Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Adoption
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Adoption

644

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
644
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Issues Considered in Contemplating Stepchild Adoption Author(s): Lawrence Ganong, Marilyn Coleman, Mark Fine, Annette Kusgen McDaniel Source: Family Relations, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Jan., 1998), pp. 63-71 Published by: National Council on Family Relations Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/584852 Accessed: 09/02/2010 13:23 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Family Relations. http://www.jstor.org
  • 2. Issues ConsideredIn ContemplatingStepchildAdoption Lawrence Ganong,* Marilyn Coleman, Mark Fine, and Annette Kusgen McDaniel The primarypurpose of this study was to explore the factors that stepfamilymembersconsider when contemplatingstepchild adoption. Thirty-two adults and 22 stepchildrenfrom 16 stepfamilieswere interviewedabout their thoughtsandfeelings regard- ing stepparentadoption. The desire to be a "regular"family, to sever relationshipswith the nonresidentialparent, and to legit- imize roles and relationshipswere reasons givenfor consideringadoption. Whetheror notfamily membersthoughtabout or dis- cussed stepchildadoption was relatedprimarilyto the level of involvementof the nonresidentialparent. Implications policies for bond are discussed. that may expandthe range of options available to strengthenthe stepparent-stepchild Stepfamily households, defined as households in which sons, much of the literatureon adoptionof unrelatedchildrenis there is an adult couple, at least one of whom has a child unlikelyto generalizeto stepchildadoption. from a previous relationship, are common in the United States. In 1990, 11.3% of children in the United States lived Process of StepchildAdoption with a parent and a stepparent (U.S. Bureau of the Census, For a stepparent be able to adopt,the nonresidential to parent 1992). A numberof these stepchildrenare eventuallyadoptedby must relinquishall legal ties to the child (Mahoney, 1994). The their stepparent;although the extent of stepparentadoption is nonresidentialparent can either voluntarily relinquish parental not known, it has been estimated that 100,000 stepchildrenare claims to the child, or the stepparentand residentialparentcan adoptedby their stepparents every year (Levine & Sallee, 1990). initiate legal proceedings to force the nonresidential parent to There are probably many similarities between stepchild lose parentalstatus.There are two generalreasonswhy courtsin- adoptions by a stepparentand adoptions in which both adults voluntarilysever the parentalrightsof a nonresidential parent:(a) adopt an unrelatedchild, especially when children are younger the nonresidentialparentis declaredto be unfit for a variety of than preschool age at the time of adoption (Reitz & Watson, reasons, and/or(b) it is in the child's best intereststo end the re- 1992). There are also similarities with older children in both lationship (Mahoney, 1994). Traditionally, legal jurisdictions types of adoption-children are confrontedwith modifying self- have used both of these reasons in a two-stage process of decid- identities;they may experienceloyalty conflicts between genetic ing whetheror not to allow stepparent adoption.First,a judgment and adoptingparents;family membersmust learn new roles; the is made aboutthe fitness of the nonresidential parent.There are a family boundariesmust be redefinedby its members;and adopt- number of bases for determiningif the nonresidentialparent is ing parentsmust cope with identity changes (Daly, 1988; Kirk, unfit, including: (a) the parenthas abandonedthe child; (b) the 1981; Visher & Visher, 1996; Watson, 1996). parenthas been abusive to the child; or (c) the parentis a sub- Despite the similarities, there are importantcontextual dif- stance abuser.Once the nonresidential parent'srightsto the child ferences that make stepchild adoptionworthy of study as a spe- have been terminated, clears the way for a decision regarding this cial type of adoption. For instance, in stepchild adoptions only whetheror not the adoptionwould be in the child's best interests. the stepparent seeking to change her or his legal statusin rela- is In recent years some courts have tried to simplify this two-stage tion to the children (Mahoney, 1994), whereas in most other process somewhat by using the child's best interests as the sole adoptions there are two adults seeking to adopt a child. In basis for allowing stepparentadoptionin situationsin which the stepchildadoptionthe stepchildhas an alreadyexisting relation- nonresidential parent has not consented to terminate parental ship with one biological parent in the home, an emerging rela- rights. However, even in jurisdictionsin which the sole standard tionshipwith anotheradultin the home (the stepparent), pos-and being used for stepparentadoptionis the principleof the child's sibly an ongoing relationship with a nonresidential biological best interest,the fitness of the nonresidential parentcontinues to parent.By contrast,in adoption of unrelatedchildren, the child be a majorpartof the legal deliberations (Mahoney, 1994). does not have a pre-existingrelationshipwith either of the adop- If they desire to adopt, the adults in the stepfamily have to tive parents.Consequently,in stepchild adoptionsthe stepparent make a case that stepparent adoptionis in the best interestsof the is the additional member of an already existing family unit, child, and often stepchildrenare consulted by the judge before whereasin otheradoptionsthe child is the newcomer.One possi- the adoption is allowed (Mahoney, 1994). Moreover, adoption ble result of these structuraldifferences is that issues such as may be costly to stepfamiliesdue to legal expenses and the loss openness in adoption,defined as the extent of direct and indirect of child support from the parent who yields parental rights. contact between the adopted child and the birthparents(Kirk, Clearly,adoptionis not only a legal event, but it is a process that 1981), may have differentmeanings in stepchild adoptionsthan in othertypes of adoptions. In addition to these structuraldifferences, it is likely that there are differences in the motivations to adopt between stepchild adoptionsand other adoptions.For example, infertility is a primary reason why childless couples adopt (Daly, 1988; *Addresscorrespondenceto: LawrenceGanong, Departmentof HumanDevelopment and Family Studies, 31 Stanley Hall, University of Missouri,Columbia,MO 6521 1. Kirk, 1964; 1981), but this is seldom the reason why stepparents adopttheir stepchildren(Wolf & Mast, 1987). Consequently,the Key Words:adoption,stepchildren,stepparent. process of deciding to adopt is likely to differ, as are the factors that are consideredwhen adoptionis contemplated. these rea- For (Family Relations, 1998, 47, 63-71.) 1998, Vol. 47, No. 1 63
  • 3. involves emotional, psychological, financial, and interpersonal recreatethe nuclearfamily because it is familiarand simplerthan factors. the reality of stepfamilycomplexity and ambiguityand because they are supportedin this effort by extendedfamily, friends,and Prior Research on Stepchild Adoption society as a whole. Unfortunately, although stepchild adoption is a relatively The lack of legal ties between stepparents their stepchil- and common occurrenceand the contemplationof adoption in step- dren may also add to feelings of ambiguityand a sense of a lack families is probablyeven more prevalent,it has rarely been re- of control for stepparents. Moreover,clinicians and social scien- searched(Reitz & Watson, 1992). Little is known about motives tists who examine legal issues contendthatthe absence of a legal to adopt or issues and concerns that stepparents parentscon- and relationshippotentiallyserves as a barrierto the developmentof templatewhen consideringstepparent adoption(Duran-Aydintug emotionallyclose stepparent-stepchild bonds (Fine, 1989; Visher & Ihinger-Tallman,1995). A survey of 55 adopting stepparents & Visher, 1988). If this is so, then adoptionmay be seen as a way yielded some evidence regarding the motives underlying to reduce ambiguityand remove an impediment(i.e., the lack of stepchildadoption(participates could identify more thanone mo- a legal relationship) closer ties. to tive); name changes (40%), family unity (31%), a good relation- Social stigma may also be a factor in the social construction ship between the stepparent and stepchild (27%), transferring of stepfamily life. The cultural meanings associated with step- legal rights to stepparents(23%), and severing ties from the non- family roles may not be ones that contribute to positive self- residential parent (23%) were the main reasons given for identities; for instance,the prefix step has negative connotations stepchildadoption(Wolf & Mast, 1987). for many (Coleman& Ganong, 1987; Fine, 1986), so individuals Clinicians and legal scholars have speculated about issues who are in stepfamiliesmay be motivatedto avoid the use of step related to stepchild adoption. For example, it has been argued labels and terms that denote stepfamily positions (Coleman & that stepchild adoptionmay representan attemptto demonstrate Ganong, 1987), and they may want to use nuclearfamily terms affection and commitment to the child, to create a parent-child for each other (e.g., motherinstead of stepmother)as an impres- bond that is legal as well as emotional (Visher & Visher, 1979). sion management strategy (Dainton, 1993; Kaplan & Hennon, Also, adoptionlegally addressessome of the complicationsasso- 1992). If stepfamiliesand stepfamilypositions (e.g., stepmother, ciated with stepfamilyliving (e.g., family membershaving differ- stepchild)are seen by family membersas stigmatizedsocial cate- ent last names), presumably making life easier for stepfamily gories associated with generally negative attributes (Ganong, members(Mahoney, 1994). Coleman, & Mapes, 1990), then this serves as additionalmotiva- In this study we take a social constructionistapproachto un- tion to patterntheir stepfamilyas closely as possible afterthe nu- derstandingconsiderationsand motivations for stepchild adop- clear family model. tion (Dallos, 1991). The socially constructedmeanings of con- Adoptionmay be seen by stepfamilymembersas one way to texts and relationshipsare of particularimportancein understand- accomplish the goals of normalizing stepfamily roles and "be- ing stepfamilies because stepfamily roles and relationships are coming" a nuclearfamily: the noncustodialparentloses parental often ambiguousand unclear(Ganong& Coleman, 1994) and be- rights and responsibilities, and these are given to the adopting cause step relationshipsare stigmatized(Ganong & Coleman, in stepparent. Legally, the stepparentbecomes a parent, and the press). Understanding socially constructedviews of individu- the stepfamily"becomes"a nuclearfamily. als within these relationshipscan help stepfamily members and Of course, not all stepfamiliestry to emulatenuclearfamilies practitioners who work with stepfamilies to better understand (Papernow, 1993). Instead, many stepfamilies construct new family members'behaviorsand intentions. ways to function that reflect their "step"realities. Members of It has long been pointed out by clinicians that stepfamily these families may consider stepchild adoption for reasons that members,particularlyremarriedadults, often attemptto use the do not reflect a desire to become a nuclearfamily. nuclearfamily as a model to emulate in constructingstepfamily In light of the gaps in the literature, the purposes of this life (Goldner, 1982; Visher & Visher, 1988; 1996). They do so study were to: (1) explore the factors that stepparentsconsider partly because culturalmodels about how families are supposed when contemplatingadoptionof their stepchildrenand (2) exam- to be are based on nuclearfamilies (Coale Lewis, 1985) and part- ine stepfamily members' motivations to adopt. Using a social ly because there is a lack of institutionalized guidelines and constructionistperspective, we investigated whether the factors norms for stepfamilyroles (Cherlin, 1978). Several clinical writ- considered by stepfamily members reflected images of family ers have noted that stepparentsare often unsureof how to relate life based on nuclearfamilies. to their stepchildren,an uncertaintythat is sharedby other step- family membersand by outsiderswho interactwith stepfamilies (Mills, 1984; Papernow, 1993; Visher & Visher, 1988). Conse- Methods quently, some stepfamilymembersbase theirviews on how their families should functionon their image of nuclear,first-marriage Sample families. According to clinicians, such a model does not serve The sample consisted of 32 adults and 22 childrenfrom 16 stepfamilies well because it does not provide much assistance in stepfamiliesin which therewas at least one stepchildbetween the anticipatingstepfamilyproblemsand figuringout workablesolu- ages of 10 and 19 living in the household the majority of the tions to existing difficulties (Coale Lewis, 1985; Visher & Vish- time. One criterionfor inclusion in the sample was that stepchil- er, 1988). However, from the stepfamily members' viewpoints, dren be at least 10 years old because we felt that younger chil- thinking of themselves as members of nuclear families allows dren would have a difficult time understanding questions asked them to use societal norms for parentsand childrenas guidelines in the interview.Of the 16 stepfamilies,14 were stepfather-mother for their role enactments. Members of stepfamilies often try to households,and 2 were complex householdsin which both adults 64 Family Relations
  • 4. were stepparents to children in the household; none were In this type of interview protocol the interviewersask such stepmother-father households. In seven of the stepfamilies, questions as, "Whatdoes adoption mean to you (as a steppar- one of the adults had children from prior relationships who ent)?";"Whatimpact, if any, do you think adoptionwould have lived in another residence with the adult's former spouse. Both on you, on your stepchildren,on the family as a whole?";"What adults were interviewed in all families, and all children who reactionsdo you expect from othersin the stepfamilyif you were resided in the household and who were between ages 10 and 19 to mentionthe possibility of adoptingthe stepchildren?" these In were interviewedfrom 15 of the families. interviewswe triedto find out not only what happened,but what All of the families were White and generally middle class; the participantsthoughtand felt aboutwhat happened. the medianfamily income was between $40,000 and $50,000 per Immediatelyafter the interview, field notes and interviewer year, and most adult participantshad attendedcollege. Most of impressionswere either dictated on the audiotapeor writtenby the adults were employed full-time outside of the home. All of the interviewer. In addition to the interviews, family members the parentshad been divorced from their previous spouses, and filled out a batteryof questions that focused on stepfamilyrela- 81% of the stepparents had been previously married and di- tionships and individualwell-being. The questionnaire data were vorced. The parents'earliermarriageshad lasted a mean of 7.32 not used as the primarydata source for this study. Tape malfunc- years (range= 9 months-20 years), and the stepparents been had tions preventedus from transcribing of the data from two of all marriedpreviously for 6.89 years (range = 1-13 years). The re- the adults,so in these cases only field notes were availablefor re- marriedcouples had been marrieda mean of 5.59 years (range= view. Stepparents parentsgenerally were interviewedby the and .92-12.17 years). The mean age of adultswas 39.80 years (range faculty members of the researchteam, and stepchildrenusually = 30-51), and the mean age of children who were interviewed were interviewedby graduatestudents.Wheneverpossible, inter- was 13.93 (range= 10-19). viewer and intervieweewere matchedby gender. The participants were recruitedthroughvarious media, and adult study participantswere asked at the end of interviews to Data Analyses recommendother remarried families that we might contact to be The transcribedinterviews were read independentlyby all in the study. Interviewswere conductedwith family membersin- four researchers.Insteadof using an a prioricoding scheme, the dividually.All of the participants lived in centralMissouri.Fami- interviews were coded using an inductive approach (Patton, lies were monetarily reimbursed for their participation in the 1990). The process of analyst triangulationwas used to guard study. against the coding schemes being the product of only one per- son's perceptions and interpretations(Patton, 1990). The plan InterviewProtocol was that each person would analyze the data independently. The in-depth, semi-structuredinterviews were conducted Analyses were compared,and minor differences and discrepan- using an approachdeveloped by Buehlman,Gottman,and Katz cies in inferencesand identifiedthemes and patternsof responses (1992). This semi-structured interview was based on Gottman's were resolved via discussion. modificationof Studs Terkel's interviewing method and Satir's We read the interviews again using the revised analytic family life chronology(Buehlmanet al., 1992). In this type of in- scheme. Interviews were read one family at a time. Patternsor terview, not every questionis askedin order,nor are all questions themes in the data were examinedboth on a family level and on asked in every interview. The researchergoes with the natural an individualbasis. That is, we triedto analyze the data in such a flow of conversation,trying to get the interviewees to be as ex- way thatcommonalitiesand differenceswithin and between fam- pansive and involved as possible. The goal was to understand the ilies could be identified, as well as similarities and divergence subjective world of the people being interviewed and the con- across individual family positions (e.g., stepparentsin different structionsthey have of theirexperiencesand life circumstances. families). Subsequent to this reading, we again met, discussed The primaryfocus of the interviewwas on the development our analyses,and resolved the few minordisagreements. of stepparent-stepchild relationships,but several questions were asked that dealt with adoption. For example, stepparentswere Results asked, "Have you ever thought about adoptingyour stepchild?" and "Whateffect do you thinkadoptionwould have on your fam- The stepfamiliesin this study were recruitedto participate in ily relationships?" stepparentshad not adoptedtheir stepchil- If an investigationof stepparent-stepchild relationships.Therefore, dren,they were asked, "How do you think the absence of a legal all of them contained steprelationships, stepparentadoption but tie with your stepchildren has affected your relationship with had occurred in only one complex stepfamily (i.e., both adults them?" Stepparents who had adopted were asked how they had childrenfrom prior marriages).Adoption by a stepparent in thoughtthe adoptionhad affected the relationship.Parallelques- simple stepfamilyhouseholds(i.e., only one adultis a stepparent) tions were asked of parentsand stepchildren. Probesor follow-up legally transforms the stepfamily into a nuclear family, and questions were asked when appropriate. Wheneverpossible, in- steprelationships transformed are into parent-childrelationships. terviewersasked open-endedquestions, or they followed closed- Consequently,it was not surprisingthat only one stepfamilyhad ended questionswith probesand requestsfor elaboration. ex-For experiencedan adoptionbecause adoptivestepparents unlike- are ample, a stepfatherindicatedthat he had thoughtabout adopting ly to identify themselves as stepparents,nor are they likely to his stepchildrenseveral times but had not said anythingto other agree to participatein a study of stepparent-stepchild relation- family members. The interviewer asked about the stepfather's ships. Therefore,the results of this study should be generalized thoughtsand feelings regardingadoptionand explored with him only to non-adoptiveor pre-adoptivestepparent households. why he had not mentionedthem to othersin the family. Although stepchild adoptionhad occurredin only one fami- ly, adoptionwas a relevantissue for this groupof stepfamilies.In nearly all of the families, at least one member had given some 1998, Vol. 47, No. 1 65
  • 5. thought to the stepparentadopting a stepchild. In about half of remarried 12 years, explained, "Well [adoptionis] out of the for the stepfamilies, adults had talked with childrenabout adoption. question.I mean, we would have to have the approvalof theirfa- In the other half of the stepfamilies,membersgave differing re- ther, and that would never happen."This motherhad endureda ports on whether or not adoption had been considered. Some- contentiouscustody battlewith her formerhusbandseveral years times one adult reportedthat he or she had talked about steppar- earlier,but this type of sentimentwas expressedeven when rela- ent adoption with the spouse, but the other adult claimed that tionshipsbetween formerspouses had been generallydispassion- adoptionhad not been discussed. ate. When formerspouse relationshipshad been characterized by We can only speculate about why some family membersre- hostility and conflict over the children,then stepfamilymembers ported discussing adoption while others reportedthat adoption were especially reluctantto pursueadoption. was not discussed. Perhaps those who said adoption had been Financial concerns also were importantbarriersto seeking discussed between family members were those for whom the adoption.The loss of financial provisions for the child from the issue was more important; the issue of adoption holds more nonresidential parent,either throughthe loss of child supportor salience for some stepfamilymembersthanit does for others.For the withdrawalof money for such items as college, was relevant stepparentsand stepchildren,adoptioncould have a direct effect for some stepfamilies. One mother, in explaining why her hus- on their self-identityand legitimatea position for them within the band had placed adoptionproceedingson hold, statedthat it was family. The self-identity of residentialbiological parents would due to ". . . the cost involved. We aren'tin a position thatwe can not undergo changes to the same degree, so adoptionwould be just dropthat [child support]money, and I don't know how much less relevantor less important them. to my ex-husbandwill fight it, just to be hateful ...." In a thirdof Family members co-construct reality through interaction the families, parentsstated that they would lose child supportif with each other and by sharing perceptions, expectations, and parentalrights of the nonresidential parentwere terminated, thus meanings of situationswith each other (Dallos, 1991). The step- ending parental obligations for financial support as well. For families in which membersreportedsimilaraccountsof how seri- some stepfamilies,this was an importantissue, and one that led ously adoption was considered were those in which there was the adults either to abandonadoptionplans or to delay them. A agreementbetween members on the possibility of adoption;that stepfather, explaining why he had not pursued adoption, said, is, those family members shared similar perceptions regarding "The only thing that has ever kept me from discussing the adop- how constrainingthe potentialbarriers were to the likelihoodthat tion of [my stepchildren]is because I don't know what it would stepparentadoptioncould be accomplished.In families with less do as far as child supportand that type of thing."One 15-year- consistency in reporting, some members perceived barriersto old stepson, who wantedhis stepfatherto adopthim, yet realized adoptionthatwere not identifiedby othersin the family. that he needed his father's economic supportto attend college, statedthathe might have his stepfatheradopthim afterhe finish- Issues Consideredin StepchildAdoption es school. Whetheror not family membersthoughtabout or discussed Otherfinancialconcerns were relatedto: (a) the ongoing fi- stepchild adoption was related primarilyto the level of involve- nancial commitmentthat an adoptive stepparentwould have to ment of the nonresidential parent. If the nonresidentialparent the adoptedchild if the remarriage ended and (b) the actualcosts was actively involved, or at least was in somewhat regularcon- of adopting,such as courtfees and attorneyfees. These monetary tact with the stepchild, then adoption usually was not seriously issues were mentioned more frequently by stepparentsthan by considered.In those cases adoptionwas not seen as a realisticop- parents and never by stepchildren.In one stepfamily in which tion; as one stepfathernoted abouthis stepson, "He's got his dad adoptionhad been discussed between adults and children,but no and he's also got me." In explaining why adoptionwas not con- action had been taken, the stepfatherstated, "I guess, really, in a sidered in her family, a mother said, "Theirfatheris still a very way, it's probably more of a relief [that adoption has not hap- dominantfigure in their life and probablyalways will be." A 14- pened]. . . if [we] were to split up, I wouldn't have no financial year-old stepson said, "I never thoughtabout adoptionbecause I ties or anything towards her." That same stepfather on legal have my other father."Another stepchild said, "It's [adoption] costs: "There'sa lot of money to have a lot of lawyers say a lot never been an issue for me and my brotherbecause we see our of things that really don't mean a whole lot except that you've real dad every otherweekend."Adoptionwas even less of an op- got to go through[it to adoptthe child]." tion when the nonresidential parenthad a good relationshipwith The only other reason given for not considering or for not the children;when that was the case, adoptionwas not thoughtto pursuingadoptionwas also relatedto a concern about continuing be appropriate. obligations and ties if the remarriage ended in divorce. One wife, However, some stepfamily members gave adoption careful remarriedfor over a decade, did not want her husbandto adopt her daughterbecause she did not think the remarriage would last considerationeven when the nonresidentialparentwas involved with the child. In situations in which the nonresidentialparent and did not want to be saddled with a relationship with him was not especially close to the children, yet maintainedcontact shouldthey divorce. periodically throughphone calls or visits, the remarriedfamily Motivations for Stepchild Adoption adults often contemplatedadoptionbut were reluctantto engage in what they anticipatedwould be hostile legal proceedings and A common motivationfor family membersto consideradop- angry interactions over the request that nonresidentialparents tion was the desire to become as much like a nuclearfamily as surrender their parentalrights. In these families the decision was possible. Sometimes this was phrasedin terms of family close- made not to seek a stepchild adoption because the stepfamily ness or family integration. example, severalindividualsmen- For adults feared that the nonresidential parentwould contest giving tioned a desire to bring the family closer together through up parentalrights.As a motherof two adolescents,who had been stepchild adoption.For example, a stepfatherwho was thinking 66 Family Relations
  • 6. about adopting his 12-year-old stepdaughtersaid, "We're just because that would be the kind of thing where she could trying to meld the family together and strengthenit." Some of come in and be the big hero ... not only will they lose these stepfamilies functionedvery similarly to nuclear families, you, but they'll lose the stability in the family and every- and members of these families saw adoption as completing the thing else, and who knows what'll happen to them ...." process of becoming a "real"family. Adoption was seen as a One of the majorreasons [for the adoption] was probably mechanismto help cementrelationships. JusLso that they would be safe if something happenedto In some stepfamiliesthe stepchildrenwere emotionallyclos- him. er to stepparentsthan they were to their nonresidentialparents, The fatherin this family agreed:"Their[biological] mother and adoption was seen as a way to solidify the stepparent- was real inappropriate still is, and it's a legal way of severing and stepchild relationshipand to reflect its closeness. In other step- those ties. [Adoption] stops a lot of problems early on." These families individuals hoped that adoption would somehow draw stepfamilyadultsrecognizedthat the childrenwould likely be re- the family closer togetherand give membersa sense of being "in quiredby law to live with the nonresidential parentif the residen- family" together.For example, the one stepmotherwho adopted tial parentwere to die and that the stepparentwould have little saw herself as "Mom,"the person upon whom everyone could legal recourse to maintaincontact with the stepchildren.In our rely for help and nurturing. her, legally adoptingher stepchil- To state third party visitation is relatively rare, particularlywhen dren legitimized that role. Her husbandagreed; after discussing stepparentsare the third party. Said one stepfather, "We were how unfit his ex-wife was as a mother,he explainedthe rationale thinkingmore in the aspect of if somethinglater on were to hap- for why his second wife adoptedhis children:"The actual deci- pen to one of us, is there some way to firm this up so we don't sion, I think, was hoping that it would give the kids the feeling have problems." in more of having a real mom." A stepdaughter anotherfamily The lack of legal relationships between stepparents and said she "wouldn't mind" being adopted by her stepfatherbe- stepchildren was not a motive to consideradoptionfor most step- cause "I could probablycall him Dad then and feel comfortable family members.This was trueeven among those who were con- with it." From these perspectives,adoptionwould legitimize the cerned about the possibility that the stepparentwould lose con- use of family labels (i.e., mom or dad) and the taking of the cul- tact with the stepchild if the parentdied. These folks perceived turally institutionalized roles of mother and father, son and the potentialfor problemsif somethinghappenedto the residen- daughter. tial parent,but they did not thinkthe absenceof legal rights made It should be noted that some of the closest steprelationships a differencein their relationships.This apparent paradoxmay be were in families in which adoptionhad never been considered.In due to the fact that the legal dimensions of family relationships some of these families, it seemed that a strong nonresidential are usually unobtrusive.Legal issues do not often come up in parent-childrelationship provided the security necessary for a daily family life, and it is likely that many of these stepfamily good stepparent-stepchild relationshipto develop. In these step- membershad not had an occasion to be confrontedby the con- families there was no motivationto adoptin orderto develop re- straintsinherentin the absence of legal rights. A few did com- lationshipsbetween stepparentsand stepchildrenthat resembled ment on the absence of legal rights, however. One stepfatherre- parent-child relationships. ported, For some stepfamiliesadoptionwas perceivedto be a way to My company allows me to pay for their health insurance removesome of the daily hassles of being in a stepfamily,such as even though I have no legal relationship. I found this having differentlast names. This was of particular importanceto bizarre.That was a weird sensation to think that I had no stepchildren,and it should be noted that in three of these step- legal relationshipto them at all. Most days it makes no dif- families, the stepchildren used the stepfather's last name at ference,but it's a weirdfeeling. school. In this way they achieved unofficially what they per- This stepfatheris citing an example of the ambiguity sur- ceived to be an advantageof adoptionin reducinga complication roundingstepparent-stepchild relationships.In this case the step- in their lives. For example, one adolescent stepson complained fatherwas quite awarethathe had no legal rights as a stepparent, that his friends could not find him in the telephonedirectorybe- yet he was allowed to assume financial responsibility for his cause the family telephonewas listed in his stepfather'slast name stepchildren, least in termsof healthinsurance. at ratherthan in his. To this stepson, adoption would easily solve Not all family membershad the same degree of motivation this problemfor him. for the stepparent adoptthe stepchild.Stepparents, to particularly Another motive for adoption was a concern about what stepfathers,thoughtabout adoptionmore often than their spous- would happen if the residentialparent would die when the chil- es. Stepchildrenalso thought about adoption more than parents dren were minors.This was mentionedby adultsonly. A mother did. These differencesmake sense in light of the fact thatsteppar- said, ents and stepchildrenwould be the ones changing the status of The only thing, my only fear is that if something would theirrelationshipif adoptionhappened. happento me ... he would have absolutely no legal right to her. And that's the scary part for me . .. it would tear Children'sUnderstanding Adoption of his heart [out] again and tear hers [the daughter's] to Althoughchildren'sunderstanding stepchildadoptionwas of pieces if somethinghappenedto me, and that's my biggest not a purpose of the study, we thought the children's reactions concern. were worthy of comment. Stepchildrensometimes thought they The stepmotherwho adoptedher stepchildrenreportedthat had been adoptedeven when no legal procedureshad been initi- her husbandagreedto the adoptionbecauseof this issue: ated. Other children were not sure if they had been adopted or . .. and I said, "If something happens to you, they're just not. This is probablybecause they lack familiaritywith the term gonna be whipped off to her and you know she'll fly in adoption;it was clear to us that several of the childrenwere not 1998, Vol. 47, No. 1 67
  • 7. entirely familiar with the concept, especially the preadolescents. those relationshipsinto "real"family ties if therewere no barriers Even those who presented themselves as if they were familiar to doing so. Adoptionwas seen as a way to solidify and strength- with and understoodthe concept of adoptionseemed to have lim- en relationshipsor to recognize strong feelings between stepkin. ited perceptionsaboutwhat adoptionmeant.For instance,earlier The perception that adoption normalizes the stepfamily by we quoted a stepdaughter who thought adoption would be good changing it into a nuclear family illustratesthe need that some because she would be more comfortable calling her stepfather stepparentsand stepchildren have to fit the norms for parent- "dad"and a stepson who wanted his friends to be able to find child roles. him in the phone book. Stepfamilyroles are unclear(Ganong& Coleman, 1994; Ka- On the other hand, a stepchild who had been adopted was plan & Hennon, 1992; Visher & Visher, 1979), stigmatized quite angryaboutit because he had thoughtthat nothing substan- (Coleman& Ganong, 1987; Dainton, 1993; Fine, 1986), andhold tive would change because of the adoption,and to his regrethe low salience for the identitiesof most stepparents (Keshet, 1990). found that many things had changed for him. The stepmother's For the most part, individualsin step roles are not interestedin motivationfor adoptingher stepchildrenappearedto be at least role making if they can enact the relativelyfamiliarroles of par- partiallyto garnerrecognitionand supportfor the important role ent and child. Those who considered adoption were those who she had played in their lives and to seek legal sanction for that were engaged in assuming parentalroles as much as possible. role. Her expectationsfor relationshipchanges that would be in- However, when nonresidential parents were actively involved stigated by the adoption were not clearly communicatedto the with their children and had warm relationshipswith them, then rest of the family; in fact, she may not even have been complete- stepparents, stepchildren,and residentialparentshad little option ly awareof these motivationsat the time of adoption.The adopt- but to engage in constructing new role for the stepparent play a to ed stepchildresentedwhat he saw as efforts to replacehis biolog- in the stepchild'slife; in these stepfamiliesadoptionwas seldom, ical mother. He blamed his stepmotherfor hurtinghis relation- if ever, considered. ship with his mother,even thoughthe motherhad voluntarilydis- Despite the ubiquity of the nuclear family as the standard continued contact with him long before the adoption, and his family form, there are other ways of conceptualizingfamily life stepmotherhad been the only mother-figure had known. This he (Scanzoni & Marsiglio, 1993). For instance, adoption scholars adolescenthad agreedto the adoptionwhen he was 10 years old, have identified a continuum of openness in adoption (Kirk, but clearly he had not understoodat thattime what it meantinter- 1964;1981). At one end of the continuumare those who reject personally and psychologically to other family members or to the notion that adoptive families differ from nuclear families. himself. These families essentially re-construct themselves as nuclear In summary,adoptionwas relatedto a desire to be a "regu- families, differencesin family formationand relationships de- are lar" family, to disconnect the nonresidential parent from their nied, and ties with birthparents not maintained. are The stepfami- lives, to legitimize roles and relationships,or to legally support lies in our study who most seriously discussed and considered what the stepparentor stepchild felt about each other. Stepchil- adoptionare similar to these adoptive families. At the other end dren did not always understandwhat adoption would mean to of the continuumof adoptiveopenness,however, are the families theirrelationshipswith parentsand stepparents. who acknowledge differences between themselves and non- adoptive nuclear families, and they provide another model of Discussion how to think about being a family. In these adoptive families, family members are encouragedto accept differences (i.e., how Implications Practitioners for they are unlike non-adoptivefamilies). Childrenare allowed, and even encouraged,to develop and maintaincontact with birthpar- The socially constructedview that adoptionnormalizesstep- ents. Adoptive parentsacknowledgethe natureof their relation- families by changingthem to nuclearfamilies illustratesthe need ship with adopted children, and both adults and children are for family life educatorsand family counselorsto help stepfamily given opportunitiesto explore ways to think about themselves, members expand their thinking about ways to function success- theirfeelings, and theirfamilies (Colon, 1978). The examplepor- fully, thus reducingthe pressurefor stepparents feel that they to trayed by adoptive families that acknowledge their differences have to fit the normsfor parent-child need to be ties. Practitioners from nuclearfamilies representsa model that stepfamiliescould able to think creatively about families so that they can help step- adapt,whetherthey adoptstepchildren not.or family members who cannot see any options other than the nu- Other models for constructingnew ways to create families clear family model. Althoughthe nuclearfamily model appeared and family roles may be learned by observing the practices of to be working at least somewhat successfully for some of the some African American families (Crosbie-Burnett & Lewis, stepfamilies we interviewed, for most it was an inappropriate 1993). For example, in African Americancommunities,biologi- model to follow because it caused more problems (e.g., strained cal mothers,or bloodmothers,are expected to care for their chil- stepparent-stepchild relationships)than it solved. There are other need to be aware of this dren, but African American communities have also recognized ways to raise children,and practitioners that vesting one person with full responsibilityfor motheringa and help stepfamily members creatively adapt a model that is child may not be wise or possible. As a result, othermothers- comfortablefor them. women who assist bloodmothersby sharingmotheringresponsi- Few stepfamily members in our study were able to think bilities-traditionally have been centralto the institutionof Black abouttheirfamilies in ways otherthanas a variationof the nucle- motherhood(Troester,1984). ar family model. For many individualsin these stepfamilies,the bell hooks (1984) suggests that the relationships between social constructionof family is embodied in the norms and ex- bloodmothersand othermothers may have greatertheoreticalim- pectations that surroundfirst-marriage,nuclear families. If the portancethan currentlyrecognized, and this phenomenoncould step-relationships close, stepfamily memberswanted to turn felt 68 Family Relations
  • 8. be an especially useful way to broadenour thinking about step- understandings about concepts such as adoptionchange as their parentroles. Accordingto hooks, "Thisform of parentingis rev- cognitive abilities develop (Brodzinsky,Singer, & Braff, 1984). olutionaryin this society because it takes place in opposition to Adults should not be surprisedif the issue of adoptionneeds to the ideas that parents, especially mothers, should be the only be discussed again with childrenas they enteradolescenceand as childrearers . . . This kind of shared responsibility for child they gain new cognitive skills and more abstractways of thinking care can happenin small communitysettingswhere people know aboutthe world and theirrelationships. and trustone another.It cannothappenin those settingsif parents It shouldbe remembered thatnot all stepparents our study in regardchildrenas theirproperty,theirpossession"(p. 144). thought about adoptionas the only way to solidify relationships Although parentsare unlikely to say that their children are with stepchildren,nor did all of them conceive of nuclearfamily pieces of property,theirparentingbehavioroften reflects such an models as the benchmark.For example, in several of the step- assumption (Hill Collins, 1990). For example, parents seem to families in which nonresidential parents were quite active in have the right to discipline their childrenas they see fit, even if childrearing, stepfathers had spent a lot of time working on that discipline is abusive. Hill Collins likens this to the developing a special relationshipwith their stepchildren.Adop- widespreadassumptionthatpropertyowners may dispose of their tion was not an option for these men, yet they had found satisfy- propertywithout consulting members of the larger community. ing ways to be close and connectedto their stepchildren.In sev- African Americans challenge the notion of children as property eral of the stepfamilies we interviewed,children participatedin when the African American community assigns othermothers the marriageceremonyof the parentand stepparent received and and other nonparents rights and responsibilitiesof parenting. the some symbol of their joining with the adults in creating a new This notion of Black women as othermothers has allowed family unit, such as a ring or a pin. Practitioners could assist step- AfricanAmericanwomen to treatbiologically unrelatedchildren family members in modeling themselves after stepfamilies who as if they were membersof theirown family. have thoughtof creativeways of being a stepfamily. The assumptionsof some of the stepparents our study that in adoptingtheir stepchildrenwould bring the family closer seems Implications for Social Policy to be related somewhat to the model of "child as property."In Pertaining to Stepfamily Adoption fact, reflecting the notion of ownership,one child indicatedthat In light of the findings from this study,it may be appropriate she wished to be adopted"becausethen I would be his." Allow- to develop social policy thatallows for the establishmentof some ing stepmothersand stepfathersto serve the role of othermother legal ties between the stepparent and stepchild without relin- would requireus to think of family boundariesas transcending quishing the biological parent's legal ties. The currentstate of the household and would provide status and a legitimaterole for law regardingadoption supportsan implicit policy that children stepparents.As it stands, the stepparentand the nonresidential shall have no more thantwo parentsat a time. This policy creates parentoften end up in competitionover who will own the proper- problems for stepfamilies, and makes adoption a necessity if ty (i.e., the child). The one who has legal rights is the owner, and stepparents want to have a legal say in their stepchildren'slives, the only way a stepparentcan gain legal rights is to adopt the yet mandatingthat a parent must sever her or his relationship stepchild. with children. Some social critics have suggested that states be We have identified two models for families that do not re- allowed to create incompleteadoptions,which would allow non- strictchildrenand families to two responsibleparentfigures, one residentialparentsand theirkin the legal rightto continueto visit from adoptivefamilies and one from AfricanAmericanfamilies. and have relationships with children who are adopted by their There are othermodels, and family life educatorsand otherfami- stepparents (Mahoney, 1994). Seen as an approach thatwould ac- ly practitionerscould aid stepfamilies by teaching them about commodate more people's needs, this method would legally these adaptivemodels of family life. allow three or more adultsto be involved in the lives of children whom they are helping to raise. Nonresidentialparentsand step- Stepparents and stepchildrenappearedto be more motivated parentscould be given legal recognitionthatthey have an interest to consider adoption than biological parentsbecause they were in the well-being of childrenwho do not live with them all of the concerned about solidifying their relationships and reducing time but whom they may financially help to supportand whom some of the ambiguitiesof stepfamilyliving. Practitioners could they may see periodically. help stepfamily members by assisting them in thinking about other ways of feeling more connected to each other. Many, per- Althoughnot designed with the stepfamilyin mind, a system haps most, stepparents not able to determineways to develop are recently implementedin Great Britain, England's ChildrenAct close steprelationships that are not identical to parentalrelation- 1989, which took effect in 1991, established a new concept in ships (Ganong& Coleman, 1994). They need help in thinkingof English law: parentalresponsibility.This Act regardschildrenas creative ways to establish emotionally satisfying steprelation- their parents'responsibilitybut eliminatesthe notion of children ships. as their parents' property.In effect, this law ends the notion of In workingwith stepfamilieswhose adultsare seriouslycon- custody in the law (Fine, in press). The ChildrenAct 1989 pro- vides an opportunityfor stepparentswho have been marriedto sidering adoption, legal and helping professionals should make the child's parentfor at least two years to have a legal relation- efforts to explore the meanings stepfamily members attach to ship with their stepchildrenby petitioningthe court for a "resi- adoptionand the expectationsstepfamily membershave regard- dence order."Such a petitioncan be grantedeven over the objec- ing the effects they think adoption will have on their relation- tions of the nonresidentialparent, althoughthe children's opin- ships. It would be wise for practitioners make sure that chil- to ions must be heard (Masson, 1992), and it gives the petitioning dren understandas completely as possible what adoption is, in- adult many of the same rights and responsibilitiesas the child's cluding legal, social, and interpersonal dimensions.We also urge biological parents.For example,establishinga residenceorderal- family professionalsto caution stepfamily adults that children's lows the stepparentto have the legal right to sign permission 1998, Vol. 47, No. 1 69
  • 9. forms for school or healthcare when the stepchildis in his or her Because enhancingthe well-being of childrenis one of the home or residence. Under this act the stepparent also be ap- can primary goals of adoption, research on stepparent adoption pointed guardian,which helps secure the stepparent's position in should focus on childrenin particular. instance,what are the For the event of the parent'sdeathif the parentholds a sole residence effects on childrenof adoptionsthat occur when the nonresiden- order. tial parenthas voluntarilyyielded parentalrights, as comparedto Although a residence order gives parentalresponsibilityto adoptionswhen the parenthas had to be declaredunfit? How do the petitioner(e.g., the stepparent),it does not end the nonresi- childrencope with identity issues that may arise? By what psy- dentialparent'sstatusand responsibility.In the case of stepparent chological or interpersonalmechanisms do they cope with the petitioners,the child may end up with a legal relationshipwith parent"giving them"to the stepparent? Researchersshould also three or four adults,includingboth parentsand stepparents, of all examine children's understandingsof the concept of adoption, whom will have both parentalresponsibilitiesand obligations to paying special attention to developmental changes that may the child. As a result of the British ChildrenAct 1989, Masson occur. (1992) assertedthat adoptionordersin favor of parentsand step- Finally, it would be interestingto comparethe impactof dif- parentswill likely become rare,and any stepparent seeking adop- ferences in state laws regardingstepparentadoption.For exam- tion during the lifetime of the child's other parentwill need to ple, is stepparent adoptionawardedmore often in states in which have exceptionally strong reasons for the order and be able to nonresidentialparentscan legally continue to see their children demonstrate adoptionis in the best interestsof the child. that afterthey give up theirparentalrights?Are stepparents moti- less The British ChildrenAct 1989 appearsto be a step towards vated to adopt when state laws allow them the possibility of re- legally establishingsocial positions for stepparents, as other- just ceiving visitation rights with their stepchildrenif the marriage mothersare socially recognizedin the AfricanAmericancommu- ends? Cross-nationalcomparisons of stepparentadoption laws nity. At the very least, it is a step away from consideringchildren could also elucidate the effects of legal options on individuals to be the propertyof theirbirthparentsand a step towardsbroad- and families. ening the notion of family, family rights,and family responsibili- ties. In England it is not yet clear whetheror not the concept of Conclusion parentalresponsibility, the legal position of guardians,and the proposed residence order will meet the stepfamily's emotional Because the numberof people involved in stepfamiliescon- need to be a legal family entity (De'Ath, 1992). tinues to rise, it is vitally important that social and legal supports be developed to foster their success. Although researchersand These two policy proposals, the idea of incomplete adop- clinicianshave often repeatedthe warningthatthe nuclearfamily tions and the British Children Act of generalized parental re- model may be inappropriate, they have seldom offered concrete sponsibility,move closer to the role-making situationsin which alternatives,and the nuclear family model remains the societal many stepparents and stepchildrenfind themselves. These policy ideal. It is the family form that is viewed as "normal." is little It ideas representsocietal-level efforts to createnew normsfor step wonderthat so many of the stepfamilymemberswe interviewed roles and to legitimize, at least in some ways, stepfamily roles considered adoption. Adoption is a legal means of establishing that lack clear, institutionalized norms.These two policy propos- the stepfamilyas a "normal" family. als also allow more flexibility to allow stepfamily members to creativelyconstructnew roles. To illustratethe extent to which adoptionis used as a mecha- nism to create a nuclearfamily, in our state at the time of adop- Implications for Future Research tion the child's birth certificate is altered to show the adoptive parent as the birth parent. In that way the adoptive parent be- Obviously,the resultsof this exploratorystudy shouldnot be comes a real or "normal" parent(i.e., the child "belongs"to him generalized without caution. Much more research on stepchild or her). The sense that everyone in a stepfamily "belongs" to adoption is needed. The responses from these stepfamily mem- each other may be what some members of the stepfamilies we bers suggest several avenues of investigation.First,because little studied were seeking. Therefore,it is not surprisingthat it was is known about the extent of stepchildadoptions,there is a need most often the stepparentwho mentionedconsidering adoption. for large-scale studies of representativesamplesthatwill provide The stepparent is the outsider in a stepfamily, the intimate descriptionsof adoptivestepparents theirfamilies. Currently, and stranger(Beer, 1988); to a stepparent,adoption may seem like it is impossible to say how many stepchildadoptionsoccur annu- the most efficient way to become a real partof the family. ally, and we cannot predict who is likely to adopt until we have demographicprofiles of stepfamiliesin which stepchildrenhave At the societal level, efforts are needed to broadenthe defini- been adopted. tion of family (Scanzoni & Marsiglio, 1993). For example, among family scholarsand social critics, feminists have long at- There is clearly a need for longitudinalinvestigationsof the temptedto disabusepeople of the traditional notion that wife and effects of stepchild adoption. Outcome variables could include childrenare chattelor men's property.Otherfamily scholarsmay intrapersonaleffects of adoption (e.g., well-being, depression, want to build on the feminists' efforts to challenge the notion that self-esteem, life satisfaction) on adoptive stepparents,adopted childrenare parents'property.Policy makersand legislatorsneed stepchildren, residential and nonresidential biological parents, to look at family law more creatively as well and develop legal and extended kin. Interpersonal outcome variables,such as rela- alternatives that strengthen stepfamilies without requiring the tionship satisfaction, emotional closeness, and family stability, severing of previousfamily ties. Changeis often disorientingand should also be assessed. Longitudinal studies of both adoptive upsetting to individuals and to the broader society. Family and nonadoptivestepfamilieswould shed light on whetheror not change, however, has been occurringat a rapidpace throughout adoptionfulfilled the expectationsof it thatwere embodiedin the the century, and we are challenged with providing supportive presentsample. means to strengthen these emergingfamily forms. 70 Family Relations
  • 10. References Hill Collins, P. (1990). Blackfeminist thought.New York, NY: Routledge. hooks, b. (1984). From margin to center. Boston, MA: SouthEnd Press. Beer, W. (1988). Relative strangers: Studies of stepfamilyprocesses. Totowa, Kaplan, L., & Hennon, C. (1992). Remarriageeducation: The personal reflec- NJ: Littlefield,Adams, & Co. tions program.Family Relations,41, 127-134. Brodzinsky,D. M., Singer, L., & Braff, A. M. (1984). Children'sunderstanding Keshet, J. (1990). Cognitive remodeling of the family: How remarriedpeople of adoption.Child Development,55, 869-878. view stepfamilies.AmericanJournal of Orthopsychiatry, 196-203. 60, Buehlman,K. T., Gottman,J. M., & Katz, J. F. (1992). How a couple views their Kirk, H. D. (1981). Adoptive kinship: A modern institution in need of reform. past predicts their future: Predictingdivorce from an oral history interview. Toronto,Canada:Butterworths. Journal of Family Psychology, 5, 295-318. Kirk,H. D. (1964). Sharedfate. New York, NY: Free Press. Cherlin, A. (1978). Remarriageas an incomplete institution.American Journal Levine, E. S., & Sallee, A. L. (1990). Criticalphases among adoptees and their of Sociology, 84, 634-650. families: Implicationsfor therapy.Child and Adolescent Social Work,7, 217- Coale Lewis, H. C. (1985). Family therapywith stepfamilies.Journal of Strate- 232. gic and SystemicTherapies,4, 13-23. Mahoney,M. M. (1994). Stepfamiliesand the law. Ann Arbor,MI: Universityof Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. (1987). The culturalstereotypingof stepfamilies.In Michigan Press. K. Pasley & M. Ihinger-Tallman (Eds.), Remarriageand stepparentingtoday: Masson, J. (1992). Steppingin the nineties: A summaryof the legal implications Currentresearchand theory(pp. 19-41). New York: Guilford. of the ChildrenAct of 1989 for stepfamilies. In B. Dimmock (Ed.), A step in Colon, F. (1978). Family ties and child placement.Family Process, 17, 289-312. both directions (pp. 4-16). London,UK: National StepfamilyAssociation. Crosbie-Burnett, & Lewis, E. (1993). Use of African-American M., family struc- Mills, D. (1984). A model for stepfamily development. Family Relations, 33, tures and functioningto addressthe challenges of European-American postdi- 365-372. vorce families. Family Relations,42, 243-248. Papernow,P. (1993). Becoming a stepfamily:Patterns of developmentin remar- Dainton, M. (1993). The myths and misconceptions of the stepmotheridentity: riedfamilies. Cleveland,OH: Gardner. Descriptionsand prescriptionsfor impressionmanagement.Family Relations, Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury 42, 93-98. Park,CA: Sage. Dallos, R. (1991). Family belief systems, therapy,and change. Philadelphia,PA: Reitz, M., & Watson, K. (1992). Adoption and the family system. New York: Open University Press. Guilford. Daly, K. (1988). Reshaped parenthoodidentity: The transitionto adoptive par- Scanzoni, J., & Marsiglio, W. (1993). New Action Theory and contemporary enthood.Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,17, 40-66. families. Journal of Family Issues, 14, 105-132. De'Ath, E. (1992). Facts, figures, and the stepfamily:Are there more questions Troester,R. R. (1984). Turbulenceand tenderness:Mothers,daughters,and 'oth- than answers in the ChildrenAct of 1989? In B. Dimmock (Ed.), A step in ermothers'.In P. Marshall(Ed.), Brown girl, brownstones:A scholarlyjour- both directions (pp. 27-31). London,UK: National StepfamilyAssociation. nal on black women.NewburyPark,CA: Sage. Duran-Aydintug, & Ihinger-Tallman, (1995). Law and stepfamilies.Mar- C., M. United States Bureauof the Census. (1992). Marriage, divorce, and remarriage riage and Family Review,21, 169-192. in the 1990s (Current PopulationReports,pp. 23-180). Washington,DC: U.S. Fine, M. (in press). Policies affecting stepfamilies:Guidancefrom the empirical GovernmentPrintingOffice. literature.Marriageand Family Review. Visher, E. B., & Visher, J. S. (1979). Stepfamilies:A guide to workingwith step- Fine, M. (1989). A social science perspectiveon stepfamilylaw: Suggestions for parents and stepchildren.New York:Brunner/Mazel. legal reform.Family Relations,41, 334-340. Visher, E. B., & Visher, J. S. (1988). Old loyalties, new ties: Therapeuticstrate- Fine, M. (1986). Perceptionsof stepparents: Variationsin stereotypesas a func- gies with stepfamilies.New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel. tion of currentfamily structure. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 537- Visher, E. B., & Visher, J. S. (1996). Therapywith stepfamilies.New York, NY: 543. Brunner/Mazel. Ganong, L., & Coleman, M. (1994). Remarriedfamily relationships. Newbury Watson, K. (1996). Family-centeredadoption practice. Families in Society, 77, Park,CA: Sage. 523-534. Ganong, L., & Coleman, M. (in press). How society views stepfamilies. Mar- Wolf, P. A., & Mast, E. (1987). Counseling issues in adoptionsby stepparents. riage and Family Review. Social Work,32, 69-74. Ganong, L., Coleman, M., & Mapes, D. (1990). A meta-analyticreview of fami- ly structurestereotypes.Journalof Marriage and the Family, 52, 287-297. Received 5-6-97 Goldner, V. (1982). Remarriage family: Structure, system, future. In J. C. Revised & Resubmitted8-12-97 Hansen & L. Messenger (Eds.), Therapywith remarriedfamilies (pp. 187- Accepted 11-1-97 206). Rockville, MD: Aspen. | Access organizations, practitioners, professors, &students interested in familyissues! Rent the Family Relations subscriber mailing list for only $110 per thousand names rS Ihl ContactKathyRoyce toll free at 888-781-9331, ext. 21 E 612-781-9331, ext. 21 NCFR * Fax: 612-781-9348 * E-mail:kcroyce@ncfr.com 1998, Vol. 47, No. 1 71

×