However, the presence of one's own family must also be credited with many positive qualities, because where can one experience more support in social and emotional care than there?? Thus, a family in the situation of unemployment always has an ambivalent meaning. On the one hand, it represents a meaningful element for one's own life context and is an important factor in social support in critical life situations; on the other hand, it is an additional burden, since one bears joint responsibility over others. Of course, the poverty situation is always associated with financial worries, fear of the future and self-doubt on the part of the parents, which then also frequently have an impact on the partnership. There is increased tension and conflict between the spouses and the children. But do these conflicts not also arise without a family? Perhaps in other areas and levels, because with poverty always come losses and losses in material, cultural and also social areas. According to Kieselbach, Lodige-Rohrs and Lunser, clinical-psychological research has shown that family relationships are closely linked by their stressful and relieving character for coping with critical life events. For example, an American study in the 1930s concluded that unemployed people who received social and practical support from their partners were not as psychologically vulnerable. The unemployed with spouses and dependents even showed a significantly better health status. However, it should be noted that social support does not automatically lead to a reduction in the burden to be coped with. Thus, the presence of young children in the family may well cause an increase in psychosocial stress, z.B. for fear of not being able to offer the child a secure future. It is a fact that married men with children have often been found to have higher stress levels than unmarried men without children.  Ultimately, however, it is always a subjective feeling whether a family is perceived as a burden or a relief in unemployment.
3.2. Changes in family role and relationship structures
Poverty situation can lead to serious changes in role distribution and relationship structures within the family. The impact of these changes depends on the duration of unemployment and the personal resources of individual family members. The German government's Poverty and Wealth Report attributes great importance to human resources for coping with critical life situations. "Personal resources (composition of the household and human capital of household members), material resources (income and assets) and social resources (availability of public and private infrastructure) are important for the everyday coping of family households. Personal resources play a key role in this context, because they ultimately tap other resources and thus play a decisive role in determining the life situation.  In this respect, the explanations of Kieselbach, Lodige-Rohrs and Lunser seem even more tangible, they mention resources, such as the educational level of the family, the relationship qualities of the family members among themselves, as well as the personality characteristics, attitudes and interaction behavior of the individual family members.  Since our society is still characterized by a gender-specific division of labor and women continue to be financially disadvantaged in their professional lives, the unemployment of the "main breadwinner," who according to the classic family structure is the man, can often lead to an impairment of self-esteem in the "provider". The man often sees himself as a failure in his paternal function, since he cannot provide for his family in a productive way. A redefinition of the distribution of roles, with the woman taking on the task of the "main breadwinner," leads to an improvement in the financial situation, but can lead to increased conflicts in the family if the man represents a traditional role behavior. "Men and women have different expectations of family and participate unequally in the organization of living together and the work in the family."25] The role of the "househusband" is met by the man with increasing dissatisfaction and the involvement in family tasks is often seen as a double burden, which, in addition to the task of looking for a new job, tends to be a hindrance. Due to the growing maternal influence, the father's authority can be impaired, which in turn can lead to conflicts, separations and divorces due to the weakened paternal self-esteem and the psychosocial burdens.  However, there are also other situations, because the father's ability to adapt to this situation depends on his cognitive attitudes, personality traits and flexibility. If he does not limit his self-definition to the role of the breadwinner and his gainful employment, a very positive change in the family structure may well occur. The man's new responsibilities can lead to a more intensive family relationship. lead to more solidified family cohesion. This also leads to a reduction of stress in the overall situation and to a better well-being in terms of satisfaction and health.
 Cf. Klocke, A./ Hurrelmann K.: "Children and young people in poverty", Opladen/ Wiesbaden, 1998, pp.161 f.
 Vgl. Federal Ministry f. Family, Seniors, Women u. Youth: Tenth Children and Youth Report, Bonn, 1998, pp.92
 Cf. Klocke, A.: "Poverty among children and adolescents- stress syndromes and coping factors", in The Poverty of Society, Obladen, 2001, pp.302f.
 Iben, G.: "Childhood and Poverty", Munster 1998, pp. 17ff.
 Quotation from: Klocke, A.: "Armut bei Kindern und Jugendlichen- Belastungssyndrom und Bewaltigungsfaktoren", in: "Die Armut der Gesellschaft", Obladen, 2001, pp.308f.
 Cf. Iben, G.: "Childhood and Poverty", Munster 1998, pp. 21
 Cf. Butterwegge, C.: "Kinderarmut in Deutschland", Frankfurt/Main, 2000, p. 16
 Vgl. Federal Ministry for. Family, Seniors, Women u. Youth: tenth report on children and youth, Bonn, 1998, pp.92
 Cf. Kamensky, J.: "Childhood and poverty in Germany", Ulm, 2000, pp.21
 Quote from: Iben, G.: "Poverty at school", in: Padagogik, Heft 6/Juni 2002, S.35
 Quote from: Kamensky, J.: "Childhood and Poverty in Germany", Ulm, 2000, p.19
 Cf. Federal Ministry f. Family, Seniors, Women u. Youth: Tenth Children and Youth Report, Bonn, 1998, p.93f.
 Cf. Federal Ministry for. Family, Seniors, Women and. Youth: Tenth Children and Youth Report, Bonn, 1998, pp.147f.
 Citation: Iben, G.: "Poverty at school", in: Padagogik, Heft 6/Juni 2002, S.35
 Cf. Hobmaier, H.: "Pedagogy", 2. Edition, 1996, Cologne, pp.159f.f.
 Cf. SGB VIII, §1: "Right to upbringing, parental responsibility, youth welfare", Art. 2, in: "Laws for Social Professions", 7. Edition, 2000
 Lutz, R.: "Children, children..!- Coping with family poverty", in: "Neue Praxis", 1/2004, pp.49
 Cf. Lutz, R.: "Children, children..!- Coping with family poverty", in: "Neue Praxis", 1/2004, p.49
 Cf. Klocke, A./ Hurrelmann K.: "Children and adolescents in poverty", Opladen/ Wiesbaden, 1998, S.212
 Citation: Brinkmann, C.: "The individual consequences of long-term unemployment. Results of a representative longitudinal study. Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung", 17 (4), 454-473, 1984, in: Iben, G.: "Childhood and Poverty," Munster 1998, pp. 39
 Quote from: Ritchy, J.Thirty Unemployed Families: their living standards in unemployment", London, 1990, in: Klocke, A./ Hurrelmann K.: "Children and Adolescents in Poverty", Opladen/ Wiesbaden, 1998, p.216
 Vgl. : Iben, G.: "Childhood and Poverty", Munster 1998, p. 40 f.
 Citation: Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs: Lebenslagen in Deutschland, Der erste Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung, Berlin, 2000, S. 130
 Cf. : Iben, G.: "Childhood and Poverty", Munster 1998, p. 42 f.
 Quotation: Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs: Lebenslagen in Deutschland, Der erste Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung, Berlin, 2000, S. 130
 Cf. Klocke, A./ Hurrelmann K.: "Kinder und Jugendliche in Armut", Opladen/ Wiesbaden, 1998, p.276 f.