question

Chapter 4

Individual and Family Development Theory

Elaine P. Congress

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:

•discuss the individual development theory of Erikson (1994, 1997), and the family life cycle theory of Carter and McGoldrick (2004) within a continually changing social context;

•explore Kohlberg’s (1981) moral stages of development and Gilligan’s (1982) feminist perspective on moral development;

•discuss the development theories viewed through a cultural lens because of an increasingly culturally diverse population in the United States;

•Consider the contributions that new roles for women, social and economic trends, an increasing divorce rate, and class differences have made to the diverse forms of the family life cycle;

•review and examine family assessment tools including the ecomap (Hartman & Laird, 1983), genogram (McGoldrick et al., 2008), and culturagram (Congress, 2008), which demonstrate the excellent tools clinicans have to apply development theories to their work with individuals and families;

•discuss an intersectional design tool first introduced by Crenshaw (1989), included to help in understanding families from diverse socioeconomic classes and cultural backgrounds.

INTRODUCTION

Theories of individual and family development provide an important knowledge base for direct social work practice. These theories are particularly helpful in the data collection and assessment phase of helping because they direct the practitioner to explore the potential significance of issues that individuals and families commonly face at different stages of development. Although individual and family development theories are primarily explanatory, they often provide general ideas for intervention.

Individual and family development theories can best be studied together, as families are made up of individuals and 66% of individuals live within families (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). This chapter focuses specifically on the individual development theory of Erikson (1994, 1997), and the family life cycle theory of Carter and McGoldrick (2004) within a changed and continually changing social context. There are also discussions of Kohlberg’s (1981) moral stages of development and Gilligan’s (1982) feminist perspective on moral development.

Because the United States is increasingly culturally diverse, these developmental theories are viewed through a cultural lens. Family assessment tools including the ecomap (Hartman & Laird, 1983), genogram (McGoldrick et al., 2008), and culturagram (Congress, 2008), which can help clinicians apply development theories to their work with individuals and families, are presented. Completing a culturagram on a family can help a clinician develop a better understanding of the sociocultural context of the family, which can shed light on appropriate interventions with the family (Congress & Gonzalez, 2013).

INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT THEORY

The developmental theory of Erikson corresponds well with the biopsychosocial orientation of social work. Departing from Freud’s psychoanalytic approach, Erikson acknowledged the importance of social variables such as the family, community, and culture in shaping the individual (Greene, 2000). His theory is an optimistic one, as he believed all individuals had the capacity to successfully master their environment. This theme is echoed in the strengths perspective in which clients are seen as having inherent capabilities for succeeding in life’s activities (Saleebey, 2013). Unlike Freud, whose development stages stopped at adolescence, Erikson formulated eight life stages, starting with the infant at birth and ending with old age and death (Greene, 2017). Each life stage provided an opportunity for the individual to learn new skills for progressing to the next stage.

Using the strengths perspective as an underlying framework, each individual is seen as having the inherent capacity to successfully master the developmental challenges presented at that stage. Each stage is characterized by two contradictory extremes that produce a psychosocial crisis. Developmental crisis has been defined as an internal event that upsets the usual psychological equilibrium of the individual. Although providing a challenge, each crisis produces an opportunity for the individual to change and grow in a positive way (Roberts, 2005). These crises are normative, universal experiences, and the expectation is that individuals will be able to integrate conflicting themes and move on to the next developmental stage.

Erikson’s (1994) eight stages of development, together with the ninth stage of development later formulated by Erikson (1997), provide a useful framework for understanding individual development. Information from Levinson (1978, 1996) in terms of adult development, and the feminist critique of Erikson and Levinson (Gilligan, 1982; Miller, 1991; Surrey, 1991), are also considered in the following discussion of different stages of development. It should be noted that while Gilligan’s work has its legacy most notably generating a wave of new research, a renewed openness within feminism to sex differences, and the notion that abstract detachment isn’t the apex of moral maturity, her research may have turned out to be more a call to arms than a work of science. Regardless, she inspired her peers to consider gender when studying individual development theory (Graham, 2012).

Trust Versus Mistrust (0–2 Years)

Occurring between birth and 2 years of age, Erikson’s first stage parallels Freud’s oral phase. The main issues for the infant relate to conflicts about trust and mistrust. Ideally, the infant learns about trust—the mother will be there to meet the dependent baby’s needs. Early infancy provides a learning environment about trust and mistrust. If this stage is successfully mastered, the end result is hope; that is, the individual emerges with the belief that one can attain one’s goal. This early developmental stage is universal throughout cultures. External social factors, however, including poverty, social dislocation, and physical and emotional neglect, can detrimentally affect the development of trust. If not successfully mastered, emotional and social detachment will be the result. An adult manifestation might be the individual who has difficulty in making a commitment to any close, interpersonal relationship. Although it is important to achieve this goal in order to move successfully onto the next stage of development, failure to achieve this goal is not irreversible. Erikson believed that teachers, clergy members, therapists, and other supportive people might help individuals revisit and resolve this psychosocial crisis in a positive way.

Autonomy Versus Shame (2–4 Years)

Erikson’s second stage, which corresponds to Freud’s anal stage, is described as early childhood. Between the ages of 2 and 4, the struggle is between autonomy and shame. During this stage, children first learn to act independently without a loss of self-esteem. They struggle with overcoming a sense of shame and doubt. The positive outcome is will—that is, the promotion of autonomous behavior. A failure during this stage can lead to compulsion and guilt-ridden behavior in adults.

Initiative Versus Guilt (4–6 Years)

This third stage corresponds to Freud’s genital phase. In contrast to Freud, however, Erikson focuses primarily on the social interaction rather than individual psychosexual development. Described as the play stage, children face the crisis of initiative versus guilt. Ideally, children learn to initiate and take pride in their activities; they also develop a sense of what is right and wrong. The goal for this stage is the development of purpose, in which the child learns to formulate and pursue goals (Newman & Newman, 2005). The problem is inhibition, and one sees adult manifestations of failure to pass successfully through this stage in the adult who procrastinates and avoids and is fearful of initiating any new project.

Industry Versus Inferiority (6–12 Years)

Erikson (1994) describes this period of a child’s life as characterized by industry versus inferiority. At this time, the child first goes to school and learns to use knowledge and skills in a structured way. Children are interested in learning in the classroom, in the community, and from peers. However, because of external or internal factors, a child may have difficulty moving successfully through this period. There may be factors in the external environment of the community or school that detrimentally affect mastery at this level. For example, the child may live in a dangerous neighborhood and going to school may be a threatening experience. The school itself may not be a receptive environment, with a deteriorating building, lack of supplies, and an overburdened, unresponsive teacher. The family may not provide support, which is essential in mastering this stage. For example, the mother may be overwhelmed by psychosocial-economic problems to the point that she is neglectful and abusive. Children may also have learning difficulties, such as hyperactivity, developmental disabilities, or health problems, that impede the development of competence during the latency years. Although the latency years mark a school-related separation from family for all children, these years may be especially traumatic for immigrant children. Attending school marks the entrance into an environment that is very different from the home environment. The child may be uncomfortable with English as the primary language or with the policies of American schools (Hendricks, 2005). In an earlier article (Congress & Lynn, 1994), the author presented the case example of an 8-year-old immigrant child who was extremely upset after assignment to a classroom apart from his sibling who was 11 months younger. American schools focus on the individual development of children; for that reason, even identical twins are usually placed in separate classes, if possible. Yet, this child had always been with his younger sibling, and his unhappiness caused by the school’s policy of separating siblings impeded his learning and achieving mastery within the school environment.

Identity Versus Identity Confusion (12–22 Years)

The period of adolescence, between the ages of 12 and 22, is characterized by the psychosocial crisis of identity versus identity confusion (Erikson, 1994). The adolescent becomes more independent of the parents and may look more to the peer group for support and guidance. This period is often rife with struggle and conflict, both intrapsychic and interpersonal, within the family. Much attention has been given to the adolescent’s attempts at separation—wanting one’s own private space, extended curfew, and dress and behaviors that differ markedly from the family. This period, however, is best characterized by ambivalence. The teenager who fought so hard for an extended curfew may call home several times to see how everything is. There is a need for parents to provide structure in order to promote the establishment of identity. It should be noted that adolescence may begin prior to 12 years of age, as children often develop physically and socially at an earlier age than at the time that Erikson first developed his theory. Also, for some youth, adolescence may end prior to the late teens, as they start families of their own. For others, this adolescent phase may extend well into their 20s as they pursue graduate and postgraduate education.

Many immigrants may come from backgrounds in which the adolescence stage of development did not exist or was extremely curtailed. For families in which children married young and/or left school in early adolescence to begin working, identity formation occurs at a much younger age. There may be much conflict within families in which the parents’ adolescence was limited, while their adolescent children seek the lengthy American adolescent experience of their peers.

Intimacy Versus Isolation (22–34 Years)

Erikson characterized the young adult era by the psychosocial crisis of intimacy versus isolation. Successful achievement during this period is measured by finding a love object, as well as satisfying work (Erikson, 1994). The age parameters for this stage should be viewed as very flexible. Many young adults are so involved in developing their careers during their young adult years that the development of an intimate relationship does not occur. For others, developing an intimate relationship may have occurred at a younger age. Also, in a society in which the divorce rate approaches 50%, developing a permanent love relationship in the early 20s is not a desirable goal for many young people. Although Erikson did not address the gay and lesbian population, it should be noted that the love object can be a person of the same sex. Finally, some adults choose never to find an individual person for a love relationship.

Levinson (1978) divided early adulthood into the following stages: early adult transition (17–22 years of age), entering the adult world (22–28), transition (28–33), and settling down (33–40). Important tasks included beginning careers and families. Many individuals, especially in developed countries, complete their education during the early transition years. It should be noted that the age at which individuals get married and have children has been steadily increasing (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). The focus for many in their 20s is to complete their education and begin careers. Thus, settling down with partners and beginning families is often postponed until individuals are in their 30s. Crisis often occurs for individuals at times of transition, as for example when adolescents transit to adulthood in their late teens.

Generativity Versus Stagnation (34–60 Years)

The seventh Erikson stage occurs between 34 and 60 years and involves the psychosocial crisis of generativity versus stagnation. This period involves learning to care for others and may include having a family and/or pursuing a career. Initially, it was thought that the midlife period presented a time of crisis for men with the realization of failure to achieve previous goals, whereas for women the crisis involved children leaving the home. More recently, the midlife crisis period has been considered a myth, as both men and women tend to make positive career changes during the midlife years (Hunter & Sundel, 1989). Also, as most women now work outside the home, their role of child caretaker has declined in importance. Furthermore, one can question if this stage in truth ends at 60, as many continue to work much longer.

Levinson (1978) pointed to the crisis of transition periods during the adult middle years. He characterized this middle adulthood period as occurring between 40 and 65 years of age and divided these years into the following periods: midlife transition (40–45 years), entering middle adulthood (45–50), age 50 transition (50–55), and the culmination of middle adulthood (55–60). Middle age is often perceived as a crisis period as individuals realize career and personal limitations. There is a growing realization that they may never achieve the personal and professional goals set for themselves during the adult beginning years. This may result in major life changes, such as becoming involved with a younger woman or leaving a successful career to undertake a new simpler lifestyle. Peck (1968) has postulated four major steps that are crucial to psychological adjustment during the middle years. They are socializing rather than sexualizing human relationships, valuing wisdom rather than physical powers, emotional flexibility rather than fixation, and mental flexibility instead of rigidity.

A concern about Levinson’s (1978) early research was that it focused primarily on men. Research on women (Papalia & Olds, 1995) has indicated major differences between age-linked developmental changes of men and women. Women were seen as less likely to have mentors, and more likely to have dreams that were split between relationships and achievement. Levinson (1996) studied women and concluded that women did go through predictable periods, but transitions between periods were likely to be more turbulent than for men. He noted that women who pursued traditional roles, as well as those who pursued careers, often struggled with integrating the two. Today, the dynamics of the work environment have exerted enormous pressure on working women as they need to cope with virtually two full-time jobs—one at the office and the other at home. Working women experience greater difficulty than men in balancing work and family. In order to succeed in one environment, working women are often called upon to make sacrifices in another environment as each makes different demands on them and has distinct norms to adhere to (Shobha, 2014).

Integrity Versus Despair (Age 60–Death)

Erikson (1994) described the final stage of old age as characterized by the psychosocial crisis of integrity versus despair. The psychologically healthy older person is seen as one who has come to terms with past successes and failures, one who has few regrets, and one who has accepted death. Those who do not resolve this crisis experience despair at impending death and lost opportunities. Erikson’s eighth stage did not include the recent phenomenon of many older adults who now assume caretaking roles for their grandchildren. It could be argued that these grandparents may experience the generativity of an earlier stage of development. Also, as mentioned earlier, as life expectancy increases, many older people continue to work well past the age of 60.

A Ninth Stage (80 Years and Beyond)

Since Erikson’s theory was last published in 1994, life expectancy has increased to 75.5 and 80.5 years for men and women, respectively (Ortman et al., 2014). The number of older people in our society is rapidly increasing and the fastest growing group of older people are the “old old” who are defined as 85 and older (AARP, 1997). To address this phenomenon, Erikson (1997) formulated a ninth stage of development for those who live into their 80s and 90s. This stage is characterized ideally by gerotranscendence. An older person achieves this stage by mastering each previous stage, as well as transcending the physical and social losses associated with old age.

Feminist Critique of Traditional Theories of Individual Human Development

Traditional theories of individual development, such as those proposed by Erikson (1994) and Levinson (1978), have been recognized as being based largely on a male, middle-class, White, Western European model. The discussion of Erikson’s theory in this chapter attempted to include considerations of various types of diversity (e.g., culture, class, sexual orientation). It is also important, however, to consider the feminist critique of traditional theories of individual development.

Feminists have argued that Erikson’s and Levinson’s theories of human development, for the most part, ignore women’s developmental experiences. Gilligan (1982) proposed that traditional theories of development represent the male experience of self-development through separation and ignore the female experience of progression toward interdependence through relationships and attachments. Similarly, Miller (1991) has pointed out that women’s sense of self develops through emotional connections with and caring for others and that such experiences are ignored and undervalued by traditional theories, thus undermining the development of self-esteem for women. Surrey (1991) has explicated the self-in-relation theory of women’s development, with the dual goals of “response–ability” to others and the ability to care for oneself. Feminist critiques have argued convincingly that theories of development that undervalue the importance of emotional connections are detrimental to both men and women. These critiques have made an important contribution to broadening theories of individual development so that attachment, affiliation, and relationship are valued as much as separation and self-development.

STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

The biopsychosocial development of individuals also includes moral development. How do children learn to make decisions about right and wrong behavior? Kohlberg (1981) has postulated six stages of moral development that can be condensed into three levels. The first level includes the premoral stage (0–4 years) and the preconventional stage (4–10 years). The child follows rules, but primarily to avoid punishment by a powerful person or to satisfy one’s own needs.

The second level is that of conventional/role conformity and includes a good boy/good girl orientation (stage 3) and an authority and social order maintaining orientation (stage 4). This level implies that doing right is primarily related to either the desire to meet the approval of others or be seen as a good citizen. Kohlberg believed that the second level was obtained by the majority of people.

The third level is characterized by postconventional/self-accepted moral principles and includes a contractual/legalistic orientation (stage 5) and the morality of individual principles of conscience (stage 6). At this level, individuals do what is right because it is legal and following laws is the most rational choice or because of their own moral sense of right and wrong. Kohlberg believed that one progressed through each stage sequentially and saw education as essential in promoting moral development. Gilligan (982), in her early work, took issue with Kohlberg’s stages of moral development and stated that it was primarily male oriented. She questioned whether the ideal of moral development could be found only within one’s self and proposed that women follow a different course of moral development. Through her research, she learned that women always considered the interpersonal and a relational perspective in making moral decisions. This reflected a different, but not an inferior, foundation for ethical decision-making.

FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THEORY

Families are made up of individuals of different ages and at different stages of development. Although early family literature focused primarily on the nuclear family in which members ranged in age from infancy to adulthood, many families now are intergenerational and may have members of all ages. In order to work effectively with individuals and families, the clinician must have an awareness of the developmental stage of each family member, as well as the stage of the family life cycle. Carter and McGoldrick (2004) have developed a family life cycle model that delineates predictable stages in family development. Similar to Erikson’s model of individual development, families experience a crisis when they pass from one life cycle stage to another. If not resolved, a family’s developmental crisis can lead to family conflict and breakup (Congress, 1996). The six stages of the traditional middle-class family life cycle delineated by Carter and McGoldrick (2004) are: (a) between families—the unattached young adult, (b) the joining of families through marriage—the newly married couple, (c) the family with young children, (d) the family with adolescents, (e) launching children and moving on, and (f) the family in later life.

New roles for women, social and economic trends, an increasing divorce rate, and class differences have all contributed to diverse forms of the family life cycle (Carter & McGoldrick, 2004). In the first edition of this chapter, U.S. Census Bureau data suggested that one out of two marriages ends in divorce. Current literature, however, suggests that the divorce rate is falling, especially as people are marrying later (Miller, 2014). Also, most of the divorced remarry within a few years (Congress, 1996). To address these phenomena, Carter and McGoldrick (2004) have identified family life cycle stages for divorced and remarried families. Now over 50% of all Americans are single; 30.4% of them have never been married, while 19.8% are divorced, separated, or widowed. Again, this is in sharp contrast to 40 years ago when the number of unmarried adults was 37% (Miller, 2014). Furthermore, one out of five couples chooses to remain childless, which is in sharp contrast to the 1970s when only one out of ten couples was childless (Livingston & Cohn, 2010).

While some unmarried people are in long-term lesbian and gay relationships, now many same-sex couples have opted for marriage, which is now legal in all 50 states. The number of same-sex partnerships, both married as well as living together, has increased by 80% between 2000 and 2010. Now, 25% of same-sex partnerships have children living in the household (Roberts & Stark, 2014).

While Carter and McGoldrick focused primarily on the heterosexual family life cycle, the family life cycle for lesbians and gay men has been discussed (Appleby & Anastas, 1998; Mallon, 2005). More recently, Goldberg (2010) has looked at gay and lesbian parenting from a family life cycle approach.

Although Carter and McGoldrick (2004) have developed the most comprehensive life cycle family theory, there are limitations as the focus is primarily on middle-class heterosexual families. What follows is a discussion of the stages that they have identified together with information about same-sex parents and families from different cultural and economic backgrounds. Attempts are made to acknowledge how issues of diversity limit the generalization of these stages and to relate these stages to those in individual development theory.

Stage 1: Between Families—The Unattached Young Adult

This first stage of family development usually occurs in late adolescence and early adulthood. Developmental tasks for this period have traditionally included emotional and physical separation from the family of origin, developing peer relationships, and establishing oneself in work (McGoldrick et al., 2015). It should be noted that this period may span the late part of Erikson’s adolescence stage and the early part of the adult stage. Both the young adult and the parents must participate in this separation process. Ambivalence about separating may produce a family crisis. Separation involves more than physical separation. Often, young adults who do not successfully complete this process of emotional separation may have difficulties establishing their own independent family.

The age at which individuals marry for the first time is increasing; therefore, the stage of the young, unattached adult may be extended. Economic factors may contribute to young adults remaining physically and financially dependent on their parents for housing and financial support. Parents may also apply adolescent rules to young adults still living in their house, which can precipitate family crises and conflicts.

It should be noted that a lengthy stage of young unattached adulthood may be increasing for both middle-class Anglo families as well as poor, culturally diverse families. The United States has become increasingly culturally diverse, and it is estimated that by the mid-21st century the majority of people will be from backgrounds other than Western European (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Already one-third of U.S. citizens are immigrants or children of immigrants (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Many cultures continue to have an expectation that young adults remain at home until married, thus keeping offspring emotionally connected and dependent on their families. Furthermore, with adolescent single parenthood, this stage leading to marriage may not exist. Young unattached adolescents/adults may not choose to establish their own home, but rather continue to live in an intergenerational family. Although mothers and grandmothers involved in raising adolescents’/adults’ children may provide needed emotional and concrete support, family conflict often occurs with regard to parental roles and power.

Serious romantic involvements during this stage pave the way for young adults to leave home and form their own families. Again, there may be family conflict when parents and adult children disagree about a future marriage partner. An increasing number of young adults choose to live together before marriage (National Health Statistics Reports, 2013). Cohabiting today does not carry the same stigma as in previous generations with about two-thirds of couples living together before marriage. At one time, marriage may have been seen as the only way for young couples to get the social support and companionship that are important for emotional health. This is not so any longer. Marriage is not necessary to reap the benefits of living together, at least when it comes to emotional health (Dush & Mernitz, 2015).

Young gay and lesbian people may experience specific challenges during this period. There may be a difficult period of “coming out to their parents” and some may even decide on a heterosexual marriage to dispel family fears about sexual orientation. Different communities in the United States may have differing acceptance of gay or lesbian youth, and there may be limited opportunities for them to meet others of the same sexual orientation.

Stage 2: The Joining of Families Through Marriage—The Newly Married Couple

The second family life cycle stage identified by Carter and McGoldrick (2004)—that of the newly married couple—is often challenging for young people. Each partner must learn that the other may have differing expectations, choices, and goals (Congress, 1996), and together the couple must learn to compromise in making both major and minor decisions. Although one might assume that this stage would be less challenging for couples who have lived together before marriage, relating to in-laws as a married couple is still apt to produce conflict (Carter & McGoldrick, 2004). The increasing rate of divorce among couples, especially in the first few years of marriage, is often the outcome of family crises and conflicts during this stage.

It should be noted that marriages occur not only among young adults but at different ages along the individual life cycle. Whereas marriage in adolescence is decreasing, an increasing number of people marry and remarry in their 30s, 40s, and 50s. Marriage also occurs among people in Erikson’s eighth stage, that of old age. Although the developmental tasks around establishing an intimate relationship may be similar, other psychosocial tasks related to work issues may impact differently on newly married couples. For example, when young adults marry, they may be struggling to establish careers. When middle-aged adults with existing careers marry, however, they may be faced with the demands of finding time for their new marriage partners, relocating for one partner’s career, and dealing with the familial stress of stepchildren. Older adults who marry, or remarry, may face conflict around retirement and shrinking financial resources.

Same-sex marriage is now legal in all 50 states. More and more gay and lesbian couples who have been living in long-term committed relationships of various lengths have increasingly taken advantage of this opportunity.

Stage 3: The Family With Young Children

The third family life cycle stage has been described as the “pressure cooker” phase in that the majority of divorces occur within this time period (Carter & McGoldrick, 2004). The major developmental task is faced when the couple must begin to think of themselves as a triad rather than a dyad. An infant is extremely demanding of time and attention. While the family is in this developmental phase, the child is in the first stage of individual development during which trust is so important. There are many occasions for conflict to arise during this period.

Current social trends may contribute to the stress of this period. Women are usually older and working while children are young, which produces additional stress. Also, the increase of the single-parent household often means a role overload for the primary caregiver. Furthermore, remarriages and blended families may result in the need to negotiate complicated relationships with stepparents and stepchildren (Carter & McGoldrick, 2004).

Having children of one’s own often reenacts and reawakens old unresolved issues in individual members. For example, a spouse who has not been able to successfully resolve the developmental psychosocial crisis of establishing trust may be especially threatened by the birth of a baby who now receives special attention.

Another complicating factor is that in most families, children are often at different stages of individual development. For example, a multichild family may be challenged by having a new infant who is very demanding of time and attention and also a latency age child who needs help to develop peer relationships. Families may also experience a crisis in handling sibling conflict, especially of siblings of different ages with differing psychosocial needs.

Again, there may be special challenges for same-sex couples who may have to make initial parenting decisions about adoption, surrogate birth, or artificial insemination. Because same-sex couples have often been part of heterosexual marriages or relationships previously, there may be children already living with one or both parents. Although schools are now much more sensitive to different family constellations, some children may experience difficulty in explaining two father or two mother parents to both their peers and teachers.

Stage 4: The Family With Adolescents

This fourth phase has been identified as a major family crisis point (Carter & McGoldrick, 2004). While adolescents are struggling with identity and separation issues, their parents may be coping with their own issues around employment and health. Parents often have difficulty in granting adolescents any independence and may wish for a return to latency years when their children were more connected with the family. Although adolescents may seem to want more independence, there still continues to be a need for structure, and parents may alternate between being too restrictive and too lenient. Intrafamilial differences also impact on culturally diverse families during this period, as immigrant adolescents often may want to associate only with their American peers, while parents prefer the family relationship patterns they have learned in their countries of origin.

For same-sex parented families, there may be special challenges when children reach adolescence. Adolescence is the time during which young people mature physically and become aware of their own sexuality. For example, a gay male married couple struggled with how to talk to their preadolescent daughter about impending menses and finally turned to a trusted aunt for this conversation.

Stage 5: Launching Children and Moving On

Although previously referred to as the “empty nest phase,” this term may not accurately reflect what actually occurs in families. First, because of economic factors, many young adults do not leave home until they are much older, and even then, they frequently return to the parental home. Second, two factors mitigate the impact of the empty nest syndrome. The majority of women with children work outside the home, and many women in midlife actively pursue new careers and higher education. This family life cycle stage may be linked to individual development issues. Parents may be struggling with midlife concerns around career changes, while their offspring are only beginning to pursue their work objectives. Difficulties may arise when parents try to enforce their unrealized career wishes on their children, as for example, when a middle-aged father who worked in a clerical social service position insisted that his son attend law school after graduating from college.

During this phase, the family changes from being a small group with one or more offspring to a dyad again. For couples who have spent most of their married years raising a family, relating as a dyad again may be challenging. Many couples, however, look forward to this phase and welcome the opportunity to be relieved of demanding child care responsibilities. Time can be spent on advancing careers, pursuing education, and travel. For these couples who were looking forward to being a dyad again, adult children who do not want to leave home or who thrust child caring responsibilities on their parents may be perceived as challenging.

Stage 6: The Family in Later Life

The final stage of the family life cycle—the family in later life—occurs when children have left home. With increasing life expectancies, this phase may span over 30 years. Although the number of older people in our population is rapidly increasing, especially as the “baby boomers” hit 60, the increase of the old (85 or older) is especially striking (Ortman et al., 2014). The transitions and tasks in later life include issues of retirement, grandparenthood, illness and dependency, and loss and death. One common challenge for individuals and couples in this period, especially for those with failing health, is the experience of role reversal with their children.

As life expectancy increases and women continue to live longer than men, the number of widowed women has and will continue to increase (Ortman et al., 2014). The majority of older people live alone in the community, not in institutional care or with their families (Ortman et al., 2014). Although elders living with families has been the pattern for many American cultural minorities, there is some evidence that this is changing. Millions of children are being raised solely by their grandparents, with numbers continuing to climb as the opioid crisis and other factors disrupt families. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that caregivers who raise their grandchildren are able to manage as well as biological and adoptive parent caregivers (AAP, 2018).

Regardless of where they live, many culturally diverse grandmothers do not “retire” from the family in old age, but rather are called upon to serve as parents to grandchildren whose parents have died or are unable to care for their children. Does the family cease when there is one remaining member, often an elderly woman whose husband has died and whose children have developed their own families? The interest in reminiscence groups, both in nursing homes as well as in senior centers, attests to the continuing importance of family throughout the life cycle.

Loss may be an especially difficult issue for lesbian and gay families during the later years. The loss of a partner may be even more traumatic for the remaining person, because they may not be comfortable sharing with others about personal loss if they live in a homophobic community (Humphries & Quam, 1998).

IMPLICATIONS AND TOOLS FOR PRACTICE

The social worker must be cognizant of developmental theory in work with individuals and families. Making an assessment of what the current stage of development is for each individual, as well as for the total family, is particularly helpful, as there are certain needs and tasks of individuals and families at different stages.

For example, a young newly married couple in their 20s is very different from a recently divorced single-parent family with two adolescent children. In the former, each member must work on establishing a commitment to each other and the marriage; they must be able to work out issues of appropriate emotional separation from their family of origin yet realign relationships with extended families and friends to include the spouse. In the latter situation, the family must work out financial and familial relationships with the departing spouse/parent. Unless contraindicated due to issues of safety, contact with the absent spouse must be maintained and a visitation plan developed. Also, it should be noted that, according to individual development theory, adolescents are in the process of establishing their own identity apart from their parents and families. They often turn to their peers for support and guidance during this phase rather than their parents, which may cause increased conflict within a family that has already endured the crisis of separation and divorce.

Even when couples seem to be in the same family life cycle stage, there may be important differences based on their individual ages. A young couple in their 20s who are engaged to be married may be struggling with issues of separation from their family of origin, whereas a middle-aged couple engaged to be married may have to work out issues of separation and connection with previous spouses and children.

There are a number of family assessment tools that can help the practitioner identify and understand individual and family development issues. A brief overview is provided of four such tools: (a) the ecomap, (b) the genogram, (c) the culturagram, and (d) the intersectional design tool (IDT).

Ecomap

The ecomap (Hartman & Laird, 1983) is built on an ecological approach to practice and outlines the relationship of the family as a whole, and its individual members, with the outside world. It provides a snapshot of the family at a certain point in time. By looking at the ecomap, the clinician can assess the extent to which the developmental needs of the family and its individual members are being met. For example, the previously discussed newly divorced family with two adolescents should show some connection with the absent parent. If this link is missing or conflictual, family problems can be addressed in treatment. Also, the ecomap demonstrates connection with different resources in the community. It would be of concern if the ecomap illustrated that an adolescent had no connection with peers for recreational activities.

Genogram

The genogram (McGoldrick et al., 2008) is a family assessment tool that examines the intergenerational relationships within a family. The genogram maps out family constellations, relationships, and events over three generations. This tool allows the social worker to become aware of the current and past connections in the immediate family, as well as connections with extended family. The clinician is able to assess the individual and family development stages when therapeutic work begins. Also, the clinician can gain an understanding of historical issues in individual and family development.

Figure 4.1 is a genogram of the divorced family with two adolescent children that has been referred to previously. The genogram allows the clinician to examine the connection of parents and children with the extended family, as well as the absent parent. Also, it is possible to look at what was happening at key points in the family history; for example, at the time of the divorce, at the time of the children’s births, and at the time of the parents’ marriages. Key events such as births, separations, divorces, deaths, serious health problems, employment reversals, relocations, and other crisis events all impact individual and family development. The genogram can help to clarify when these events occurred and their impact on family development. For example, an examination of Figure 4.1 indicates that the Jamison/Hernandez family experienced many crises in a short period of time. John Jamison Jr. and Juanita Hernandez were divorced and shortly afterward John remarried. Also, we are aware John’s new wife is in her 20s, only 10 to 12 years older than her new stepsons. The two adolescent boys live with their mother, and there is indication that both have experienced academic and behavioral problems around the time of the divorce. Although Juanita has continued as the custodial parent, the social worker would want to explore what arrangements have been made for the adolescent sons to visit their father.

FIGURE 4.1  Genogram.

In terms of important historical facts, we note that John III was born only 6 months after his parents were married, which may suggest that the couple had little time to adjust to living together as a couple before they were married. Also, there is the possibility that John Jr. and Juanita “had to get married” and that John III was not planned. The Jamison family experienced a major crisis when John III was an infant and when John Jr.’s brother was in a fatal accident. There may be pressure on the oldest male child, John Jr., and now John III, to carry on the family tradition.

Also, we note ethnic, geographic, and class differences between the Jamison and the Hernandez sides of the family. The Jamisons and the new wife, Carol Madison Aldrich, come from the Northeast, whereas Juanita was born in Texas. The Jamisons appear to be from a White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant background, whereas Juanita is Mexican American. John Jr. has graduate education, whereas Juanita did not graduate from high school. Both sons are in the adolescent phase of development during which children strive to become more independent of their parents. Yet parental roles and values are very important in shaping adolescent and adult identities. As both parents come from such different backgrounds, the social worker would want to explore the impact this has had on the family in the past as well as the present.

Culturagram

The ecomap and genogram are useful tools in assessing the development of the family, as well as the developmental stages of its members. These tools, however, neglect the important role of culture in assessing and understanding the family. To increase understanding of the impact of culture on the family, the culturagram (Congress, 1994, 1997; Congress & Kung, 2013) has been developed and applied to work with people of color (Lum, 2003), battered women (Brownell & Congress, 1998), children (Webb, 2003), immigrants (Congress, 2004), people with health problems (Congress, 2004), and older people (Brownell, 1997). The culturagram grew out of the recognition that families are becoming increasingly culturally diverse. It is estimated that over 25% of those living in the United States are either immigrants or children of immigrants (Potocky-Tripodi, 2002). Although earlier immigrants to the United States were primarily men, recent waves of immigration have been mostly women and children (Foner, 2005). The presence of families from 125 nations in one zip code attests to the increasing diversity of our country (National Geographic, 1998).

Practitioners demonstrate varied degrees of cultural competence in working with individuals and families from different cultures. Schools, agencies, and governmental organizations are frequently rooted in a Western European background. Individual and family development theories were originally based on practice with traditional White American middle-class families. Cultural differences often have a major impact on individual and family development. For example, individuals and families from other cultures are often more familial and communal than their White Anglo-Saxon American counterparts. Class also may be an important factor. Middle-class families from other cultures may be more assimilated and follow Carter and McGoldrick’s family development patterns more closely than poor families. The clinician must guard against judging individuals or families as pathological because they do not follow traditional individual and family development patterns. The adolescent who chooses not to separate from his parents to attend a distant college despite a full scholarship is not pathological, but perhaps is heeding a cultural norm that maintaining familial connection is more important than individual achievement. The culturally diverse family in the launching stage in which adult children choose not to move out and live independent of their parents may believe that ongoing connection with family provides essential lifetime support.

Many culturally diverse families exhibit much strength in handling the crisis of each developmental stage. Some examples of this include the single adolescent mother who struggles to receive a General Education Diploma, while working full time to support her child; the working class family in which the father, as a janitor, and mother, as a housekeeper, manage to provide for and raise a large family; and the grandmother who, despite serious health problems, cares for her grandchildren.

When attempting to understand culturally diverse families in terms of individual and family development theory, it is important to assess the family within a cultural context. Some have written about the unique characteristics of different cultures (Ho, 2004; McGoldrick et al., 1996). Considering a family only in terms of a specific culture, however, may lead to overgeneralization and stereotyping (Congress & Kung, 2013). For example, a Puerto Rican family that has lived in the United States for 40 years is very different from a Mexican family that emigrated last month, although both families are Hispanic. Also, one cannot assume even within a particular cultural group that all families are similar.

The culturagram (Figure 4.2) is a family assessment tool that represents an attempt to individualize culturally diverse families (Congress & Kung, 2013). Completing a culturagram with a family can help a practitioner develop a better understanding of the family in terms of individual and family development theory. The culturagram can be a powerful tool for better assessment, treatment planning, and intervention in work with culturally diverse families.

FIGURE 4.2  Culturagram.

Source: From “Using Culturagrams with Culturally Diverse Families” by Elaine Congress, pp. 969–975, Fig: 144.1 (p. 971: Culturagram–2007), in Social Workers’; Desk Reference, 2nd ed., edited by Roberts, A. & Greene, G. (2009). By permission of Oxford University Press, USA. www.oup.com

As is apparent in Figure 4.2, the culturagram consists of 10 major areas that are important to consider in order to understand culturally diverse families. They are: (a) reasons for immigration; (b) length of time in the community; (c) legal status; (d) language spoken at home and in the community; (e) health beliefs; (f) impact of crisis events; (g) holidays/special events and contact with cultural/religious groups; (h) current and past discrimination, bias, and racism; (i) values about education and work; and (j) values about family, including structure, power, myths, and rules.

Reasons for Immigration

Reasons for immigration vary among families. Many families come because of economic opportunities in the United States, whereas others relocate because of political and religious discrimination in their country of origin. For some, it is possible to return home again, and they often travel back and forth for holidays and special occasions. Others know that they can never go home again. Economic and social differences between the country of origin and the United States can affect immigrant families. For example, in the United States, latency-aged children often attend large schools far from their communities and begin to develop peer relationships apart from their families. For culturally diverse families that come from backgrounds in which education is not easily accessible, and even young children are supposed to work and care for younger siblings, the U.S. school system, with its focus on individual academic achievement and peer relationships, may seem strange. Furthermore, immigrant children who bring a history of individual or family oppression may feel very isolated and lonely in their new environments. Individual development theory for latency-aged children, as well as family development theory for families with young children, needs to be understood in the context of immigration issues involving loss, change, and assimilation.

Length of Time in the Community

This area of the culturagram assessment provides an important context to understand culturally diverse families. Usually the family members who have arrived earlier are more assimilated than other members. Also, because of attending U.S. schools and developing peer relationships, children are often more quickly assimilated than their parents. This may lead to conflictual role reversals in which children assume a leadership role. A current phenomenon involves mothers first immigrating to the United States and then sending for their children. These circumstances can certainly impact on individual and family development. A young infant left in the care of relatives in the homeland may have difficulties in developing trust because of the lack of continuity in parenting during this crucial development period. Also, the family with young children that is disrupted when the mother emigrates may face challenges in reuniting as a family after several years’ hiatus.

Legal Status

The legal status of a family may have an effect on both individual and family development. Often families consist of both documented and undocumented members. In families affected by domestic violence, often a husband with legal status may threaten his undocumented wife with reporting her undocumented status to immigration authorities. If a family is undocumented and fears deportation, individual members, as well as the family as a whole, may become secretive and socially isolated. Latency-aged children and adolescents may be discouraged from developing peer relationships because of the fears of others knowing their immigration secret.

Language

Language is the mechanism by which families communicate with each other. Often, families may use their own native language at home but speak English when outside the home and in the community. Sometimes, children begin to prefer English as they see knowledge of this language as most helpful for survival in their newly adopted country. This may lead to conflict in families. A most literal communication problem may develop when parents speak no English, and children speak their native tongue only minimally.

Health Beliefs

Families from different cultures have varying beliefs about health, disease, and treatment (Congress, 2004; Congress & Lyons, 1992). Often, health issues impact on individual and family development, as for example when the primary wage earner with a serious illness is no longer able to work, a family member has HIV/AIDS, or a child has a chronic health condition such as asthma or diabetes. The children of immigrants may be at greater risk for certain chronic adult diseases (Santora, 2006), and the access to care and the care they receive are very important. Also, mental health problems can impact negatively on individual and family development. Families from different cultures may encounter barriers in accessing medical treatment or may prefer alternative resources for diagnosing and treating physical and mental health conditions (Congress, 2004). Many immigrants may use healthcare methods other than traditional Western European medical care involving diagnosis, pharmacology, x-rays, and surgery (Congress, 2004). The social worker who wishes to understand families must study their unique healthcare beliefs.

Crisis Events

Families can encounter developmental crises as well as “bolts from the blue” crises (Congress, 1996). As discussed previously, developmental crises may occur when a family moves from one life cycle stage to another. Life cycle stages for culturally diverse families may be quite different from those for traditional middle-class families. For example, for many culturally diverse families, the “launching children” stage may not occur at all, as single and even married children may continue to live in close proximity to the parents. If separation is forced, this developmental crisis might be especially traumatic.

Families also deal with “bolts from the blue” crises in different ways. A family’s reaction to crisis events is often related to their cultural values. For example, a father’s accident and subsequent inability to work may be especially traumatic for an immigrant family in which the father’s providing for the family is an important family value. While rape is certainly traumatic for any family, the rape of a teenage girl may be especially traumatic for a family who values virginity before marriage. Families from different cultures who suffered a loss as a result of the 9/11 tragedy may demonstrate a variety of crisis-related symptoms (Congress & Lynn, 2005).

Holidays/Special Events, Contact With Cultural/Religious Groups

Each family has particular holidays and special events. Some events mark transitions from one developmental stage to another; for example, a christening, a bar mitzvah, a wedding, or a funeral. It is important for the social worker to learn the cultural significance of important holidays for the family, as they are indicative of what families see as major transition points in their family development. Contact with cultural and religious institutions often provides support to an immigrant family. Family members may use cultural institutions differently. For example, a father may belong to a social club, the mother may attend a church where her native language is spoken, and adolescent children may refuse to participate in either because they wish to become more Americanized. The clinician also needs to explore the role of spirituality within the immigrant family.

Current and Past Discrimination, Bias, and Racism

Many immigrants, and especially refugees, have experienced prejudice and discrimination in their countries of origin. Unfortunately, racism and discrimination do not end with immigration to the United States. Many undocumented immigrants live with the fear of being deported and separated from their families. This may be especially difficult for families whose children were born here and thus are U.S. citizens. Immigrants may be the victims of racism or discrimination because of their skin color or limited language skills.

Values About Education and Work

All families have differing values about work and education, and culture is an important influence on such values. Social workers must explore what these values are in order to understand the family. For example, employment in a high-status position may be very important to the male bread winner. Often it is especially traumatic for the immigrant family when the father cannot find any work or only work of a menial nature. Sometimes there may be a conflict in values. This occurred when an adolescent son was accepted with a full scholarship to a prestigious university 1,000 miles away from home. Although the family had always believed in the importance of education, the parents believed that the family needed to stay together and they did not want to have their only child leave home, even to pursue education.

Values About Family

Many families from culturally diverse backgrounds may have differing views about family structure and power, based on gender and age. Often, American families are more egalitarian, with women and children having equal voices within the families. This may be very different for many families from cultures in which males were considered the most dominant, women were subservient, and children had limited voices. Also, some cultures have much respect for older people and depend on their input for decision-making, while in the United States, there is often more of a youth orientation. Because of language differences, however, often a role reversal occurs with children assuming greater power because of their greater fluency in English. In working with culturally diverse families, the clinician needs to be aware of family values that are different from those of themselves or other American families.

Intersectional Design Tool

While knowing a family’s cultural background is important, knowledge of other factors are also important in understanding families. A middle-class family from Mexico whose father is in the United States on a work visa with a tech company is very different from an undocumented Mexican family supported minimally by a father making food deliveries. An intersectional approach was first introduced by Crenshaw (1989) who was concerned that knowing a person’s gender was only one part of understanding a person. All people have different aspects, some of which have more power and privilege than others. Thus, Black women often faced more discrimination because of having two aspects or statuses—gender and race that had less power and privilege. This theory was expanded to include other statuses that have varying degrees of power and privilege. To help in understanding how this impacts family, the IDT (2017) was developed. Figure 4.3 includes important statuses that helps in understanding families with whom we work.

FIGURE 4.3  Intersectional design tool.

CONCLUSION

Social workers need to integrate knowledge of individual and family development theory in their work. Such knowledge can help workers identify and normalize individual and family problems. The stages of individual and family development should not, however, be applied rigidly. There is a risk of characterizing individuals or families as pathological if they do not follow the expected guidelines for the stage. Any attempt to describe “normal” development runs the risk of pathologizing those who do not fit the theoretical descriptions. It is important to recognize that theories of individual and family development have been based largely on a White, male, middle-class model. These theories must continue to be expanded to take into account various types of diversity and changing social trends.

With regard to individual development, for example, more recognition must be afforded to women’s experience, and affiliation and connection need to be valued as much as separation and self-development. With regard to family development theory, the need for flexibility and multiple conceptions of normal development are necessitated by diverse types of families such as single-parent, blended, gay and lesbian, poor, and culturally diverse families. Even when changing social trends and diversity are given due recognition, individual and family development theories provide only broad guidelines in work with clients. Social workers must apply these theories in the context of the specific, unique individuals and families with whom they are working. Using the tools of the ecomap, genogram, culturagram, and an intersectional approach helps in understanding families from diverse socioeconomic classes and cultural backgrounds.

SUMMARY POINTS

•Social workers need to integrate knowledge of individual and family development theory in their work.

•Family development theory should continue to be expanded to take into account various types of diversity and changing social trends.

•There should continue to be more recognition toward a woman’s experience and affiliation regarding individual development and should be valued as much as separation and self-development.

•The need for flexibility and multiple conceptions of normal development are necessary to take into account diverse families such as single parent, blended, gay and lesbian, and culturally diverse families.

•Using the tools of the ecomap, genogram, culturagram, and intersectional design helps in understanding families with diverse classes and cultural backgrounds