Family form or Family Process?

Reconsidering the Deficit Family Model Approach

Author(s): Ramona Marotz-Baden, Gerald R. Adams, Nancy Bueche, Brenda Munro and Gordon
Munro
Source: The Family Coordinator, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Jan., 1979), pp. 5-14
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/583262
Accessed: 30-03-2015 08:54 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Family
Coordinator.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Family Form or Family Process?
Reconsidering the Deficit Family
Model Approach*
RAMONAMAROTZ-BADEN,GERALDR. ADAMS, NANCY
BUECHE, BRENDA MUNRO, AND GORDON MUNRO**

This paper examines the utility of a deficit family model approach by questioning
whether family form or familial process is more likely to contribute to children's
positive personal and social development. A literature review of the recent work on
the effects of alternative family forms (divorced families, father or mother absent
families, remarriages, employed mother families) on children's personality, social
behavior and school achievement suggests that it is more fruitful to consider the
social interactional dynamics that lead to a given outcome than to focus on the form
of the family as the critical independent variable.

The middle-class nuclear family, mother in deviations in children's personality, social

the home, has traditionally served as the ideal
standard of American family life. Deviations
from this family form have produced outcries
of concern that the family is decaying
(Brandwein, Brown, & Fox, 1974; Glasser &
Navarre, 1965). Although we empathize with
this concern, the emotionality of the topic has
clouded perceptions of some of the critical
issues central to an understanding of factors
affecting the socialization of children.
The assumption reconsidered in this paper
is that the nuclear family is the ideal way to
rear and socialize children. A basic tenet in
much of the literature is that variations in the
nuclear family will produce undesirable
*Presented at the Sixth Annual Family Research Confer-
ence, Brigham Young University, February, 1977. We wish
to thank Craig Peery and Jay Schvaneveldt for their insight-
ful comments on a previous draft of this paper. Please
direct requests for reprints to the senior author.
**Ramona Marotz-Baden is Associate Professor, Depart-
ment of Home Economics, Montana State University,
Bozeman, Montana 59717. Gerald Adams is Associate Pro-
fessor, Department of Family and Human Development at
Utah State University, Logan, Utah 84322. Nancy Bueche,
Brenda Munro and Gordon Munro were master's students
at U.S.U.
behavior, and school success. Although some
deviations may emerge from variant family
forms, the basic question, it seems to us, is
whether children from variant family forms
show greater or lesser signs of undesirable
behaviorthan children from traditional nuclear
families. It is reasonable to assume that
undesirable behavior can result from sociali-
zation in any family form. However, one
should question whether a given form is more
likely to produce ineffective adults than
another.
Two Competing Perspectives
Regardless of the reason for the evolution of
greater numbers of variant family life forms,
the fact is that there is no one standard family
pattern. The report of the White House Con-
ference on Children (1970) delineated eight
prevalent variations of the American family in-
cluding (a) the traditional nuclear family,
(b) the dyadic nuclear family, (c) the single-
parent family, (d) the three-generation family,
(e) old-age couples, (f) the institutional fam-
ily, (g) the foster family, and (h) kin net-
works. Furthermore, this report recognized a

January 1979 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR 5

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 number of emerging experimental family
structures which equally affect children, e.g.,
the communal family, unmarried parent and
child family, and unmarried couple and child
family.
The common stance has been to use a
deficit model when describing variant family
forms. For instance, Goldstein, Freud, and
Solnit (1973) argued from a deficit model
perspective that the discontinuity of divorce
creates psychic damage in children because
of the absence of a continuous, stable role
model. However, such a position may be an
overstatement in its assumption of dysfunc-
tionality in attachment and personality devel-
opment and projects the child as a mere ob-
ject of environmental effects. Child develop-
ment specialists, however, report active,
adaptive capabilities of the human organism
(Kagan, 1976; Looft, 1973; Riegel, 1975; Sam-
eroff, 1975) which run counter to this argu-
ment. Implicit in the latter argument is the
capability of children's egos to confront and
overcome situational obstacles as they
develop. This does not imply the absence of
possible psychological damage. Rather, it
suggests an individual's capacity to surmount
potential traumatic effects. An obvious
example is the number of people who experi-
enced the trauma of concentration camps as
ch iIdren and later became wel l-known writers,
scientists, poets or political leaders.
The dialectic nature of the two opposing
perspectives demands an examination of the
basic question of whether it is family form or
individual capacities which contributes more
to a child's personal and social development.
Most developmental psychologists posit that
individual psychological capabilities and
attributes are supported by certain socializa-
tion processes (e.g., see Becker, 1966; Clau-
sen, 1966) rather than family form per se.
Therefore, it appears to us, that the essential
question is whether it is family form or famil-
ial process which is more likely to contribute
to positive personal and social development.
We reviewed some recent literature examin-
ing the effects of alternative family forms on
children's development to see if the data were
more supportive of a family form or a family
process perspective. Within certain limits we
found that the type of family form had little or
6 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
no differential effect on the child's develop-
ment. It btecameclear that certain aspects of a
child's development were associated with
specific family processes.
The alternative family forms examined are
common. The most prevalent deviation from
the traditional mother at home nuclear family
form is the divorced family. Another derivative
is the father or mother absent family. Perma-
nent separations are increasingly followed by
remarriages (Glick, 1975). While the structure
of this particular form may look identical to
that of the nuclear model, interaction patterns
may be quite different. The last family type
viewed was the family with an employed
mother. The amount of concern raised by
various groups about the effects of employ-
ment of the mother on her children and the
number of studies of this phenomenon are
evidence that this form is considered a vari-
ant.
Unfortunately, there has been little syste-
matic research comparing children from
various family forms on the same dependent
variables. Most of the research is quasi-
experimental, usually without a control
group. In addition, it is cohort specific; there
are few cross-cohort comparisons. Therefore,
our conclusions should be viewed as more
suggestive than definitive.
Effects of Divorce on Children
Divorced or single-parent families have been
viewed historically as detrimental for children
(e.g., Burchinal, 1964; Glasser & Navarre,
1965) although more recently these families
have increasingly come to be viewed as a
viable alternative child rearing form (e.g.,
Billingsley & Giovannoni, 1971; Sussman,
1971). The research reviewed indicates that
behavioral problems, general adjustment and
interpersonal relations appear to be related
less to divorce than to other mediating factors
which may exist in any family form.
Behavioral problems with children seem
more related to conflict in the home than to the
structure of the family. Children in happy
one-parent homes appear to be better adjusted
than children in unhappy two-parent families
(Burchinal, 1964; Despert, 1953; Goode, 1948;
Landis, 1960; Nye, 1957). Additional evidence
(e.g., see Lerner, 1954; Hetherington, Cox, &
January 1979
Cox, Note 1) suggests that in one-parent
families, conflicts between the ex-spouses
adversely affect the child's behavior.
Some evidence (Loeb & Price, 1966)
suggests that children, especially daughters,
of divorced and separated parents are more
likely to be aggressive or act out. Other
evidence suggests that the effect of a marital
break is less severe. Burchinal (1964), for
example, compared male and female adoles-
cents on several social and interpersonal
measures from unbroken families, broken
families headed by mother, mother and
stepfather families, father and stepmother
families, and families in which both divorced
and remarried. With the exception of mean
school absenteeism (variance of two days), no
differences between these groups were
reported for selected personality character-
istics, school or community participation
scores, and numbers of friends. Similar
findings reported by Gurin and Epps (1975)
showed no differences between black Ameri-
can college students from nuclear, extended
and one-parent families on college academic
scores, job aspirations, work ethic values, and
moral standards.
Divorce, however, stigmatizes by labeling
one-parent families as deviant and disorgan-
ized. A review article by Brandwein, Brown
and Fox (1974) cited data indicating neigh-
bors would not let their children play with
their peers from divorced homes (Grollman,
1969; Marsden, 1969). In addition, Grollman
(1969) reported some evidence of discrimina-
tion in admittance procedures by colleges
against children of divorced parents. In fact,
this stigmatization leads some children to
feel shame about their parents' divorce and
others to even lie about the whereabouts of
the absent parent (Landis, 1960). However,
we found little data to indicate that stigma-
tization leads to permanent behavioral prob-
lems. The only studies found addressing this
issue were those of Wallerstein and Kelly
(1975, 1976). These investigators report that
approximately 70% of the children they fol-
lowed for a year after the divorce showed no
signs of psychological deterioration. Parental
divorces may, nonetheless, have some effect
upon the child's adult interpersonal relations.
Burr's data (1973) suggest that children from
January 1979 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
divorced parents have a greater proclivity to
divorce. In general, however, it does not
appear that adolescents' emotional health is
related to having one- or two-parent families
(Burchinal, 1964). Mitchell and Wilson (1967)
found that mental health among adults was
more dependent upon the person's current
situation than upon childhood variables such
as divorce.
Alternate family forms have been viewed as
major contributing factors to delinquency. Of
18 studies cited by Herzog and Sudia (1970) 7
upheld the relationship between delinquency
and single parent households, 4 found
contrary results, while 7 were inconclusive.
These researchers noted several problems
with these studies. Foremost was the gener-
ally recognized fact that delinquent children
from lower socioeconomic and ethnic neigh-
borhoods were more likely to be picked up,
officially charged and sentenced. Since even
the 11 conclusive studies were confounded by
SES, ethnic background, and methodological
design problems, extreme caution should be
utilized in generalizing from these studies.
These researchers suggested that a broken
home, per se, was not the critical precipitator
of delinquency. The Gluecks (1962) found
"lack of family cohesiveness more strongly
correlated with juvenile delinquency than was
father absence" (Herzog &Sudia, 1970, p. 15).
Conflict between spouses (Nye, 1957) and fa-
milial disorganization (at least for boys)
(Browning, 1960) appeared more strongly
related to delinquent behavior than family
structure. Further, financial stability or insta-
bility of the family and the quality of super-
vision rather than single parent family struc-
ture were the crucial factors in juvenile delin-
quency (Eisner, 1966).
Other effects of divorce should be noted.
The economic level of the two separate family
units almost always drops, as income for-
merly spent on maintenance of one house-
hold must now be spread over two. Economic
discrimination against women compounds
the problem. Children are still more likely to
remain with their mothers than their fathers,
putting the economic burden on the parent
least likely to adequately support them. This
frequently involves change in housing to
lesser accommodations in a poorer neighbor-
7
hood (Carter & Glick, 1970). Moving itself is
often a stress (Weissman & Paykel, 1972),
and may be compounded by problems of re-
duced personal safety, higher neighborhood
delinquency rates and poorer schools.
Divorces often require considerable adjust-
ment by the individual family members. The
family must reorganize its domestic and eco-
nomic responsibilities and its system of af-
fectional and emotional support. Authority
shifts are common. Discipline and other
socialization practices become primarily the
task of the custodial parent. Yet most fam-
ilies, and the individuals therein (Wallerstein
& Kelly, 1975, 1976), seem to successfully re-
organize in time. The time dimension is often
overlooked. Most separations and divorce are
stressful, but stress usually dissipates over
time as families reorganize without the absent
member.
In summary, there is little evidence sug-
gesting that divorce is directly related to neg-
ative developmental consequences for chil-
dren. Rather, circumstances associated with
poverty and conflict between parents in any
family form seem to be contributing factors.
Parental Absence
Lynn (1974), in summarizing his literature
review on the absent father, says there is a
negative relationship between father absence
and the child's general adjustment, especially
in cases of separation, desertion, and di-
vorce. The conclusions we have drawn are
less clear.
Herzog and Sudia's (1970) extensive review
of the father absence research indicated that
several forms of father absence must be con-
sidered in assessing its impact. Therefore,
multiple issues need be addressed. In par-
ticular, was the absence temporary or
permanent, and at what age in the child's life
did the separation occur? The complexity of
the study of this problem has led several
reviewers to call for further qualifications in
summarizing the available research. Rosen-
field and Rosenstein (1973) added the precipi-
tating cause, duration of absence, frequency
of absence, amounts and kinds of contact,
and emphasized that the timing of the separa-
tion and the quality of the relationship which
remains for the child are important mediating
factors.
8 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
How the father is separated from the family
and the attitudes the family members have
held for the father before separation are rele-
vant to the child's development. Knox (1970)
found that death of the father resulted in
increased idealism about interpersonal rela-
tionships. In comparison, loss of a father
through divorce or separation may temporarily
stimulate hostility and anger in the child
(NBC Special, Note 2). Before a divorce there
tends to be more friction and interpersonal
conflict than is experienced prior to father ab-
sence due to death (Nye, 1957). This in-
creases the likelihood of idealization of the
dead father and hostility toward the divorced
father. Idealism of the dead parent may stimu-
late unrealistic expectations about marriage
and interpersonal relationships. For example
Bowerman and Irish (1962) found that when
the mother remarried, interpersonal adjust-
ment toward the new parent was higher in
divorced than in widowed situations.
The degree of psychological presence of
the absent father is also a mediating factor.
Even though the father is physically gone he
may remain symbolically present, especially
in cases of prolonged temporary separation or
even desertion or death. Boss' (Note 3, p. 10)
data on children's personal adjustment,
school adjustment, involvement in profes-
sional counseling, and the interviewer's
assessment of the children's adjustment in
MIA (missing-in-action) families support her
other findings that " . . . the phenomenon of
psychological father presence has positive
effects on the family system immediately
after casualty but has negative effects after a
long period of time when the reality of his
long absence can no longer support the in-
congruity of the situation." This incongruity
blocks both the grieving process and reorgan-
ization of the familial system around the re-
maining members.
Fathers evidenced more concern about the
development of appropriate sex roles than
mothers (Bronfenbrenner, 1961; Good-
enough, 1957, Lynn, 1974). The amount of
sex-typing in the child, however, appears to
be determined more by the father's impor-
tance in the child's life than in any other type
of father-child antecedent-consequence rela-
tionship, although the data are ambiguous-
(e.g., Mussen & Rutherford, 1963,1969). Con-
January 1979
 flict and stress are also mediating factors.
Bronson (1959) reported that the effects of
fathers on sex role development of their sons
were mediated by stress and anxiety in the
home. The more stressful and anxious the
home environment, the less effective mascu-
line fathers were in masculinizing their sons.
A major factor in the effect of father
absence is the age of the boy when the father
leaves. Studies indicate that, for boys, father
absence in early childhood results in a
lessened masculine orientation (Biller, 1969;
Biller& Bahm, 1971; Carlsmith, 1964; Hether-
ington & Deur, 1972) and a view that the father
has little authority or power (Bach, 1946).
The quality of female parenting, however,
appears to significantly affect masculine de-
velopment of the male child. Hetherington
and Deur (1972) report that, just as for daugh-
ters, the mother's attitude toward her ex-
husband and males in general affects sex role
development for boys, especially in cases of
father absence from 18 months to 4 years (see
also Bach, 1946; Helper, 1955; Levy, 1943;
Newbauer, 1960; Stoller, 1974).
The amount of general contact boys in
father-absent homes have with male adults
was found to be related to their masculinity
(Nash, 1965). Santrock (1971) reported that
father-absent boys with a male model were
more independent and higher in masculine
characteristics than boys with no male model.
Although research is scant, there are some
indications that daughters who are reared in
female headed households develop as "nor-
mally" as those reared in nuclear families.
Separation occurring early in the child's life
(0-5 years) may hinder the female child's later
self-concept, and over identification with the
female role model can result in a disturbed
heterosexual interaction later in the child's
life (Parke, 1969). However, interaction with
male adults outside the family may attenuate
this effect.
Hetherington's (1973) investigation of
adolescent girls from intact nuclear families
and single parent families whose father had
either died or been divorced indicated that
these females were no more likely than
children from nuclear families to reflect sex
typing problems or indicate aggressive-
mascu line tendencies. However, both groups
January 1979 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
felt insecure and apprehensive around male
peers and adults. She implied that this might
be due to inadequately learned role behavior
and lack of ability in knowing how to interact
socially.
Hetherington also found that daughters
whose mothers held a negative attitude to-
ward their former husbands tended to gener-
alize this attitude to males. Further, mothers
from separated and divorced families tended
to be over-protective and solicitous of their
adolescent daughters. This may have been
due to a fear of their children having to experi-
ence a similar situation. Mothers with a posi-
tive attitude toward males, however, tended
to have less difficulty with their female chil-
dren and their children had positive attitudes
toward the opposite sex. Nevertheless,
daughters from divorced and widowed fam-
ilies were found to be more externally con-
trolled, apprehensive, socially inadequate and
anxious than daughters from intact families.
The relationship between family form and
the consequences of children's development
was not as clear as Lynn's (1974) conclusion
suggested. The literature we reviewed sug-
gests that parental absence per se is not di-
rectly related to delinquent behavior, sex role
development, or most general psychological
adjustments. For most behaviors expressed
by children there were other factors mediating
between the absence of the parent and
specific developmental characteristics in
children. In support of this notion Hethering-
ton, Cox, and Cox (Note 1) report data deline-
ating likely mediating factors. Their two year
longitudinal comparative study of boys and
girls from divorced and intact families found
that divorced mothers were more effective
in their child rearing practices if (a) both
parents agreed on child rearing techniques,
(b) both held positive attitudes toward each
other, (c) there was low conflict between
the divorced parents, (d) the father main-
tained contact with the child, and (e) if both
parents were emotionally mature. They note
the importance of support systems such as
siblings, parents, and other kin groupings,
friends and hired help. However, the most
important factor was a continued positive
relationship with the ex-husband. In our
terminology, these mediating factors are seen
9
as family process variables.
Remarriage
The Cinderella myth (Smith, 1945) that
relationships between stepparents and step-
children should be considerably less harmo-
nious than the relationships between natural
parents and their children in an intact family
setting is not consistent with the available
data. As Betterman (1968) suggests, probably
all children in remarriage situations experi-
ence some degree of trauma. The child faces
an almost total shift from familiar patterns of
family relationships to new ones at a time
when "significant" adults are emotionally less
available to him because of their own
involvement with each other. In addition, the
child may face adjusting to stepsiblings.
There is some evidence (Duberman, 1973) that
stepparent-child relationships are more har-
monious than step-sibling relationships.
However, relationships between children and
stepparents appear better in mother-step-
father families than in father-stepmother
families (Benson, 1968; Bowerman & Irish,
1962; Duberman, 1973). Bowerman and Irish
also report that adjustment to stepparents in
their comparative sample was higher in
divorced than in widowed situations.
Other studies reveal a lack of detrimental
effects on children from divorce-remarriage
families in terms of stability, self-sufficiency
or dominance (Bernard, 1956), selected
personality characteristics, truancy, and in-
terpersonal and social psychological charac-
teristics (Wilson, et al., 1975). The majority of
mothers in Goode's (1948, pp. 307-309) study
thought that their children's lives improved
upon remarriage. Nye (1957) reported more
adjustment problems between children and
stepparents than in original, intact family sit-
uations, but also found that the greatest
adjustment needed to be made in unhappy,
original intact families. More recently, Wil-
son, et al. (1975), comparing children from
stepfather-mother families with natural
father-mother families in two national sur-
veys, reported that out of 68 dependent mea-
sures of social-psychological characteristics
in one survey only 10 were statistically sig-
nificant. This difference could not be ex-
plained on the basis of father's education, re-
ligion or age. However, 4 of the 10 significant
10 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
differences would be predicted by a type 1
error to a chance factor. Further, of 39
social-psychological characteristics studied
in the second survey, only one was signifi-
cantly different. This difference disappeared
when the data were controlled for parental
SES and children's mental ability. Summar-
izing this study and others, Rallings (1976, p.
448) suggests " . . . [the need for a] systems
approach, focusing on role behavior."
In summary, there is little evidence sug-
gesting that divorce and/or remarriagecauses
any lasting intrapsychic damage or major
deviant social behavior in children. There are
probably proportionately as many "normal"
children from divorced and reconstructed
families as from original, intact families. Per-
haps researchers should focus on measuring
the differential effects of warmth, love and
understanding between parents and their chil-
dren on children's behavior rather than focus-
ing on the effects of structural differences
(broken versus unbroken homes).
Maternal Employment
The effect of maternal employment on child
development has been a topic of debate since
the end of World War II. Maternalemployment
has been on the rise for over a decade (e.g.,
Hayghe, 1973; Young, 1973). A series of em-
pirical reviews (Burr, 1973; Etaugh, 1974;
Hoffman, 1963, 1974; Hoffman & Nye, 1974;
Howell, 1973; Wallston, 1973) assessed re-
search on the effects of working mothers on
the child's psychological and social develop-
ment with a surprisingly strong and common
consensus emerging between reviewers. At
least for the female child, mother's employ-
ment in a satisfying and rewarding job is
related to positive patterns of psychological
and social development. For the male child
few positive or negative effects are consis-
tently found.
Perhaps the longest used argument against
maternal employment has been the belief that
working mothers will not adequately provide
the "security blanket effect" necessary for the
child's psychological adjustment. Specifically
mothers who have chosen to work and parent
have been accused of not allowing enough
time for parent-child attachments that are
thought to give the necessary personal trust
important for psychological and social adjust-
January 1979
ment. Critics have argued that children of em-
ployed mothers will be withdrawn, neurotic,
bedwetting, thumbsucking, poorly adjusted
individuals. However, little support can be
found for this accusation (Burr, 1973; Etaugh,
1974; Howell, 1973). In addition, little
evidence can be found that supports the once
popular, but equally unrealistic assumption,
that working mothers are, through their ab-
sence of fulfilling household responsibilities,
cultivating a deviant juvenile delinquent sub-
culture. Once again, little support can be
found in reviews of the available literature
(Burr, 1973; Etaugh, 1974; Hoffman, 1974;
Woods, 1972). Given that juvenile delinquents
have been found in the homes of some
working mothers (although not disproportion-
ately to homes where the mother has
assumed primarilya parenting role when con-
trolled for SES and other background factors).
Maccoby (1958), Hoffman (1974), and Burr
(1973) have indicated that the relationship is
less likely one of family structure or maternal
employment and more likely one of appropri-
ate supervision, SES, and/or community fac-
tors.
Actually, several beneficial outcomes are
likely to materialize out of maternal employ-
ment beyond the obvious ones of increments
in family income. Working mothers (Douvan &
Adelson, 1966; Hoffman, 1974; Woods, 1972)
and single mothers (Gurin & Epps, 1975;
Kriesberg, 1970) are found to have personal
beliefs about the importance of independence
and have children who are rather autonomous
and independent. Further, mothers who are
satisfied with their employment serve as
important role models (Hoffman, 1974) and
have been found to give quality mother-child
interactions (Harrell& Ridley, 1975) which are
likely to make the mother an even more
salient role model. Given that independence
training by parents is associated with
achievement and competence striving (Parke,
1969), it would be expected that children of
working mothers would show high career
aspirations and academic achievement. In-
deed, mothers who report a strong satis-
faction with their employment have been
found to have children, particularly daughters
(Hoffman, 1974) with high achievement
January 1979 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
needs, high cognitive skills (Woods, 1972)
and high career aspirations which were likely
to entail plans for college (Etaugh, 1974;
Hoffman, 1974; Howell, 1973). Furthermore,
working mothers have also been found to
have daughters who approved of maternal
employment (Burr, 1973) and admired and
respected their mothers more than daughters
of full-time mothers (Douvan & Adelson,
1966).
One additional benefit a child internalizes
through observing mother in a working role
has to do with sex role perceptions. Children
of working mothers have been found to
perceive smaller differences between mascu-
line and feminine roles than children in which
the mother is a full-time homemaker (Etaugh,
1974). Also, these children were more likely to
give higher evaluations of female competence
(Hoffman, 1974).
Mother's happiness with her role mediates
the impact of maternal employment upon
social adjustment. Hoffman's (1963) study of
4 matched groups of mothers; (a) those who
were happily employed outside the home,
(b) those who were employed but wished they
could stay at home, (c) those who were happy
in their full-time role of housewife/mother,
and (d) those who wished they were
employed but were staying home for the sake
of the child, found that happily employed
mothers were high on positive affect toward
their children, used mild discipline, and
avoided inconveniencing their children with
housework. Their children were relatively non-
assertive and ineffective. Mothers who dis-
liked working were less involved with their
children and obtained their children's help
with tasks. These children were assertive and
hostile.
In summary, the current reviews of the
literature provide relatively consistent evi-
dence that maternal employment may be
related to quality parent-child interactions
and role modeling that stimulates positive
aspirations and cognitive skill development. It
seems evident that maternal employment is
not the relevant variable. Rather, mother's
happiness with her role, adequate super-
vision, and sufficient support systems for
caring for children are more critical, again
11
supporting the process model.
Conclusion
The effects of family structure or family
form on a child's well being can be assessed
through two perspectives: (a) a product
orientation which assesses developmental
outcome, and (b) a process perspective which
considers the interactional dynamics that
lead to a given outcome. In this review we have
argued that an understanding of the social
interactional process that leads to a specific
outcome is as important as the outcome
itself. Although process determines outcome,
one also must remember that " . . . the
human being is a changing being in a
changing world" (Riegel, 1976, p. 696).
Therefore, the effects of variant family forms
on the well-being of its members includes a
process of social change and individual
change in an interlinking experiential matrix.
That is, a complete understanding of variant
family forms requires research which deals
with social and individual ontogeny, and the
interaction between these two social-develop-
mental processes.
We are in agreement with Pedersen's (1976,
p. 463) statement, "in place of a deficit-
oriented, global classification of environ-
ments, research should be directed to the
study and conceptualization of the more
specific components of experience in the
father-child and husband-wife relationships
within the nuclear family." We would like to
extend this to include a comparison across
family forms. Research on the mediating pro-
cesses that accompany family life styles as
they influence the socialization of children is
urged. This review, for example, identified
several important factors including familial
conflict, financial instability, quality of
supervision, support systems, and role
modeling as factors central to understanding
developmental outcomes regardless of the
form of the family unit.
This will require sophisticated method-
ology and multivariate frameworks over
simple dichotomous comparisons between
the nuclear family and other family forms.
One theoretical orientation amenable to the
study of process is the systems approach.
12 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Change in one aspect of the family brings
about changes in other parts of the system. In
the family, as well as in other primarygroups,
there exists a state of interdependency which
involves reciprocal roles and social inter-
action positions. A shift in the role of mother,
for example, to include employment outside
the home, or a divorce with the subsequent
change in the father's position and role,
will precipitate changes in the roles and
relationships of other family members. The
process of adapting to these changes and
the effect of situational factors upon this
process should provide useful information for
evaluating outcomes and how to modify them
to benefit the family members involved.
Finally, we propose that future research not
only recognize the interlinkage of family roles
and memberships, but also the "dialectics" of
time itself (Riegel, 1972, 1976). This places an
equal emphasis upon individual and family
role behavior and the study of actions and
changes in the individual and family structure
across calendar, social, and historical time.
This perspective recognizes demographic,
social and historical contributions to individ-
ual development and, more importantly, the
interacting nature of these factors on individ-
ual and social ontogeny (Looft, 1973).
REFERENCENOTES
1. Hetherington, E. M., Cox, M. C., & Cox, R. Beyond
father absence: Conceptualization of effects of divorce.
Paper presented at the meetings for the Society for Re-
search in Child Development, Denver, April, 1975.
2. NBC Special, Children of Divorce, narrated by Barbara
Walters, 1975.
3. Boss, P. Psychological father presence in the missing
in action (MIA)family system: The testing of a theory on
father interaction. Paper presented at NCFR meetings,
Salt Lake City, Utah, August, 1975.
REFERENCES
Bach, G. R. Father fantasies and father-typing in father-
separated children. Child Development, 1946, 17, 63-80.
Becker, W. Consequences of different kinds of parental
discipline. In M. Hoffman & L. Hoffman (Eds.), Reviev,
of child development research. New York: Sage, 1966.
Benson, L. Fatherhood: A sociological perspective. New
York: Random House, 1968.
Bernard, J. Remarriage: A study of marriage. New York:
Dryden, 1956.
Betterman, C. The multi-marriage family. Social Casework,
1968, 49, 218-222.
Biller, H. B. Father absence, maternal encouragement, and
sex-role development in kindergarten age boys. Child
Development, 1969, 40, 539-546.
January 1979
 Biller, H. B., & Bahm, R. M. Father-absence, perceived ma-
ternal behavior, and masculinity of self-concept among
junior high school boys. Developmental Psychology,
1971, 4, 178-181.
Billingsley, A., & Giovannoni, J. One parent family. In R.
Morris (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social work (Vol. 1). New
York: National Association of Social Workers, 1971.
Bowerman, C., & Irish, D. Some relationships of step-
children to their parents. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 1962, 24, 113-121.
Brandwein, R. A., Brown, C. A., & Fox, E. M. Women and
children last: The social situation of divorced mothers
and their families. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
1974, 36, 498-514.
Bronfenbrenner, U. The changing American child: A specu-
lalive analysis. Journal of Social Issues, 1961, 17, 6-18.
Bronson, W. Dimensions of ego and infantile identifica-
tion. Journal of Personality, 1959, 27, 532-545.
Browning, C. Differential impact of family disorganization
on male adolescents. Social Problems, 1960, 8, 37-43.
Burchinal, L. Characteristics of adolescents from unbroken
and reconstituted families. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 1964, 26, 44-45.
Burr,W. Theoryconstruction and the sociology of the fam-
ily. New York: Wiley, 1973.
Carlsmith, L. Effect of early father-absence on scholastic
aptitude. HarvardEducational Review, 1964, 34, 3-21.
Carter, H., & Glick, P. Marriage and divorce: A social and
economic study. Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press,
1970.
Clausen, J. Family structure, socialization, and personal-
ity. In M. Hoffman & L. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child
development research (Vol. 2). New York: Sage, 1966.
Despert, L. Children of divorce. Garden City: Doubleday,
1953.
Douvan, E., &Adelson, J. The adolescent experience. New
York: Wiley, 1966.
Duberman, L. Step kin relationships. Journal of Marriage
and the Family, 1973, 35, 283-292.
Eisner, V. Effects of parents in the home on juvenile delin-
quency. Public Health Report, 1966, 81, 905-910.
Etaugh, C. Effects of maternal employment on children: A
review of recent research. Merrill-PalmerQuarterlyof Be-
havior and Development, 1974, 20, 71-98.
Glasser, P., & Navarre, E. The problems of families in the
AFDC program. Children, 1965, 12,151-157.
Glick, P. A demographer looks at American families. Jour-
nal of Marriage and the Family, 1975, 37, 15-26.
Glueck, S., & Glueck, E, Family environment and delin-
quency. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962.
Goldstein, J., Freud, A., & Solnit, A. J. Beyond the best
interests of the child. New York: Free Press, 1973.
Goode, W. After divorce. Glenco: Free Press, 1948.
Goodenough, E. W. Interest in persons as an aspect of sex
differences in the early years. Genetic Psychology
Monographs, 1957, 55, 287-323.
Grollman, E. Explaining divorce to children. Boston: Bea-
con, 1969.
Gurin, P., & Epps, E. Black consciousness, identity and
achievement: A study of students in historically black
colleges. New York: Wiley, 1975.
Harrell,J., & Ridley, C. Substitute child care, maternal em-
ployment and the quality of mother-child interaction.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1975, 37, 556-564.
January 1979 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Hayghe, H. Marital and family characteristics of the labor
force in March 1973. Monthly Labor Review, 1974, 97,
21-27.
Helper, M. M. Learning theory and the self-concept. Jour-
nal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 51, 184-
194.
Herzog, E., & Sudia, C. Boys in fatherless families. United
States Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970.
Hetherington, E. M., & Deur, J. L. The effects of father
absence on child development. In W. Hartup (Ed.), The
young child: Reviews of research, 1972, 2, 303-319.
Hetherington, E. M. Girls without fathers. Psychology To-
day, 1973, 6, 47-52.
Hoffman, L. W. Mother's enjoyment of work and effects on
the child. In F. I. Nye & L. W. Hoffman (Eds.), The em-
ployed mother in America. Chicago: Rand McNally,
1963.
Hoffman, L. W. Effects of maternal employment on the
child-A review of the research. Developmental Psychol-
ogy, 1974, 10, 204-228.
Hoffman, L. W., & Nye, F. I. Working mothers. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass, 1974.
Howell, M. C. Effects of maternal employment on the child
(II). Pediatrics, 1973, 52, 327-343.
Kagan, J. New views on cognitive development. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 1976, 5, 113-129.
Knox, D. Conceptions of love by married college students.
College Students Survey, 1970, 4, 18-30.
Kriesberg, L. Mothers in poverty. Chicago: Aldine, 1970.
Landis, J. T. The trauma of children when parents divorce.
Marriage and Family Living, 1960, 22, 7013.
Lerner, S. Effects of desertion on family life. Social Case-
work, 1954, 35, 3-8.
Levy, D. M. Maternal overprotection. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1943.
Loeb, J., & Price, J. R. Mother and child personality char-
acteristics related to parental marital status in child
guidance cases. Journal of Consulting Psychiatry, 1966,
30, 112-117.
Looft, W. R. Socialization and personality throughout the
life span: An examination of contemporary psychologi-
cal approaches. In P. Baltes & K. Schaie (Eds.), Life-
span developmental psychology: Personality and social-
ization. New York: Academic, 1973.
Lynn, D. The father: His role in child development. Mon-
terey, Calif.: Brooks/Cole, 1974.
Maccoby, E. Effects upon children of their mothers out-
side employment. Work in the lives of married women.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1958.
Marsden, D. Mothers alone: Poverty and the fatherless
family. London: Penguin, 1969.
Mitchell, D., & Wilson, W. Relationship of father absence
to masculinity and popularity of delinquent boys. Psy-
chological Reports, 1967, 20, 1173-1174.
Mussen, P., & Rutherford, E. Parent-child relations and
parental personality in relation to young children's sex-
role preferences. Child Development, 1963, 34, 589-608.
Mussen, P., & Rutherford, E. Parent-child relations and
parental personality in relation to young children's sex-
role preferences. In R. D. Parke (Ed.), Readings in social
development. New York: Holt, 1969.
Nash, J. The father in contemporary culture and current
psychological literature. Child Development, 1965, 36,
261-297.
13
Newbauer, P. B. The one-parent child and his oedipal de-
velopment. Psychoanalytical Study of the Child, 1960,
22, 456-465.
Nye, I. Child adjustment in broken and in unhappy un-
broken homes. Marriage and Family Living, 1957, 19,
356-361.
Parke, R. D. Readings in social development. New York:
Holt, 1969.
Pedersen, F. Does research on children reared in father-
absent families yield information on father influences?
The Family Coordinator, 1976, 25, 459-464.
Rallings, E. M. The special role of stepfather. The Family
Coordinator, 1976, 25, 445-449.
Riegel, K. F. Influence of economic and political ideolo-
gies on the development of developmental psychology.
Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78, 129-141.
Riegel, K. F. Toward a dialectical theory of development.
Human Development, 1975, 18, 50-64.
Riegel, K. F. The dialects of human development. Ameri-
can Psychologist, 1976, 31, 689-700.
Rosenfield, J. M., & Rosenstein, E. Toward a conceptual
framework for the study of parent absent families. Jour-
nal of Marriage and the Family, 1973, 35, 131-135.
Sameroff, A. Transactional models in early social rela-
tions. Human Development, 1975, 18, 65-79.
Santrock, J. W. Influence of onset and type of paternal ab-
sence on the first four Erickson development crises. De-
velopmental Psychology, 1971, 3, 273-274.
Smith, W. C. The stepchild. American Sociological Re-
view, 1945, 10, 237-242.
Stoller, R. J. Symbiosis anxiety and the development of
masculinity. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1974, 30,
164-172.
Sussman, M. Family systems in the 1970's: Analysis, poli-
cies and programs. Annals, 1971, 396, 40-56.
Wallerstein, J. S., & Kelly, J . B. The effects of parental
divorce: Experiences of the preschool child. Journal of
the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 1975, 14,
600-616.
Wallerstein, J. S., & Kelly, J. B. The effects of parental
divorce: Experiences of the child in later latency. Ameri-
can Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1976, 46, 256-269.
Waliston, B. The effects of maternal employment on chil-
dren. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1973,
14, 81-95.
Weissman, M., & Paykel E. Moving and suppression in
women. Society, 1972, 9, 24-28.
Wilson, K., Zurcher, L., McAdams, D. C., & Curtis, R.
Step fathers and step children: An exploratory analysis
from two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 1975, 37, 526-536.
Woods, M. B. The unsupervised child of the working
mother. Developmental Psychology, 1972, 6, 14-25.
White House Conference on Children. Report to the Presi-
dent. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1970.
Young, A. Children of working mothers. Monthly Labor Re-
view, 1973, 96, 37-40.

UNIVERSITYOF KENTUCKY
GraduateProgramin the
Departmentof
FAMILYSTUDIES
HumanDevelopmentand
ResourceManagement
Curriculumoptions
leadingto the
MASTEROF SCIENCEDEGREE
- Early Childhood Education
- Consumer Economics
-Theory and Research
- Family and Developmental
Services
- Family Life Education
* Asistantshipsavailable
* Inteidiscipinrwyapproach
* Speial provisions for fellowship
aidto nority applicants
For more information, please write:
Department of Family Studies
304 Funkhouser Building
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 40506

14 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR January 1979

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:54:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions