The aim of this paper is to clarify the difference of the internal structure between two family patterns, one is composed of the “working wife”, and the other is composed of the “non-working wife”.<br>The development of industry causes the gradual separation between the place of production and that of consumption. In general, housewives of urban family are ordained to function, out off from the place of production, only in the place of consumption. These prescriptions have some influence on fixing the status of housewives in the family study, so that it is imagined that housewives should devote themselves to the domestic affairs and nursing. This fact is apparent from the example that T. Parsons and others, including some Japanese scholars, point out the “working wife” as “the deviant”.<br>But I take a serious view of the differences between these theories and actual conditions. In Japan, the rate of “working wife” is 52.4 percent of all working women in 1960. Since the war, that percentage is continually increasing. As far as these facts are concerned, at least, I think that T. Parsons and other's schemata don't reflect the actual conditions of Japan.<br>I want to make an approach to the family especially to the internal structure of the family that reflects these reality. And in this note, the internal structure analysis focuces on the decision making process and the devision of labour in the family. Because, there are three fundamental differences between the “working wife” and the “non-working wife” as a social existence. Those are differences of having or not having income, of how to use the time in living and of action areas. And I think these three differences must infuence the decision making process and the devision of labour in the family. Standing on these viewpoints, I undertook intensive interviewing-research about 60 families of primary school teachers in Sapporo, Hokkaido.<br>Summary:—<br>(1) According to the trend which the actual materials show, the decision making process and the division of labour can be typed into next three patterns.<br>* I=Participant in decision making process-Ia= Final decision maker-Ib= Follower<br>II=Non-Participant in decision making process<br>And these three patterns differ in each of the five parts of family affairs—the management of household economy, the management of general domestic food, clothing and habitation, nursing, the education of children, and the social intercourse.<br>(2) The first distinctive feature that the difference of the “working wife” and the “non-working wife” influences the internal structure of each family appears to be the difference of management of general domestic affairs and nursing. In these parts, the “non-working wife” reigns over the family as an expert. And the division of labour is as following; a husband takes the role of earning a living, a wife takes the role of domestic affairs and nursing. On the other hand, in the case of the family of the “working-wife”, there is a tendency that these family affairs are done in cooperation with some members of the family. Or a part of these functions seems to be transfered to society. I think that the difference of these parts is based upon the difference of how to use the time in living.<br>(3) But, secondly, these non-working wives, being expert of routine household work are more dependent on husbands than the working wives, in the case of large domestic economy. Eventually, a husband of the “non-workingwife” has more chances to become a leader than the “working wife's” one. And these differences are prescribed by the difference of having or not having income.<br>(4) The third distinctive feature is the influence which the difference of the structure of consiousness of housewives has upon the internal structure of each family. The differ