Children of Divorce Final Exam Review

Children of Divorce Final Exam Review

Tuesday, April 24, 12


What Was My Childhood Like?



Children • Paradoxical effect on marriage • Stabilization (institutional emphasis) • Destabilization (individual emphasis)


Children • Changes in: • Roles - caregiver, worker, availability to spouse; pressure towards more traditional gender roles

• Bodies - sexuality changes • Routines - sleep, eating, traveling, working • Values - new values, or dormant values emerge


Children • Marital quality declines during the

transition to parenthood and across the early years of parenting (many years!)

• Decline is more pronounced for wives than husbands


Children • Belsky & Hsieh, 1998, followed couples with newborn sons for 5 years

• Father reported “Love” score • Three patterns of change


Belsky & Hsieh 1998 • “Stays good group” - Fathers’ love stays high, and mothers conflict stays low

• “Good gets worse” - Fathers’ love was high but went lower, and mothers’ reported conflict went from low to high

• “Bad to worse” - Fathers’ love low to begin with, and gets worse, and high initial mother reported conflict remains high


519

PATTERNS OF MARITAL CHANGE "stays good" (n=51)

8076-

good-gets-worse" (n=10)

72Husband Love

6864"bad-to-worse" (n-38)

6010

27

36

60

Child Age In Months

Figure I. Patterns of change in husband-love scores.

good-gets-worse groups to determine why Tuesday, April 24, 12

marriages (as experienced by wives). Finally, a

Belsky & Hsieh • Predictors of initial marital quality were • Neuroticism (propensity towards negative affect - depression, anxiety, hostility)

• Agreeableness (thoughtful, considerate, cooperative, not selfish, cynical or manipulative)

• Extraverted (warm, friendly, likes people) Tuesday, April 24, 12

Belsky & Hsieh • Predictors of change were interaction patterns around parenting

• In particular, whether co-parenting

interactions were VALIDATING or INVALIDATING

• Undermining, negative or hostile interactions


519

PATTERNS OF MARITAL CHANGE "stays good" (n=51)

8076-

good-gets-worse" (n=10)

72Husband Love

6864"bad-to-worse" (n-38)

6010

27

36

60

Child Age In Months

Figure I. Patterns of change in husband-love scores.

good-gets-worse groups to determine why Tuesday, April 24, 12

marriages (as experienced by wives). Finally, a

Children DO make a difference • Belsky & Hsieh find that co-parenting is much more unsupportive during the toddler years in marriages that get worse

• Marital dynamics are more important than

personality traits in predicting why marriages that look the same initially (are both good) diverge over time (some get worse)

• Co-parenting is more important than division of

household labor (or, co-parenting is THE form of household labor)



Who Fights?


Chance of Divorce

2

0-1

2-3

1.5

4-5

Years To Divorce

1 0

2 -0.5

High-Distress Divorce (wife)

-1

1.5 -1.5

Conflict

1 0.5

Low-Distress Divorce (wife) Low-Distress Divorce (husband)

0.5

-2

6-7

0-1

2-3

4-5

6-7

High-Distress Divorce (husband)

Years To Divorce

Note: National Survey of Families and Households—high distress, n ¼ 242; low distress, n ¼ 267. All variables dardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. Regression analyses indicate that no slopes were significa the happiness of high-distress husbands and reported chance of divorce by high-distress wives and husbands.

0

-0.5 mean square of the correlations for each spouse, -1 the following formula: using qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi -1.5 Root mean square ¼ ðr12 1r22 1r32 1r42 1r52 Þ=5:

bands in marriages that remained conti together. For wives, the corresponding tions were .34, .29, and .31. Across both g the correlations between life happiness a ital quality were lowest in the low-distres The -2 average correlations between the five dimen- Nevertheless, the differences between sions of marital quality and life happiness were correlation coefficients were not signific 0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 .26 for husbands in high-distress marriages that p . .10). We observed comparable pat ended in divorce, .20 for husbands in low-distress results when we used the risk factors (de Years Tohus-Divorce marriages that ended in divorce, and .27 for above), rather than life happiness, as c


FIGURE 1. MARITAL QUALITY INDICATORS BY Low-Distress Divorce

Chance of Divorce

2 1.5 1

Low-Distress Divorce (husband)

0.5 0

2

-0.5


-1

1.5 -1.5 -2

1

Happiness

(wife)

0.5

0-1

2-3

4-5


6-7

Years To Divorce

Note: National Survey of Families and Households—high distress, n ¼ 242; low distress, n ¼ 267. All variables are dardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. Regression analyses indicate that no slopes were significant, ex the happiness of high-distress husbands and reported chance of divorce by high-distress wives and husbands.

0

-0.5 mean square of the correlations for each spouse, using-1 the following formula: qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Root mean square ¼ ðr12 1r22 1r32 1r42 1r52 Þ=5: -1.5 The average -2 correlations between the five dimensions of marital quality and life happiness were 2-3 that .26 for husbands 0-1 in high-distress marriages ended in divorce, .20 for husbands in low-distress marriages that ended in divorce, and .27 for hus-

bands in marriages that remained continuou together. For wives, the corresponding corr tions were .34, .29, and .31. Across both gend the correlations between life happiness and m ital quality were lowest in the low-distress gro Nevertheless, the differences between pairs correlation coefficients were not significant 4-5We observed comparable 6-7 p . .10). patterns results when we used the risk factors (descri above), rather than life happiness, as criter

Years To Divorce


Chance of Divorce

BY YEARS FROM INTERVIEW UNTIL DIVORCE. 2 1.5 1


0.5 0 -0.5

2


-1 1.5

-1.5

-2

Interaction

Low-Distress Divorce (wife)

1

0.5

0-1

2-3

4-5

6-7


Years To Divorce

Note: National Survey of Families and Households—high distress, n ¼ 242; low distress, n ¼ 267. All variables are s dardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. Regression analyses indicate that no slopes were significant, ex the happiness of high-distress husbands and reported chance of divorce by high-distress wives and husbands.

0

-0.5

mean square -1 of the correlations for each spouse, using the following formula: qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi -1.5 Root mean square ¼ ðr12 1r22 1r32 1r42 1r52 Þ=5:

bands in marriages that remained continuou together. For wives, the corresponding corre tions were .34, .29, and .31. Across both gende the correlations between life happiness and m ital quality were lowest in the low-distress gro -2 correlations between the five dimen- Nevertheless, the differences between pairs The average sions of marital quality 0-1and life happiness 2-3were correlation 4-5coefficients were 6-7 not significant .26 for husbands in high-distress marriages that p . .10). We observed comparable patterns ended in divorce, .20 for husbands in low-distress when we used the risk factors (describ Years Toresults Divorce marriages that ended in divorce, and .27 for husabove), rather than life happiness, as criter


2

2

Years To Divorce 1

1.5

1.5

0.5

Violence

Conflict

1 0

2

-0.5

0 -0.5 -1

1.5 -1.5

-1.5

-2

-2

1

0-1

2-3

4-5

6-7

0-1

Years To Divorce

0.52 Chance of Divorce

Chance of Divorce

-1

0.5

6-7

Low-Distress Divorce (wife)

0 1


-0.5 0 0.5

-1 -1

-0.5


-1.5

-2

4-5

Years To Divorce

1.5

-1.5 -2

2-3

0-1

2-3

4-5

6-7

Years To Divorce

0-1


2-3

4-5

6-7

Note: National Survey of Families and Households—high distress, n ¼ 242; low distress, n ¼ 267. All variables are dardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. Regression analyses indicate that no slopes were significant, e the happiness of high-distress husbands and reported chance of divorce by high-distress wives and husbands.

Years To Divorce


Some people fight



How do we argue? • What is a successful argument?

ONE THAT

PROMOTES ENGAGEMENT

• Not necessarily resolution • Further clarification about sources of conflict • Building a framework for ongoing discussion and conflict

• Conflict is work- it can be constructive or destructive


Trust • Trust is a basic precondition for any successful argument

• With trust, it is possible to tolerate

negative emotions, expressions of doubt, and some kinds of criticism

• Without trust, negative emotion, doubt and criticism get magnified quickly

• Leading to defensiveness or retaliation Tuesday, April 24, 12


Successful arguments • Be Assertive (Say what you mean) In a Kind Way

• Maintain engagement • Good Communication Principles


Gottman: Anatomy of a Bad Argument • Work of John Gottman from the “Love

Lab” provides some evidence of what is destructive in an argument


Harsh Start-ups • How couples begin arguments vary • Slow or cool start-up • Can we talk? Something’s bothering me. “I” statements

• Harsh start-up • Criticism, sarcasm, or harsh words • “You must be a retard to book that hotel”


The Four-Horsemen of Bad Arguments • Contempt • Criticism • Defensiveness • Stonewalling (withdrawal) Tuesday, April 24, 12


Flooding

• When the negative emotion expressed by one partner overwhelms the ability of the other partner to respond or cope

• Reflects a lack of attunement and empathy • Promotes disengagement (self-protection) by the other

• Can lead to a vicious cycle of pusuit- retreat, as

the upset spouse increases the volume to try to “connect” and the overwhelmed partner retreats further to feel safe


Failure to Repair

• The most crucial aspect of conflict in relationships

• The ability to repair a ruptured bond promotes a feeling of trust

• Given the inevitability of conflict and

rupture, the building block of successful (safe) conflict is knowing that the bond can be repaired

• Lack of repair corrodes trust, promotes

recrimination and suspicion and isolation


Not Everyone Fights




Fighters • The “conflict” group shows • frequent arguments • physical aggression • thoughts of divorce • little happiness • minimal interaction Tuesday, April 24, 12

The quiet • Couples who report • Few arguments • Little physical aggression • Few expressed thoughts of divorce • Moderate levels of happiness and interaction


Understanding Divorce • For high distress couples, the traditional

measures of marital quality do a good job of predicting who will divorce

• For low distress couples, marital quality seems unrelated to divorce


Common risk factors • Divorced parents • Early age of marriage • Prior cohabitation with another partner • Liberal family values • Believing in acceptability of divorce • Having alternative partners Tuesday, April 24, 12

A framework for understanding divorce • Social Exchange Theory (Levinger 1976) • Attractions • Barriers • Alternatives Tuesday, April 24, 12

Exchange Theory: Attraction • The basic rewards and costs of marriage have changed

• Sex used to be a reward mostly found within marriage

• For women, economic stability was a reward found within marriage

• Status Tuesday, April 24, 12

Exchange Theory:Barriers • Modern life has lowered barriers to leaving marriage

• Less religious control • Fewer legal restrictions • Lower levels of belief in the norm of lifelong marriage


Exchange Theory:Barriers • Yet for the upper class, barriers remains • Social stigma • Perceived impact on children • Economic decline (the upper class has farther to fall)


Exchange Theory: Alternatives • Modern life presents more alternatives than ever before

• Increasing urbanization • Also a greater pool of single people



,&*!),&0.!,&1! FI..$)G!,-.(G-'!;G-GI3A!?RQCSBCC@!

&%(.1!/3!*,.! !5,%$,!9.(! (#5!*,.!,%4,.)*! (!/3!0#+4,'3! .(*+037W!!M(1! +*&/'.!*#!*,.! 2!$+00.(*'3! #!GhY!%(!:;;R!

PQR& '6K69&739926=

W2=0M6=

#2K0916=&09&>6:393A6=

!39926=

FCC FU

BT

G

IC

U

T

VC

FE TB

EC UB

&00%&4.!0.2'.$*! N,.(!&)L.1!%(! .!%)!/.$#9%(4! (!M9.0%$&()! +0-.3!#2!-#*.0)! %(.!%(!GFTR6! ,%)!$#+(*03!5&)! :RY!&40..1! (4!#/)#'.*.7S! Tuesday, April 24, 12

BC

C FGVC

FGTC

FGIC

FGGC

BCCC

BCCI

&

'0A6/&%86>&FI&3<=&04=69D&'J7O69>&73L&<0A&A0A34&A0&FCCQ&=J6&A0& 90J<=2<8D& +0J916/&?6M&*6>6391;&,6&0Sɨ<<234&,6<>J>&3<=& %769213<&,077J<2AL&+J9K6L&=3A3&

&

Exchange Theory: Alternatives • People with moderate levels of reward, low barriers, and many alternatives may be more likely to leave

• Again, think of the “Me Marriage”


Comparison of Alternatives • The rise of individualism (in the urban industrial

context) led to a radical shift in our expectations of marriage

• Marriage is expected to provide a deep source of love and emotional fulfillment (Barich & Bielby, 1996; Buss, Shackelford, Kirkpatrick & Larsen, 2001).


Comparison of Alternatives • For a certain amount of reward • If you have MODEST expectations you will be happy

• If you have HIGH expectations you will be less happy

• THE CRITICAL FACTOR is not the absolute level of reward/cost, but how these compare with expectations for the current relationship

• AND the perception of reward-expectation match in alternative relationships!


Low conflict divorce? • Infrequent fighting, moderate happiness, engage in pleasurable activities together, sex is ok or even good

• Few perceived problems • Low levels of commitment = low commitment to IDEA of commitment

• HIGH expectations of what marriage should be • Few barriers • Obvious alternatives Tuesday, April 24, 12


Tasks of Divorce 1. Separate psychologically, establish new, separate identities 2. Separate finances and establish independent economic lives 3. When children are present, to become single parents and learn to co-parent 4. Reorganize and re-establish social networks 5. Fulfill legal duties to divorce and settle money and child custody Tuesday, April 24, 12

Loss following Divorce • Money • Women’s per capita income declines about 30%

• 1998 Income • Married couple - $54,000 • Father headed family - $36,000 • Mother headed family - $22,000 Tuesday, April 24, 12

Downward Mobility • Less desirable housing • Less safe, smaller spaces, less privacy • Change in school for children • Longterm impact on college and educational attainment

• Fewer options for advancement • Educational opportunity Tuesday, April 24, 12

Isolation • On average, people lose three friends after a divorce

• Divorced people are twice as likely to have “friend breakups” and also feel more excluded by friends



Work and Family (Role change) • 80% of divorced mothers work, compared to employment rate of 40% prior to divorce

• Women working full time already work longer hours after divorce

• Women who never worked have the greatest difficulty with transition


Loss of Routine • Increased work pressure and having no one to share home responsibilities leads to breakdown of family routines

• Meals are skipped • Events are cancelled • Housework doesn’t get done Tuesday, April 24, 12

Mental Distress • UK study -Divorced mothers were 3x

more likely to be depressed than married mothers

• Higher suicide rates in men and women • Australia - men 6x more likely to attempt suicide when divorced

• USA - 20% of women endorse suicidal thoughts following divorce

• Higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse Tuesday, April 24, 12

Adjustment • Positive adjustment • Higher education level • Better mental health prior to divorce • Believe in their own competence • Assertiveness, self-assurance, intelligence, creativity, sociability, social maturity


Part 2: Review



How Bad Is Divorce For Kids?


Marital Instability Over Life Course Study (MIOLC) • Same data set as in Alone Together • Outcomes well being • Psychological discord • Marital with father •671Relationship • adult offspring identified from the original sample of 2,034 adults surveyed


Figure 1. Distribution of psychological well-being scores for offspring with divorced parents and continuously married parents. Tuesday, April 24, 12

F en

Divorce: Bad for relationships • Relationship problems are more common • Less marital happiness, more discord, more divorce proneness, more divorce

• Parental bonds are weakened • Less closeness with parents • See parents less often • Less support from parents Tuesday, April 24, 12

Figure 2. Distribution of marital discord scores for offspring with divorced parents and continuously married parents. Tuesday, April 24, 12

y s s n n , s o w

r y y y s

Figure 3. Distribution of father-child relationship quality scores for offspring with divorced parents and continuously married parents. Tuesday, April 24, 12

Moderation • Divorce is particularly bad for kids in certain situations

• Moderating factors • Pre-existing: conflict in marriage • After the divorce: remarriage or other transitions


er yta lten of ve rso s, al ce

Figure 4. Offspring’s psychological well-being by parents’ marital discord and divorce.


Special Coll

ed ct ere a a s, ly

l Collection

thes divo chil

Figure 5. Offspring’s psychological well-being by the number of family transitions (parental divorces and remarriages).


even of adu beca a co app cism sion tinu adu disc mar cial

erst

Cherlin 50

37.5

25

12.5

0

Austria

finland

France

Sweden

United States

Percentage of Children Who See New Partner Within 3 years of disruption of marriage Tuesday, April 24, 12

Cherlin 9

6.75

4.5

2.25

0

Austria

finland

France

Sweden

United States

Percentage of Children with 3 or MORE parental figures by age 15 Tuesday, April 24, 12

Everything you need to know about being a parent


Warmth

Control


High

Low

High

Authoritative

Permissive

Low

Authoritarian

Disengaged

Post Divorce Parenting • Factors that reduce control • Guilt • Depression • Lack of time/energy Tuesday, April 24, 12

Parenting


Decreased

Increased

Affection

Irritability

Involvement

Punitiveness

Supervision

Unpredictability

Adult Outcomes of Divorce • Hetherington finds 4 main outcomes • 1) Enhancers - 20% • 2) Competent Loners - 10% • 3) Good Enoughs - 40% • 4) The Defeated - 30% • And two phases: Libertines and Seekers Tuesday, April 24, 12

Protective Factors: What Keeps You Sane During Times of Stress


Social Maturity • A broad idea that Hetherington breaks down into several components

• Adults with higher levels of social maturity

adapt better following the break up of their family

• A broadly adaptive trait for all adults Tuesday, April 24, 12

1. Planfulness • Ability to make concrete rather than general goals and ability to identify the steps to achieve those goals. Requires:

• Creativity • Specificity • Delay of gratification • Organization Tuesday, April 24, 12

II. Self-Regulation • People who are better able to manage their

normative feelings of depression, anxiety, loneliness and anger are better able to engage in planning, to maintain social support, and make better decisions

• Recall how “Intimacy Skills” involve emotional regulation - being able to tolerate intense feelings and still communicate and plan

• Biological & Psychological Tuesday, April 24, 12

III. Adaptability • Ability to change with the circumstances • Requires self-regulation; to not react to

the immediate frustration but to see the goal (or what is needed) and to be willing to change

• Flexible people can achieve sustainable solutions in the post-divorce world


Social Responsibility • Being sensitive and responsive to the needs of others and being willing to help them

• People who give a lot will get a lot of support back in times of stress

• Social “giving” is an effective antidote for

feelings of loneliness, low self-esteem, and anger


Other Protective Factors • Autonomy • Self-Efficacy • Religion • Work • Social Support • New Love Tuesday, April 24, 12

New romance • The most powerful buffer against post-divorce stress was a new love relationship with a supportive and stable partner

• This finding is strong evidence for the utility of Attachment Theory in understanding marital dynamics


New romance • The recreation of a safe harbor provides a deeply felt sense of well-being

• Restores a sense of relational self-efficacy • Provides emotional and psychological

support that facilitates other necessary activities of adaptation to post divorce life



What About the Kids?



Children 2 years later • VLS children showed the typical pattern described in all children immediately following divorce

• Higher rates of stress, anxiety, behavioral problems


Children 2 years later • Adults matter most... • A competent custodial parent is the most important buffer for kids

• But parents (most often mothers) are at their weakest in the immediate postdivorce period


6 years later: Children • As with adults, multiple risk and protective factors

• Parenting is the primary influence through adolescence, but with time, peers, siblings, and schools take on more importance

• Proximal factors become more important than what happened around the time of divorce


Parenting • Particularly important in the custodial parent

• There is no other parent to compensate

for an incompetent parent, who is unable to shield a child from daily hassles of life

• Rejection, irritability and neglect flood into a child’s life


Authoritative Parents • Had children who were the most socially responsible, least troubled, and highest achieving


Permissive Parents • Creates a risk factor for those children who need help learning emotional selfregulation and social regulation


Authoritarian • Parenting style characterized by lack of warmth and attunement

• Children are often quite deceptive -

conforming around the feared parent and disrespectful, mean or disruptive around other less intimidating authorities

• Often produces what it is meant to prevent - defiant and rebellious children


Authoritarian Homes • High rates of conflict which impact children across development

• Young adults from such home often did poorly at school and work

• Angry, disruptive relationships Tuesday, April 24, 12

Disengaged Parents • Parents who are basically focused on their

own needs, and not at all focused on child’s needs

• Respond to expression of children’s needs with irritation and withdrawal

• Personality problems, substance use, depression


Disengaged Homes • The children were the most troubled in the study

• Wild, defiant and unhappy • Few social or emotional skills • As they aged, problems with work,

marriage, the law, and alcohol/drugs emerged


Wallerstein Redux • Hetherington also found that children were

frequently thrust into roles that they were not developmentally prepared for

• Confidant, advisor, emotional support

• Children confronted with adult problems that they cannot actually solve develop a sense of LOW self-efficacy, or helplessness

• Most commonly seen in teenage girls who

had boundary blurring as younger children


6 years later: Postdivorce adjustment • At six years, 25% of children were

struggling with emotional, social, academic, or behavioral problems

• Compared to only 10% of children of continuously married parents

• Half empty or half full? Double the risk vs. 3/4 of kids were doing well


Post-Divorce Patterns of Adjustment • Competent-Opportunist • Competent-Caring • Competent-at-a-Cost • Good Enough • Aggressive Insecure Tuesday, April 24, 12

Competent Opportunists • Mature, self regulated, good social skills • Instrumental (manipulative) in their relationships • Raised in high conflict homes, by age 6 had to

learn how to play parents against one another to get their needs met



Competent Caring • Present in both groups, but more from divorced than non-divorced families

• By necessity had to assume some caregiving role for others at an early age


Competent Caring • Similar to competent opportunists, but not status oriented or socially manipulative

• More sensitive and responsive to others needs

• Propensity to help vulnerable people Tuesday, April 24, 12

Competent Caring • When does stress enhance child development? • No history of difficult temperament, anxiety, depression or antisocial traits

• Stress challenges but doesn’t overwhelm • Availability of protective factors - especially the support of at least one caring adult


Competent Children • A common template: a single parent home

run by a supportive loving working mother

• Not always available but encouraged mature and independent behavior


Competent at a Cost • Like their competent brethren, able, independent, successful

• But, plagued by anxiety, a sense of inadequacy • A pattern of adapting that emerged during adolescence

• Pre-existing anxiety plus more likely to have experienced parentification

• Early failure to solve parent’s problems -haunted by a sense of letting people down


Good Enough • The average child coping in a difficult situation

• 50% of kids from divorced families and 60% from non-divorced families

• Most problems were transient Tuesday, April 24, 12

Aggressive Insecure • Authoritative parenting rare • Conflict, rejection, neglect are common • Quick to anger, prone to depression, substance use problems

• Unpleasant personalities make it hard to get support from others

• 10% from non-divorced, 20% from divorced families



Aggressive Insecure • Highest pregnancy rate • Highest attempted suicide rate • In adolescence, divided into two groups • Depression/low self-esteem • Antisocial behaviors • Can these kids pull it together? Tuesday, April 24, 12

VLS: Why do children of divorce more often repeat their past? •

Non-traditional values: More prevalent in children of divorce

• •

“Divorce is an acceptable solution to an unhappy marriage”

• • Tuesday, April 24, 12

Trust/Safety: Reluctance to commit and a sense of conditionality of all relationships

70% of children of divorce agree 40% of children from continuously married agree

VLS Divorce Rates Divorced Parents

High Conflict, Intact Families

Low Conflict, Intact Families

36%

29%

18%


Relationship Skills • Both divorced and High-Conflict “Intact”

families produced children who on average had more weaknesses

• Negotiation and compromise • Validation • Self-control Tuesday, April 24, 12

Lifelong Learning... • Mate Selection: • The main protective factor that emerges in the VLS for children of divorce

• A child of divorce who marries a stable,

supportive spouse from a non-divorced family sees his/her divorce risk fall to that of a young person from an “intact” home

• It appears that we can adapt and learn new relationship skills as young adults!


Wallerstein

• Thesis 1 - We are in an experiment • Thesis 2: What is true for adults is not always true for children


“Cherished Myths” 1. What’s good for parents is good for kids 2. The crisis for kids is temporary, and kids recover


What Is Divorce? • A long lasting developmental disruption that continues to affect people as they mature from childhood into adulthood

• A disruption that we do not make any longterm plans to address, or even recognize


Cherlin revisited... • “The child who grows up in a postdivorce

family often experiences not one loss - that of the intact family - but a series of losses as people come and go.”


Cherlin 50

37.5

25

12.5

0

Austria

finland

France

Sweden

United States

Percentage of Children Who See New Partner Within 3 years of disruption of marriage Tuesday, April 24, 12

Cherlin revisited 9

6.75

4.5

2.25

0

Austria

finland

France

Sweden

United States

Percentage of Children with 3 or MORE parental figures by age 15 Tuesday, April 24, 12




Growing up is harder • In particular, when it comes time to engage in courtship and mate selection

• Karen states “I knew I didn’t love him, but I was scared of marriage. I was scared of divorce, and I’m terrified of being alone.”





How it works • Relationships become the most important part of life in young adulthood

• Divorce creates an absence of good

memories for how two adults can live together in a loving relationship

• “The psychological scaffolding that they

need to construct a happy marriage has been badly damaged” by the two people depended upon to provide this


Absence & Incoherence • The image of parents together and happy is lost

• In particular, without a coherent

explanation of how & why the relationship ended, it is impossible to recover any image of them being together and happy

• The absence of a coherent ending makes it

difficult to have a coherent narrative of any part of the relationship



Children of Divorce Final Exam Review

Recommend Documents