This study aims to analyze and compare the understanding and lived experience of peace and security within two dominant family models in Iran: the traditional and the modern. Family, as the primary institution of socialization and value transmission in any society, also serves as the foundational structure for the reproduction of both collective and individual identity. Therefore, examining how peace and security are realized within the family—particularly in the Iranian context, which simultaneously grapples with rapid modernization and the persistence of historical traditions—carries heightened significance. In this study, theoretical perspectives from prominent scholars such as Anthony Giddens on the transformation of intimacy, Johan Galtung on positive and negative peace, and Salvador Minuchin on structural family patterns have been applied. Additionally, insights from Iranian intellectuals—including Taqi Azad Armaki, Bagher Sarokhani, and Seyyed Javad Tabatabaei—have been incorporated to localize and contextualize the conceptual framework. This theoretical integration yielded five key analytical dimensions: power structure, gender roles, communication styles, cultural values, and psychological security, which together form the conceptual framework of the study. The research methodology is based on secondary data analysis, drawing on national surveys and published 
domestic studies to examine and compare the two family models. Findings indicate that the traditional Iranian family,The research methodology is based on secondary data analysis, drawing on national surveys and published domestic studies to examine and compare the two family models. Findings indicate that the traditional Iranian family, grounded in patriarchal authority, relatively fixed and inflexible gender roles, hierarchical relationships based on obedience, and collectivist cultural values, has achieved a certain level of institutional stability and broad social support. In this model, peace is often defined as external, conditional, and normatively anchored—meaning family members acquiesce to an imposed order and unwritten consensus in order to preserve familial cohesion and the legitimacy of the family institution.
In contrast, the modern Iranian family—characterized by a decline in hierarchical authority, a shift toward gender equality, greater flexibility in role distribution, and enhanced dialogue and interaction among members—has shaped a new model of familial life. This family model emphasizes individualistic values, personal growth, and autonomy, while simultaneously striving to preserve deep emotional bonds. As a result, peace in this model assumes a dynamic, internal, and mutually consensual nature—one that relies less on structural authority and more on trust, negotiation, and open communication.
Nevertheless, each of these two family models faces distinct challenges. While the traditional family benefits from high levels of cohesion and broad social support, it often leads to the suppression of individuality, restrictions on women’s agency, and the neglect of members’ psychological needs. On the other hand, despite its achievements in promoting gender equality and improving the quality of emotional relationships, the modern family is vulnerable to excessive individualism, weakened social solidarity, and fragility in the face of economic and cultural crises.
The analysis ultimately indicates that neither the traditional nor the modern family model, in isolation, is fully capable of ensuring comprehensive familial peace and security. Therefore, the study concludes by emphasizing the need to redefine the concepts of family peace and security within Iran’s indigenous socio-cultural context. This redefinition should be grounded in three foundational pillars: first: gender justice and the equitable redistribution of power within the family; second: genuine participation of all members in family decision-making processes; and third, the strengthening of communication and dialogue-oriented skills that can simultaneously address collective cohesion and individual needs. Designing supportive policies based on these principles can facilitate a transition toward a more balanced and resilient family model.