{"title":"Staying connected after divorce: Adolescent child and nonresidential parent perspectives","authors":"Melinda Stafford Markham, Becky DeGreeff, Erin Guyette","doi":"10.1111/fare.12994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The purpose of this study was to investigate how nonresidential parents and adolescent children maintained their relationships and communicated with one another following parental divorce.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>A substantial proportion of children whose parents have divorced live with one parent and have less contact with the other parent. It is important to understand nonresidential parent–child relationships and the role communication technology plays in relationship maintenance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Qualitative interviews were conducted with a total of 34 adolescent and nonresidential parent participants (10 nonresidential parent–child dyads and 14 individual participants) to understand how nonresidential parents and children maintain their relationship following parental divorce and how they use communication technology to stay connected from a distance. Thematic analysis techniques (Braun & Clarke, 2006) were used to analyze the data.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Three common positive factors or “benefits” relating to nonresidential parent–adolescent relationship closeness emerged: planned physical visits, frequent communication using multiple communication methods, and same sex of parent and child. Factors that served as barriers that interfered with nonresidential parent–adolescent relationship closeness were identified: residential parent interference, perceived child disengagement or lack of interest, and child blocking methods of communication.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results of this study provide additional insight and understanding that will help positively influence nonresidential parent–child relationships.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Practitioners can help nonresidential parents identify communication technologies they can use with their adolescents and ways of reducing existing communication barriers.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48206,"journal":{"name":"Family Relations","volume":"73 3","pages":"2170-2192"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fare.12994","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
The purpose of this study was to investigate how nonresidential parents and adolescent children maintained their relationships and communicated with one another following parental divorce.
Background
A substantial proportion of children whose parents have divorced live with one parent and have less contact with the other parent. It is important to understand nonresidential parent–child relationships and the role communication technology plays in relationship maintenance.
Method
Qualitative interviews were conducted with a total of 34 adolescent and nonresidential parent participants (10 nonresidential parent–child dyads and 14 individual participants) to understand how nonresidential parents and children maintain their relationship following parental divorce and how they use communication technology to stay connected from a distance. Thematic analysis techniques (Braun & Clarke, 2006) were used to analyze the data.
Results
Three common positive factors or “benefits” relating to nonresidential parent–adolescent relationship closeness emerged: planned physical visits, frequent communication using multiple communication methods, and same sex of parent and child. Factors that served as barriers that interfered with nonresidential parent–adolescent relationship closeness were identified: residential parent interference, perceived child disengagement or lack of interest, and child blocking methods of communication.
Conclusion
The results of this study provide additional insight and understanding that will help positively influence nonresidential parent–child relationships.
Implications
Practitioners can help nonresidential parents identify communication technologies they can use with their adolescents and ways of reducing existing communication barriers.
期刊介绍:
A premier, applied journal of family studies, Family Relations is mandatory reading for family scholars and all professionals who work with families, including: family practitioners, educators, marriage and family therapists, researchers, and social policy specialists. The journal"s content emphasizes family research with implications for intervention, education, and public policy, always publishing original, innovative and interdisciplinary works with specific recommendations for practice.