Master of Social Work

McGill University School of Social Work

AN EXPLORATION OF THE ADJUSTh1ENT

OF SINGLE MOTHERS

by

Suzan Friedman
Barbara Kaufman
Linda Seligman

THE ABS TRACT

This research was designed to explore the adjust­

ment of mothers who were single due to divorce or separa­
tion. Previous studies have tended to compare these
families to two parent families, thereby perceiving them
as inadequate and incomplete. The purpose of this study
was to explore whether single parent families could be
viewed as a unique family structure, with their own
inherent strengths and weaknesses.

The sample was composed of 35 single mothers,

who were members of Parents Without Partners. The data
was obtained by means of a questionnaire, administered to
the women at a group meeting. While questions pertaining
to children were included in the questionnaire, all infor­
mation was limited to mothers' responses.

An adjustment scale was devised to enable the

researchers to sub-divide the sample into two groups, lower
and higher adjusted. Six variables were selected for
further examination, i. e. socio-economic circwnstances,
self-adjustment, social relationships, relationship with
ex-spouse, quality of parenting, and parent-child relation­
ship.

The results indicated different levels of functioning

in these areas. The higher adjusted group, as compared with
the lower adjusted group, were found to be functioning better
physically, psychologically, and socially. They generally
had more positive attitudes towards working, had a greater
number of social contacts, and derived greater satisfaction
from them. Structurally, they were more able to cope with
their increased role committments, and parent-child relation­
ships were less conflictual. Further, the higher adjusted
group had been better able to resolve their negative feelings
towards the ex-spouse and divorce than the lower adjusted
group. Finally, children of higher adjusted mothers were
reported to be happier, and were experiencing less diffi­
culty than children of lower adjusted mothers.

On the basis of these results, the researchers

concluded that the one parent family could be considered
a viable unit. Although it must integrate many changes,
the one parent family can provide a positive environment
for its members.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We wish to express our thanks to Diane Reichertz,

our research advisor and Dr. E.V. Shiner, Director of
Research, for their helpful guidance and valuable advice,
in the preparation of this study.

We are also grateful to the members of Parents

Without Partners Organization, without whose cooperation
this study would not have been possible.

We are especially thankful to Ricky, Harley and

Zul whose support, patience and enthusiasm helped keep our
spirits up.

Finally, we thank each other for a sense of humor

and contagious laughter, which helped make an otherwise
tedious experience into a pleasant one.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

Acknowledgements.................................... ii
List of Tables •.••••••.•••••.••••••••·.••.••••••••..• v

Chapter
I INTRODUC Tl ON • . • • . • • • • • . • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • 1
Purpose and Scope
Assumptions
Definitions
11 REv IEW OF LITERA TURE ••••••••••••••••••••.••. 5

Attitudes Towards Divorce/Separation

Socio-economic Circumstances
Social Relationships
Self Adjustment
Quality of Parenting
Relationship with Ex-Spouse
Parent-Child Relationship
III STUDY METHODOLOOY .•.••••.••.•••••••••••.•••• 28

The Sample
The Instrument
Administration of the Instrument
Adjustment Scale
IV SAlVtPLE PROF ILE ...................... Q •••••••• 42

:..ii
Chapter Page

v DATA ANALYS IS ••••••••••• '• ••••••••••••••• 54

Identifying Information and

Socio-Economic Circumstances
Self Adjustment
Quality of Parenting and Parent-Child
Relationship
Relationship with Ex-Spouse

VI CONCLUS IONS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 74

Summary of Key Findings
Limi ta tions

VII SUi\11iARY ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 90

APPENDIX
A QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS .•••. o ••••••••• 93

BIBLIOGRAPliY. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 127
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Frequency distribution of adjustment scores ..•• 38

2. Comparison of adjustment scale scores and 40

respondents' self-ratings of adjustment •..•.•••

3. Distribution of respondents by age ••••.••••..•• 43

4. Total number of children by age and sex ..•.•••. 44

5. Distribution of respondents by length of last

marriage....................................... 46

6. Distribution of respondents by length of time

as a single parent ...••••••.••••.••••••.•..•••• 47

7. Distribution of respondents by causes of divorce/

separa tion: 1st and 2nd choice................. 49

8. Distribution of respondents by job type ••.•••••• 50

9. Use of community resources .••••••••••••••••••••• 53

Graphs Page

1. Family monthly incomes.......................... 51

v
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The researchers' interest in this study stemmed from

their experience with one parent families at a child and
adolescent psychiatric clinic. They found that single parent
families were over-represented in their caseloads and posed
a unique set of problems.

Investigation of the literature indicated that, in

1966, there were 372,000 (8 to 9 percent) one parent fami­
lies in Canada. l It has also been noted that while the
divorce rate is increasing (25 percent of all marriages end
in divorce), the number of people choosing to remarry has
decreased 2 , indicating a growing number of one parent fami­
lies in the future.

Since the nuclear family has traditionally been

regarded as the fundamental family unit, the one parent
family has been considered incomplete and inadequate.

lCanadian Council on Social Development, The One

Parent Family: Report of an Inquiry on One Parent F'am1Iies
in Canada. (Ottawa: Canadian Council on Social Develop­
ment, 1971), p.l.
2"The American Fam.ly", Newsweek Magazine, March 12,
1973, P. 47.
l
 2

The literature has tended to compare one parent families

with two parent families, thereby placing them in a position
of being deviant and inherently problematic.

Schlesinger, in his book on the one parent family,

sta ted that
the traditional research design in
which one parent families - often
of different nature - are compared
with intact ones, is methodologically
irrelevent, and will easily lead to
misleading generalizations. l

Substantiating this position, the Canadian Council

on Social Development reported that
One of the biggest problems of one
parent families today is th~t people
expect them to be problems.

The researchers therefore proposed to explore the

single parent family as a separate entity, rather than
comparing it to ~vo parent families.

IBenjamin Schlesinger, ed. The One Parent Family:

Perspectives and Annotated Bibliography (Toronto: Univer­
sity of Toronto Press, 1969), p. 20.
2Canadian Council on Social Development, "The One
Parent Family", p. 1.
 3

Purpose and Scope:

The intent of this study was to explore the adjust­

ment of one parent mothers. An adjustment scale was created
which enabled the researchers to differentiate and compare
various levels of functioning. In the review of the litera­
ture, specific areas such as parent-child relationships,
social relationships and relationship with former spouse,
were identified as areas for exploration and comparison.

The sample was drawn from the Parents Without

Partners Organization, "an international, non-profit, non­
sectarian, educational organization, devoted to the welfare
and interest of single parents and their children!!.l

Since the vast majority of single parent families

are headed by women (90 percent)2, it was decided to limit
the sample to female-headed one parent families. The
sample was further limited to divorced/separated women,
since it was felt that the experiences of widowhood and
those never married would create additional variables,
which could not adequately be handled within the scope of
this study.

lAl Bossinger, "Facts and Observation on PWP and

Its First Fifteen Years of Growth" (Pamphlet on Parents
Without Partners, Jan., 1971), p. 1.
2Benjamin Schlesinger, "The One Parent Family",
p. 1.
Assumptions:

1. It was assumed that divorced and separated

women share similar experiences.

2. It was assumed that psychological adjustment

could be measured according to levels of physical, mental
and social functioning. l

Definitions:

1. Single (One) Parent Family:

A family consisTIng of one parent - female
who is caring for her children, in her home,
and who is a single parent due to divorce or
separation.
2. Adjustment:
An individual's general adaptation to
(her) environment and the demands of life,
including the way (she) relates to others,
handles (her) responsibilities, deals with
stress and meets (her) own needs. 2

1Louise Thorpe, Willis Clark and Ernest Ziegs,

California Test of Personality. Monterey: California Test
Bureau, 1953, cited by Luther G. Baker, Jr., "The Personal
Social Adjustment of the Never Married Woman", Journal of
Marriage and the Family (August, 1968).
2Robert Gddenson, ~--~~~~~~~~--~~--~~~~
The Enc of Human Behavior:
Psychology. Psychiatry and~~1~e~n~t~a~1~~~~ New York: Double-
day & Co., 1970), pp. IS-I! .
 CHAP'l'ER I I

REV I EW OF LITERA 'lURE

In this chapter, the researchers identified a

number of variables by which to present the literature
relevant to one parent families. These areas formed the
basis for the present exploratory study.

1. Attitudes Towards Divorce

Social values and norms are generally reflected

in the prevailing social systems. Since divorce threatens
to alter the traditional family unit, believed to be funda­
mental to the social structure," ••• it offends the sense
of order and fitness in social affairs. Hence it is nearly
always tolerated in fact but never approved in principle."l

Legal, religions, and social systems have illus­

trated this ambivalence. The Report of the Special Joint
Committee of the Senate and House of Commons on Divorce,
1967, recognized the need for changed divorce laws and
accordingly recommended extending the grounds for divorce. 2

lKingsley Davis, "Children of Divorce", in Readings

in Marriage and the Family, ed. by Judsen T. Landis and
Mary A. Landis (New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1959), p. 351.
2Report of the Sp!cial Joint Committee of the Senate
and House of Commons on Divorce, A.W. Roebuck, and A.J~P.
Cameron, Chairman (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1967),p. 14.
5

Although this committee did recommend new laws, at the same

time, it emphasized that the H ••• family is the fundamental
unit of our social organization .•. , essential for the well
being and happiness of the individual." It further implied
that divorce was undesirable, and it was the responsibility
of the community to maintain the institution of marriage
and the family.1

Religious institutions have generally discouraged

divorce. Some religions have refused to recognize it, and
have made the consideration of alternatives to an unhappy
marriage virtually impossible.

The community, unsure of how to approach the divorced/

separated person and her family, and lacking "clearly defined
patterns of adjustment,t! has been poorly equipped to handle
their problems. 2

The one parent famUy has been viewed as a minority

and, therefore, as deviants from the norm. As such it
has been considered a disorganized, unstable, and undesir­
able family structure. 3

1 Ibid" p. 91.
2James Bossard, "Divorce: Some Selected Repercussions,"
in Man and Wife: A Source Book of FamUY Attitudes, Sexual
Behaviour and Marriage CO,unsellin.Kz.. ed. by Emily Hartshorne
Mudd and Aron Krich (New York: W.W. Norton and Co. Inc.,
1957), p. 101.
3Jane K. Burgess ,'The Single Parent Family: A. Social
and Sociological Problem," The Family Co-ordinator, XIX No. 2,
(April, 1970), p. 140.
 7

However, increasing divorce rates and experimentation

in new life styles have brought about changes in attitudes
towards marriage, divorce and one parent families.

Bohannan, Cooper, and Davids were representative

of a number of authors who pointed out the potential
negative aspects of marriage as an institution: for
example, marriage could be " .•. a shield against becoming
whole or autonomous individuals;l " ••• the only evil of
divorce is the prior evil of marriage,,2; "the great misery
of many families today makes it evident enough that radical
change is needed.,,3

Toffler's4 and Goode's5 writings were illustrative

of the view that an increasing divorce rate would diminish
its social stigma, and with widening acceptance, divorce

lPaul Bohannan, "The Six Sta tions of Divorce", in

Divorce and After: An Anal sis of the Emotional and Social
Problems of Divorce, ed. by Paul Bohannan New Yorlc Double­
day and Co. Inc., 1970), p. 53.
2 David Cooper, The Death of the Family, (London:
Penguin Press, 1971), p. 52.
3Leo Da vids, "New Family Norms,!I The Single Parent:
The Journal of Parents Without Partners, Inc., xv No. 10
\December, 1972), p. 9.
4Alvin Toffler, Future Shock, (New York: Random
House, 1970), pp. 251-252.
5Wi11iam J. Goode, "Marital Satisfaction and Insta­
bility; A Cross Cultural Analysis of Divorce Rates", in
Perspectives of Marriage :-md the Family: Text and Readings,
ed. by J. Ross Esh1eman (. ~oston: Al1yn and Bacon Ine .', 1969)
P. 753.
 8

would no longer be considered psychologically and socially

deviant. Goode carried this view even further, believing
that as divorce became a viable alternative to marriage,
it would become " .•• part of the courtship and marriage
system: that is part of the sifting out process analogous
to the adolescent dating pattern."l Steinzor and Gendzel
saw divorce as a growth producing experience, as an It • • •

expression of increasing personal freedom afforded the

average citizen,u2 and as a ft • • • priceless opportunity for
one to achieve self-knowledge and the development of inde­
,.. ft
pen d ence.J •.•.

In the past, one of the major problems for the one

parent family has been the expectation that this type of
structure would present innumerable problems. Were this
type of family to be recognized as a viable unit, with
its own inherent strengths and weaknesses, it would cease
to be defined as deviant and problematic. "Thus premarital
or extramarital intercourse, divorce, working mothers,

lIbid., p. 753.
2Bernard Steinzor, When Parents Divorce: A New
~oach to New RelationshiEs (New York: Pantheon Books~
196~, p. 219.

3Ivan B. Gendzel, "Dependence, Independence and

Interdependence," The Single Parent: The Journal of
Parents Without Partners! Inc., XV, No. 1 (January?
February, 1972), P. 4.
 9

abortions, or unemployment, as problems, may not exist in

the year 2,000 simply because they have been redefined."l
No longer labelled as deviant, the one parent family could
be seen as providing a positive environment, whose problems
when they existed would not necessarily be related to divorce
and a missing parent.

2. Socio-Economic Circumstances

One of the significant consequences of divorce has

been a change in financial circumstances o The Marsden
and Canadian Council on Social Development studies have
indicated that available income generally decreases, and
as a result, one parent families were more likely to live
in conditions defined as poverty, than two parents' family.2
This was further illustrated by the fact that forty percent
of one parent families in the United States were considered
to be in the poverty bracket. 3 Explanations for this

Eshleman, ed., Pers ectives in Marriaue

Text and Readinrrs
=---~~--~~~~~~~~~--~~~~
Boston: llyn and
, p. 636.

2Dennis Marsden, Mothers Alone: Poverty and the

Fat her1 e s s Fam i 1 Y ( Lond o-n"';':-'--;A'-:1:-:1::'"'·e-n~L";"a-n-e'--:T=h:-e";;;";;"-i:P";"e"";n'-"g'-u-1':-;'·n; :;. . . ,P;: -'-r....e-"'-ss ,
~l; Canadian Council on Social Development, p. 18
The One Parent Family.
3Ethel P. Gould, "Special Report: 'The Single
Parent Family Benefits in Parents Without Partners, Inc., If

Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXX, No. 4 (November

1968), p. 669.
 la

decrease in income have varied. While social security and

alimony payments have proven to be inadequate, obtaining
employment has, at the same time, been difficult because
of the woman's limited skills and experience. In addi­
tion wages for women in the labour force have often been
limited, and have sometimes been insufficient to compen­
sate for necessary child care, thereby forcing some to
seek public assistance.

Those women who have elected to enter the labour

market have had to deal simultaneously with a number of
complicated and demanding tasks; finding time and energy
for a job, and remaining the kind of mother children need
under the circumstances. l Nevertheless, a higher propor­
tion of single mothers than married women have chosen to
work. In Canada, in 1970, 36.3 percent of married women
between the ages of thirty-five to fourty-four were employed
as compared with 60 percent of all divorced, widowed and
separated women. 2 Glasser and Navarre implied that a single
working mother would result in decreased involvement with

IMarjorie p. Ilginfritz, "Mothers on their Own:

Widows and Divorcees", Marriage and Family Living, XXIII,
No. 1 (February, 1961), p. 41.
2Canadian Department of Labor, Women's Bureau,
Women in the Labor Force: 1970 Facts and Figures
(Ottawa: Information Canada, 1971), pp. 18-22.
 11

her children, and that this in turn would be damaging to

them. l Siegal and lrnas in their review of research on
working mothers have disagreed, identifying the mother's
motivation to work rather than the work itself, as the
significant variable. 2

Limited income has, as well, forced a number of one

parent families to seek new, and often less comfortable
housing. One third of the women in the Marsden 3 study had
to find new homes following divorce, and one half of the
women studied by Young 4 claimed that their housing condi­
tions, following the divorce, were inadequate.

3. Social Relationships

Changes in economic and marital status may be

accompanied by a shift in social relationships. Financial
inequality with former friends may necessitate less contact,

lPaul Glasser and Elizabeth Navarre, "Structural

Problems of the One Parent Family," in Perspectives in
Marriage and the Family: Text and Readings, ed. by J. Ross
Eshleman, (Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1969), p. 658.
2Alberta Engvall Siegal and Miriam Bushkoff Irnas,
"The Working Mother: A Review of Research," Child Develop­
ment, XXXIV (March, 1963 to December, 1963), p. 537"
3Marsden, Mothers Alone, p. 100.
4William M. Young, "Single Parents and their Teen­
agers," The Single Parent: The Journal of Parents Without
Partners, Inc., XIV, No. 6 (July/August, 1971), p. 6. .
 12

or a change in social groups, both of which would present

difficulties for the divorcee. H ••• The possible drop in
social status •.• , may isolate the family from its own peer
group and place them among a group with which they cannot
or will not communicate freely.!!l

In a culture that has been highly couple oriented,

the single parent's status has been a disadvantage. Single
women are " •.• particularly vulnerable to community sanctions
and must be cautious in their social relationships, lest
their own standing and that of their family be lowered. tl2
In the Marsden study single mothers felt ostracized and
stigmatized by the community. They were further discour­
aged by the minimal number of opportunities in which to
....
meet men without censure.~

Single parents have been considered a "social

inconvenience l, • 4 Married couples have found it increasingly
difficult to integrate the single parent into their social
groups and to cope with their divided loyalties towards

IGlasser and Navarre, "Structural Problems", P. 659.

2Ibid., p. 659

3Marsden, Mothers Alone, p. 109

4Harold T. Christensen and Kathryn P. Johnsen,

Marriage and the Family (New York: The Ronald Press

Co., 1971), p. 482.
 13

ex-husband and wife. 1 Therefore, the divorced/separated

woman has been confronted~th a social dilemma: she has
encountered social isolation at a time when she most needed
the support and encouragement of others. The Canadian
Council on Social Development, Goode and Hill have pointed
out that positive social relationships were crucial to the
single parent's adjustment. 2 It was found that the approval
or disapproval of one's social group influenced the extent
of trauma an individual experienced after her divorce. Thus,
those lacking such support, underwent greater adjustment
difficulties.

In this area, single parents' groups have proved

to be invaluable, offering the single parent an atmosphere
of acceptance and support.

4. Self Adjustment

The termination of a marital relationship has been

considered a traumatic experience. Ackerman has stressed
the feelings of alienation that follows a divorce, describing

IMarge Flaherty, "A Haven for the Lone Parent lt ,

The Single Parent: ,The Journal of Parents Without Partners,
In~., XIV, No. 8 (November, 1971), P. 8. '
2Canadian Council on Social Development, The One
Parent Family, p. 18; William J. Goode, Women in Divorce
(New York: The Free Press, 1965), p. 195; Reuben Hill,
"Social Stresses on the Family", in Sourcebook in Marriage
and the Family, ed. by Marvin Sussman (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1968), p. 447.
 14

the process as a movement towards feelings of " .•• emptiness,

meaninglessness, loneliness, despair, deadness and ultima­
tely a loss of values and a loss of self.1t This, he
believed has contributed to an increase in mental illness,
delinquency, addictions and suicide among divorced persons. l

Bernard and Goo~have assumed that divorce/separation

has a greater impact on women than on men. They linked
this to the greater significance marriage has for women,
and their reliance on " •.. its success and satisfaction for
the general adjustment to living itself.,,2 "Dwindling into
a wife takes time. It involves a redefinition of the self,
and an active reshaping of the personality to conform to
the wishes of husbands lt , and loss of a sense of separate
identity in the process. 3 In this context, the divorce/
separation and loss of a husband has meant the loss of self.
Marsdents study seemed to support this view by stating
that the loss of the father weighed " .•. most heavily on the
mothers, who tended to suffer from depression, tiredness,
ill-health and a sense of guilt. 4 More than one quarter of
the women suffered a deterloration in physical and mental
health. 5

lNathan Ackerman, "Divorce and Alienation in Modern

Society", Mental Hygiene, VLLL, No. 1 (January, 1969), p. 121.
2William J. Goode, The Family, (New Jersey: Prentice
Hall, 1964), p. 97.
3
Jesse Bernard, Tl.e Future of Marriage (New York:
World Publishing, 1972), p. 39.
4Marsden, Mothers. Alone, p. 134.
c:."1-.!! -1 ... 1"'\"
 15

The predominant feelings associated with divorce

have been described as frustrati ,n, failure, and guilt.
The single parent has been seen as experiencing " ••• an
everpowering sense of isolation that comes from not having
a partner to share the routines of life".l Divorced/
separated women suffered a sense of incompleteness, felt
inadequate, and envied others with intact families. 2 The
purposeful and active rejection by another person has
contributed to the feelings of~ilure that follow a divorce/
separation. This feeling has been further accentuated by
<:)

its social visibility.~ Clayton and Steinzor, in their

experience with divorced persons, observed that feelings
of inadequacy were experienced because of their perceived
inability to sustain a relationship, their uncertainty
about their roles as women, and their fears that they would
not again be found attractive and desirable. 4 Finally
divorced/separated women experienced guilt for having 'failed

lNorman Lobenz, "How Divorced Young Mothers Learn

to Stand Alone," The Single Parent: The Journal of Parents
Without Partners, Inc., XIV, No. 9 (Decembe~, 1971), p. 4.
2Kurt Freudenthal, "Problems of the One Parent
Family," Social Work: Journal of The National Association
of Social Worl{ers, IV, No. 1 (January 1 1959), p. - 47
3Bohannan, "The Six Stations of Divorce,1I P. 37.
4patricia W. Clayton, IIMeeting the 'Needs of the
Single Parent Family," The Family Coordinator, XX, No. 4
(October, 1971), P. 328; Steinzor, When Parents Divorce, P. 12.
 16

to make a success of marriage, for wanting to lead a life

of their own, and for what they perceived as deficient
mothering. 1

The literature has presented single parenthood as

inevitably problematic. It was, therefore, interesting to
note that, in the Young study, sixty percent of the sample
felt more relaxed without their husbands. 2 Similarly, in
the report by the Canadian Council on Social Development,
a number of the respondents stated that they felt better
since becoming single pareats. 3 This has lead the researchers
to question whether it is single parenthood itself which is
inherently problematic, and whether a number of single parents
find their new life style preferable to their previous one.

5. Quality of Parenting

Since ninety percent of women maintain custody of

their chi1dren,4 divorce takes on greater significance for
them. The absence of the father places a dual responsibility

lFreudentha1, "One Parent Family," p. 47; Young,

Single Parents and their Teenagers," p. 9.
2Young, "Single Parents and their Teenagers," p. 11.
3Canadian Council on Social Development, One Parent
Family, p. 9.
4Schlesinger, The One Parent Family, p. 1.
 17

on the mother, who is now expected to fulfill all the

instrumental and emotional obligations of the unit.
Glasser and Navarre, and LeMasters have implied that the
single parent family is structurally deficient. I1Providing
for the physical, emotional, and social needs of all the
family members is a full time job for two adults,,,l and
that " .•. onl y the most capable, and most fortunate can
perform all the roles involved adequately."2 In addition,
it was assumed that single parenthood would involve " •••
a reduction in the tasks performed and/or a reduction in
the adequacy of performance, or external assistance. u3

Furthermore, because the Single parent structure

no longer provides a partner of lI equa lfl or "greater" status,
the woman is deprived " ..• of a significant element in the
meeting of (her) own needs." The combined needs of the
children may then be physically and emotionally exhausting. 4

IGlasser and Navarre, nStructural Problems," p. 657.

2E.E. LeMasters, Parents in Modern America: A
Sociological Analysis (Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1970),
p. 160.
'0
"'>Glasser and Navarre, "Structural Problems," p. 657.
4Ibid., p. 663.
 18

Several empirical studies confirmed this. l They

found that problems and conflicts frequently revolved
around maintenance of the home. The women felt overburdened
with the additional rde committments, and overwhelmed by
their responsibilities. Because of this they became pre­
occupied with their performance as mothers, and resented
the disproportionate amount of time and demands made on them.

Glasser and Navarre identified a potential problem

in the performance of the mother's role as disciplinarian.
In her new position as sole source of power, the mother might
become either too rigid, too permissive or inconsistent with
2
her children. These assumptions were further supported in
studies done by the Canadian Council on Social Development,
Marsden and Young, which noted frequent problems in dicipline
and authority.3

Because of the excessive demands placed on her, Glasser

and Navarre predicted that the single mother would be less

IFreudenthal, "One Parent Family," p. 47; Jona M.

Rosenfeld, Eliezer Rosenstein and Marilyn Raab, "Sailor
Families: The Nature and Effects of One Kind of Father
Absence," Child Welfare, VII, No. 1 (January, 1973), pp. 36-37;
Young, "Single Parents and their Teenagers,ft pp. 8-11.
2Glasser and Navarre, "Structural Problems," p. 663.
3Canadian Council on Social Development, One Parent
Family, p. 36; Marsden, Mothers Alone, P. 134; Young, "Single
Parents and their Teenagers," pp. 9-11.
 19

involved with her children. l Marsden's study partially

supported this prediction, stating that families either
"disintegrated into a kind of anarchy," or became "over­
poweringly close.,,2 The Canadian Council on Social Develop­
ment and Freudenthal found that single mothers became over­
protective, overly involved, or used the children inappro­
priately for emotional support. 3

The li~rature overwhelmingly indicates that the task

of parenting creates a major problem for the single parent.
This struggle was described in Newsweek which stated that
" ..•many people seem to need relief from parenting. One of
the startling developments in recent years is the growing
number of broken families in which neither wants custody.,,4

6. Relationship with Ex-Spouse

Previously mentioned difficulties have been created

by termination of the marital relationship. The resolution

lGlasser and Navarre, "Structural Problems',' p. 658

2Marsden, Mothers Alone, p. 235
3Canadian Council on Social Development, One Parent
Family, p. 33; Freudenthal, "One Parent Family," p. 47.
4"The American Family," p. 55.
 20

of this would involve tla certain type of mourning that one

must go through in acknowledging the death of a relationship,
and the death of whatever fantasies may have existed about
the satisfactory outcome of the relationship."l However,
for the divorcee, unlike the widow, there has been no
defined pattern for grieving, nor acceptance of the need
for this process. Furthermore, spouses often maintain con­
tact, because of the children. These two factors would make
it difficult for the woman to work through her feelings about
her ex-husband.

The mourning process has been further prolonged by

a number of additional factors, Divorce has been described
as genera ting ambivalent feelings to'wards the ex-spouse.
"Remaining ties with former mate, emotions of love or hate,
a sense of guilt and lingering feelings of responsibilities
appear, singly or in combination ••• " 2 Frequent legal battles
over children or money has often led to resentment towards
the ex-spouse, and envy of his freedom. 3

IGendzel, "Dependence, Independence and Inter­

dependence," p. 6.
2Bossard, "Divorce: Some Selected Repercussions,"
pp~ 101-102.
3Bernard Greene, .~~~=-~~~~~~~~~-=~~~
A Clinical A roach to Marital
Problems: Evaluation and Management Illinois: Charles C.
•1 Thomas, 1970), p. 416 •
 21

Lobenz expressed the opinion that "the constant

tension of dealing with ex-husband drains many women of the
emotional strength and freedom they need to be able to
build new relationShips."l In order to resolve these feelings,
it has been suggested that the woman must accurately perceive
her part in the divorce, and be able to look at her ex~spouse

and former life with indifference. 2 Klatskin speculated

that the "ideal" feelings towards an ex-spouse would be civil
but formal: too much hosttlity might produce disturbances,
and too much intimacy might lead to fantasies of reconciliation. 3
This resolution process would enable the divorcee to establish
a separate identity, and develop autonomy, and learn to depend
on her own " ••• capacity to cope with environment, with people,
with thoughts, and emotion:::,.u 4

In summary the divorced/separated woman has to adapt

to a series of profound changes. At the time when group

lLobenz, "Divorced Young fI-lothers," p. 5.

2Goode, Women in Divorce, p. 200; Morton M. Hunt,
The World of the Formerly l11arried (New York: McGraw Hill
Book Co., 1966), p. 27.
">
Klatskin, "Developmental Factors," in
...lE. H.
Children of Separation and Divorce, ed. by Irving R. Stuart
and Lawrence E. Abt' [New York: Grossman Publishers, 1972),
p. 193.

4Bohannan, "The Six Stations of Divorce,lt P. 53.

 22

support seems to be most crucial, the single parent exper­

iences a sense "of social discontinuity or of social dis­
placement."l It is at this time that "the disturbance to
self-esteem, the shock to each person's sense of inter-
dependability, the fear that one has failed in a meaning­
ful relationship all lead to the intensification of the
struggle to find solace and security for one's self.,,2
The one parent family structure, however, while demanding
increased parental obligations, provides insufficient
emotional support. This may, in turn, affect the quality
of the parent-child relationship.

7. Parent-Child Relationship

The emotional trauma of divorce, experienced by

the mother, tI • • • impose a drain on the physical and psychologi­
cal energy available for meeting her children's needs."3
Furthermore, a single parent's inability to work throu~h

her own conflicts and feelings about the divorce may affect
her ability to deal appropriately with her children'S feelings
and concerns about the divorce and their absent father.

lCanadian Council on Social Development, One Parent

Famil...l, p <> 12.
Harris, "The Child as Hostage," in Child-
Grossman Publishers, 1972), P. 12.
':)

....Elizabeth Herzog and Cecelia E. Sudia, "Families

Without Fathers," Childhood Education (January, 1972), P. 179.
 23

'l'he children's feelings have frequently been seen

as a reflection of the parent's, and thus, their experiences
may be similar. Freudenthal and Schlesinger have observed
that the child may often remain confused about the father's
absence, and may feel guilty and responsible for the dis­
solution of the marriage. Convinced that the father no longer
loves them, they may feel humiliated, abandoned, unimportant
and doubtful of their personal worth and attractiveness.
Furthermore, children may express hostility and anger towards
their fa ther, holding him r ..!sponsible for the depri va tion
of a normal home situation. l At the same time, IIgenfritz
noted that these feelings may be accompanied by a refusal
to accept the situation and a sustained hope that the family
2
would be reunited.

An emotionally unresolved separation may, as well,

affect the single parent's reaction to her children. Harris
saw the possibility that a single mother might use the
children to increase her ovm self-esteem and to maintain
ties with the ex-spouse.

(1) The child is used as a means of depriving a

parent of affection in retaliation for deprivation
of affection that the other parent experienced.

lFreuden thaI, "One Parent Family," pP. 44-48;

Benjamin Schlesinger, ed. The One Parent Family: p. 7.
2Ilgenfritz, "Mothers on their Own," p. 40.
 (2) The child is used as a means of ensuring

continued attachment to the divorced spouse.

(3) Total allegiance to one parent is demanded

with the concurrent total rejection of the other,

so that the child becomes the weakened puppet of

parental needs.

(4) The child is used as dirrcthostage for

payment of money or services.

The Marsden study supported the view, observing that

when feelings about the divorce and ex-spouse were unresolved,
the children were used as a battlefield for affection. 2

When the marriage had been particularly painful,

the children could be symbols of that hurt. 3 Wylie and
Delgado observed that mothers tended to displace their
feelings about the ex-spouse on to their sons, seeing them as
having similar faults. The mother son relationship, then,
tended to perpetuate what had been a conflictual marital
relationship.4

Structurally, the one parent family may pose various

problems for the children. It may force them into roles

lHarris, "The Child as Hostage, If pp. 13-14

2Marsden, Mothers Alone, pp. 120-121
3Virginia Satir, Peop1emaking (Palo Alto, Califor­
nia: Science and Behaviour Books, Inc., 1972), p. 183.
4Howard Lee Wy1ie and Rafae1 De1gado, "A Pattern of
Mother-Son Relationship Involving the Absence of Father,"
Ameri~an Journal of Orthopsychiatry, XXIX (July, 1959)
pp. 644-649.
 25

and the performance of tasks inappropriate to their age.

Marsden noted that sons, in particular, assumed in varying

degrees, the role of confidant, breadwinner and discipli­
narian. l Furthermore, the reliance on one child, often a
teenager, for principle emotional support, was reported to
be potentially dangerous. 2 Thus, the loss of the father
may intmsify or diminish the mother-child relationship.
In either case it may make separation difficult and may
move the child into premature or late independence.

Goode and Satir have represented the view that the

one parent family may not provide, for the children, ade­
quate socialization, sufficient observational models and
experience with the adult male/female relationship. This
in turn, might leave them unprepared for future adult roles. 3

On the contrary, Biller and Bortelmann were of the

opinion that mothers alone may facilitate masculine develop­
ment. They believed that it was not simply the absence of
the father, but the attitude of the mother towards men and

1Marsden, Mothers Alone, p. 125.

2Canadian Council on Social Development, One

Parent Family, p. 34.
')
'"'Goode, Women in Divorce, p. 309; Satir, People-
making, PP. 170-172.
 26

masculinity and her responses to the son's behaviour, that

were important. l

Therefore, the researchers here assume that the one

parent family structure, itself, may not necessarily be
detrimental to child development. It does, however, require
the family to integrate many changes. A new equilibrium
must be established with new tasks, and distribution of
roles. The difficulties involved in this integration may
be lessened by the fact that the situation may be " ••.
largely free of the unbearable conflicts of the previous
unhappy marriage.,,2 The functioning of this family would
depend on " .•• the personal resources or inadequacies of the
family members, particularly of the solitary parent ••• ,,3
It was not, therefore, the structure of the one parent family
itself which produced distrubances but "How the parent
approaches the situation that is really the key determiner.,,4

lHenry B. Biller and Lloyd J. Bortelmann, "Masculine

Development: An Integrative Review," Merril Palmer Quarterly,
XIII, No. 4 (October, 1967), p. 277.
2F • Ivan Nye, ItChild Adjustment in Broken and in
Unhappy, Unbrol{en Homes, It in Sourcebook in Marriage and
the Family, ed. by Marvin B. Sussman (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1968), p. 440
<)

""Glasser and Navarre, "Structural Problems,lt P. 664.

4James L. Greenstone, "The Crisis of Discipline"
The Single Parent: The Journal of Parents Without Partners
Inc., XIV, No. 8 (November, 1971), p. 7.
 27

This would seem to be supported by Young's research

which showed no significant difference between the teenagers
of .one parent and two parent families. l In addition, Nye
found that children in happy one parent families were adjusting
far better than children in unhappy but intact families. 2
As mentioned previously, the researchers have questioned the
validity of such a comparison.

In summary, the single parent must accept the

"incompleteness l l of the family, in its traditional sense,
attempt to provide as complete a family life as possible for
herself and her children,3 and recognize that ft • • • the form of
the family is not the basic determinant of what happens in the
family ••• , but the process that goes on among the family
members, is what, in the end, determines how well a family
gets along together. 1t4

lYoung, "Single Parents and Their Teenagers," P. 15.

2Nye, "Child Adjustment," p. 434.

3Sa tlr, Peoplemakinr" P. 172.

4Ibid., p. 195.

 CHAPTER III

STUDY METHODOL.00Y

The Sample:

Because of the large number of single parent

families being seen at the Child and Adolescent Clinic,
the authors felt it would be both of interest and impor­
tance to examine some of the factors which differentiated
those one parent families who sought psychiatric help, and
those who did not. In order to do so, a control group was
needed, and Parents Without Partners was selected.

Parents Without Partners is an international organi­

zation set up to provide programs and activities for single
parents and their families. In Montreal, there are three
chapters, with a membership of approximately 300, 40 percent
of whom are male. All members must have children, although
custody is not required. Because there is a membership fee,
and due to the nature of many of the programmes, members
tend to be of a higher socio-economic status than might be
found in a random sample of all one parent families.

Originally, it was decided that the Parents With­

out Partners sample would be used as a control group to
compare with the Clinic sample. This was based on the

2,

 29

the assumption that Parents Without Partners was a self­

help group where members were not necessarily seeking
psychiatric help.

However, on closer examination, it was found that

Parents Without Partners was providing services which
might, in fact, be comparable to those provided by the
Clinic. Therefore, in order to eliminate the possibility
of such a bias, the authors chose to limit themselves to
the Parents Without Partners' sample as the main focus of
the study. Since most one parent families are headed by
women, the sample population was further limited to include
only female respondents.

By use of an adjustment scale, which is described

below, the Parents Without Partners' respondents were ranked
along a continuum of adjustment. In this way, it was possi­
ble to compare two groups within the sample group, one
tending towards a higher adjustment, the other towards a
lower adjustment.

The Instrument:
1wo possible ways of gathering the necessary data
were considered: the interview schedule and the question­
naire. Since individual interviewing would have required
more manpower and time than the researchers had available,
a decision was made in favor of using the questionnaire.
 30

The questionnaire was self-administered and contained

95 items, the majority of which required only check answers
rated on a four point scale or simply a yes-no response. A
few open-ended questions were included where general infor­
mation from the respondent was desired, or in questions where
the researchers felt the respondents might want to elaborate.
In addition, seven questions demanded self-rating along a
five point scale.

The questionnaire was structured to obtain infor­

mation related to the following areas of concern:

A. Identifying Information, including age, sex,

marital status, length of time as single parent, age of
children, marital status of family of origin, education,
religion, etc.;

B. Socio-economic situation, including employment

and housing;

c. Social Relationships, including frequency and

intensity of contacts with relatives, friends, and social
agencies, and satisfaction with these contacts;

D. Relationship with ex-spouse, including frequency

and intensity of contact, feelings of blame., guilt, etc.;
 31

E. Quality of parenting, and parent-child relation­

ship, including changes in quality and amount of time spent
with the children, changes in disciplinary patterns, and an
overall rating of the children's adjustment to one parent family
sta tus;

F. Adjustment scale, including physical health,

psychological attitudes, and ability to perform concrete
household and/or occupational tasks;

The format of the questionnaire was purposely designed

in such a way that the questions did not rigidly follow the
logical sequence of these content areas. Rather, the ques­
tions were organized to increase the respondents' comfort in
answering the questions. An attempt was made to avoid exposing
sensitive areas, and questions were arranged so that those
identified as threatening did not follow upon one another.
It was hoped, in this way, to minimize the possibility of
respondents failing to answer all questions, or answer
inaccurately those questions in which potentially painful
material was being requested. The questions were so designed
that only the simplest form of answers were required. All
of the 95 items were contained in eleven type-written pages
and are appended.

Administration of the Instrument:

The final draft of the questionnaire was pretested
 32

in order to check its usability before the full-scale

study was launched. Five female teachers of single parent
status were selected from a parochial school in Montreal.
These initial respondents gave comments about each question,
as well as their general feelings towards the themes included
in the questionnaire: for example, the authors had origi­
nally placed questions regarding the former spouse at the
beginning of the questionnaire. However, these were per­
ceived by the respondents as being extremely threatening
and their suggestion was to place them at the end, as may be
seen in the final draft appended.

ThUS, the questionnaire was slightly modified and

re-edited, in an attempt to eliminate ambiguities and refine
the phrasing of the questions. The sequence of the ques­
tions was also reordered.

The final revised questionnaire was enclosed in a

brown envelope, with a pencil and instructions to sehl it
upon completion. This was done to ensure complete anony­
mity, in order to aim at a higher percentage of return forms
and a more honest and realistic response.

Arrangements were made for the researchers to attend

a general meeting of Parents Wi thou t Partners. At this time,
the purpose of the study was explained to the membership,
and the questionnaire was administered.
 33

Questionnaires were handed out to all female

members, approximately 65 in all. Of the 65, 47 were
returned. Because the study was limited to divorced or
separa ted women, and because some questionnaires Vlere in­
complete, the final sample totalled 35.

The data from the questionnaires was initially

transferred to master coding cards so that information
could be extracted and compared readily. This was followed
by compiling a general description of the sample population
by frequency distribution.

Adjustment scale:

As was indicated previously, analysis of the data

required a means of distributing the sample along a con­
tinuum of adjustment. In order to do so, the following
definition of adjustment seemed most appropriate. "Ad­
justment is an individual's general adaptation to (~er)

environment and the demands of life, including the way

(she) relates to others, handles (her) responsibilities,
deals with stress and meets (her) own needs."l Using
this statement, 13 questions from the questionnaire were
selected to make up the adjustment scale. The reasons
for including those questions, and the means of scoring
them are as follows:

IGOldenson, The K .• cyclopedia of Human Behaviour:

Psychology, Psychiatry! u'ld Mental Health, (New York:
Dmnneday & co., 1970), pr:. 18-19.
 34

A. Freedom from nervous symptoms: l

Questions used to elicit information in this area

are:

Question number 83: Has medication been prescribed for your

nerves since the divorce/separation?
Question number 84: Have you found it more difficult to
sleep at night since the divorce/
separation?
Question number 95: Do you find your health is better since
the divorce/separation?
Question number 85: }fuve you found it difficult to concen­
trate since the divorce/separation?
Question number 86: Do you ever feel it is not worth the
effort to get out of bed in the
morning?

These questions were based on the authors' assump­

tion that poor sleeping habits, increased use of tranqui­
lizers, inability to concentrate, and difficulty getting
out of bed in the morning were symptoms of anxiety and
depression.

lCategories from: Louis Thorpe, Willis Clark, and

Ernest Tiegs California Test of Personalit:f, Monterey:'
California Test Bureau, 1953, cited by Luther G. Baker, Jr.,
"The Personal Social Adjustment of the Never-Married Woman"
Journal of Marriage and the Famil:f, (August 1968), p. 474.
 35

Question Possible Score

Scoring: 83 No = 2 Yes = I

84 No = 4 Yes ::= I

95 No = I Yes == 2
85 Never ::= 4 Often = I

86 Never = 4 Often ::= I

Those respondents who were considered to be higher

adjusted received the higher score.

B. Sense of personal freedom:

Question number 91:

Do you wish you could be as free of
responsibilities as your husband is?
Question number 90:
Do you ever wish you could be com­
pletely free of your children?

The authors here assumed that those Vlomen who wished

to be completely free of their children and free of other
responsibilities, would be more poorly adjusted than those
women who do not feel as overburdened by these responsibi­
lities.

9,uestion Possible Score

Scoring: 91 Never == 4 Often = I
90 Never ::= 4 Often = I
 36

Those respondents who were considered to be

higher adjusted received the higher score.

C. Feeling of self-reliance:

Question number 93: If you feel you have grown more

independent, would you like to
maintain this degree of indepen­
dence?
Qu~stion number 94: Do you find it easier to solve
family problems and make decisions
since the divorce/separation?

These questions were based on the authors' assump­

tion that those women who enjoyed their independence, and
were able to solve family problems as well as or better
than prior to divorce/separation would find it easier to
adapt to single parenthood than those who could not.

Question Possible Score

Scoring: 93 Often :::: 4 Never :::: I
94 Often == 4 Never :::: 1

Those respondents who were considered to be higher

adjusted received the higher score.

D. Ability to look after household tasks:

Question number 92: Are you able to look after household

tasks as adequately as during your
marriage?
 37

The researchers assumed that those women who were

adjusting poorly would have difficulty performing daily
tasks adequately.

Question Possible Score

Scoring: 9 ')
.... rating of 5 = 4 points
rating of I == 0 points

E. Satisfactory interpersonal relationships:

Question number 88: Do you ever feel lonely?

Question number 87: Do you find you have less patience
with the children?
Question number 89: Do you feel you have enough contacts
with friends?

These questions dealt with interpersonal relation­

ships, and were based on the assumption that those women
who maintained sa tisfactory social contacts with fam.ily and
friends would make or have made a better adjustment than
those who tended to become more isolated.

Question Possible Score

Scoring: 88 Never == 4 Often == 1
87 Never = 4 Often == 1
89 Often == 4 Never == 1

After the adjustment scores were tabulated and

transferred to a master sh{et, it became apparent that the
scores were distributed al,ng a range from 22 as the
 38

lowest score, to 43 as the highest score. Table I shows

the range of scores which resulted.

TABLE I

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION 01" ADJUS'IMENT SCORES

Score Frequency Score Frequency

22 1 33 2

23 34 3

24 4 35 4

25 1 36

26 2 37 2

27 1 38 2

28 39 2

29 1 40 1

30 1 41 2

31 2 42

32 1 43 3

In an attempt to differentiate between high and

low adjustment, 32 was selected, as it was the mid-point
between the total range of scores. Those along the con­
tinuum who scored 32 and below were considered to have made
 39

a poorer adjustment than those who scored 33 and above.

Therefore, 14 respondents were included in the lower ad­
justment group, and 21 in the higher adjustment group.

In order to support the selection of 32 as the

break-off point for comparison, the authors used questions
number 36, which reads as follows: How would you rate
your over-all adjustment since the divorce/separation?
(Circle a number along the scale to indicate choice)

Adjusting Not Adjusting

Well 1 2 3 4 5 At All

It is interesting to note the following results.

12 of the 14 respondents who scored 32 and below on the
adjustment scale also rated themselves as more poorly
adjusted on this rating scale, i.e. a self-rating below
1. 19 of the 21 respondents who scored 33 and above on
the adjustment scale also rated themselves as highly
adjusted, i.e, a self-rating of 1. Therefore, only 2
people who rated themselves as highly adjusted scored
32 or below, and 2 people who rated themselves as poorly
adjusted scored 33 and above on the adjustment scale, as
seen below.
 40

TABLE 2

COMPARISON OF ADJUSTMENT SCALE SCORES

AND RESPONDENTS' SELF-RATINGS
ON ADJUSTMENT

Self-Rating
1

22­ 2 12
Adjust­ 32
ment
Score 33­ 19 2
43

It was therefore apparent that the adjustment scale

was significantly supported by personal self-ratings.

The researchers then analyzed and compared the

higher adjusted group and the lower adjusted group in order
to elaborate the differences and similarities between the
two sample groups.

This was done by regrouping the data back into the

six variables previously described. The total number of
responses are appended by variables, and not necessarily in
 41

in the identical sequence presented in the questionnaire.

For the sake of clarity and in an attempt to focus

directly on specific material, the data which provided the
most illustrative and informative responses are discussed
in detail in the following chapters.
 CHAPTER IV

SAMPLE PROFILE

Of the 47 completed questionnaires, only 35

comprised the sample, because six respondents were widowed.
This was done to maintain uniformity in the subjects' mari­
tal status and to eliminate the added variables involved
in widowhood. In addition, three questionnaires were
returned but were incomplete. All the women in the sample
had custody of their children, except in those cases where
the children had married or moved out of their homes. This
applied to six of the children.

Of the 35 respondents making up the sample, 48

percent or almost half were between the ages of 31 and 40
and 35 percent were between the ages of 41 and 50. There­
fore, over 80 percent of the sample were over the age of 31.

Table 3, below, gives a detailed breakdown of the age

distribution.

42

 43

TABLE 3

DIS1~IBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY AGE

Age (years) Distribution

Number Percent

. Under 20
21 - 25
26 - 30 5 14.2
31 - 40 17 48.0
41 - 50 10 28.6
Over 50 3 8.6
Total N=35 100

Religion:
Briefly, religious affiliations were as follows:
20 of the 35 respondents (57.1 percent) were
Protestant, 11 (31.4 percent) were Roman Catholic, 1
(2.9 percent) were Jewish, and 3 (8.6 percent) described
themselves as athiest.

Educa tion:
Of the 35 respondents, 57.2 percent completed
some or all high school and 17.1 percent had completed
 44

some type of vocational training. Seven (20 percent) of the

respondents had completed some or all the work towards a
first university degree. In addition, 2 respondents (5.7
percent) had completed graduate school.

Family Composition:
Of the 35 families studied, 10 (28.6 percent) were
composed of one child, 16 (45.7 precent) had two children,
5 (14.2 percent) had three children, 3 (8.6 percent) families
had four children and 1 (2.9 percent) family had five child­
ren. From these responses, it was apparent that almost 75
percent of families in this study were small in number,
with two or fewer children.

The total number of children in the 35 families

were 74, as shown in Table 4.

TABLE 4
TOTAL NUMBER OF CHILDREN BY AGE AND SEX

Children Adolescents Adults

Age 1-10 11-13 14-18 19-21 22 and over
No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- No. Per­
. cent cent cent cent cent

Female: 13 17.6 8 10.8 11 14.9 5 6.7 5 6.7

Male: 16 21.7 4 5.4 5 6.7 1 1.3 6 8.1

Total N=74 100 percent

Visitation Rights:

Since visitation rights are a major factor in

divorce/separation proceedings, it was interesting to note
that 14 or almost half of the respondents had made no such
regular arrangements. This may be related to the fact that
10 ex-spouses did not live in Montreal. rrhe data also
revealed that, in 3 cases, no visits were allowed; in 2
cases, holiday visits were allowed; and in 16 cases, visits
occurred weekly.

Marital History:

Data related to the marital history of the res­

pondents was as follows:

A. Age at time of marriage:

42.7 percent of respondents were married between
the ages of 18-20; 45.7 percent were married between the
ages of 21-25; 8.6 percent were married between the ages of
26-30 and 2.9 percent married a t the ages of 30 and above.

B. Number of times married:

,
94.3 percent of the sample were married only once,
while 5.7 percent were married twice.

For purposes of this study, only the most recent

marriage was considered o
 46

c. Present marital status:

18 of the respondents were legally separated and
17 respondents were actually divorced.

D. Length of last marriage:

Data concerning length of last marriage are indi­
eated in Table 5 below:

TABLE 5

DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY
LENGTH OF LAST MARRIAGE

Years No. of People Years No. of People

By Length of By Length of
Last Marriage Last Marriage

Under 1 year 9 3
1 year 10 4

2 2 11 2

3 1 12 3

£1 1 13 3
5 2 14 2

6 2 15-20 5
7 2 21-29 2
8 1

Total N=35
 47

E. Length of time as a single parent:

Data concerning length of time as a single parent
are indicated in Table 6 below:

TABLE 6
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY
LENGTH OF TIME AS A SINGLE PARENT

Years No. of People By Years No. of People By

Length of Time as Length of Time as
A Single Parent A Single Parent

Under 1 year 5 9
1 year 3 10 3
2 5 11 1
3 5 12
4 2 13
5 3 14
6 1 15-20 1
7 2 21-29
8 4

Total N=35

F. Divorce patterns in families of origin:

In order to determine whether there. existed a
pattern of divorce/separation in the respondents' families
of origin, two questions were provided requesting background
 48

information as to the marital status of siblings, parents

and grandparents,

The data revealed that 65.7 percent of both the

women tested and their ex-spouses had no divorces in either
of their families. However, the similarity ended there.
Of the women questioned, 17.1 percent had divorced or
separated parents whereas only 2,9 percent of the ex-spouses
had parents who were divorced or separated. Approximately
16 percent of both the women and their former spouses had
divorced or separated siblings.

G. Causes for divorce/separation:

The cause most often selected by the respondents
was "lack of communication". As this is a somewhat general
category, it was interesting to note that the next most
often selected cause was "infidelity". The data also,
revealed that 10 of the 35 respondents did not indicate
a second cause for the divorce/separation, perhaps making
their first choice that much stronger.

Table 7 below indicates distribution of responses by

causes of divorce/separation.
 49

TABLE 7
DIS1~IBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY
CAUSES OF DIVORCE/SEPARATION

Cause First Choice Second Choice

No. Percent No. Percent

Lack of Communi­
.cation 16 45.7 12 34.3
Constant Argu­
ments 2 5.7 5 14.2
Sexual Dissatis­
faction 2 5.7 4 11.4
Financial Disagree­
ments 1 2.9 1 2.9
In-law Trouble
Inf ideli ty 9 5.6 2 5.7
Conflicts about
Children
Irresponsibility 1 2.9 1 2.9

Alcoholism 2 5.7
Mental Illness 1 2.9
Beatings 1 2.9
No Response 10 28.6
Total N=35 100 percent
 50

EmploY,111en t:

In response to questions regarding emplo~lent, it

was found that 33 women were employed: 10 (28.6 pe~cent)

were employed part-time; 23 (65.7 percent) were employed

full-time. Only 2 of the respondents were unemployed.
Table 8 below indicates the distribution of respondents by
type of job.

TABLE 8
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS
BY JOB TYPE

Type of Job No. Percent

Secretarial and
Clerical 21 59.9
Bookkeeper 4 11.4
Receptionist 1 2.9
Cashier 1 2.9
Sales 1 2.9
Other: e. g. Inter­
viewer, Supervisor 2 5.7
Do not work 2 5.7
No Response 3 8.6
Total N=35 100 percent
 51

Child care arrangements:

The data indicated that 9 (25.6 percent) women relied

on relatives, friends and neighbours to care for their child­
ren; 8 (22.9 percent) relied on schools or day nurseries and
5 (14.2 percent) employed a housekeeper or babysitter. With­
in this sample, the question was not applicable in 9 (25.6 per­
cent) cases. This may be related to the large number of older
chi~dren, included in the sample, who do not need outside care.

Socio-economic circumstances:

GRAPH I

FAMILY MONTHLY INCOMES

6
No. of
Responses 5

4
,...
OJ

o $100- 200- 300- 400- 500- 600- 700- 800- 900- 1000
199 299 399 499 599 699 799 899 999 and over
 52

It was apparent from Graph 1 that the average

monthly income of these families was generally higher than
the researchers had expected: for example, this was unlike
the Canadian Council on Social Development Report which
stated that approximately 70 percent of single mothers stu­
died were on public assistance. l

Further, Gould reported that 40 percent of single

parent families were relying on public welfare. 2

Housing accommodations:
On the basis of the aforementioned data, it might
follow that housing accommodations may be of a higher quality
than that of one parent families in general. This was sub­
stantiated by the following data:
51.4 percent of respondents lived in an apartment,
while 42.0 percent lived in houses, duplexes or townhouses.

Use of community resources:

Concerning the respondents use of community resour­
ces, Table 9 indicated that at least 33 contacts had been
made to various agencies, as is indicated in the following
table.

lCanadian Council on Social Development, The One

Parent Family, p. 128.
2GOUld, "Special Report, 11 p. 669.
 53

TABLE 9
USE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES

Community Resource People Using 'i'hem

Family or Juvenile Court 2

Public Welfare 3

Manpo'wer Training or Placement 6

Psychiatric Services 7

Public Housing
Counselling Services 8

Day Care Services 5

Health Care Services, Clinics 2

Homemal{er Services
Child Welfare
None of the Above 12
 CHAPTER V

DA TA ANALYS IS

Since the questionnaire was theoretically divided

into specific areas, it was useful to analyze the data along
the same lines. The sample was further sub-divided by means
of adjustment scale scores, resulting in two sample groups
to be compared: Higher Adjustment group and Lower Adjust­
ment group, heretofor referred to as H. A. group and L. A.
group.

In order to compare the two sets of results, the

researchers chose to use the following limits:
1. A difference of 0-14 percent as MINIMAL
difference.
2. A difference of 15-29 percent as NOTICEABLE
difference.
3. A difference of 30 or more percent as
STRIKING difference.

While the researchers did not use this in all cases

as part of the discussion, it should be kept in mind that it
was used in all instances to determine the importance and
relevance of data selected.
 55

Section I. Identifying information and socio-economic

circumstances.

Although many differences did exist in personal

characteristics between the higher and lower adjusted
groups, it was interesting to note that age and religion
were very similar. This finding would tend to discount
the general belief that being a Roman Catholic or a member
of a religion holding similar views about divorce/separation
would create more difficulties than those whose religious
convictions were not as strongly opinionated on the subject.

Further, it would seem rather remarkable that no

substantial difference existed when the actual reasons for
the divorce/separation were examined. It was originally
felt that those people experiencing greater difficulties
adjusting would have been involved in more stressful types
of conflict prior to the divorce/separation. This lack of
difference between the two groups may be explained by the
fact that the wording of the question made it impossible
to elicit such specific types of information. The cate­
gories chosen by the authors tended towards more generalized
types of marital conflict which could not be scaled along
a continuum of stress.

An interesting trend appeared when data concerning

marital history was examined. Generally it was found that
 56

the H. A. group married earlier, and have been divorced or

separated longer, with MINIMAL differences in length of the
most recent marria

Although family composition showed MINIMAL difference

(H. A., 2.3 children per family as compared with 1.8 children
per~mily in the L. A. group.), there was a slight tendency
for the H. A. group's children to be older: that is, there
existed MINIMAL differences up to age sixteen but NOTICEABLE
differences over age twenty-one. This trend towards older
children amongst the H. A. group may be further linked with
the fact that this group had been divorced/separated for a
longer period of time.

It is STRIKING to note that 50 percent of the L. A.

group had completed some university or graduate school,
while only 9 percent of the H. A. group had done so. This
may be related to the fact that the L. A. group married at
a later age, allowing for extra years of education.

On this basis, it might be assumed that the ty?e of

employment would differ as radically as education. However,
this assumption was found to be incorrect, as the bulk of
both sample groups were engaged in clerical ,or secretarial
positions.

It would also be logical to assume that the more

 57

educated La Aa group would tend to show greater economic

assets. Again, this was not borne out. The results indi­

cated MINIMAL differences between monthly income levels.

Although the difference in employment was not that

remarkable in itself, it was the attitude of the respondents

to these issues that demanded further attention. Even though

nearly all of the women in the sample were working, a

STRIKING difference existed in their reasons for doing so.

There were 57.1 percent of the L. A. group who were working

as a direct result of their single parent status, as compared

with only 19 percent of the H. A. group. This could be linked

with accompanying feelings of frustration and resentment at

being forced to work.

With regards to housing, 85.7 percent of the L. A.

group and 61.9 percent of the H. A. group have changed

accommodations since the divorce/separation, This NOTICEABLE

difference was further highlighted by the respondents'

attitudes towards this change. There was found to be 46.2

percent of the H. A. group who felt that their living

accommodations had changed for the worse, as compared with

66.7 percent of the L. A. group, One might speCUlate that

the L. A. group exhibited more widespread dissatisfaction

with their situation in general.

One of the most important factors to be highlighted

 58

here is the length of time as a single parent. The findings

in this study revealed that only 14.3 percent of the L. A.
group had been divorced/separated for a year or less, as
compared with 35.7 percent of the L. A. group. One could
infer from this that the first year following a divorce/
separation was an important period for stabilization or
re-equilibration, necessary for adjustment.

Given these differences in identifying information

and socio-economic situation between the two sample groups,
it was then possible to deal in depth with the more specific
variables.

Section 11. Self-adjustment

Because thirteen questions from within the original

questionnaire were used as an instrument to divide the total
sample into higher and lower adjusted groups (Adjustment
Scale), it would be inappropriate to use them once again
in the analysis. However, it is interesting to note the
differences which emerged. For the sake of clarity and
brevity, Table 8 below indicates percentage differences
between the two groups in ten specific characteristics.
 59

TABLE 8

COMPARISON OF ADJUS'ThIENT SCALE RESULTS

Characteristics H. A. group H. A. group

Percent Percent

1.* Required medication for

nerves 28.6 71.4

2. Experienced difficulty
sleeping 9.5 57.1

3.** Experienced difficulty

concentrating 23.8 71.4

4. Experienced loneliness 76.2 92.8

5. Experienced difficulty
getting out of bed 23.8 71.4

6. Experienced less patience

with children 19.0 92.9

7. Experienced adequate contact

with friends 85.7 42.8

8. Wished to be free as ex-

spouse 42.9 85.7

9. Experienced less difficulty

solving family problems 76.1 54.3

10. Performed housework as ade­

quately as during marri­
age 66.7 21.4

*Characteristics 1 and 2 indicate responses to yes/no format.

**Characteristics 3-10 indicate responses to often/sometimes

category of 4 point scale format.
 60

This table demonstrates the STRIKING differences

which existed between the two groups.

In the discussion of the variable designated "3elf­

Adjustment", it must be noted that many of the questions
were used in the adjustment scale, as defined by the authors,
and have been presented in Table I. However, four sets of
responses remain.

Question 35 of the questionnaire was originally

designed to elicit the respondents perception of the opinions
of significant others regarding the divorce/separation.
However, the majority of respondents did not answer part or
all of the question. It may be inferred that either the
question was worded poorly, the directions were too ambi­
guous to be understood, or the information to be elicited
was painful or unknown.

When asked whether they were presently seeking or

had sought psychiatric help since the divorce/sepration,
responses of both groups were similar. A little more than
half of the two samples had never sought help and, of those
remaining, very few continued to see a professional worker
for more than three sessions. At the time of the study,
between 92 and 95 percent of both the higher and lower
adjusted groups were not seeing a psychiatrist, psychologist
or social worker.
 61

The most interesting difference here concerns feelings

of independence since the divorce/separation. While approxi­
mately 90 percent of both groups felt they had grown more
independent, 71.4 percent of the H. A. group felt they had
grown more independent TO A LARGE DEGREE while only 50
percent of the L. A. group felt this way.

This confirms the researchers prior assumption that

better adjustment to single parent status naturally demands
an increase in personal independence, as responsibilities
towards the household and family become much greater.

Section Ill. Social relationships.

The area of interpersonal relationships was thought

to be of major importance to adjustment. The authors
assumed that interdependence and reliance on friends and
relatives would take on added significance for the single
parent.

The data indicated that, while both groups claimed

to see a small group of friends regularly, the two samples
tended to differ in the amount of time spent with friends
a t the time of the study as compared with the pericrl of time
during their marriage.

It was found that 64.3 percent of the L. A. group

sta ted tha t they saw less 'f their friends than they had

prior to the divorce/separ tion, as compared va th only 28.6

 62

percent of the H. A. group. That is, the H. A. group tended

to rely more heavily on contacts with friends after the
divorce/separation than when they were single o On the other
hand, the L. A. group tended to spend more time with rela­
tives than the H. A. group.

Apparently then, each group seemed to rely on a

different set of people for support: that is, friends
for the H. A. group and relatives for the L. A. group. The
question then arises as to the differences in type of support
these two groups of people provide. Unfortunately, the
question which was to elicit this type of information (ques­
tion 35) was, as mentioned previously, left unanswered for
the most part. It was therefore almost impossible to specu­
late about what types of influence each group exerted on the
adjustment of the individuals participating in this study.

Further, it was assumed that heterosexual relation­

ships would be an integral part of individual adjustment.
The STRIKING finding that emerged indicated that 92.9 per­
cen t of the L. A. group were d issa tisf ied wi th the i;r oppor­
tunities for meeting men as compared with 52.4 percent of the
H. A. group. This was further supported by the data which
indicated that 71.4 percent of the H. A. group, as compared
with 50 percent of the L. A. group, had had an important
,
relationship with a male since the divorce/separation.
 63

This may be linked to the previously stated fact that

the L. A. group tended to be more involved with relatives,
thereby limiting their potential for more social interaction.
It was, of course, difficult to tell which was causal, but
the authors felt that certain inferences may be made from the
information presented thus far.

It might be tempting to assume that the L. A. group

was more involved in family relationships because their
children were younger, thereby tying them down, making socia­
lizing more difficult. However, in going back to the actual
data, the differences in children's ages between the two
groups tended to be MINBIAL and therefore did not provide
enough evidence to confirm this hypothesis.

Further, one might speculate that, because the L. A.

group had been divorced/separated for a shorter period of
time, the need for a male substitute to take on some of the
added responsibilities might be heightened. This was confirmed
by the data which indicated that 42.3 percent of the L. A.
group often thought of marrying again as compared with only
9.5 percent of the H. A. group. These results might be
indicative of greater dependency needs of the lower adjusted
women and could, therefore, be linked to basic personality
differences.
 61

Finally, a STRIKING difference was noted between

the two groups in their use of community resources. It was
found that 71.4 percent of the H. A. group made use of these
services, as compared with only 42.9 percent of the L. A.
group_

The researchers originally assumed that the L. A.

group would have greater need for community supports. It
was, therefore, interesting to find that a smaller percentage
of the L. A. group, than H. A. group, were making use of these
resources.

Section IV. Quality of Parenting and Parent/Child

Relationship.

One of the most crucial interpersonal relationships

involved in divorce/separation is that between parent and
child. Various facets of this relationship were explored
in order to examine differences between the adjustment groups.

Many of the questions were based on the assumption

that the adjustment and happiness of the child would be a
reflection of the mothers' adjustment, or lack of it, as it
is communicated to him. It should be kept in mind that all
information regarding children was based on the mothers t •

perception of how her offspring were functioning.

~vo measures used to indicate whether children were

 65

experiencing difficulties adjusting after a divorce/separation

were their relationships with their peers and their performance
in school. While MINIMAL differences existed with friends
(that is, both groups tended to deny the existance of any
serious difficulties in this area), the data revealed that
L. A. group children were experiencing a NOTICEABLE degree of
increased difficulty in academic performance. (35.7 percent
of L. A. group children as compared with 14.3 percent of
H. A. group children were experiencing academic problems).

Further, the authors originally felt that the substi­

tution of an important male adult would result in better
adjustment for a child. Therefore, it was surprising to find
tha t 85.7 percent of both sample groups denied the formation
of this relationship.

On the basis of these results, it became apparent

,
that a substitute male did not play a major role in the
adjustment of these children. One possible explanation is
that the fathers were able to maintain enough contact with
their children so as to alleviate the need for the formation
of an outside relationship.

As mentioned previously, much of the literature,

regarding the effects of divorce/separation on children,
points to self-blame as a common response. 'This might be
 66

seen as a natural reaction to a situation which is both

difficult to understand and often left undiscussed. It
would seem to be the task of a single mother to recogn
it and then help the child to deal with it.

From the data, it appeared that 14.3 percent of the

H. A. group sometimes recognized this element of self-blame
in their children, while no one in the L. A. group was aware
of these feelings. One could hypothesize that the recogni­
tion of such feelings in oncts children is a painful process
and would therefore require the ability to separate one's
personal feelings of anxiety and depression from those of
their children.

Although 14.3 percent of the H. A. group did sometimes

recognize self-blame in their children, the data revealed
that the bulk of both samples (over 70 percent) did not see
any evidence of it y This could be explained by the fact that
either these problems never existed, have already been worked
out or are too threatening to deal with.

It is often felt that, as a result of divorce!

separation, working mothers would spend less time with their
children than they did during their marriage. From the
sample, it became clear that what was important was not the
amount of time spent with children but the quality of the time
 67

spent together. Even though half of both sample groups

indicated they did not spend less time with their children
than they had done previously, the L. A. group STRIKINGLY
indicated having less patience at home (Adjustment Scale).
One might further linl{ this to the fact that L. A. group
mothers felt that they were working solely because of their
single parent status and might therefore be unable to cope
with further demands on their time.

On the basis of this, a greater potential to con­

flictual relationships might be a possible result of single
parent status. However, the results of this study demon­
strated that 14.3 percent of the L. A. group disagreed less
often as compared with 47.6 percent of the H. A. group. In
other words, those families in the H. A. group were having
less parent/child conflict than they did previously.

Single parent status inevitably demands that the

mother undertake the primary role of disciplinarian." This
may create a very different situation fur the child now that
only one parent is the decision maker. This study revealed
that, while over half of both sample groups felt their
children were receptive to them as disciplinarians, there
was a NOTICEABLE difference in degree: that is, 14.3 percent
of the L. A. group felt their children were very receptive
as compared to 38.1 percent of the H. A. group.
 68

There was also a NOTICEABLE difference when one

examined the mothers' feelings of comfort with the job of
disciplinarian: 86.2 percent of the H. A. group felt com­
fortable while only 63.7 percent of the L. A. group felt this
way.

This can be associated with the fact that 71.4 per­

cent of the L. A. group wished to share the job of discipli­
narian with a man while only 42.9 percent (STRIKING difference)
of the H. A. group felt this need.

One of the problem areas stressed by some authors

was a mother's potentially excessive dependence on children
after a divorce/separation~ Such over-involvement was consi­
dered damaging to both parent and child. On the contrary, the
data in this study indicated a greater reliance on children
by mothers in the H. A. group. In terms of concrete house­
hold tasks, 52.3 percent of the H. A. group often or some­
times depended on their children for help, while only 21.4
percent (STRIKING difference) of the L. A. group did so.
Similarly, with regards to emotional support, 52.4 percent
of the H. A. group indicated that support was given by one
child in particular (generally the eldest daughter), in
comparison to 28.6 percent (NOTICEABLE difference) of the
L. A. group.

It must be noted, however, that the H. A. group women

 69

were also more involved in outside social relationships.

Thus, the demands made on children of these women were

probably not excessive or inappropriate.

Another theory was that an inappropriate associa­

tion may develop between a parent and the child who most

resembled the former spouse. The data relating to this

theory revealed that 92.9 percent of La Aa group mothers

feit that they had, in fact, one child who reminded them

of their former spouse, while only 57.1 percent of the H.A.

group reported this resemblance. Furthermore, the vast

majority of both samples who recognized this similarity

stated that they responded to this particular child in the

same way as they did with their other children. Obviously,

although STRIKING differences did exist between the two

groups in terms of resemblance to former spouse, the mother

did not perceive that their behavior was influenced by the

child's resemblance.

Finally, on an overall rating of children's happiness,

mothers of the H. A. group (66.7 percent) reported that their

children were often happier since the divorce/separation as

compared with 35.7 percent (STRIKING difference) of the

L. A. group who felt this way. This confirmed the authors'

basic assumption that the child's reaction to a divorce/

separation would be highly dependent on his mother's adjust­

ment.
 70

Section V. Relationship with ex-spouse.

One of the most important elements in the resolu­

tion of the problems inherent in divorce/separation is the
adaptation to the loss of one's spouse.

In an assessment of how the women in this sample

felt about their former husbands, a STRIKING difference was
noted. It was found that 88.0 percent of the L. A. group
described their feelings negatively, as compared with only
52.4 percent of the H. A. group. Similarly, 71.4 percent
of the women of the Lo A. croup perceived their former spouses'
feelings towards them as negative, while only 33.4 percent
of the H. A. group perceived these feelings as negative.

Associated with this are the respondents' self­

ratings regarding the degree of personal responsibility of
the marital break-up. It was found that 56.6 percent of
the L. A. s~mple accepted MINIMAL or no responsibility in
the divorce/separation, while only 33.4 percent of the
L. A. group did so.

On the basis of these negative feelings, the data

further revealed STRIKING differences in feelings of revenge
towards the ex-spouse.

During the period immediately following the divorce/

separation, it was ass~~ed that vindictive feelings might
 71

have been a natural outcome of such a stressful situation.

This was borne out by the data which indicated that only
21.4 percent of the L. A. group never felt that their ex­
spouses ought to be punished as compared with 52.4 percent
of the H. A. group.

However, the data revealed that, while the L. A.

group tended to retain these vindictive thoughts over a
period of time, (28.6 percent still never felt their ex­
spouse ought to be punished), these revengeful feelings of
the H. A. group tended to cL-ss ipa te (66.7 percent of this
group still never felt their ex-spouse ought to have been
punished).

It should be kept in mind that approximately 35

percent of the L. A. group were found to be in the first
year of divorce/separation as compared with only approxi­
mately 14 percent of the H. A. group: that is, one could
speculate that a higher proportion of the H. A. group had
had more time to work through their feelings towards their
ex-spouse and re-equilibrate themselves and their situation.

With regards to visitation rights, the data suggested

that the L. A. group tended to be less satisfied with the
present visiting arrangements than are the H. A. group (21.4
percent of the L. A. group would liketo maintain present
arrangements as compared with 42.9 percent of the H. A. group).
 72

One further indication of the degree of the women's

involvement with their ex-spouse might be their attitudes
towards their ex-husbands' remarriage.

TABLE 9
RESPONDENTS' ATTIWDES TOWARDS
EX-SPOUSES' REMARRIAGE

If 'Ex-spouse had Remarried H. A. Women L. A. Women

Nos. Percent Nos. Percent

Women felt very happy 3 50 1 16.7

mildly pleased 1 16.7 0
a little upset 0 3 50.0

no feeling at all 0 0
very unhappy 1 16 7 0 2 33.3

Don't know 1 16.7 0

N == 6 100 6 100

If Ex-spouse were to Remarry H. A.Women L. A. Women

Nos. Percent Nos. Percen t

Women felt very happy 6 40

0
mildly pleased 0
1 ' 12.5

a little upset 2 13.3 2 25.0

no feeling at all 0 2 25.0
very unhappy 5 33.3 3 37.5
Don't know 2 1'')v.->? 0
N = 15 100 8 100
 73

It should be noted that 42 percent of the L. A.

group's ex-spouses had remarried, while only 28.2 percent
of the H. A. group's ex-spouses had done so.

Further, it is STRIKING that the H. A. group indi­

cated more positive feelings towards the subject of their
ex-spouses' remarriage than did the L. A. group.

Finally, as mentioned previously, there was a

STRIKING difference between the two groups in their desire
to remarry: that is, the L. A. group thought of this four
times as often as the Ho A. group.

This desire to remarry may be, in general, a reac­

tion to the L. A. group's dissatisfaction and difficulties
adapting to the demands of single parenthood.
 CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION

This final chapter has been divided into two sections:

I. Summary of key findings integrated with relevant litera­

ture; 11. Limitations of this study.

I. Summary of Key Findings.

1. Striking diffcTences existed between levels of

adjustment among divorced/separated mothers.

Those women who scored higher along the continuum of

adjustment, as defined by the authors, were found to be

functioning at a higher level, physically, emotionally and

socially. Although some authors, i. e. Ackerman and Marsden l ,

observed a deterioration of physical and mental health in

divorced women, they tended not to differentiate single

mothers according to levels of adjustment. Their dbservations

partially describe the single mothers in this study. However,

when the total sample had been divided into two sub-groups

by means of an adjustment scale, the literature tended to

apply more aptly to the L. A. group.

lAckerman, "Divorce and Alienation," p. 121;

Marsden, Mothers Alone, p. 109.
 75

2. Religious affiliation was not related to adjust­

ment.

The authors had originally hypothesized that those

women, affiliated with religions opposed to divorce, would
have greater difficulty adapting to it. It was, therefore,
surprising that no difference was found between religious
affiliations of the two groups.

It must be noted that the questionnaire was not

designed to deal with this subject in depth and that religion
may have had an influence on the resolution of the divorce.
However, at the time of this study, religion of single
mothers was not found to be an important factor.

3. More 1.. A. women (50 percent) than H. .l\. women

(9.5 percent) had some university education.

While the present research was not designed to com­

pare this finding with other data, the authors felt it was
of interest to mention here.

It was speculated that higher education might

increase onc's expectations of self. Since both groups
were found to be in similar occupations, living accommo­
dations and income brackets, the authors assumed that these
higher expectations might lead to greater dissatisfaction,
and, therefore, to lower adjustment. The area where the
researchers questioned satisfaction was that of housing,
 76

the results of which supported the above speculation.

4. The majority of L. A. women, unlike H. A. women,

felt they were working solely because of their
single parent status.

Glasser and Navarre l considered work to be a detri­

ment to the female single parent. They predicted that this
would make excessive demands on her time and have a detri­
mental influence on her adjustment.

Siegal and Haas 2 , however, identified the women's

motivation to work, rathcr than the work itself, as the key
factor.

In this study, while all women were employed, L. A.

women fel t tha t they were worlcing as a direct result of their
Single parent status while H. A. womcn did not attribute
their working to this factor.

On this basis, the authors would agree with. Siegal

and Haas that, in fact, it was motivation to work which was
the important determinant.

llilasser and Navarre, "Structural Problems," P. 658.

2Siegal and Haas, "The Working Mother", P. 537.
 77

5. The L. A. mothers tended to rely more on rela­

tives than friends for emotional support, while
H. A. women relied more on friends.

Goode and Hill were in agreement that positive social

relationships were important factors in adjustment l • This
was supported by the findings in this study which indicated
that the H. A. has more satisfactory contacts with friends.
On the contrary, the L. A. group felt their contacts with
friends were inadequate, were more dissatisfied with oppor­
tunities for meeting men, and often felt lonelier. In add i­
tion, they had more frequent contacts with relatives, as
compared with the H. A. group, following the divorce/separa­
tion. While Goode and the Canadian Council on Social Develop­
ment reported that relatives could provide much needed support
to the single parent 2 , this study seemed to indicate that
greater reliance on family was related to lower adjustment.

It was seen in the literature that maintaining old

friendships and the formation of new ones was difficult for
the divorc~e. It was possible, therefore, that the L. A.
group, who experienced more problems in this area, would turn
to relatives for the needed support. On the other hand, the
L. A. groups greater desire to remarry and greater difficulty
making decisions and solving problems might indicate greater

IGoode, Women in Divorce, p.195; Hill, "Social

Stresses on the FamilY,H ? 447.

2Goode, Women in Divorce, p. 195; Canadian Council

on Social Development, 11-:) One Parent Family, p. 18.
 78

dependence needs, which may be easier satisfied within the

extended family. On this basis, reliance on relatives may
have precluded adequate social relationships.

6. A greater proportion of H. A. mothers, as compared

with L. A. mothers, achieved a higher level of
independence.

Bohannan and Gendzel believed it was important for

the single parent to achieve some degree of independence
following divorce l . In this study, 71.4 percent of the H. A.
mothers became independent lIto a large degree" since the
divorce/separation, as compared with 50 percent of the L. A.
group. The authors originally assumed that the L. A. women
would have more difficulty coping with demands for increased
independence. It was, therefore surprising to find that the
vast majority of both groups (85 percent) wished to maintain
the degree of independence achieved. However, the results
were not consistent with other findings in this study in
which L. A. mothers expressed difficulty in maintai~ing

independence. They expressed a much greater desire to remarry,

more difficulty making decisions and solving problems, greater
inability to cope with household tasks, and more discomfort
as disciplinarian than did the H. A. group.

lBohannan, "The Six Stations of Divorce," p. 53 and

Gendzel, "Dependence, Independence, and In'terdependence, 11
P. 6.
 79

This discrepancy may be explained by the wording of

question 93, which related more to the respondents'desire
to maintain independence, rather than to her difficulty in
maintaining it. Furthermore, since the value of indepen­
dence has been stressed in western society, the researchers
assumed that the respondents would be hesitant to reply
negatively to this question.

7. Mothers in the H. A. group were better able to

fulfill their parental responsibilities.

The literature indicated that single parents were

overwhelmed with additional role committments, and resented
the disproportionate amount of time and demands made on
them l . The researchers found that this applied primarily
to L. A. mothers, who had less patience and more conflict
with their children, experienced more difficulty as disci­
plinarians, and were less able to cope with household
tasks. Further, the majority of H. A. mothers were, found
to be coping as well as they did before the divorce/separa­
tion. This is contrary to the assumption, presented in the
literature, that single parenting was inevitably problematic.

An important finding in this area concerned decision

making. More than half of both groups had less difficulty

lFreudenthal, ItThe One Parent Family," P. 47; Rosen­

feld, Rosenstein and Raab, "Sailor Families, I!!p. 36-37;
Young, flSingle Parents aJ cl their Teenagers, It p;. 6-11.
I
 80

making decisions than they did prior to divorce/separation.

One possible explanation for this is that, free of the
conflicts of an unhappy marriage, the single mother no
longer had to contend with a partner who might disagree
with her decisions. l

8. H. A. women seemed to have made a more satis­

factory resolution of their conflicts and
feelings about the ex-spouse and the divorce.

According to the literature the successful resolu­

tion of divorce/separation requires a Vloman to be able to
accurately perceive her part in the divorce, and look at
her ex-spouse and for~er life with indifference 2 • This
was supported in this study which revealed that 2/3 of the
H. A. group, as compared with less than 1/2 of the L. A.
group, were able to more accurately perceive their respon­
sibilities in the marital difficulties.

Further, the L. A. women overwhelmingly expressed

negative attitudes towards their former spouses arid believed
that their ex-husbands, in turn, felt negatively towards
them. Also, although both H. A. and L. A. groups expressed
the desire to punish their ex-spouses during the period
immediately following the divorce/separation, by the time

ILeMasters, Parents in Modern America, p. 162.

2Goode, Women in Divorce, P. 200; Hunt, The World
of the Formerly Married. P. 27.
 81

of the study, these feelings had dissipated for the H. A.

group_

This may be associated with the fact that a higher

percentage of L. A., than H. A. women, had been divorced/
separated for one year or less. On this basis, the authors
speculated that the resolution of negative feelings towards
the ex-spouse was a significant factor in single women's
ability to adjust, particularly during the first year
following a divorce/separation.

9. The influence of the time factor on adjustmm t

seemed to be relevant only during the first year
following the divorce/separation.

The length of time a person had been a single parent

was not a distinguishing characteristic except in the first
year following the divorce, when differences were NOTICEABLE.

A higher proportion of L. A. mothers had been divorced

a year or less, as compared with H. A. mothers. One might
speculate, then, that a certain period of time is required
to mourn the loss of a spouse, to resolve negative feelings
towards the ex-spouse, to perceive one's responsibility in
the divorce, and, finally, to re-stabilize oneself.

Divorce, then, may be considered one type of crisis,

with specific stages involved in the process of re-equili­
bration.
 82

10. H. A. mothers tended to rely more heavily

on their children for emotional and concrete
support than did the L. A. mothers.

Several authors have pointed out that the single

parent's inappropriate reliance on.her children for concrete
and emotional support would be damaging to the child. One
would assume that L. A. women, who lacked appropriate out­
side supports, might be involved in such relationships.

This was not borne out by the data in this study,

which indicated that it was the H. A. women who claimed to
rely more on their children. This finding must be qualified
by the fact that the H. A. group also reported greater con­
tacts with friends. Viewing these two factors together
would seem to indicate that their relationships with the
children were not excessive or inappropriate.

On the other hand, L. A. women did not rely on,

their children for emotional support. This may be linked
to other findings which indicated that the L. A. group had
greater difficulty with authority and discipline, and had
more conflictual relationships with their children.

Thus, it would seem that a reliance on children ,for

emotional and concrete support is not necessarily harmful,
if accompanied by other appropriate supports outside the
family unit.
 83

11. A striking number of L. A. mothers (92 percent)

as compared with H. A. mothers (50 percent)
stated that one of their children reminded them
of the absent spouse.

Satir and Freudenthal believed that children could

become symbols of the hurt involved in a divorce l • Feelings
of hostility might then be displaced onto a child, who is
perceived by the mother as most like the father.

The authors originally assumed that the L. A. group,

who had less adequately resolved their negative feelings
towards their ex-spouses, might treat this child differently
from the others. This speculation, however, was not borne
out by the data, which indicated no difference in the mother's
behaviour.

However, given the fact that L. A. mothers felt more

negatively towards their former spouses, the authors specu­
lated that this was a very sensitive area. Since neither
group was able to give consistent data in this area,. it was
possible that mothers could not accurately perceive or admit
that their behaviour was different towards one particular
child.

lFreudenthal, "The One Parent Family," p. 47; Satir,

Peoplemaking, P. 183.
 84

12. The majority of both groups in this sample did

not perceive their children as having emotionally
substituted an important male adult.

An important consequence of divorce is decreased contact

with the father. Satir suggested that the single parent must
accept the "incompleteness" of the family, and attempt to
provide as complete a family life as possible l • The authors
assumed that children might tend to substitute an adult male,
in place of the missing father.

Again the data refuted the original assumption. Most

of the respondents did not perceive their children as having
emotionally substituted another adult male. Since it was
found that visiting rights were reported as being weekly,
week-ends, or whenever wanted, it seemed possible that fathers,
although absent, were able to maintain adequate contacts with
their Children, providing necessary emotional support, and
thereby eliminating the need for male substitution.

Another possible e;~plana tion of this finding· was the

wording of question 64, which emphasized an emotional rela­
tionship with one important male, excluding by implication
the less intensive contacts children might have had with
adult males, such as teachers and group leaders.

lSatir, Peoplemaking, p. 172.

 85

13. The child's adjustment seemed to be related

to the mother's adjustment.

Glasser and Navarre and Greenstone agreed that the

single mothers' attitude toward the divorce/separation and
single parenthood was the important factor in child adjust­
ment. l

Although mothers in both groups did not perceive

their children as experiencing difficulty in interpersonal
relationships due to the divorce/separation, in other areas,
a NOTICEABLE difference was observed. Children of lower
adjusted mothers were perceived as having increased difficulties
in school performance and rlS often being unhappier than they
had been prior to the divorce/separation. At the same time,
L. A. mothers were not as satisfied with their children's
overall adjustment to the divorce, as H. A. mothers.

The authors originally assumed that the adjustment

and happiness of the child would be a reflection of the
mothers' adjustment, or lack of it, as it is communicated
to him. This would seem to be supported by the fact that
children of lower adjusted women were experiencing greater
difficulties. The authors have, therefore, concluded that
mothers' adjustment was, in fact, a key determinant in
child's adjustment.

IGlasser and Navarre, Structural Problems, n p. 664;

Greenstone, liThe Crisis of Discipline," P. 7.
 86

The researchers' original intention was to explore

whether the problems of single parenthood, presented in the
literature, were necessarily applicable to all single parents.
In this study, it was found that, while a number of single
parents did experience difficulties in some of the areas
discussed, many others were coping as well or better than
they had prior to the divorce. One might conclude, that
their problems were not necessarily insurmountable but that
a certain process must occur to enable the single parent to
adapt to changes in lifestyle, as a result of the divorce/
separation.

In conclusion, the fact that 60 percent of the sample

in this study 'were considered to be "higher adjusted" was a
positive indication that the one parent family, due to divorce/
separation, can function as a viable family unit which"
can be cohesive, warm, supportive and favorable to the
development of the children."

14. A smaller proportion of the L. A. group (42.9

percent) than the H. A. group (71.4 percent)
used community services.

The authors originally assumed that the L. A. group

would have had greater need of these services. This seemed
... bbe supported by the data in this study which indicated that
the L. A. women were experiencing greater difficulty in their
role as a single parent. It was, therefore, interesting to
 87

note that fewer 'Nomen in the L. A. group used outside resources.

One possible explanation for this was that the use of

services required a certain degree of independence, motivation
and awareness, which seemed to be more characteristic of the
H. A. group in this study. The authors speculated that these
services were not necessarily reaching those families who most
needed them. This mig~t suggest that greater effort is required,
on the part of social agencies, to make themselves more access­
ible to those in need of services.

11. Limitations.

1. One of the immedia te limi ta tions of this study was

the sample selection, which was tal{en from Parents Without
Partners. It was neither a random sample, nor was it repre­
sentative of single parents in general. Membership in Parents
Without Partners requires a certain degree of motivation, not
necessarily common to all single parents. It was possible,
therefore, that either those who were functioning very well,
or those who were functioning poorly did not have the desire
or the motivation to join such groups.

Further, it may also be assumed that a certain degree

.
of motivation and, possibly, adjustment, were factors in the
return rate of the questionnaire. Therefore, the fact that
2/3 of the total sample was composed of H. A. women may be
linked to the fact that a certain degree of adjustment might

have been necessary in order to respond comfortably.

2. A second limitation, related to the sample, was its

small size. It was composed of 35 female headed one parent

families. Although several findings were of sufficient

magnitude to warrant the use of statistical tests of signi­

ficance, the researchers were prevented from using them

because of the small sample size.

3. Because this study was exploratory in nature, the

researchers could not deal with any specific areas in depth.

Due to the relevance of our findings, however, the

researchers would hope th~t further investigations on the

subject would be considered.

4. The adjustment scale used to differentiate levels

of adjustment was devised after the questionnaire was

administered. Therefore, the adjustment scale was not as

comprehensive as the researchers would have preferred.

The original intention had been to use a psychiatric

clinic sample as the L. A. group and Parents Without Partners

as the H. A. one.

However, upon closer analysis, it seemed that a more

controlled sample could be obtained by limiting it specifi­

ca1ly to members of Paren~s Without Partners.

 89

5. Responses to the questionnaire were based solely

on the mothers' subjective perception of family functioning.

Since no attempt was made to obtain responses from children

or ex-spouses, it was impossible to determine the accuracy

of the mothers' responses.

 CHAPTER VII

SUMMARY

This research was designed to explore the adjustment

of mothers who were single due to divorce or separation.
Previous studies have tended to compare these families to
two parent families, thereby perceiving them as inadequate
and incomplete.

The purpose of this study was to explore whether

single parent families could be viewed as a unique family
structure, with their own inherent strengths and weaknesses.

The sample was composed of 35 single mothers, who

were members of Parents Without Partners. The data was
obtained by means of a questionnaire, adm~nistered to the
women at a group meeting. While questions pertaining to
children were included in the questionnaire, all information
was limited to mothers' responses.

An adjustment scale was devised to enable the

researchers to sub-divide the sample into two groups, lower
and higher adjusted. Six variables were selected for further
examination, i.e. socio-economic situation, self-adjustment,

,0

 91

social relationships, relationship with ex-spouse, quality

of parenting, and parent-child relationship.

The results indicated different levels of functioning

in these areas. The higher adjusted group, as compared with
the lower adjusted group, were found to be functioning better
physically, psychologically, and socially. They generally
had more posi ti ve a tti tudes towards worl{ing, had a grea ter
number of social contacts, and derived greater satisfaction
from them. Structurally, they were more able to cope with
their increased role committments, and parent-child relation­
ships were less conflictual. Further, the higher adjusted
group had been better able to resolve their negative feelings
towards the ex-spouse and divorce than the lower adjusted
group. Finally, children of higher adjusted mothers were
reported to be happier, and were experiencing less difficulty
than children of lower adjusted mothers.

On the bas of these results, the researchers con­

cluded that the one parent family could be considered a
viable unit. Although it must integrate many changes, the
one parent family can provide a positive environment for its
members.
 APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS

 QUESTIONNAIRE:

Instructions

Up to this time research has dealt with one-parent

families in comparison to two parent families. The purpose
of this questionnaire is to begin to look at one-parent
fa~ilies in their own right.

Thank you for your cooperation.

1. Do ~ write your name.

2. Give your answers by circling one letter corresponding
to the correct answer (unless otherwise indicated).
3. Please answer all questions as frankly as you can.
4. All information will be treated confidentially.
5. Upon completion, please put the questionnaire in the
envelope provided, and seal it.

94

 95

A. Identifying information:

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percen tage)

*1. Who referred you to this

agency or group?
2.. Age:
a) under 20
b) 21 - 26
c) 26 - 30 19 7.1
d) 31 - 40 42.9 57.1
e) 41 - 50 23.8 35.7
f) over 50 14.3

3. Your religion:
a) Roman Catholic 28.6 35.7
b) Protestant 57.1 57.1
c) Jewish 4.8
d) Greek Orthodox
e) Moslem
f) other (atheist) 9.5 7.1

4. How old were you when you

were married? (Most recent
marriage)
18 23 8 0

19 4.8 7.1
20 23.8 21.4
21 19.0 14.3
22
23 4.8 28.6
24 14.3
25 4.8 7.1
26 7.1
28 7.1

*All questions heretofor indicated by a star had too many

"no responses,tI and therefore could not be used by the
authors.
 96

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) <,Percen tage)

5. How many children do you

have and what are their
ages?
Son(8)

Daughter(s)

1 - 5 years 12.2 20
6 - 10 years 24.5 24
11 - 15 years 28.6 24
16 - 20 years 12.2 24
21 and over 22.5 8

6. How many times have you

been married?
a) 0
b) 1 90.5 92.9
c) 2 9.5 7.1
d) over 2

7. Who. t was the length of your

last marriage until separa­
tion/divorce?
-::::--_':" yea r s
2 - 5 years 19,0 14.3
6 - 10 years 33.3 35.7
11 - 15 years 23.8 35.7
16 - 20 years 14.3 14.3
21 and over 9.5
 97

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

8. Did the marriage end by:

a) divorce 47.6 50
b) separation 52.4 50
c) desertion
d) death

9. Wha t was the main cause for

the divorce/separation?
(Select 2 of the following
in order of importance)

( 1) (2) lack of communi­

cation 47.6 42.3
(1) (2) constant argu­
ments 4.8 7.1
( 1) (2) sexual dissatis­
faction 4.8 7.1
( 1) (2) financial dis­
agreements 4.8
( 1) ( 2) in-law trouble
( 1) ( 2) infidelity 28.6 21.4
( 1) (2) conflicts about
children
( 1) (2) other (specify)
9.5 ,21.4
(1 alcoholism) (1 mental
(1 beating) illness
(1 alcoholism
(1 irrespon­
sibility

a) lack of communi­
ca tion 38.1 28.6
b) constant argu­
ments 14.3 14.3
c) sexual dissatis­
faction 9.5 14.3
d) in-law trouble
e) financial disagree­
ments 7.1
 98

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percen tage)

9• ( Con t t d . )
f) infidelity 9.5
g) conflicts about
children
11) other
no response 28.6 28.6

10.. How long have you been

a single parent?
____years.

1 year and under 14.3 35.7

2 - 5 years 52.4 28.6
6 - 9 years 14.3 28.6
10 and over 19.0 7.1
11. Is your former husband
living in the same city
as you?
a) yes 66.7 78.6
b) no 33.3 21.4

12. Who has custody of the

children?
a) you 100 100
b) your former spouse
c) grandparents
d) other (specify)

13. Are there children living

away from home?
a) yes 33.3 14.3
b) no 66.7 85.7
 H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percen tage)

13. (Con t t d • )

If yes, are they living

in:
a) foster homes
b) with relatives
c) boarding school 4.8
d) with ex-spouse 4.8 7.1
e) on their own 23.8 7.1
f) other (specify)

14. Is anyone in your immediate

family divorced or separated?

a) no divorce/separation
in family 66.7 64.3
b) parents divorced/
separated 19.0 14.3
c) grandparents divorced/
separated
d) sister(s) divorced/
separated 4.8 7.1
e) brother(s) divorced/
separated 9.5 7.1

15. Is anyone in your ex-spouses

family divorced/separated?
a) no divorce/sepration
in family 66.7 64.3
b) parents divorced/
separated 7.1
c) grandparents divorced/
separated
d) sister(s) divorced/
separated 9.5 7.1
e) brother(s) divorced/
separated 9.5 7.1
no response 4.8 7.1

L. A. respondent (7.1)
answered ( d and e)
 100

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

16. What was the last grade you

completed in school'?
a) graduate school 14.3
b) undergraduate school 7.1
c) some college 9.5 28.6
d) vocational training 19.0 14.3
e) high school 57.1 35.7
f) some high school 14.3
g) grammar school
h) grades 5 - 7
i) grades 1 - 4
j) no formal training

17. What is your total monthly

income'?
$
200 - 299
9.5
300 - 399
9.5 14.3
400 - 499
9.5 28.6
500
600
- 599

- 699

19.0
14.3
21.4
14.3
700 - 799
9.5 7.1
800 - 899
7.1
900 - 999
4.8
1000 - over
9.5

no response 7.1

*18. Villa tare the sources of your

income? (Select as many as
applicable)
Sources Amounts
a) your earnings $
b) earnings from --­
other family
members living
wi th you $_ __
 101

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

18 ~ ( Con t I d ~ )

Sources Amounts

c) alimony $

d) child support $----­

e) social assis­
tance $

f) family allow­ ---

ance- $

g) savings $-
--
h) regular income
----
from relatives,

i)
friends, etc.
other
$

$ --­
----
19. Do you live in a(n)

a) apartment 57.1 42.3

b) house owned rented 14~3 21.4
c) duplex owned--- rented-- 1'1.3 28.6
d) flat 4.8 7.1
e) townhouse 4.8
f) public housing
g) other

no response 4.8

20. Are there relatives or friends

living in your home besides
yourself and the children?

a) yes 9.5 14.3

b) no 90.5 85.7

If yes, who? 2 mothers 1 mother

1 brother and
his 'family

21. Ifus the physical quality of

the accommodation changed
since becoming a single parent?

a) yes 61.9 85.7

b) no 33.3 14.3
no response 4.8
 10:'

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

21 • ( Con t f d . )

If yes, has the change been

a) for the better 53.8 33.3

b) for the worse 46.2 66.7

22. Do you work

a) full time 66.7 64.3

b) part time 23.8 35.7
c) not at all 9.5
If you do work, what kind
of work do you do?

a) secretarial and
clerical 57.1 64.3
b) bookkeepers 9.5 14.3
c) cashier 4.8
d) supervisor 4.8
e) interviewer 7.1
f) sales 7.1
g) receptionist 7.1

23. Are you working because you

are a single parent?

a) yes 57.1 71.4

b) 110 33.3 28.6

24. Are you unemployed because

you are a single parent?
a) yes 9.5 all
b) no 4.8 employed
,
 H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

25. Has there been a change in

your employment pattern that
is tied in with being a
single parent?

a) yes 19.0 57.1

b) no 80.9 42.3

26. If you are currently employed,

what are the arrangements for
child care?
a) relatives 9.5 21.4
b) homemaker provided by
the community
c) privately employed
housekeeper or baby-
sitter 14.3 14.3
d) school 14.3 14.3
e) nursery or day care 14.3
f) neighbours and
friends 9.5 14.3
g) other (specify) 7.1
no response 2 1
not applicable 6 3

27. Are you satisfied with the

child care arrangements?
a) yes 61.9 57.1
b) no 14.3 21.4
no response 2 3
not applicable 3
 104

B. Self Adjustment:

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percen tage)

28. How many times have you

sought help from a psy­

chiatrist, psychologist,

or social worker since the

divorce/separation?

a) 0 57.1 64.3
b) 1 - 3 33.3 21.4
c) 4 - 6 7.1
d) more than 6 9.5 7.1

29. How many times did you seek

help from a psychiatrist,

psychologist, or social worker

before your divorce/separation?

a) 0 52.4 35.7
b) 1 - 3 23.8 28.6
c) 4 - 6 7.1
d) more than 6 23.8 28.6

*30. If you have sought help, was

it related to:
a) marital problems
b) personal problems
c) children's problems
d) other (specify)

31. Are you seeing a psychiatrist

or social worker at the present

time?

a) yes 4.8 '7.1

b) no 95.2 92.9
 105

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percen tage)

.*32. If you have sought help after

the divorce/separation, was it
sought for
a) personal problems (specify)
b) children's problems (specif-y~)----------
c) other (specify) _______________________

33. Was medication prescribed

for your nerves prior to

the divorce/separation?

a) yes 71.4 64.3

b) no 28.6 35.7

34. Do you feel you have grown

more independent since your

divorce/separation?

a) to a large degree 71.4 50

b) to some degree 23.8 42.3
c) very little 4.8
d) not a tall 7.1

*35. Vi ha t
do you think the following
people think of your divorce/
separation? (Select a, b, c,
d, e, for each number)
1. his family a,b,c,d,e, a) strong approval
2. your family a,b,c,d,e, b) mild approval
3. his close friends a,b,c,d,e, c) indifferent
4. your close friends a,b,c,d,e, d) mild disapproval
5. mutual friends a,b,c,d,e, e) strong disapproval
6. co-workers a,b,c,d,e,
7. priest, reverand or rabbi a,b,c,d,e,
8. other (specify) a,b,c,d,e,
-----­
 106

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

36. How would you rate your

overall adjustment since
the divorce/separation?
(Circle a number along the
scale to indicate choice)

Adjusting Not adjusting

well 1 2 3 4 5
at all

1 90.5 14.3
2 4.8 28.6
3 50
4 4.8 7.1
5

C. Social Relationships:

37. Do you have a small circle

of friends whom you see
regularly?
a) yes 78.6
b) no 21.4

38. In general, what is the

marital status of your
friends?
a) mainly single divorced/
separated 42.9 35.7
b) equal number of married
and single 42.9 35.7
c) mainly married 14.3 28.6
 107

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percen ta ge)

39. Is the amount of time

spent with friends
a) more 14.3
b) the same as 21.4
c) less 64.3

than prior to the divorce/

separation?

40. Generally, have you changed

your friends since becoming
a single parent?
a) to a large degree 38.1 50
b) to some degree 57.1 50
c) not at all 4.8

40. If yes, has it been because

of (Select as many as possible)
a) work
b) moving to another part
of the city
c) joined new social groups
d) change in marital status
e) decrease in common inter­
ests with married friends
f) apparent reluctance of
married friends to include
a single person in their
socializing

41. Do you feel you have enough

contact with relatives?
a) of ten 42.9 50
b) sometimes 19 0
0 21.4
c) rarely 14.3 ' 7.1
d) never 14.3 14.3
 108

Ho A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

42. Is the amount of time

spent with relatives
a) more 14.3 35.7
b) the same as 42.9 42.3
c) less 28.6 14.3
than before the divorce/

separation?

no response 7.1
H. A. - 3 relatives (14.3 percent) not in Canada

43. Do you have many oppor­

tunities for meeting
people socially?
a) often 38.1 28.6
b) sometimes 42.9 42.3
c) rarely 19.0 28.6
d) never

44. Are you satisfied with your

opportunities for meeting men?
a) yes 47.6 7.1
b) no 52.4 92.9

45. Are you satisfied with the

number of dating opportunities
you have?
a) often 9.5
b) sometimes 61.9 50
c) rarely 14.3 28.6
d) never 14.3 21.4
 109

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

46. Has there been any important

male adults in your life since
the divorce/separation?
a) yes 71.4 50
b) no 28.,6 42.,3
no response 7.1
If yes, was this male adult

your

a) boyfriend 57.1 50
b) relative
c) neighbour
d) other (specify) 14.3 (friends)
47. Which of the following services
have you had contact with?
(Select as many as applicable) (answers in numbers)
a) Family or Juvenile Court 1 1
b) Public Welfare 3
c) Manpower training or place­
ment 5 1
d) psychiatric services 4 3
e) public housing
f) counselling services 5 3
g) day care services 4 1
11) health care services,
clinics 1 1
i) child welfare 1
j) homemaker services
k) none of the above 5 7

If you did use some of these

services, were you satisfied

with these contacts?

a) often 6
b) sometimes 5 4
c) rarely 1 1
d) never 3 1

no response 1
 110

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

48. Ims your single parent status

ever resulted in discrimina­
tion against you in:
Yes
a) obtaining housing 38.1
b) obtaining credit 23.8 21.4
c) in socializing 42.9 21.4
d) in employment 9.5 7.1

No
a) obtaining housing, 61.9 85.7
b) obtaining credit 76.2 64.3
c) in socializing 57.1 64.3
d) in employment 90.5 78.6

D. Parent-Child Relationships

49. Do you do all the housework

yourself?

a) yes 71.4 64.3

b) no 28.6 35.7
If you do not do all the house­
work, who provides the most help?

a) hired help
b) relatives, neighbours,
friends
c) older child
d) all the children
e) other (specify)
---­
50. Do you ever feel you are depriving
your children by being a single
parent?
 11]

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

50. (Cont'd.)

a) often 19.0 21.4

b) sometimes 38.1 57.1
c) rarely 9.5 7.1
d) never 23.8 7.1

no response 4.8 7.1

not applicable 4.8

51. Has there been a change

in the way you discipline
your children since the
divorce/separation?
a) yes 28.6 42.3
b) no 57.1 42.3

no response 7.4 7.1

not applicable 4.8 7.1

If yes, are (in numbers)

a) more strict 3 1
b) inconsistent 4
c) less strict 2 1
d) about the same

H. A. - 1 more consistent

52. Do you depend more on the

children to carry out house­
hold tasks since the divorcel
separation?
a) often 19.0
b) sometimes 33.3 21.4
c) rarely 19.0 28~6
d) never 23.8 35.7

not applicable 4.8 7.1

no response 7.1
 112

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

53. ls there one child in

particular who has given
you more emotional support
than the other children
since the divorce/separation?
a) yes 52.4 28.6
b) no 19.0 42.3
no response 28.6 21.3
not applicable 7.1

54. Do you find that because

of your divorce/separation,
the disagreements between you
and children happen
a) more often 9.5 7.1
b) as often as before 23.8 42.3
c) less often 47.6 14.3
d) never disagree 9.5
no response 14.3

not applicable , 21.3

55. How Vlould you describe your

children's reaction to you
as disciplinarian?
a) very receptive 38.1 14.3

b) receptive 33.3 35.7

c) resistant 14.3 28.6

d) highly resistant 4.8 7.1

no response 14.3 7.1
do not know 7Ql
 113

H. A. L. A..
(Percentage) (Percentage)

56. Are you comfortable with

the job of disciplinarian?
a) often 42.9 21 .. 4
b) sometimes 33.3 42.3
c) rarely 4.8 7.1
d) never 4.8 28.6

no response 14.3

57. Do you feel your children

would like you to remarry?
a) yes 42.9 35.7
b) no 14.3
c) do not know 57.1 50.0

58. Do you spend less time with

your children now than you
did when you were married?
a) yes 47.6 42.3
b) no 52.4 57.1

59. Does your Child, or one child

in particular, remind you of
your former spouse?
a) yes 57.1 92.9
b) no 33.3 7 .. 1
 114

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

59. (Con t' d.)

If yes, how would you describe
your behaviour towards him/her?
If you Imve more than one child: (the figures below are
in numbers)
a) more affectionate
than with other
children
b) same as other
children 7 4
c) less affectionate
than wi.th other
children 1
If you have only one child:
a) more affectionate
with him than before 1

b) same as before 4 8

c) less affectionate
than before

60. From your experiences, do you

think your child or any of your
children blame themselves for
the divorce/separation?
a) often
b) sometimes 14.3
c) rarely 9.5
d) never 71.4 85.7

no response 4.8
1 L. A. answered that the child was too young

If so, who?
--------
 115

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)
61. Do you ever think it might
have been better for you if
your former spouse had had
custody of the children?
a) often 7.1
b) sometimes 4.8 14.3
c) rarely 4.8 7.1
d) never 80.9 64.3
no response 9.5 7.1

62. To wlmt extent do your children blame your husband for

the divorce/separation? (Circle a number along the
scale to indicate choice)
H. A.

Not at 38.1 4.8 9.5 19.0 9.5 Entirely'

all 1 2 3 4 5 to blame
35.7 7.1 7.1 14.3

L. A.
no response L. A. - 21.4 H. A. - 19.0 percent
do not know L. A. - 14.3
 116

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percen ta ge)

. 63. To wha t extent do your children blame you f or the

divorce/separation? (Circle a number along the
scale to indicate choice)
H.A.
52.4 19.0 4.8
Not at Entirely
all 1 2 3 4 5 to blame
57.1 7.1

L.A.

no response H.A. - 19.0 L. A. - 21.4

do not know L. A. - 14.3

64. Do you think your child/

children have emotionally

substituted an important

male adult for their absent

father since the divorce/

separation?

a) yes 9.5 , 7.1

b) no 85.7 85.7
no response 4.8 7.1
not applicable 7.1
If yes, who?
a) relative (numbers) 2 1
b) neighbour
c) your boyfriend
d) other (specify)
---­
 117

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percen tage)

65. Since the divorce/separation,

do you worry more about the
children when you do go out?

a) often 33.3 35.7

b) sometimes 23.8 42.3
c) rarely 9.5 14.3
d) never 19.0 7.1

no response 4.8
not applicable 9.5

66. Would you prdbr having a

man around to help discipline
the children?

a) often 28.6 35.7

b) sometimes 14.3 35.7
c) rarely 28.6 7.1
d) never 14.3 14.3

no response 9.5
not applicable 4.8 7.1

67. In general, do you feel satis­

fied with your children's
adjustment to the divorce/
separation?

a) completely satisfied 52.4 35.7

b) moderately satisfied 38.1 57.1
c) dissatisfied 7.1
 118

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

68. Do your children have

difficulties with friends
due to the divorce/separation?

a) often 4.8
b) sometimes 19.0 14.3
c) rarely 23.8 42.3
d) never 42.9 35.7

no response 9.5 7.1

69. Has there been a change in

your children's school work
since the divorce/separation?

a) improvement 28.6 28.6

b) remained the same 38.1 28.6
c) increased difficulty 14.3 35.7

no response 9.5 7.1

do not know 4.8
not applicable 701
maybe 7.1
at first 7.1

70. Do you think your children are

happier since the divorce/
separation?

a) often 66.7 35.7

b) sometimes 9.5 35.7
c) rarely 9.5 14 3
0

d) never 14.3
no response 9.5
do not know 4.8
 119

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

E. Relationship with Ex-Spouse

71. What arrangements were made

at the time of divorce/
separation for children's
visits with the other parent?
(Select as many as are appli­
cable)
(in numbers)
a) weekly 5 4
b) week-ends 4 3
c) monthly
d) summer 1

e) holidays 2

f) no visits 3

g) other (specify) ____ 8

6
-when wanted 5
4
n
-no arrangements ..) 2
not applicable 1

no response 1

72. Would you like to have your

ex-spouse have contact with
the children?
a) more often 23.8 35.0
b) the same as present 42.9 21.4
c) less of ten 19.0 14.3
no response 9.5 21.4
not applicable 4.8 7.1
,
 120

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

73. Do you think the children

feel the same way about
your former spouse now as
when you were still married?

a) loves father more 14.3 14.3

b) loves father same
as before 42.9 35.7
c) loves father less 23.8 21.4
d) always disliked
father 14.3 7.1
no response 14.3
do not know 7.1

H. A. - 1 response: son - b dtr. - c.

74. Did you ever feel that your

former husband ought to be
punished for what he did to
you?

a) often 19.0 28.6

b) sometimes 19.0 14.3
c) rarely 9.5 28.6
d) never 52.4 21.4
no response 7.1

75. How do you feel towards your

former husband? (Circle a
number along the scale to
indicate choice)
H. A.

Positive 4.8 4.8 38.1 9.5 42.9 Negative

feelings feelings
1 2 3 4 5
14 0 3 35.7 42.3

L. A.
 121

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

76. Do you find it difficult

to keep your children from
knowing when you feel angry
with your former husband?

a) often 23.8 21.4

b) sometimes 33.3 28.6
c) rarely 19.0 28.6
d) never 23.8 21.4

77. How do you think your former husband

feels about you now? (Circle a number
along the scale to indicate choice)
H. A.

Positive 4.8 14.3 23.8 4.8 28.6 Nega tive

feelings , feelings
1 2 3 4 5
21.4 14.3 57.1

L. A.
no response H. A. - 9.5 L. A. ­
do not know H. A. - 14.3 L. A. - 7.1

78. Do you still feel that your

former spouse ought to be
punished?

a) often 9.5 21.4

b) some times 19.0 21.4
c) rarely 4.8 28.6
d) never 66.7 28.6
 122

H. A. LQ A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

79. How would you rate the extent of

your responsibility in the break-up
of the marriage? (Circle a number
along the scale to indicate choice)
H. A.

4.8 4.8 52.4 28.6 4.8

Completely Not at all
responsi- 1 2 3 4 5 responsible
ble
42.3 42.3 14.3
L. A.
no response H. A. - 4.8
80. If your former spouse bas
remarried, how do you feel
about it?
a) very ha ppy 14.3 7.1
b) mildly pleased 4.8
c) a little upset 21.4
d) very unhappy
e) no feeling at all 4.8 14.3
do not know 4.8

81. If no,
If your former spouse were
to remarry, how would you
feel about it?
a)
b)
very happy
mildly pleased
28.6 -
,
7.1
c) a little upset 9.5 14.3
d) very unhappy 21.4
e) no feeling at all 23.8 14.3
do not know 9.5 I
 123

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percentage)

82. Have you ever thought of

marrying again?

a) often 9.5 42.3

b) sometimes 42.8 28.6
c) rarely 28.6 21.4
d) never 19.0 7 .1

F. Adjustment Scale

80
'::>
. Has medication been pre­
cribed for your nerves
since the divorce/separation?

a) yes 28.6 71.4

b) no 71.4 28.6

84. Do you find it more difficult

to sleep at night since the
divorce/separation?

a) yes 9.5 ·57.1

b) no 85.7 42.3

85. Have you found it difficult

to concentrate since the
divorce/separation?

a) often 7.1
b) sometimes 23.8 64.3
c) rarely 38.1 7.1
d) never 33.3 2'1.4

no response 4.8
 124

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

86. Do you ever feel that it is

not worth the effort to get
out of bed in the morning?

a) often 14.3
b) sometimes 28.8 57.1
c) rarely 33.3 14.3
d) never 38.1 14.3

87. Do you find you have less

patience with the children?

a) often 28.6
b) sometimes 19.0 64.3
c) rarely 38.1 7.1
d) never 23.8
no response 14.3
not applicable 4.5

88. Do you ever feel lonely?

a) often 33.3 57.1

b) sometimes 42.9 35.7
c) rarely 19.0 7.1
d) never 4 8
0

89. Do you feel you have enough

contacts with friends?

a) often 52.4 21.4

b) sometimes 33.3 21.4
c) rarely 14.3 35.7
d) never ?1.4
 125

H. A. L. A.
(Percentage) (Percentage)

90. Do you ever wish you could

be completely free of your
children?

a) often 21.4
b) sometimes 33.3 35.7
c) rarely 19.0 35.7
d) never 38.1 28.6

91. Do you wish you could be as

free of responsibilities as
your husband is?

a) often 64.3
b) sometimes 42.9 21.4
c) rarely 23.8 7.1
d) never 23.8 7.1
no response 4.8
not applicable 4.8

92. Are you able to look after the household

tasles as adequately as during your marriage?
(Circle a number to indicate choice)

H. A.
Yes: No 66.7 4.8 19.0 No: Great
-----------------------------------------
difficulty 1 2 3 4 5 diffuul ty
21.4 21.4 14.3 14.3 28.6

L. A.
no response H. A. - 9.5
 126

H. A. L. A.
(Percen tage) (Percen tage)

93. If you feel that you have

become more independent,
would you like to maintain
this degree of independence?
a) often 47.6 35.7
b) sometimes 38.0 50
c) rarely 9.5 14.3
d) never 4.8

94. Do you find it easier to

solve family problems and
mal-ce decisions since the
divorce/separation?
a) often 57.1 28.6
b) sometimes 19.0 35.7
c) rarely 9.5 21.4
d) never 14.3
r·
no response 9 .v

95. Do you find your heal th is

better since the divorce/
separation?
a) yes 76.1 57.1
b) no 19.0 42.3
 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boo1(s

Berg1er, Edmund. Divorce Won't Help. New York: Harper &

Brothers Publishers, 1948.

Bernard, Jesse. The Future of Marriag~. New York: World

Publishing, 1972.

Blpod, Robert O. Marriage. New York: The Free Press,

1969.

The Fami1x. New York: The Free Press, 1972.

Bohannan, Paul, ed. Divorce and After: An Analysis of the

Emotional and Social Problems of Divorce. New
York: Doubleday and Co. Inc., 1970.

Carter, Hugh, and Glick, Paul, C. Marriage and Divorce:

A Social and Ec,onomic Study,. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1970.

Charney, Israel, Vi. Marital Love and Ha te. New York: The
Macmillan Co., 1972.

Christensen, Harold, T., and Johnsen, Ka thryn p. Marriage

apd the Familz. New York: The Ronald Press Co.,
1971.

Cohen, Nathan, E. Social Work and Social Problems. New

York: National Association of Social Workers,
Inc., 1964.

Cooper, David. The Death of the Family. London: Penguin

Press, 1971.

Eshleman, J. Ross, ed. Perspectives in Marriage and the

!amily: Text and Readings. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon Inc., 1969.

127

 128

Family Service Association of America. The Significance

of the Father. New York: Family Service Associa­
tion of America, 1959.

Farson, Richard E., Hauser, Phillip; Stroup, Herbert; and

Wiener, Anthony J. The Future of the Family.
New York: Family Service Association of America,
1969.

Franzblau, Abraham N. A Primer of Statistics for Non­

Sta tisticians. New York: Harcourt, 1958.

Glasser, Paul, and Navarre Elizabeth. "Structural Problems

of the One Parent Family.lI Perspectives in Marriage
and the Family: Text and Readings. Edited by J.
Ross Eshleman. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc., 1969.

Goldenson, Robert. Encyclopedia of Human Behaviour:, Psy­

chology, Psychiatry, and Mental Health. New Yorlc
Doubleday and Coo, 1970.

Goode, William J. Women in Divorce. New York: The Free

Press, 1965 0

The Famill. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1964.

Greene, Bernard L. A Clinical Approach to Marital Problems:

Evaluation and Management; Illinois: Charles C.
Thomas, 1970.

Hunt, Morton M. The World of the Formerly Married. New

York: McGraw Hill Co., 1966.

Landis, Judson T., and Landis, Mary G. Readings i~ Marriage

and the Family. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.,
1959.
LeMasters, E. E. Parents in Modern America: A Sociological
Analysis. Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1970.

Marsden, Dennis. Mothers Alone: Poverty and the Fatherless

Family. London: AlIen Lane The Penquin Press, 1969.

Mudd, Emily Hartshorne, and Krich, Aron. Man and Wife; A

Source Book of FarnUy Attitudes, Sexual Behaviour and
M!rriage Counselling. New York: W. W. Norton and
Coo, 1957.
Parad, Howard J., ed. Crisis Intervention. New York:
Family Service Association of America, 1965.
Phillips, Bernard S. Social Research: Strateg~ and
Tactics. New York: MacMillan and Co., 1971.
Satir, Virginia. PeoJ21emaking. Palo Alto, California:
Science and Behaviour Books, Inc., 1972.
Schlesinger, Benjamin, ed. The One Parent Family: Perspec­
tives and Annotated BibliograEhx. Toronto: University.
of Toronto Press, 1969.
Siegal, Sidney, N9n Parametric Statistics for the Behavioural
Sciences, New York: McGraw Hill Co., 1956.
Steinzor, Bernard. When Parents Divorce: A New Approach to
New Relationships. New York: Pantheon Books, 1969.
Stuart, Irving R., and Abt, Lawrence E., ed. Children of
Separation and Divorce. New York: Grossman Publishers
1972.
Sussman, Marvin B. Sourcebook in Marriage and the Family.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1968.
Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock, New York: Random House,
1970.
Weiss, Robert S. Statistics in Social Research: An Intro-
dnction. New York: Wiley, 1968.

Periodicals

Ackerman, Nathan. tlDivorce and Alienation in Modern

Society," Mental Hygiene, LIII, No. 1 (January,
1969), 118-126.
Biller, Henry B., and Borstelmann, L10yd J. "Masculine
Development: An Integrative Review," Meril! '
Palmer Quarterly! XIII, No. 4 (October, 1967),
253-94.
 130

Buler, Zoe. "One Parent Families Present Problems," The

Single Parent: The Journal of Parents Without--­
Partners Inc., XIV, No. 9 (December, 1971), 8-10,
Burgess, Jane, K. "The Single Parent Family: A Social ,a·nd
Sociological Problem,u The Family Coordinator, XIX,
No. 2 (April, 1970), 137-44.
Clayton, Patricia W. "Meeting the Needs of the Single Parent
Family," The Family Coordinator, XX No 4 (October,
1971), 327 -36.
Davids, Leo. "New Family Norms," The-Single Parent: The
Journal of Parents Without Partners Inc., XV, No.-lO
Flaherty, Marge. uA Haven for the Lone Parent," The Single
Parent: The Journal of Parents Without Partners Inc.,
XIV, No. 8 (November, 1971), 8-10.
Freudenthal, Kurt. "Problems of the One Parent FamilY,ft
Social Work Journal of the National Association of
Social Workers, IV, No. 1 (January, 1959), 44-88.
Gendzel, Ivan B. "Dependence, Independence and Interdependence,"
The Single Parent: The Journal of Parents Without Part­
ners Inc., XV, No. 1 (January/February, 1972), 4-6.
Gould, Ethel P. "Special Report: The Single Parent Family
Benefits in Parents Without Partners Inc.," Journal of
Marriage and the Family, XXX, No. 4 (November, 1968),
666-71.
Greenstone, James L. "The Crisis of Discipline," The Single
Parent: The Journal of Parents Without Partners Inc.,
XIV, No. 8 (November, 1971),4-7.
Herzog, Elizabeth, and Sudia, Cecelia E. ItFamilies Without
Fathers," Childhood Education, I (January, 1972),
175-181.
Hetherington, E. Mavis. "Girls Without Fathers," Psychology
Today, VI, No. 9 (February, 1973), 47-52.
Ilgepfritz, Marjorie P. "Mothers on Their OWn: Widows and
Divorcees," Marriage and Family Living, XXIII, No. 1
(February, 1961), 38-41.
 131

Jensen, Gordon D., and Wallace, John G. "Family Mourning

Process," Family Process, VI, No. 1 (March, 1967),
56-66.
Lerner, Samuel H. "Effect of Desertion on Family Life,"
Social Casework, XXXVI, No. 1 (January, 195,4), 3-8.
Lobenz, Norman. "How Divorced Young Mothers Learn to Stand
Alone," 1:he Single Parent: The Journal of Parents
Without Partners Inc., XIV, No. 9 (December, 1971),
3-6.
Parker, Seymour, and K1eine1', Robert S. "Characteristics of
Negro Mothers in Single Headed Households," Journal
£!.. 'Marriage and the Famil~, XXVIII, No. 4 (November,
1966), 507-513.
Rosenfeld, Jona M., Rosenstein, Eliezer, and Raab, Marilyn.
"Sailor Families: The Nature and Effects of One Kind
of Father Absence," Child Welfare, LII, No. 1
(January, 1973), 33-44.
Siegal, Alberta Engvall, and Haas, Mariam Bushkoff. "The
Working Mother: A Review of Research,!! Child
Deve10:Qment, XXXIV (March, 1963 to December, 1963),
513-42.
"The American Family. 11 Newsweek ~;lagazine, March 12,
1973, PP. 47-57.
Thomas, Mary ~largareto "Children With Absent Fathers,"
Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXX, No. 1
(February, 1968), 89-96. .
Toby, Jackson. "The Differential Impact of Family Disor­
ganization," American Sociological ReView, XXII,
No. 5 (October, 1957), 505-12.
Wylie, Howard Lee, and Delgado, Rafael A. "A Pattern of
Mother Son Relationship Involving the Absence of
Father,tt American Journal of Orthopsychiatr~,
XXIX (July, 1959), 644-49.
Young, William M. "Single Parents and Their Teenagers,"
The Sin le Parent: The Journal of Parents With'out
Partners Inc., XIV, No. 6 July/August, 1971 , 4-16.
 13:

ReEorts and Public Documents

Canadian Council on Social Development. The One Parent

Family: Report of an Inquiry on One Parent Families
in Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Council on Social
Development, 1971.
Canadian Department of Labour. Women's Bureau. Women in
the Labour Force: 1970 Facts and Figures. Ottawa:
Information Canada, 1971.
Re120rt of the Special Joint Committee of the Senate and House
of Commons on Divorce. A. W. Roebuclc, and A. J. p.
Camero, Chairman. Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1967.

Unpublished Materials

Bosinger, Al. "Facts and Observations on PWP and Its First

Fifteen Years." Pamphlet on Parents Without Part­
ners.
Chang, 11ary Ann., and Smith, Yee-Sum Margot E. G. ItFemale
Headed Single Parent Families. 1t Unpublished Master's
Dissertation, School of Social Work, McGill University,
October, 1970.
Fung, A. KA-Ching, and Luu, A. Kai-Chuen. "The Adjustment
of Hong Kong Chinese Students." Unpublished Master's
Dissertation, School of Social Work, McGill Univer­
sity, May, 1971.
Mahjail A. itA Study of Problems of One Parent Families."
Unpublished Master's Dissertation, School of Social
Work, McGill University, October, 1972.