FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 1

An Overview of Family Development

Jade A. Enrique, Heather R. Howk, and William G. Huitt

Citation: Enrique, J., Howk, H., & Huitt, W. (2007). An overview of family development.
Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date],
from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/family.pdf

The family is the smallest unit of a society and, therefore, critical to its development and
maintenance. There are four major issues in the development of a family: mate selection,
spousal relationships, parenting, and change. This paper reviews the literature regarding the
importance and current state of the family, the four major issues related to family development,
and some activities that educators and parents can implement in order to prepare children and
youth for family responsibilities. The paper also discusses ways to measure student’s successful
development in these areas.

Despite the historic centrality of the nuclear family unit (mother, father, first-born), there
are several definitions of family. According to the Population Reference Bureau (2000), “Family
can be a group of people held together by birth, marriage, or adoption or by common residence
or close emotional attachment. Families may include persons who claim decent from common
ancestors in a lineage, a tribe or a clan” (para. 12). Although marriage often signifies the
creation of a family, unofficial joining together endorsed neither by church nor state, are quite
commonplace.
According to Ooms (as cited in Patterson, 2002), families serve several important
functions for society. Some of these functions are: family formation and membership, economic
support, nurturance and socialization, and protection of vulnerable members. However, Levine
(as cited in Shaffer, 2000) states that the three basic goals that families have for their children
are: survival, economic self-sufficiency, and self-actualization. These three goals are symbolic
of various cultures. This shows that although there are several differences in the types of
families in the world, they have certain things in common. It is the job of educators to examine
the characteristics of families in order to foster most advantageous development in the children
they serve (Christian, 2006).

A Changing World

The family system is a basic unit of society that has evolved along with changes in the
needs and demands of the individuals and society (Kozlowska &Hanney, 2002). As the smallest
social unit of society, the family has been instrumental to the development of cultures and
nations. The extended family was the first social unit in the nomadic hunter/gatherer age and
grew into families within tribes. The agricultural age somewhat modified the social organization
(Bianchi and Casper, 2000), but what did not change until the industrial revolution was the clear
connection of children and parents to a larger unit of tribes or clans. The industrial age in
western society and modernity brought a decreased connection with the extended family in many
cultures. An increased responsibility on the husband to generate income as a worker outside of
family unit became the norm (Toffler & Toffler, 1995). In recent decades, women have joined
the workforce in record numbers, putting increased pressure on both adults to provide the
economic resources for the family.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 2

In advanced industrialized societies, the fate of the nuclear family is of concern to many
researchers, government officials, and citizens. Commentators ask if the family is falling apart
or merely evolving into a new form (Wrigley, 2004). Indicators of family disequilibrium, such
as divorces and the number of children being raised in single-parent families, are rising
alarmingly. A discussion of preparing children and youth for the establishment and maintenance
of a family cannot avoid these issues. Instead, relevant literature must be surveyed to clarify the
issues and provide insights on how they may best be addressed.
Certainly the family has been the primary social institution for the raising of children.
These children need love, support, nurturing, and discipline. In traditional westernized nations,
this was thought to be best provided in a two-parent married family existing within an extended
family structure (Bianchi and Casper, 2000). The two-parent nuclear family then became the
prototype with the woman leaving her relatively low-paying job she got after (or before)
finishing high school and taking care of children. She did this while her husband held a steady
job that paid enough to support the entire family. Popularized as the American 1950’s-style
traditional family, around 75% of school-aged children had a parent at home full time. Family
structures of this type had to support distinct gender roles and the economy had to be vibrant
enough for a man to financially support a family on his own. Government policies and business
practices supported this family type by reserving the best jobs for men and discriminating against
working women when they married or had a baby.
In the United States, the 1960’s civil rights and feminist movements resulted in a
transformation in attitudes towards family behaviors (Evans, 2004). People became more
accepting of divorce, cohabitation, and sex outside of marriage and less sure about the
permanence of marriage. They became more tolerant of blurred gender roles, of a mother
working outside of the home, and a variety of living arrangements and life styles. The
transformation of these attitudes accelerated in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Consequently, the
percentage of children with a full-time parent at home dropped somewhat in the late 1970 to
around 57% and is now only around 25%.
A new ideology emerged during these years that stressed personal freedom, self-
fulfillment, and individual choice in living arrangements and family commitments. Young
people began to wait until their mid- to late-twenties to marry. They began to expect more out of
marriage and to leave bad marriages if their expectations were not fulfilled.
The changes in norms and expectations about marriage may have followed rather than
preceded increases in divorce and delays in marriage; however, such cultural changes have
important feedback effects, leading to later marriage and higher divorce rates. Currently, the
chances of a first marriage ending are at a high rate--40% to 50%--with the rate increasing to
50% to 60% for second marriages. When cohabitation occurs, as is often the case, the rate of
breaking up increases (Evans, 2004).
Evans (2004) reported that, “of the seventy-three million children under the age of
eighteen, about twenty million live in single-parent families, and perhaps as many as nine million
in stepfamilies. Each year, an additional one million children experience their parents’ divorce
and another million plus are born out of wedlock” (p. 61). More than 25% of all families with
children are headed by single parents; the majority by mothers. The difficulty of father absence
has been well documented, both in variety and degree of harmful outcomes (Children, Youth &
Family Consortium, 2004). For example, father absence is connected with a high rate of school
dropouts of teenagers, early sexually activity and teen pregnancy, and juvenile delinquency.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 3

The remainder of this paper will focus on more specific issues surrounding the creation
and maintenance of families. Suggestions will also be made as to what educators can do to
promote family development. Additionally, measurement issues will also be briefly discussed.

Issues Surrounding Family Creation and Maintenance

There are at least four major issues that must be addressed as parents, educators, and
communities prepare children and youth for the responsibilities of creating and maintaining their
own families as responsible, successful adults. These are 1) mate selection, 2) spousal
relationships, 3) parenting and 4) changing family patterns.

Mate Selection

Selecting a mate has traditionally been influenced by a variety of variables related to

propinquity (the property of being close together) and homogamy (similarity of important
qualities or characteristics). While propinquity is still an important factor, it has been mitigated
through geographical and social mobility and increasing use of the Internet. Mobility in post-
industrialized countries, resulting from access to the means of acquiring wealth and the lessoning
of restrictions of movement, is a central feature of a post-modern society (Birdsall & Graham,
1999). In the last decade, the use of the Internet has become increasingly popular as a means to
meet socially and interact with other humans without leaving the home or office (Cioffi, 2003).
However, there are several weaknesses of online interactions of which young people need
to be aware. First, people are unable to fully express themselves. Nonverbal cues such as body
language, facial expression, and pitch or tone of voice, are absent from online interactions. A
second disadvantage is the rhythms of impressions are slower and choppier than face-to-face
interactions. Delays of a few seconds may convey false hesitation or disinterest. Even those
people who meet via the Internet will normally meet face-to-face in order to overcome these
disadvantages (Cioffi, 2003). The success rates of these services seem to be fairly low; still
people are encouraged to use them due to the speedy access to a high number of potential dates.
Being nice and showing respect have been the two most common ways of starting to create a real
relationship in person (Brehm, Miller, Perlman, & Campbell, 2002).
The most important components of homogamy include attractiveness, age, race, religion,
and socioeconomic status. There are some differences between men and women: men more
value physical attractiveness while women more value instrumental qualities related to earning
power (Coombs & Kenkel, 1966; Rubin, 1973). This difference has been reduced somewhat by
the feminist movement, with women becoming more involved in the financial success of the
family. The result is that men are placing more value on instrumental qualities of their mates.
While some information is available about attraction, much of the new information
discusses additional factors, including similarities in attitudes, values, and personality as well as
differences between the sexes. Though physical attractiveness is important, issues of moral
character, personality, self-esteem, and self-preservation are also factored into the assessment of
attractiveness.
The old saying that ‘opposites attract’ still rings true for many teenagers and young
adults. Responsible individuals might easily connect with others more free- spirited and
spontaneous. An active, take-charge person could understandably fall in love with a more
accommodating, respectful, even bashful partner. Those from more chaotic, unpredictable
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 4

backgrounds seem almost magnetically drawn to those who appear to hail from more stable,
“Leave-it-to- Beaver” families (Bianchi & Casper, 2000).
In addition to attractiveness, Grammer (1989) suggested another important factor for both
men and women in mate selection is social distance, defined as the degree of similarity or
difference between two people in terms of social status. For females, high status males are seen
as better protectors and providers. Females also tend to exhibit higher aspirations in mate
choice. Other factors are individually motivated or related to high self-esteem. Males with high
self-esteem tend to seek out females of high physical attractiveness. When a person takes into
account both attractiveness and social distance, the likelihood of ending up with a compatible
partner is higher.
Unfortunately, many teenagers are pessimistic about the possibly of having a stable, two-
parent home for their children and increasingly do not think that their marriage will last a
lifetime (Whitehead and Popenoe, 2000). At the same time, many teenagers and young adults
have become more open-minded of out-of-wedlock childbearing, single-parent childbearing and
non-marital cohabitation.
Because differences between people seem to grow stronger and more disruptive as years
pass, it is critically important to strive to understand and truly value a potential spouse's
uniqueness and the ways that he or she thinks, feels, and experiences life events (Grammer
1989). By so doing one begins to recognize that interpersonal differences can enhance the
relationship rather than becoming sources of conflict or pain. Parents and educators can assist
children and youth to prepare for marriage by providing them with experiences that allow the
construction of a clear sense of self-identity and interpersonal security while at the same time
learning to appreciate those who have a different set of strengths and weaknesses.

Spousal Relationships

There are two major theories related to improving spousal relationships. One view is
represented by Markman and Stanley (Markman, Stanley & Blumberg, 1996; Stanley, 2001).
They propose that the key to good spousal relationships is communication and conflict
resolution. Gottman and his colleagues disagree (Gottman, 1995; Gottman & Silver, 1999).
They suggest it is establishing and maintaining a foundation of friendship and reducing the
amount of criticism, defensiveness, contempt, and stonewalling. Using one of the theories
separately, or using them in combination, researchers have developed some fairly accurate
predictors of whether or not a marriage will succeed or fail.
Markman and Stanley. Markman et al. (1996) proposed that while communication and
conflict resolution skills are important, communicating openly and honestly is often a tough task,
especially in those relationships that are most important. Ironically, it is often with the people
we care the most about, like spouses, parents, and good friends that we have the hardest time
communicating clearly. In these important relationships, it is critical that each person clearly
articulate what he or she wants to say, and what emotions are being experienced. If a person
does not know what the other wants and/or feels, then it is difficult to know how to respond. By
accurately communicating feelings and desires, not only does the listener know exactly where
the other stands, is also able to facilitate being heard and understood, which sometimes is the
most important part of communicating. Feeling better about the situation may be as simple as
feeling that the other person understands one’s position.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 5

Markman et al. (1996) suggested that one of the most effective ways to own one’s
feelings and desires is to utilize "I-statements" in communications with other people. This
relatively powerful strategy involves making statements like "I feel" and "I want" as opposed to
"you-statements". When each person states his or her feelings and wants in terms of "I-
statements", each is taking responsibility for one’s own feelings and desires and sharing this with
the communication partner. Each person is not blaming or trying to discern what the other wants
or feels; each is simply explaining one’s inner experiences and requests.
Although making "I-statements" is a relatively straight-forward way to improve
communication, it takes some practice. It is easy to mistakenly blame the other person in a
disguised I-statement by saying something like "I feel that you are a big jerk". This is not an I-
statement, because it is blaming the other person, and does not take responsibility for one’s own
feelings. This message can be improved by saying "I feel badly when you…” which will likely
avoid defensiveness and hostility on the part of the other person (Markman, Stanley, &
Blumberg, 1996).
In order to help people communicate more effectively, practitioners have developed a
formula for good communication statements that clearly state one's own feelings and wants.
This formula often helps individuals when first starting to work on communication, especially
when attempting to make sure that one properly owns one’s feelings (Markman, Stanley, &
Blumberg, 1996). The formula is: (1) "When you…", (2) "I feel…", and (3) "I want…"
The "When you…" component involves stating a specific, behavioral description of the
situation that the partner wants to talk about. It is important that the partner presents the issue in
a specific, behavioral description and makes an effort not to be judgmental or blaming.
Examples of this piece of the statement might be "When you don't take out the garbage" or
"When you walk away while I'm talking". Only one issue should be brought up at a time and the
statement should be concrete and specific.
The "I feel" statement needs to be a description of the emotions that one is experiencing
as a result of the situation or issue. Each partner should state his or her feelings about the issue
and explain to the other person how it is affecting them internally. Examples include "I feel
angry and humiliated" or "I feel frustrated". Both people should share their feelings and reveal
to the other person exactly what they are experiencing. Sometimes this will be difficult and may
have feelings of vulnerability as a result of disclosing their inner state, but it is a critical
component of communicating effectively and developing close relationships.
"I want" involves identifying exactly what the partner wants to occur in the particular
situation. Again, it is important to be specific, and identify what, behaviorally, each person
wants to happen. It is best if vague terms like "supportive" and "loving" is not used, as
sometimes the other person may not know what this means. Instead, state specifically what
behaviors would signify that the other is being "supportive" or "loving" (Markman et al., 1996).
Being clear helps the listening person to know exactly what it is that wanted.
Gottman. In contrast, Gottman (1995) stated that there are the three types of potentially
satisfying marriage patterns: volatile, validating, and avoidant. Volatile couples are very
emotionally expressive and remain so throughout their partnership. They are very passionate,
showing both positive and negative emotions. This couple is very open, honest, and engaging
with each other. They often feel like they are a team fighting against outsiders. They fight but
continually work to renew the relationship if feelings are hurt. Validating couples are moderate
on their emotional expressiveness and only believe in communicating these at the right times
about major issues. They are friends and believe in togetherness. Avoidant couples are low-key
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 6

and tempered. They agree to disagree and often minimize the importance of problems (Gottman,
& Silver,1999).
For Gottman and his colleagues (Gottman, & Silver,1999; Gottman, & DeClare, 2001),
good communication and successful conflict resolution are neither central nor required for a
successful marriage. Rather it depends on each partner’s satisfaction, even if to outsiders it
seems as if there is significant conflict. Each pattern has its drawbacks, but couples
demonstrating these patterns are unlikely to divorce (Gottman, 1995). He discovered a ratio of
positive to negative interactions that predict successful marriages: couples need five positive
interactions for every one that is less than positive (i.e., a ratio of 5:1; Gottman, Murray,
Swanson, Tyson, & Swanson, 2002). Gottman likens developing a sound marital relationship to
plant growth: both need a proper environment within which to grow. These researchers add
several other factors that marriages need to survive in a satisfying fashion: good moments of
mutual pleasure, passion, humor, support, kindness, and generosity to outweigh the bad moments
of the marriage.
One of the predictors of divorce used by Gottman and colleagues (Gottman, 1995;
Gottman, & DeClare, 2001) is a couples’ differing conflict resolution styles. If the individuals
have varying conflict resolution styles then they may not do well. For example, if a volatile
person marries an avoider then the couple would have a difficult time negotiating a common
style of conflict resolution. Their frustration level would grow so high that the relationship
would be unstable and unpleasant.
Similarities of Markman et al. and Gottman. Both Markman et al. (1996) and Gottman
(1995) proposed four destructive qualities that are negative patterns in marriage that quickly
overpower the magic ratio. Relationships with an ingrained pattern of any of these negative
behaviors can be considered toxic. However, the presence of these negative patterns does not
necessarily indicate that the relationship is doomed but they do mean that work is needed.
Markman et al.’s (1996) four patterns that hurt relationships are: escalation, invalidation,
withdrawal and avoidance, and negative interpretations. Escalation is a process of one-up-
manship. Each reply in anger increases the stake so the conditions become worse with each
round. Couples who are in stable and successful relationships are typically able to nip escalation
and end it. Those in tenuous relationships typically are not able to catch the escalation in time.
The difficulty with escalation is while each person is attacking the other with verbal weapons,
couples often damage their relationship in a way that greatly reduces recovery. If a couple’s
fight escalates too far then it can verge on the side of becoming dangerous. Markman et al.
compare the tactics used by escalation to being equal to marital terrorism.
The second pattern that hurts relationships according to Markman et al. (1996) is
invalidation. This is seen as a pattern of put-downs, either subtle or direct in nature. Invalidation
is scornful in a relationship because of the belligerence and disdain that are reflected. This is
also seen as an attack on a partner’s character and is never seen as healthy. A subtle form of
invalidation is holding back on due and expected praise, which can be made worse by injecting
criticism where praise is due. According to Markman et al. (1996), “invalidation is one of the
strongest predictors of divorce” (p. 30).
The third area that Markman et al. (1996) discuss is withdrawal and avoidance. These
are two different ways in which people seek to ignore or get out of important discussions.
Withdrawal can be physical or less obvious (such as getting quite or shutting down). Avoidance
has the same goal, but the emphasis is on preventing the discussion from ever happening in the
first place. It is noted that, “the common pattern of one person pursuing in a relationship, while
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 7

the other withdrawals is very destructive” (p. 34). Again, an imbedded pattern of withdrawal or
avoidance is one of the most powerful predictors of divorce.
The last pattern that hurt relationships is negative interpretations. This is when an
individual or both consistently hold to the belief that the motives of their partner are more
negative than is truly the case. These are erroneous interpretations in a negative path. Rarely
will one of these patterns exist without some of the others. Battling negative interpretations does
not just mean engaging in positive thinking, but it is a matter of choice. A couple is able to view
things openly, or at least in the light they are intended, or they can choose to interpret in a way
that will destroy the relationship.
Gottman and Silver (1999) described four destructive qualities that quickly overpower
the 5:1 magic ratio as the four horsemen of the apocalypse: criticism, contempt, defensiveness,
and stonewalling. Criticism is attacking someone’s personality or character, rather than a
specific behavior and usually with blame. Each marriage is involved with some criticism;
however, it is when the criticism becomes a pattern that it often speaks of disaster. Criticism is
just a step across the line from one of the healthiest things that couples do engage in—
complaining. The difference between a complaint and criticism is that a complaint is usually
specific and stated for a position while criticism is usually more global, is other focused, and
involves blame. One strategy to overcome this is for both to effectively use “I” messages
(Markman et al., 1996)
The second destructive quality is contempt. Contempt is a step up from criticism and
involves the goal to insult and psychologically abuse your partner. A few of the general signs
are aggressive humor, ridicule, and body language. Couples who engage in contempt need to
stop using arguments to retaliate or show superiority.
The third of Gottman and Silver’s (1999) destructive qualities is defensiveness.
Adopting a defensive stance is often a natural response, but it only adds to the problem in
marriage. Everyone needs to become more aware of his or her defense mechanisms in order to
overcome this destructive pattern. An example would be, “denying responsibility; making
excuses; cross-complaining (I will meet that complaint and even up it with my retort); yes-
butting; whining; and repeating oneself (over and over.)” (Gottman, 1995, p. 41). A first step for
overcoming this pattern is to see this pattern in oneself. A second step would be working on
becoming less defensive in order to actually listen to what their partner is saying to them.
The last area that Gottman and Silver (1999) discuss as a destructive quality is
stonewalling. This is very similar to withdrawal and avoidance, but the difference is that
stonewalling is a refusal to respond. When used on an occasional basis, it can actually be
healthy. However, if used as a typical pattern, it is destructive. According to Gottman (1995),
this message of stonewalling sends a clear message of, “I am disengaging from any meaningful
communication with you” (p. 45).
Helping children and youth to develop the strategies for developing friendships,
communicating, and resolving conflicts are important for developing and maintaining intimate
relationships. Teaching these strategies to school-age children will assist them to appropriately
solve conflicts in school and will help reduce conflicts later in life, especially in marriage and
friendships.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 8

Parenting

Parenting is a complex activity that includes many specific behaviors that work
individually and together to influence a child’s outcome. Although specific parenting behaviors,
such as spanking or reading a book out loud to a child, may influence the child’s development,
looking at specific behavior in isolation may be misleading. The construct of parenting style is
used to capture normal variations in parents’ attempt to control and socialize their children
(Baumrind, 1991). These different parenting behaviors create and shape a child’s emotional
sense of well being. There are two points that are critical in understanding this definition. The
first is that the discussion of parenting styles is meant to describe normal variations in parenting.
This does not include those homes with deviant parenting, such as might be observed in abusive
or neglectful homes. The second point is that parenting often revolves around issues of control.
Although parents may differ in how they try to control their children or socialize them, it is
understood that the crucial role of the parent is to influence, teach, and control their children.
There are four primary strategies used in parenting: authoritarian, permissive,
uninvolved, and authoritative (Baumrind, 1991). These categories are also discussed in terms of
the effectiveness of communities (Commission on Children At Risk, 2003), schools (Gill,
Ashton & Algina, 2004), and teaching practices (Snowman & Biehler, 2006). Each of these
parenting strategies reflects different naturally occurring patterns of parental values, practices,
and behaviors with the most effective being an authoritative style.
Baumrind (1991) explains that authoritarian parents “are obedience- and status-oriented,
and expect their orders to be obeyed without explanation” (p. 62). These parents are well-
ordered with clearly stated rules and structured environments. There are two types of
authoritarian parents: nonauthoritarian-directive, who are directive, but not intrusive in their
power, and authoritarian-directive, who are highly intrusive.
Permissive parents are “more responsive than they are demanding. They are
nontraditional and lenient, do not require mature behavior, allow considerable self-regulation,
and avoid confrontation” (Baumrind, 1991, p. 62). These types of parents may also be divided
into two types: democratic parents, who, though lenient, are more conscientious, engaged, and
committed to the child and nondirective parents, who are less likely to be involved in their
children’s lives.
Macoby and Martin (as cited in Shaffer, 2000) state that uninvolved parents are the least
effective style of parenting. These parents are undemanding in their approach. They either have
rejected their children or are so involved in other activities that they do not have the time or the
strength to be involved in their children’s lives.
Alternately, the most effective parenting is established by authoritative parents. This type
of parenting is both demanding and responsive (Baumrind, 1991):

They monitor and impart clear standards for their children’s conduct. They are assertive,
but not intrusive and restrictive. Their disciplinary methods are supportive, rather than
punitive. They want their children to be assertive as well as socially responsible, and
self-regulated as well as cooperative (p. 62).

Children of authoritative parents are more self-assured and independent. They are often better
prepared to face peer pressures of adolescents and young adulthood. In a related theory, Maslow
(1954, 1971) asserts that before a person can care and nurture another, he or she must have
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 9

experienced being loved and cared for. According to Maslow, even if a child is fed, sheltered,
clothed, and kept safe, further involvement with others is still needed to build a foundation for
healthy adulthood.

Changing Family Patterns

Looking at families as human, social systems allows educators to better understand the
children and families they serve (Christian, 2006). Patterson (2002) defined a family system as
comprising of two or more individuals acting as a whole unit and the relationship patterns that
affect each part. These relationships are reciprocal and constantly evolving (Shaffer, 2002).
Family systems theory is the study of these interactions and focuses on family behavior.
Communication, interaction patterns, separateness, connectedness, loyalty, independence, and
adaptation to stress are all things that are studied as it relates to the entire family and not just to
the individuals in the family (Christian, 2006).
Fingerman and Berman (as cited in Christian, 2006), claimed this theory explains
families’ behavior in many situations. For example, a main tenet of family systems theory is that
change in any level of the family functioning can produce change in other areas (Cox, & Paley,
2003). Becvar and Becvar (1999) also suggested change can occur in cycles. Developmentally
within each of these cycles, there can be many sources of conflict and unity. This change can be
in an individual in the family, relationships, and/or the entire family (Cox & Paley, 2003). Table
1 provides an overview of the types of family life changes that typically occur in a marriage that
does not end in divorce.
However, in the modern era where multiple marriages often occur this cycle becomes
much more complicated. There have been key changes in the quality and quantity of
husband/wife and parent/child relationships during the course of the twentieth century (Ziehl,
2003). Traditional forms and concepts related to family are being loosened. Although the
traditional nuclear family still exists, more and more reconstituted families are being created and
accepted (Hunter and Schuman, 1980). Single-parent families, families of divorce, blended
families, extended families, migrant families, and gay and lesbian families are seen almost
everywhere (Christian, 2006).
Patterson (2002) stated that with all of this change within individuals, the chronic
reconstituting of and changes within the family, and the changes in society, family stability can
be undermined. In order to be more resilient, families need to achieve balance. They can do this
by achieving steadiness and mastery of these four protective mechanisms: family cohesiveness,
family flexibility, family communication, and family meanings. Cohesiveness refers to the
degree to which the family is emotionally connected and depends on each other. Flexibility
refers to the degree to which the family can vary from their patterns when an event occurs.
Family communication describes the amount and ways that a family talks openly and expresses
feelings to each other. The concept of family meanings refers to the ability of a family to
identify their identity and worldview when discovering solutions or manage challenges in their
lives. Finally, it is very important that professionals take note that balancing these concepts is
extremely important, when families want to be adaptive and adjust to change. Skills in these
areas should be identified and encouraged to promote the healthy development and resiliency of
families.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 10

Table 1. Stages of the Family Life Cycle

Stage Emotion Issues Stage Critical Terms
a. Differentiation from family of origin
1. Unattached Accepting parent-adult
b. Development of peer relations
Adult offspring relationship
c. Initiation of career
a. Formation of marital system
2. Newly Married
Commitment to marriage b. Making room for spouse with family and
Couple
friends
a. Adjusting marriage to make room
Accepting new member
3. Childbearing b. Taking on parenting roles
into the system
c. Making room for grandparents
a. Adjusting family to needs of each child
Accepting the new
4. Preschool-Age b. Coping with energy drain and lack of
personality
privacy
Allowing child to a. Extending family interactions with
5. School-Age
establish relationships society
Child
outside the family b. Encouraging educational achievement
Increasing flexibility of a. Shifting parent-child relationship to
family boundaries to balance freedom and limits
6. Teenage Youth
allow youth's b. Refocusing on mid-life career and marital
independence issues
a. Releasing young adult children into
7. Launching Accepting exits from and
work, college, marriage
Center entries into the family
b. Maintaining a supportive home base
a. Rebuilding marriage
8. Middle-Age Letting go and facing b. Realigning family to include spouses of
Parents each other again children and grandchildren
c. Dealing with aging of older generation
a. Adjusting to retirement/old age
b. Coping with death of parents and spouse
c. Closing or adapting family home
9. Retirement Accepting retirement
d. Maintaining couple and individual
functioning
e. Supporting middle generation

What Educators Can Do

In order to help families and educate children, professionals need to be aware of the
changes in families and be prepared for the accompanying physical, behavioral, and emotional
adjustments that need to be made (Christian, 2006). When educators use family systems theory,
change in boundaries, roles, rules, hierarchy, climate, and equilibrium should be seen as
important features of family life. When change occurs in any one of these six areas, it is
especially significant because it can be seen in behaviors that occur in schools. Within each
category, the change can be big or small. But due to the uniqueness of each family the change
might be displayed in different ways.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 11

Huitt (2006) recommended that in today’s society the need has grown for educators to
develop a more holistic approach when educating children. He stated that when trying to
encourage children to become successful adults in the 21st century, it is important to not only pay
attention to academic issues, but to also encourage growth in other aspects of the child’s
development. For example, developing children’s capacities in the emotional, social, and moral
character domains provides the foundation upon which to build strong marital relationships and
parenting skills. Additionally, educators should consider the need to create an effective
developmental ecology where families, the community, and the school system are involved.
There are three activities in which schools can take proactive action to prepare children
and youth for marriage and child rearing: (1) helping children to develop competency skills in
relationships, (2) helping children to learn parenting skills, and (3) providing support for families
while adjusting to change within them are three ways that professionals in education can serve
children while promoting an even and complete development.

Developing Competency Skills in Relationships

Preparing children for mate selection, successful spousal relationships, parenting, and
changing family patterns involves the development of a set of intermediate competencies such as
empathy, compassion, communication, and solving problems nonviolently. Educators should
also foster bonding in young children. These skills are essential when trying to initiate and
maintain relationships. Vessels (1998) stated that people with moral character, especially
integrity, are predisposed to: (1) show kindness and compassion with empathetic understanding;
(2) show the courage to be honest and principled irrespective of circumstances; (3) acquire a
wide range of abilities that enable them to independently resolve problems, analyze situations
where moral values and principles may be in conflict, and adapt to change in a personally and
socially constructive manner; and (4) display a high level of effort in their daily work, and a high
level of commitment to individual and group goals and standards.
Many of these skills can be and are already integrated in school lessons. However,
helping students to develop emotional awareness, empathy, and respect for diversity in a
parenting education program can also have the immediate result of creating a more cooperative
classroom environment (Schiffer, 2002). Through secure, nurturing, empathetic relationships
with caregivers, children learn how to communicate, have intimate relationships, communicate
their wants and needs, and recognize their own wishes to develop constructive relationships with
peers and other adults. They also learn to recognize the difference between appropriate and non-
appropriate behaviors which, in turn, increases their ability to focus on their academic tasks.
Teaching personal relationship skills that develop emotional literacy is crucial to both daily
interactions with family members and peers as well as virtuous parenting.
Empathy and caring are seen as traits needing to be enhanced for children to break any
patterns of child abuse, neglect or violence they may have experienced. Psychological research
indicates that many youth who commit violent crimes have not developed empathy (Schiffer,
2002). Young males, who are inundated with violent images from sports and entertainment and
not taught to express warmth and caring, are at risk for failing to feel comfortable with their
emotions, especially with showing empathy towards others. This is a factor associated with an
increase in criminal behavior.
Additionally, teaching children and teens nonviolent ways to solve conflict assists in
sharpening their abilities to communicate their needs and to resolve difficulties without them
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 12

having to resort to violence. Such training is valuable especially for those children who do not
have positive role models in their home lives. Self-reflections are also critical when teaching
parenting skills. Those who are raised in a dysfunctional family situation can gain insight into
their family dynamics and learn to develop resiliency and independent thinking to overcome
their negative experiences, enabling them to make healthier decisions in the present and later in
life (Schiffer, 2002).
Finally, fostering bonding can help children and youth develop the skills that result in the
establishment and maintenance of relationships. Wentzel and Erdley (as cited in Brehm et al.,
2003) stated there are five strategies in which students need to engage in order to foster
relationships. These five strategies are: (1) initiating interaction, (2) being nice,(3) engaging in
pro-social behavior, (4) having respect for others, and (5) providing social support. Similarly,
maintenance strategies that Stafford and Canary (as cited in Brehm et al., 2003) derived are: (1)
being positive and cheerful, (2) engaging in openness, (3) providing assurances, (4) engaging in
social networking, (5) sharing tasks, (5) joining in group activities, (6) engaging in mediated
communication (keeping in touch without face-to-face contact), and (7) finding humor. Many of
these strategies can be first initiated in classroom activities or encouraged by teachers during
recess or lunch periods.

Helping Children and Youth to Acquire Parenting Skills

Children and youth also need to be prepared for ways to parent effectively. This is an
important skill that the parents are often responsible for teaching. However, with the increasing
rate of divorces and single-family homes, this is an area that the school system should assist
society with teaching (Schiffer, 2002). Today’s youth need to be able to recognize the
importance of being involved with someone, caring for them, and also becoming prepared to be
mothers and fathers. Becoming aware of parenting responsibilities, including the need to
provide guidance, love, and positive discipline as well as developing the financial resources
needed to care for a family is important.
Teaching elementary-school students how to be good parents may sound premature or
even inappropriate. After all, children need large doses of parenting themselves. But the skills
involved in good parenting—shaping values, negotiating conflict, communicating, knowing right
from wrong, responsibility, patience, and teamwork—make for successful friends, students,
siblings, colleagues, and spouses (Schiffer, 2002). A caring human being does not equal a good
parent. But learning and practicing these life skills helps to create effective, productive,
nurturing, and responsible human beings who will have the tools for good parenting.
Popkin (2002) provided some alternative terms for the three parenting styles discussed
previously: the active (authoritative), the dictator (autocratic/authoritarian), and doormat
(passive). The style which encourages positive and more successful outcomes in school with
children is the active (authoritative) style. Active parents help their children learn survival skills
for surviving in a democratic family, four skills stand out:

1. Courage - If children have courage (in combination with support and guidance from
parents), they can try, fail, and try again until a challenge is mastered. Courage is a
strong base for children and can be considered as a core of a personality because it
builds self-esteem, the heart of a child's potential.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 13

2. Self-Esteem - Simply put, self-esteem is how someone feels about him- or herself. If
esteem is high, a person views him- or herself as capable and able to succeed, with
courage to try new things. When unsuccessful in a task, a person with high self-
esteem looks at the experience as an opportunity to learn.
3. Responsibility - In active parenting, parents are leaders who encourage cooperation
and stimulate learning. All family members make decisions and accept responsibility
for those decisions -- that is, experience the consequences following a decision.
Parents will not always be there to tell a young person what to do. If children and
youth have learned to make responsible decisions and have the courage to stick with
those decisions, however, they are ready to meet life's challenges on their own.
4. Cooperation – a child or youth who can cooperate with others learns that life involves
teamwork. In a society of equals, a child who can cooperate is more likely to survive.
A parent-child relationship should be one of cooperation, not conflict. That
cooperation must be won through many family experiences.

Surrounding children and youth with parents, teachers, schools, and community members who
lead authoritatively will allow children to grow into effective spouses and parents in the future.

Providing Support for Families While Adjusting for Change

External assets outside of school are needed for today’s youth (Benson, Galbraith, &
Espeland, 1994; Huitt, 2006; Lerner, & Benson, 2003) and why it is important for schools,
families, communities, religious organizations, and the media to work together in fostering
development in children. According to Patterson (2002), schools and other agencies effective in
advocating for policies for children need to help insure that there are adequate resources in the
ecological context to help families become resilient and protect themselves against negative
change. For example, schools need to continue to be creative, accountable, and prepare young
children for future success so that future families can fulfill their functions.
Christian (2006) agreed that educators need to be more cognizant of what is occurring
within families rather than thinking that it is irrelevant to their classrooms/ schools. Many
professional organizations in education have also recently begun to emphasize the importance of
working with families as well as children. The following are nineteen specific recommended
ideas for working with families in a school situation:

In the Classroom

1. Balance children’s activities and curriculum to incorporate both individual and

group identity.
2. Give children ample opportunity for role play, in both structured and unstructured
situations.
3. Observe children carefully as many behavior problems are due to role-bound
activities.
4. Make distinctions between home rules and school rules.
5. Watch for unspoken rules on how we treat one another (especially in regards to
gender or power) and discuss them with care.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 14

6. Note the signs that a hierarchy is in the process of changing. (Bobby might not
lead in discussions in class like he used to because an older stepbrother has taken
his place in charge of the younger siblings).
7. Watch for hierarchies emerging in the classroom and on the playground. Try to
encourage leadership and diffuse bullying by alternating and varying activities
and the parts that each student plays.
8. Create a classroom climate of safety, positive feedback and guidelines, and
healthy sensory experiences.
9. Provide as much consistency as possible when you are aware of changes in a
family (death of a family member, recent move, new baby). Sometimes being
stable and secure in the classroom can provide examples for students who do not
see it anywhere else.

Working with Families

10. Avoid stereotyping both families and children.

11. Respect families’ need for control when introducing new ideas, materials, or
experiences to children.
12. Recognize different parenting styles and family boundaries.
13. Recognize that for some families everything is a family affair.
14. Help families recognize their child’s many and varied strengths.
15. Ask for families’ input and assistance when conflict arises over rules.
16. Encourage families to plan ways to increase stability and security (having routines
such as: reading a book at bedtime or talking about the day’s events).
17. Engage in careful and keen observation of families in order to find out who is in
charge. (Who returns the phone calls? How does the child role-play their different
family members? Does a child think that a male teacher is the boss of the female
teachers?)
18. Provide opportunities for families to discuss their beliefs about children.
19. Consider inviting a trained family professional to facilitate discussion when a big
change or issue is impacting a number of families.

It has been noted that some children replay the situations that occur at home in the
relationships with other students at school. By following many of the above suggestions,
educators will begin to have a better awareness of the children and families they serve. This in
turn, will help with many classroom/school behavior problems and promote strengths in children
and their own future families (Christian, 2006).

Measurement and Evaluation

The vast majority of qualities, attributes, and skills related to successful parenting have
been discussed in other papers explaining the Brilliant Star framework. For example, the
development in the domain of moral character provides a critical foundation for all human
relations (Vessels, & Huitt, 2005). Information on measuring emotional qualities such as
empathy and optimism was discussed in the paper on affect and emotion (Brett, Smith, Price, &
Huitt, 2003). Likewise, information on assessing one’s developing competence related to
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 15

internal motivation and self-regulation was discussed in the paper on conative development
(Huitt, & Cain, 2005).
However, there are some specific issues that directly pertain to marriage and family.
Although there is no specific way to measure family development in schools, needs assessments
could be done throughout the year by school personnel in order to find out what children and
their families needs. In addition, many of the following questions could be answered:

• Have the students demonstrated that they have developed and implemented an
activity on which others truly depended?
• Have the students acquired knowledge of how human beings grow and develop and
how to facilitate this?
• Have the students completed any investigations of their own families in terms of the
styles of parenting and relationships that they have grown up with?

These are certainly issues that should be addressed in any holistic education program.

Summary and Conclusions

Successfully establishment and maintenance of a family is a complex, yet vital, task if a

society or culture is expected to grow and prosper. It is possible for young people to complete a
high school or college program and never receive specific training on the prerequisite skills and
knowledge to do accomplish this. Most societies seem to assume that these skills will develop
naturally as part of a young person’s experience as they are not part of the explicit school
curriculum (McEneaney, & Meyer, 2000), yet the data on divorce and social problems suggest
this is not working (Heatherington, 2002; Wallerstein, 2002). Schools need to address this
important issue and work with families and communities to prepare young people to be more
successful in the future than their parents are today. Continued neglect in adequately preparing
children and young people for family life is simply not a viable option.

References

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance
use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.
Becvar, D.S., & Becvar, R.J. (1999). Systems theory and family therapy. Landham, MD:
University Press of America.
Benson, P., Galbraith, J., & Espeland, P. (1994). What kids need to succeed: Proven, practical
ways to raise good kids. Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing.
Bianchi, S., & Casper, L. (2000). American families. Population Bulletin, 55(4). Retrieved
October 2004, from
http://www.prb.org/Template.cfm?Section=PRB&template=/ContentManagement/Conte
ntDisplay.cfm&ContentID=4804
Birdsall, N., & Graham, C. (Eds.). (1999). New markets, new opportunities?Economic and social
mobility in a changing world. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press. Retrieved
December 2004, from http://brookings.nap.edu/books/081570917X/html/
Brehm, S., Miller, R., Perlman, D., & Campbell, S. (2002). Intimate relationships. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 16

Brett, A., Smith, M., Price, E., & Huitt, W. (2003). Overview of the affective domain.
Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved
November 2007, from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/brilstar/chapters/affectdev.pdf
Chau Vuong, P. D. (2003). Virtual communities. The Soul mate manifesto: Uniting all soul mate
believers in an effort to solve dating. Retrieved on September 2004, from
http://www.solvedating.com/soulmatemvirtualcommunities.html
Children, Youth & Family Consortium. (2004). Focusing on fathers. Seeds of Promise, 1(3).
Retrieved September 2004, from
http://www.cyfc.umn.edu/publications/seeds/series1v3/volume3.html
Christian, L.G. (2006). Understanding families: Applying family systems theory to early
childhood practice. Young Children, 61(1), 12-20.
Cioffi, D. (2003). Internet Dating 101. Retrieved September 2004, from
http://www.safenetdating.com/InternetDating101.doc
Commission on Children at Risk. (2003). Hardwired to connect: The new scientific case for
authoritative communities. New York: Institute for American values. Retrieved
November 2004, from http://www.americanvalues.org/html/hardwired.html
Coombs, R., & Kenkel, W. (1966). Sex differences in dating aspirations and satisfaction with
computer selected partners. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 28, 62-66.
Cox, M.J. & Paley, B. (2003). Understanding families as systems. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 12(5), 193-196.
Evans, R. (2004). Family matters: How schools can cope with the crisis in childrearing. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Giles, H. (1998). Parent engagement as a school reform strategy. New York, NY: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Urban Education, from ED419031 Retrieved October 17, 2004, from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/files/parentinv2.html
Gill, M., Ashton, P., & Algina, J. (2004). Authoritative schools: A test of a model to resolve the
school effectiveness debate. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 389-409.
Gottman, J. (1995). Why marriages succeed or fail: And how to make yours last. New York:
Simon and Schuster.
Gottman, J., & Silver, N. ((1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. New York:
Three Rivers Press.
Gottman, J., & Silver, N. (2000). The seven principles for making marriage work. New York:
Three Rivers Press.
Gottman, J., Murray, J., Swanson, C., Tyson, R., & Swanson, K. (2002). The mathematics of
marriage: Dynamic Nonlinear models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Grammer, K. (1989). Human courtship behaviour: Biological basis and cognitive processing. In
A. Rasa, C. Vogel, & E. Voland (Eds.), The sociobiology of sexual and reproductive
strategies. New York: Chapmann and Hall.
Hetherington, E. M. (2002). For better or for worse: Divorce reconsidered. New York: Norton.
Huitt, W. (2006, April 26). Becoming a Brilliant Star: A model of formative holistic education.
Paper presented at the International Networking for Educational Transformation (iNet)
Conference, Augusta, GA. Retrieved October 2007, from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/brilstar/brilstar.html
Huitt, W., & Cain, S. (2005). An overview of the conative domain. Educational Psychology
Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved November 2007, from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/brilstar/chapters/conative.pdf
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 17

Hunter, J.E. & Schuman, N. (1980). Chronic reconstitution as a family style. Social Work, 25(6),
446-451.
Kozlowska, K., & Hanney, L. (2002). The network perspective: An integration of attachment
and family systems theories. Family Process, 41(3), 285-312. Retrieved November 2004,
from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0AZV/is_3_41/ai_93444765
Lerner, R., & Benson, P. (Eds.). (2003). Developmental assets and asset-building communities:
Implications for research, policy, and practice. New York: Springer.
Markman, H., Stanley, S., Blumberg, S. (1996). Fighting for your marriage: Positive steps for
preventing divorce and preserving a lasting love. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
Maslow, A. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: The Viking Press.
McEneaney, E., & Meyer, J. (2000). The content of the curriculum: An institutional perspective.
In M. Hallinan (Ed.), Handbook of sociology of education (189-211). New York: Plenum
Publishing.
O’Toole, K. (2000). Study conducted by the Stanford Institute for the Qualitative Study of
Society (SIQSS). Retrieved on September 11, 2004 from
http://www.stanford.edu/group/siqss/Press_Release/press_release.html
Patterson, J.M. (2002). Understanding family resilience. Journal of clinical Psychology, 58(3),
233-246.
Popkin, M. (2002). Active parenting now: For parents of children ages 5 to 12. Kennesaw, GA:
Active Parenting Publishers.
Population Reference Bureau. (2000). Conveying concerns: Women report on families in
transition. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved March 2002, from
http://www.prb.org/Template.cfm?Section=PRB&template=/ContentManagement/Conte
ntDisplay.cfm&ContentID=1362#transit.
Rubin, Z. (1973). Liking and loving: An invitation to social psychology. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston.
Schiffer, J. (2002). Parenting tomorrow’s parents today. How to bring parenting education for
children and teens to your schools. Raton, FL: The Parenting Project.
Shaffer, D.R. (2000). Social and personality development (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Simpson, I. (2004). Family. MSN Encarta. Retrieved on September 20, 2004 from
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761558266/Family.html
Snowman, J., & Biehler, J. (2006). Psychology applied to teaching (11th ed.). Boston: Houghton-
Mifflin.
Stanley, S. (2001). Making the case for premarital education. Family Relations, 50, 272-280.
Retrieved April 2002, from http://www.prepinc.com/main/docs/making_a_case.pdf
Toffler, A., & Toffler, H. (1995). Creating a new civilization. New York: Turner Publishing.
Vessels, G. (1998). Character and community development: A school planning and teacher
training handbook. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Vessels, G., & Huitt, W. (2005). Moral and character development. Paper presented at the
National Youth at Risk Conference, Savannah, GA, March 8-10. Retrieved November
2007, from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/chardev.pdf
Wallerstein, J. (2000). The unexpected legacy of divorce: A 25 year landmark study. New York:
Hyperion.
Whitehead, B. D., & Popenoe, D. (2000). Changes in teen attitudes towards marriage,
cohabitation and children 1975 – 1995. The next generation series. Camden, NJ: Rutgers
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 18

University, The National Marriage Project. Retrieved on September 1, 2004 from

http://marriage.rutgers.edu/Publications/Print/Print%20Teen%20Attitudes.htm
Wrigley, A. E. (1988). Elements of a critical theory of the family (Chapter 6). Critical theory of
the family. New York: The Salsbury Press. Retrieved on September 12, 2004 from
http://www.hnet.uci.edu/mposter/CTF/chapter6.html
Ziehl, S.C. (2003). Forging the links: Globalization and family patterns. Society in Transition,
34(2), 320-337.