Estonian Human Development Report

higher social position of the younger population (Figure
3.4.3.).
A comparison of different households indicates that
families which consist of two adults and children have the
largest number of people belonging to the high quality of
life type. The largest number of people with a low quality
of life belongs to single-member households and singleparent
households.
Contrasting the segments of Estonia’s population
reveals that the largest difference in quality of life is based
on ethnicity. A high quality of life is characteristic of 43%
of the Estonian-speaking population, whereas the same
is true for only approximately 25% of the Russian-speaking
population. One distinctive feature is the significantly
higher tendency of members of the Russian-speaking population
to belong to the “dissatisfied” group. This raises
the question: what are the main aspects of quality of life
that bring about the difference in the quality of life of the
Estonian-speaking population and the Russian-speaking
population? Figure 3.4.4. shows that there are differences
in all of the observed dimensions and the largest differences
are manifested in the categories of social involvement
and personal security.
In conclusion, the main differences between Estonian
residents in quality of life appear by age and ethnicity.
A comparison of the components that make up
the quality of life of Estonians and non-Estonians shows,
most importantly, the difference in the levels of quality
of life. The Estonian-speaking population’s quality of life
is consistently higher according to all of the attributes
analyzed. However, the significantly lower satisfaction
of non-Estonians with their personal security and their
higher risk of perceived alienation (withdrawal) that are
evident among the other quality of life components may
indicate a more unfavourable effect of the social environment
(the so-called quality of life conditions) on the
development of individual quality of life. Differences
that are even more substantial appear in the quality of
life components of young and elderly people. The lower
than average quality of life of elderly people is a result of
their extremely low social position and perceived alienation.
This is aggravated by their material situation which
is devoid of opportunities and produces discontentment,
thus functioning as both the cause and effect of the aforementioned
problems.
Figure 3.4.3. Average assessments of the dimensions
of quality of life in the case of age groups 15–
24 and 60–75 (compared to the overall average)
Perceived
social
position
Perceived
social
involvement
Satisfaction with
one’s economic
situation
Economic means
0.40
0.20
0.00
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
Satisfaction with
relations with friends
Source: Integration of Estonian Society: Monitoring 2008.
Satisfaction with
one’s dwelling
Satisfaction
with personal
security
Satisfaction
with family life
15-24 y.o.
60-75 y.o.
Figure 3.4.4. Average indicators for dimensions of quality
of life by ethnicity (compared to the overall averages)
Perceived
social
position
Perceived
social
involvement
Satisfaction with
one’s economic
situation
Economic means
0.40
0.20
0.00
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
Satisfaction with
relations with friends
Source: Integration of Estonian Society: Monitoring 2008.
Satisfaction with
one’s dwelling
Satisfaction
with personal
security
Satisfaction
with family life
Estonians
Non-Estonians
3.5. Quality of life of children
Introduction
According to the new approach to childhood, children
are a part of the social structure and exist here and now
as subjects and as active social agents. Based on this
approach we can look at their quality of life from two
aspects. First, the quality of life that children can enjoy
themselves here and now (e.g. their health, the existence of
significant adults and peers and relationships with them,
access to social benefits). Second, the children’s quality of
life as the source of potential for a successful adulthood
(development of knowledge and skills as well as physical
and mental resources). Consequently, children’s quality of
life includes both the personal goals of children as well as
activities that ensure the sustainability of the society, i.e.
social goals.
A child’s quality of life is created in a family context and
is directly affected by the family’s coping skills (the ability
of the adults to cope with family-related matters, socio-economic
issues and issues related to upbringing, etc.). Important
influences include the family’s living conditions and its
general level of integration in the society, as well as whether
or not the child is valued in a wider social context. In addition
to communicating with adults, children need to relate
to their peers. According to William Corsaro (1997) who
established the new paradigm of childhood, involvement in
a group of their peers has a therapeutic effect on children.
Children who have been mistreated at home or in school
69 |