Week 2: Family Therapy Journey / Discussion Week 2: Narrative Therapy and Models for Step Family Development

Copyright Information (bibliographic)

Document Type: Book Chapter

Title of book: Stepping In, Stepping Out: Creating Stepfamily Rhythm

Author of book: Joshua M. Gold

Chapter Title: Chapter 2 Developmental Schemas of Step Families

Author of Chapter: Joshua M. Gold

Year: 2016

Publisher: American Counseling Association

Place of Publishing: United States of America

The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research. If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of fair use that user may be liable for copyright infringement.

Developmental Schemas of Stepfamilies

In this chapter, I examine the social myths around stepfamily roles through the perspective of narrative theory. This therapeutic perspective represents a critical orientation to the concerns presented by stepfamily members within the counseling context (Portrie & Hill, 2005).

Counselors have three paradigms through which to approach step­ family dynamics (Baxter, Braithwaite, & Nicholson, 1999; Stewart, 2007). One paradigm seeks to focus on stepfamily issues as unrelated episodes, in which differing family members play complementary roles (e.g., persecutor and victim). Issues include stepparenting, discipline, finances, living arrangements, relationships with nonresidential spouses, and the addition of a new child. By concentrating on the details of the latest conflict and the differing personalities involved, however, the clinician and family members are likely to lose sight of "the larger picture." A second paradigm seeks to isolate the "problem" or im­ pediment to stepfamily success (e.g., the stepchild or stepparent) and labors through individual counseling to "cure" that one person. Such an approach is predicated on the tenets of individual counseling and is difficult to reconcile with a systemic orientation, which advocates focus on the relationships among individuals (Stewart, 2007). A third paradigm is a developmental orientation to understanding, intervening with, and facilitating the success of stepfamilies. However, "limited work has taken the developmental matters of the blended family on its own terms" (Baxter et al., 1999, p. 292). This chapter will briefly describe two differing developmental schemas and link the develop­ mental orientation with the practice of narrative therapy.

13

Stepping In, Stepping Out: Creating Stepfamily Rhythm

A Developmental Orientation to Stepfamily Success

Family development theory provides an approach to studying families that is useful in explaining patterned change, the dynamic nature of the family, and how change occurs in the family life cycle. Originating in the 1930s as sociologists and demographers establish family categories (as precur­ sors to family stages of development), and associated with the efforts of Paul Glick, Evelyn Duvall, Reuben Hill, and Rachel Ann Edwards, family development theory explains the processes observed in families over time. This progress becomes more critical as the incomplete institutionalization of stepfamily life is measured.

This concept of incomplete institutionalization is based on Cherlin's (1978) assertion of a "lack of social structures that organize, direct and ex­ ecute the essential tasks of living" (Stewart, 2007, p. 39). These institutions (e.g., the legal system, faith-based organizations, the medical community) are really social authorities that define appropriate functioning between members in social relationships and between those family systems and the broader society. In the absence of frameworks for stepfamily relation­ ships, socially held negative perceptions of stepfamilies form the basis of dominant social narratives. These narratives, which lack correspondence to the lived experience of members of stepfamilies, generate "negative labels, stereotypes and cultural myths" (Stewart, 2007, p. 41).

Stepfamilies evolve through processes of change and adjustment (Mc­ Goldrick & Carter, 2011, p. 317; see also Goldenberg & Goldenberg, 2002). Stepfamily life represents a complex interactive process whose goal is to forge a family identity and sense of cohesion among individuals with no common history, rituals, or behavior patterns. No wonder, then, that creation of a successful stepfamily has been identified as /1 one of the most difficult transitions a family is ever called upon to make" (Stewart, 2007, p. 182). Individual life cycle needs affect stepfamily task resolution-for example, an older male with adult children marrying a younger woman with young children, coping with loss of prior marriages or relationships, living with difference, resolving loyalty issues, acknowledging the absent parent, living simultaneously in two households, developing a family identity, overcom­ ing boundary problems, learning coparenting, and involving a stepparent despite little social support. Individuals have to determine the tasks that must be done, the priority to give each one, and what guidance is available.

"Developmentalists focus on complexity and processes that occur within family systems as assess how these aspects of family life unfolds over time within a particular social context" (Stewart, 2007, p. 47). Rather than accept dominant and stereotypically negative descriptions of stepfamily members and stepfamily life, developmentalists observe how veritable strangers to one another form nourishing, reliable relationships; what challenges emerge in what sort of predictable order; and which resolu­ tions seem critical for family identity and cohesion. A developmental map portrays what family experiments are normal and predictable within an overall picture of stepfamily evolution, as opposed to emphasizing family

14

Developmental Schemas of Stepfamilies

crisis (Stewart, 2007). Portrie and Hill (2005) proposed that such a "map" needs to be descriptive, to consider diversity, and to express dynamic shifts of blended family relationships, emphasizing the integration of in­ dividual and family developments, issues of solidarity and satisfaction as foundations to negotiate role identification, boundary management, and resolution of conflicts and expectations. The orderliness and predictability of this transition or evolution is part of the professional knowledge that the counselor may contribute to the session through educating all family members that their lived experience is in no way abnormal and their re­ lationships in any way deficient. However, it is safe to say that very few stepfamily members are equipped with this knowledge, leaving them to concentrate on their frustrations with other family members or the latest stepfamily "crisis." By focusing on the issues facing remarriage and then stepfamily life, counselors focus attention on the present rather than issues in the past (e.g., relating to the family of origin). The intent is to provide guidance and reassurance as family members go through their days, to prevent overreaction to normative stepfamily experiences, and to foster the stepfamily maturation progression.

Family development theory divides the family experience into phases, or stages, over the life span and describes changes in family functioning and roles during each stage (Carter, McGoldrick, & Garcia-Preto, 2010). These changes imply distinctions in structure and role relationships within a given family unit. The stage is usually inferred from the events that indi­ cate a change in the membership in the family or the way in which family members are spatially and interactionally organized (i.e., openly negotiated among family members). The successful completion of developmental tasks leads to immediate satisfaction and approval as well as to the increased potential for success with later tasks; failure results in family unhappiness, social disapprovat and greater difficulty with subsequent developmental tasks. For the family to continue to grow, biological requirements, cultural imperatives, and personal aspirations need to be satisfied during each stage of the family life cycle (Carter et al., 2010). To be successful, family members need to adapt to changing needs and demands of other family members and the changing expectations of the larger kin network and society. The stage theories specific to this topic do not provide, or impose, time frames and lengths; rather, task resolution determines transition to the next stage. Additionally, stage tasks are meant to be addressed completely and in a specific order. As with all stage theories, family development is undoubtedly a continuous process, but dividing the process into stages helps clinicians, and family members, see the tasks more clearly.

Stage Theories

Stewart (2007) described stage theories as a mixture of tools, concepts, hypotheses, and frameworks to explain stepfamily life. Lacking one grand theory as a function of the structural (race, class, gender), process (relation­ ship quality, parenting style), and contextual (state laws, social attitudes)

15

Stepping In, Stepping Out: Creating Stepfamily Rhythm

variables characteristic of stepfamily life, these theories contradict the myth that stepfamilies cannot function as well as two-biological-parent families because of the absence of a biological connection to the children, thereby designating stepfamilies as inherently problematic. It can be safely asserted that stress in stepfamilies is different from that experienced in two-biological-parent families because of the diverse and conflicting notions of kinship, but this does not mean that stepfamily members are inherently poorer at dealing with stress than members of other family constellations-they simply need to be aware of how the stresses that they do face represent typical aspects of stepfamily life (McGoldrick & Carter, 2011).

Two complementary models of stepfamily development are described in this section. The first model, developed by Papernow (1999, as cited by www.steptogether.org), is divided into three stages, which are further subdivided; this overview is intended only to highlight specific stage tasks.

Early Stage

1. Fantasy: • Adults see the stepfamily as a healing crucible from the pain of

divorce or bereavement. • Partners believe that since they love each other, stepparents and

stepchildren will love each other too. • Stepparents dream of marrying nurturing parents, and single par­

ents see stepparents as sharing parenting burden. • Children may fantasize about seeing parents back together or

claiming an exclusive relationship with the biological parent. 2. Immersion:

• All family members are immediately faced with the reality of the new family situation.

• Stepparents encounter unexpectedly strong and negative feelings of jealousy, resentment, confusion, and inadequacy, because they are excluded by the spouse and children.

• Biological parents may feel less uncomfortable because they have the support of the biological children.

• The adults wonder about the lack of a spousal connection and the overemphasis on parenting or stepparenting.

• Stepparents begin to internalize blame for all stepfamily conflict. 3. Awareness:

• Stepfamily members begin putting names on painful feelings as a result of their family experiences.

• A better understanding of the parent-biological child relationship allows for the observance of pattern and how those patterns may interfere with the strength of the spousal connection.

• All members surrender fantasies of instant family. • The stepparent begins to get to know the strangers that he or she

has joined.

16

Developmental Schemas of Stepfamilies

The overarching challenge of the early stage is to bear the developmental tasks of confusion and disappointment without surrendering or dissolving the new stepfamily. As stepfamily members begin to articulate different experiences within the stepfamily and relinquish fantasies of the instant replication of the nuclear family, they can begin to engage in the step-by­ step process of building a family out of strangers.

Middle Stage

4. Mobilization: • The couple openly airs differences. • This period tends to be chaotic and embattled. • The family members struggle between an "I" vs. "we" identity.

5. Action: • The adults jointly at first and then with the children negotiate new

agreements about how the family will function. • The family structure changes, and new boundaries are drawn,

especially between the couple and the children. • The family begins to function without constant monitoring of "step"

issues.

Later Stage

6. Contact: • The family has arrived at the honeymoon period at last. • The moves of the "action" phase have provided new arenas of

agreement within which the family members can function easily. • The marital relationship becomes more a source of nourishment

and support. • Stepparents and children forge real relations, unhampered by "step"

issues. • Only now can a clear stepparent role emerge.

7. Resolution: • The family is characterized by solid and reliable steprelations. • Norms are established, and a family-specific history is built that

integrates prior family stories yet embraces the new. • Acceptance of differing levels of belonging on the part of different

children is honored. • Large changes no longer threaten spousal or stepparent-stepchild

relationship.

The key variable that determines whether one gets stuck or proceeds is the time it takes to negotiate the "awareness work" of the early stage: real­ izing that something is wrong, that it is not the fault of a single person, and that there is an opportunity to improve the situation and move on. Without this insight, family members would experience repeated and escalated conflicts, growing estrangement, and (as members become more hopeless) eventual stepfamily dissolution. Parents side with biological children against

17

Stepping In, Stepping Out: Creating Stepfamily Rhythm

the stepparent and his/her children, further polarizing the stepfamily. In stepfamilies with only one stepparent, that adult feels ostracized within the stepfamily, drifting further and further from connection. The marital relationship, tenuous to begin with, dissolves under the pressure of parent­ ing and stepparenting. The adults become so focused on the disagreements in parenting that being spouses becomes secondary in attention, and then tertiary as adults begin to focus on the "I," as an expression of emotional self-protection and identity, rather than the "we" of a couple.

Kerns (2009) offered a five-stage model for stepfamily development:

l. Honeymoon/Fantasy: • The adults feel very positive about the new marriage and the in­

tegration of the stepparent and other children. • However, the children have mixed feelings regarding the biological

parent's new spouse and the imposition of "siblings." • Each member holds different thoughts and expectations (e.g., parents

hope for instant love, children secretly hope that their biological parents reconnect).

2. Chaos: • The children feel disloyal to the absent biological parent if they

like the stepparent. • The parents feel constantly in the middle of stepparent and step­

child relations. • The stepparents are excluded from old ways of running the house­

hold. 3. Awareness:

• The adults become aware that their problems are common. • Change must occur, and it must start with each member (who may

not be willing). 4. Action:

• Appropriate stepfamily issues are identified and addressed. • Family members access support groups or family counseling. • The adults unify to strengthen marital relationship. • All family members try to understand how each other family

member can see the same situation so differently. 5. Commitment:

• The adults, as models and then the children, move forward by collaborating and cooperating.

• The stepfamily members realize that they can work things out and become more cohesive as compared to more disjointed through resolution of disagreements.

• The stepfamily begins to build its own traditions and history.

The consistency between models seems to emphasize the assertion that time itself will not foster stepfamily cohesion and harmony. Rather than "wait and see," the key to a resolution of the identified developmental challenges is intentional awareness, negotiation, and effort on the part

18

Developmental Schemas of Stepfamilies

of all stepfamily members, including those who do not reside within the stepfamily home. For counselors, attention to these viewpoints, or others that may be proposed, and specific attention to the relevant stage tasks provide confirmation of possible challenges resolved and new issues to address. For stepfamily members, knowledge of these perspectives con­ firms the normalcy of their struggles and may reduce their bewilderment and feeling of defeat.

In summary, McGoldrick and Carter (2005) proclaimed that "so complex is the process of forming a remarried family that we have come to think of this process as adding a whole new phase to the family life cycle for those involved" (p. 417). The mainstream culture lacks any established patterns or rituals to help stepfamilies navigate their multifaceted relationships. In that void, dominant negative social discourses come to have a powerful influence on stepfamily members.

Issues of Diversity

In this section, I discuss what the professional literature has to say regard­ ing developmental shifts as a function of the ethnicity or sexual identity of stepfamily members. The impact of culture on stepfamily dynamics is important to understand, which makes the paucity of research on fami­ lies of color and gay and lesbian families all the more regrettable; in the words of Portrie and Hill (2005), "current research does not speak to the diversity and need for awareness of cultural issues" (p. 450). The situation has improved, but only slightly, since 2005; readers should not interpret this brevity of discussion as an indication of the lack of importance of this information but rather as an indication that scholarship is limited in this area. It is critical for the clinician and family members to honor the differ­ ent life experiences of stepfamilies that represent the cultural diversity of the United States in the 21st century.

African American stepfamily dynamics are influenced by cultural defi­ nitions of (re)marriage, nonmarital childbearing, and definitions of family that include nonblood relationships. Cohabitation may be perceived as an alternative to marriage rather than prelude, which raises the possibility of cohabiting rather than married stepfamilies. The birth of children to unmarried women means that children may be present in a first marriage; a biological second parent might not be part of the picture. Fictive kin are valued family members whose connection is based on an emotional bond, willingness to help, and an enduring relationship but not on legal ties or obligations nor family lineage. This type of relationship expresses itself in more fluid family boundaries and experiences of the children of adults coming and going in their lives.

As I was writing this chapter, I was constantly stymied in my attempt to find any information specific to Hispanic stepfamilies. This lack of profes­ sional resources may indicate a challenge in identifying such families; issues of funding for their study; or reluctance among these families themselves to come to the notice of social service agencies, counselors, and family prac­

19

Stepping In, Stepping Out: Creating Stepfamily Rhythm

titioners. Whether the presented models of stepfamily development and the issues germane to other cultural groups do indeed apply to Hispanic stepfamilies has yet to be determined.

Gay and lesbian stepfamilies are frequently paired and discussed as a unit in the few studies I was able to identify that dealt with these fami­ lies. For consistency with the literature, I will discuss these two groups together; clinicians will have to rely on gay or lesbian stepfamily members to inform them as to which details are indeed relevant, and which are nonapplicable, to their life experiences as stepfamily members. Here, I present overarching themes unique to gay and lesbian stepfamilies as compared to stepfamilies from any other cultural group.

McGoldrick and Carter (2005) described the burdens of secrecy and isolation caused by the dominant social discourses fostering a negative social stigma concerning three related disclosures: one's sexual identity, one's partnership status, and one's parental role. Gay and lesbian step­ families must confront the anxiety about consequences of "coming out" in declaration of any or all three revelations, with no certainty of how these declarations may be received by friends, family, or social institutions. These three relational systems are intentionally listed based on issues of familiarity and possible social support. While the disclosure process to family and friends may be a single event, gay and lesbian stepfamilies will repeatedly confront possible social negation, if not prejudice, in interactions with employers, the legal system, schools, and faith-based establishments. In each case, varying degrees of acceptance or tolerance may be expected, with little recourse when faced with negative responses, so gay and lesbian stepfamilies seem to be faced with an ongoing dilemma: disclosure in hopes of acceptance but with fears of rejection or to remain secretive and isolated and without possible needed support. Therefore, the process of coming to terms with issues of sexual identity fold into the stages and system dynamics of blended and developing families.

A decade ago, Portrie and Hill (2005) criticized this paucity of pro­ fessional knowledge, stating that "the limited multicultural research on blended families demands future research endeavors" (p. 450). It is regrettable that, 10 years later, the situation has not significantly changed.

Implications for Treatment Planning and Delivery

In summary, and as a launching platform for this section, perhaps de­ velopmental theory identifies common need while narrative therapy emphasizes the individual interpretation of that need. Applying the idea of turning points (Baxter et al., 1999), clinicians and family mem­ bers can focus on pathways of relationship development and on nodal events, such as changes in household/family composition, conflict or disagreement, holidays or special events, quality time, family crisis, and reconciliation and problem solving-in other words, on transformative events that fostered a sense of family. Seen as "a framework that holds relevance for all blended families" (p. 293), these descriptive models

20

Developmental Schemas of Stepfamilies

can offer a new perspective for family members bogged down in what seems to be endless conflict.

The narrative integration asks each family member to share perspectives on the same event, coupled with consideration of social narratives around the same event. That very exploration uncovers for the family members the bewildering number of views of the same incident and how the differing reactions of family members make sense, given the perspectives that each holds. Given the myriad perspectives internal to the family and external from social narratives, it is no wonder that the family could not resolve that specific issue. Given that concentrated family resources can address any concern, the fragmentation of effort based on these views defeats the best efforts from any one family member. Rather it is the consensus of the family issue-through reauthoring that event, possible solutions, and possible contributions of each family member to the family's overall success-that will get "unstuck" the family specific to that presenting problem and, more generically, provide a new orientation to other and future family complaints and challenges.

McGoldrick and Carter (2011) provided a series of turning points for clinicians and family members to address. First, they recommended the utilization of the three-generational genograms to illustrate presenting or existing family patterns in the family of origin, the predivorce family, the single-parent family, and finally, the stepfamily. Just enumerating the four family constellations, doubled by the life experiences of each present spouse, confirms the foundational belief systems that each spouse brings to the final and current stepfamily life experiences. This exercise will allow the adults to recognize the differing expectations and practices based on those assumptions that each has accumulated over his or her relational history. Those insights might encourage a willingness to acknowledge the insuffi­ ciency of either prior belief system in addressing stepfamily developmental needs, with the resulting conjoint decision to reimagine how to create the type of stepfamily both imagine. McGoldrick and Carter recommended attention to nine critical areas where spouses' narratives and dominant social perspectives hold the potential for derailing a positive development of the new stepfamily.

1. Educating and normalizing patterns and processes in remarriage and "refamily /ing" bearing in mind that family members are at differing life cycles;

2. Exploring the emotionally central role of women (stepmothers) and the difficulty in moving into a new system where much is demanded of them and the emotionally distant role of men (stepfathers) and what is realistic for them;

3. Discouraging couples from trying to maintain the myth of the intact nuclear family;

4. Recreating the unrealistic ideals of remarriage; 5. Practicing patience for the ambiguity of guilt, divided loyalties, am­

bivalence, etc., among the children and stepchildren;

21

Stepping In, Stepping Out: Creating Stepfamily Rhythm

6. Discovering a positive way to involve ex-spouses and absent parents in sessions;

7. Resolving the feelings of loss for the closeness of the pre-stepfamily single-parent child relationship;

8. Building cooperative sessions to resolve a child's difficulties, as children never have the power to decide on remarriage, custody, or visitation; and;

9. Putting biological parents in charge of child uproar, with stepparent as observer and then co-coach.

These topics recur at each stage of stepfamily development, with positive, conjoint resolution practices serving to resolve each issue more smoothly and cooperatively with increased practice and competence.

Conclusion

There are advantages to the use of developmental theory when thinking about stepfamilies, but Baxter et al. (1999) identified four reasons to use developmental theory cautiously in this context. They expressed a concern that reliance on one developmental model may come at the expense of other important areas of focus, such as spousal, parental, and stepparental systems, as well as ex-spouses and ex-grandparents. Second, developmental models assume a linear progress through tasks, which may be inconsistent with life demands and changes. Third, these models provide little etiology for the stage tasks, leaving readers and practitioners to ponder the "why now?" with little guidance. Finally, the stage descriptions are not as discrete in real life as they are on paper, and to date, little empirical validation of the schemas is available. While anecdotal and qualitative reports confirm their accuracy and utility, no empirical substantiations could be located in the professional literature.

Nevertheless, developmental theory is an attractive framework to explain and normalize a family phenomenon. For the clinician, this orientation transcends episodes in favor of family patterns and replaces attention to complaints with a focus on task accomplishment. Portrie and Hill (2005) cautioned that "relying on assumptions about blended families may per­ petuate cultural beliefs that endorse a deficit perspective of stepfamily functioning" (p. 445), but their judicious application may legitimize what has been viewed as toxic and pathological. Using the tenets of narrative therapy, "the key that determines whether a crisis is transitional or has permanent crippling impact is whether it is handled adequately within the family system, in spite of a general lack of social support offered by our society" (McGoldrick & Carter, 2011, p. 317). Awareness of developmental stages and tasks specific to stepfamily life may assist in the adequate han­ dling "within the family system" as these authors observed. In addition, the lack of social support, or invalid existing social support, isolates step­ families, causing them to serve as their own support system and depriv­ ing them of external normalization of stepfamily progress. In other cases,

??

Developmental Schemas of Stepfamilies

the social support systems are proving unsupportive, lending credence to Stewart's remark (2007) that "very few have investigated the role that our social institutions might play with respect to these processes" (p. 51). This oversight supports a review of the roles of stepfamily members as defined and affected by social narratives. This exploration allows family members to become aware of how dominant narratives interfere with the resolution of specific stage tasks and to begin to reauthor those narratives in a manner more representative of lived stepfamily experience and more facilitative toward stage task resolution.

Resources

Anonymous. (n.d.) The gay or lesbian stepparent. Family Education. Retrieved from http:/ /life.familyeducation.com/ stepfamilies/ sexuality I 47611.html The strengths and challenges of gay stepparenting

Missouri Families. (2009). Stages of stepfamily development. Missouri Families. Retrieved from http: I I www.missourifamilies.org/ features I divorcearticles I divorcefeature42.htm A summary of a five-phase model of stepfamily evolution

Papernow, P. (1989). Seven stages of development for stepfamilies. Stepfamily Association of America. Retrieved from http:/ /www.home.comcast. net/ ~ndzimmerI stepfamilyI stages.html An overview of the phases of stepfamily development

Whiteside, M. F., & Campbell, P. (1993). Stepparenting in gay and lesbian families: Integrity, safety, and the real world out there. National Stepfamily Resource Center. Retrieved from http: I I www.stepfamilies.infoI articles I stepparenting-in-gay-and-lesbian-families.php A short description of the social challenges of stepparenting and sexual identity issues.

23