Children with special needs: Unpacking how mothers and fathers construct their roles to care for a c

1

• Children with special needs Unpacking how
  mothers and fathers construct their roles to care
  for a child with a chronic health condition

Ted McNeill Ph.D., RSW., John Beaton Ph.D., Gert
Montgomery MSW, RSW., David Nicholas Ph.D.,
RSW. Father Involvement Research 2008 Toronto,
CANADA
2
Addressing gaps in knowledge

• We lack a detailed understanding of the gestalt
  of couples experiences
• We talk about family systems theory but our
  knowledge is more about individuals
• e.g., patient, mother, sibling(s), father
• We need to move from silhouette of partner to
  explicit understanding of fit with the partner

3
For example

• If caring for a child with a chronic health
  condition is a catalyst for more meaningful
  involvement for fathers, then what does that look
  like in the context of the parenting
  relationship?
• For mothers who feel burdened due to providing
  the majority of the childs care, what is the
  relationship like with the father?
• For mothers whose identity is closely linked to
  her role as a caregiver, how much of a role is
  available for fathers?
• These questions suggest that a relational focus
  would be a useful lens to help understand the
  individual roles and experiences of mothers and
  fathers.

4
Methodology

• Grounded theory study
• Goal is an explanation of parents experiences,
  roles, identities, etc.
• Theoretical sampling strategy ? parents of
  children with spina bifida, cerebral palsy,
  juvenile rheumatoid arthritis and a few other
  chronic conditions
• 20 couple interviews
• 10 individual interviews (5 couples)

5
Description of sample

• Diverse sample
• 45 identified with a particular ethno racial
  community (i.e., non dominant culture)
• Average age mid 40s
• Education ranged from elementary school to
  professional degrees
• Family income ranged from lt 20K to gt 100K
  Average income 62K
• 75 had 2 children 20 had 3 5 had 4

6
Results Shared experiences

• Life is a real struggle for many of the families
  in this study
• Worries for their child (day to day care, stigma,
  childs future)
• Feeling different from other families and
  striving for normality
• Managing childs care and looking after other
  children
• Financial strains
• Balancing work inside and outside the home
• Less individual and couple time

7
Parenting configurations

• In most families (15/20), the mother was more
  involved inside the home and the father worked
  more hours outside the home

8
Results

• Key concepts for understanding the parenting
  roles
• Complementarity (i.e., specialization)
• Symmetry (both have required skills)
• Key domains caregiving, household management,
  and breadwinning

9
Complementarity

• Usually there has to be one who is strong. I
  mean like tough and strong and one who gives
  love. It cant be both.
• The heart and the brain.

10
Complementarity

• I What do you do every day with your child? What
  are the daily routines?
• F My wife can tell you better.

11
Complementary with shared values

• Anyway, I think we represent the two sides of
  parenting but we have the same values.

12
Symmetry

• I So its sort of like you both can do it all,
  you tag off back and forth?
• M Yeah. Hes just as good as I am.

13
Symmetrical Relationship

• "I want my kids to see that in todays society
  its not just the traditional breadwinner, its
  the caregiving also because you need both, I
  think you need both as a parent."

14
Shared caregiving

• I Caregiving is sometimes more associated with
  the roles of mothers and women. What are your
  thoughts on this as you parent your child?
• F I think its a pile of crap.

15
Integration of gender identities

• "I look at this really as a balance. A balance of
  the male and the female. Whether you are male or
  female, the challenge is to get that balance
  within yourself. Quite often in relationships
  people are looking to the other person to fulfill
  that aspect of themselves, which is kind of like
  a crutch. Its depending on that other person to
  fill your need and really, I think what were
  discovering is that we have both.

16
Complementarity AND Symmetry

• Most couples combine elements of complementary
  and symmetrical parenting.
• Not either/or but elements of both a continuum

17
Parenting roles Complementary and/or
Symmetrical
Domains (Caregiving, household management and
breadwinning)
Complementary (specialized roles)
Symmetrical (shared roles)
Combined (some specialized AND shared
roles)
18
Adaptation

• There is not just one model for success.

19
The emerging model

• Labels such as traditional, transitional, or
  egalitarian do not do justice to multiple
  influences that come together to shape the
  parenting relationship
• Adaptation is idiosyncratic, relative, practical
  and reflects what works for the couple
• Current state reflects best available choice(s)
• Success takes different forms at different
  stages of the relationship

20
Influential factors

• Multiple factors shape parenting roles and
  experiences
• gt Child factors and health condition
• gt Individual parent qualities and characteristics
• gt Relational factors child, couple, extended
  family, friends
• gt Gender norms and identities
• gt Culture
• gt Religion and spirituality
• gt Social resources, work, social norms, etc.

21
Relational Adaptation Model for Co-Parents
Social And Contextual Factors
Individual Biology Birth order Gender
identity Strengths Preferences F of O
experience Etc.
Social Culture Religion Spirituality Work Resource
s Friends Discourses Etc.
Developmental
Individual
Adaptational Processes
Parents' Experience Roles
Values and Meaning
Child Age, sex Health condition Care
needs Severity/prognosis Characteristics Etc.
Relational Couple factors Extended family SES
factors Etc.
(3) Extended Family
(1) Child/Parent
Relational
(2) Couple
Social And Contextual Factors
Time
22
Adaptational processes and factors for success

• Flexibility
• Response ability
• Communication and problem solving
• Meaningful emotional connection (us)
• Shared meaning and values
• Negotiation of roles (implicit/explicit)
• Adequate social support (targeted to need)

23
Attributes of success and satisfaction

• Balance
• Fairness
• Choice and fit for each individual
• What works for the couple

24
Notion of GOOD ENOUGH

• For most in the study, the parenting
  configuration was not perfect but was good
  enough
• But there is a tipping point when it is no
  longer good enough...
• Changes in care needs
• Loss of sense of mutuality or fairness
• Work changes
• Availability of social support
• Leads to conflict, dissatisfaction,
  disengagement

25
Conclusions

• One size does not fit all ? successful parenting
  configurations may take different forms at
  different stages of the relationship
• Complementarity and symmetry are useful concepts
  for understanding how parents work out their
  roles
• A multifactorial model is needed to understand
  the complexity and range of factors that
  influence parenting roles and identities

26
Conclusions contd

• One parents story about the relationship is
  insufficient to understand the total gestalt
• More father (or mother) involvement isnt
  necessarily better it must work in the
  context of the couple relationship
• Parenting roles and behaviour are best
  understood within the context of the couple
  relationship

27
Conclusions contd

• Successful parenting configurations may take
  different forms at different stages of the
  relationship depending on childs age, gender,
  care needs, etc.
• Regardless of how couples divided their roles and
  responsibilities, satisfied parents had shared
  goals and parenting philosophies.
• In symmetrical arrangements, parents may have
  primary or secondary roles regarding specific
  functions depending on time, preference, skill,
  etc.

28
Conclusions contd

• For most couples, the parenting configuration was
  not perfect but was good enough, but there was
  a tipping point that led to conflict for some
  couples.
• For couples who were dissatisfied with their
  parenting arrangement, division of labour,
  disagreements about parenting goals and
  philosophy, and lack of a meaningful emotional
  us were identified as key factors.

29
Discussion