributions of Filipino Parents
The emphasis on the aforementioned family values suggests parental childrearing attitudes that are more authoritarian than progressive.
Authoritarian attitudes emphasize parental authority and child obedience and conformity; in contrast, progressive attitudes involve beliefs that children are agentic and self-directing and should be able to express and assert themselves (Schaefer & Edgerton, 1985).
The extant local data bear this out. In the cross-national Value of Children (VOC) study conducted in the 1970s, the quality that over 60% of Filipino parents most valued in their children is “to mind their parents.”
In contrast, independence and self-reliance were among the lowest cited responses (Hoffman, 1988).
Even two decades later, when asked to define a “good” and competent child, the most frequent responses of Filipino rural mothers pertained to obedience towards parents, being helpful in household chores, caring for younger siblings, and providing for the needs of the family (Durbrow, Peña, Masten, Sesma, & Williamson, 2001).
It corresponds that disobedience is the transgression that most often warrants disciplinary action, typically in the form of physical punishment (spanking) and verbal reprimands (De la Cruz, Protacio, Balanon, Yacat, & Francisco, 2001; Jocano, 1970; Licuanan, 1979; Medina, 2001).
Indeed, parents believed that discipline—often equated with physical punishment—is a necessary responsibility of parents to “bend the young in the right direction” (De la Cruz et al., 2001; Jocano, 1970).
Thus, in their emphasis on obedience to authority, the foregoing clearly indicates that Filipino parents hold predominantly traditional and authoritarian childrearing attitudes. This is in the context of a childrearing environment that is generally reported to be affectionate, indulgent, and supportive, especially for younger children (Medina, 2001; Ventura, 1981).
The implications for Filipino parents’ attributions are less explicit. Parents’ beliefs are rooted, in part, in adults’ conceptions of the nature of children. In a qualitative study on concepts of children and parenting, 74 mothers and 13 fathers expressed that children do not have a “mind of their own”; that is, they have yet to develop reason and an understanding of reality, are impulsive and demand immediate gratification, and possess a natural penchant for mischief. These beliefs legitimize parental authority and children’s subservience (De la Cruz et al., 2001). Indeed, if a child does grow up to be “good,” then this is primarily attributed to proper discipline, monitoring, and the teaching of values, according to Filipino mothers (De la Cruz et al., 2001; Durbrow et al., 2001). In Durbrow et al.’s (2001) cross-national study of Filipino, American, and Caribbean mothers, only 26% of Filipino mothers believed that competence is inherent in the nature of the child (although this is more than the number of U.S. and Caribbean mothers who thought the same).
In the framework of Bugental and her colleagues, parents consider successful and unsuccessful interactions with children as either caused or controlled by them or by the child (Bugental & Happaney, 2000; Bugental & Shennum, 1984). In the context of the foregoing, so much power in the hands of Filipino parents to mould and discipline children suggests parent-centred explanations for both successful and unsuccessful outcomes and interactions with children. Similarly, that successes and failures are thought to reflect on the collective, rather than the individual, may encourage attributions directed to the parent who socializes, instead of the child. It may also be speculated that negative child outcomes are attributed to the child’s nature, which has yet to be shaped by the parent.
Although the discourse on Filipino sociocultural and family values has been largely consistent, recent demographic trends suggest that the Filipino family is changing. Increasing numbers of women in the labour force, single-parent homes, overseas migration, and other influences of globalization (McCann-Erickson Philippines, 2006) may portend a shift in parenting beliefs and practices. Medina (2001, p. 237) observed that Filipino parents “are adapting gradually to the changing times by shifting their childrearing orientation from dependency to independence, from restrictiveness to permissiveness, from extreme control to autonomy, and from authoritarianism to liberalism and individuality.” However, there are few empirical data to support this assertion, and the current study examines, in part, contemporary Filipino parents’ cognitions.
More information regarding this particular topic on child rearing in the Philippines may be found and read on the following website:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3150789
As the article/research shows there are vast differences in child rearing practices as compared to a country like Australia, as well.
If you are in or are contemplating a relationship with a Filipino partner from Australia then it would be advisable to explore and discuss this aspect of your relationship even if there are no children involved at this point in time. Filipinos expect a ‘disciplined environment’ when it comes to child rearing and Australian sponsors are well advised to consider and communicate their expectations in these aspects, during any developing relationships, with Filipinos.
Respall Migration Australia (RMA) has been providing partner visa assistance in the Philippines since 1999 and have a reputation of providing a remarkable migration service for over 26 years. Contact Us if you have any further questions about this or any other aspects that you may require additional assistance with during a partner visa application from the Philippines to Australia.
Thank you.
