Communication in Divorced Families with Children

The Hilltop Review The Hilltop Review

Volume 10

Issue 2

Spring

Article 11

October 2018

Communication in Divorced Families with Children Communication in Divorced Families with Children

Casey L. James

Western Michigan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/hilltopreview

Part of the Family, Life Course, and Society Commons, and the Interpersonal and Small Group

Communication Commons

Preferred Citation Style (e.g. APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.) Preferred Citation Style (e.g. APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.)

APA

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by

the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has

been accepted for inclusion in The Hilltop Review by an

authorized editor of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more

information, please contact wmu-

[email protected].

Communication in

Divorced Families

with Children: A

Review of the

Literature

Casey L. James

Love, hope, children, and security:

While not by any means an exhaustive list,

these are all reasons people get married.

According to the U.S. Census (2012), in the

United States 53.9 percent of people were

married in 2011. There are many

communication strategies that can be used to

help a marriage survive and thrive, but what

about communication strategies for divorce?

According to the American Psychological

Association (2016) 40-50 percent of marriages

in the US end in divorce (Marriage & divorce,

n.d.). When children are not involved, couples

have the ability divorce and live separate lives.

However, according to the US census in 2011,

41 percent of married couples had at least one

child under the age of 18 (Jacobsen, Mather, &

Dupuis, 2012, p. 4). When a couple has living

minor children, they are often unable to live

their lives without needing to communicate

with each other after the dissolution of the

marriage.

Divorce can have profound and lasting

impacts on children. Children of divorced

families are not only more likely to be divorced

themselves as adults, but are at a higher risk for

emotional and physical health problems, peer

relational issues, and suicidality (Child and

Divorce Statistics, n.d.). A marital status

transition “can lead to depression, behavioral

problems, poor school performance and

separation anxiety” (Portes, Lehman, &

Brown, 1999, p. 38). These children “tend to

be less self-efficient, have a lower self-esteem

and have less effective coping skills (Portes et

al., 1999, p. 38). To help reduce the risk of a

child becoming a statistic in one of the prior

mentioned categories, it is important that the

child can adjust to and process the divorce in a

healthy and productive manner. There are

several key components to this, but many

revolve around the parental units and

communication. This paper will explorer both

parent and child communication and co-parent

communication.

There are many aspects to

communication during and after divorce, and

the small list of various aspects discussed in

this paper are not an exhaustive list. First, the

different types of family conversation and

conformity dyads will be reviewed. Second,

the researcher will explore ambiguity and

competency in parent-child communications.

Next, child adjustment in separations and

divorces will be explored. Finally, the

researcher will discuss post-divorce

communication between the child and both the

custodial parent and non-custodial parent, as

well as, between the co-parents, and how

technology is used in these relationship groups.

Method

Data was pulled from nine studies

published in academic journals across the

country, as well as, various internet based

psychology and census sources. All studies

were done within the United States and were

primarily in the northern part of America. It is

important to note that while some studies had

more diverse participant groups, most study

samples were primarily Caucasian families with

the mother as the custodial parent. Ages of

children varied, but the focus was almost

exclusively on children under the age of 18.

Co-parents within these studies were all

biological parents, with second families rarely

explored except in terms of peer-to-peer

communication. One study included families

that were recently separated or in the process

of getting divorced, but were not legally

divorced yet.

Conversation and Conformity Dyads

Families are made up of a conversation

and conformity dyad. Families that highly

value communication would be considered as

having a high conversation orientation, while

those who do not highly value communication

would be considered low conversation

orientation. According to Schrodt and

Skimkowski (2015), “Parents of high

conversation oriented families believe in the

importance of open communication as a

means of teaching and socializing their

children” (p. 3). For high conversation

oriented families, open dialogue is encouraged

and a part of daily life. For low conversation

oriented families, there is less verbal

communication back at forth and conversation

may only be surface topics. Low conversation

families are less likely to discuss topics that

revolve around opinions, feelings, and

emotions.

The other side of the dyad is

conformity orientation, which also comes in

both high and low values. High conformity

orientation families value “uniformity and

obedience” (Schrodt & Skimkowski, 2015, p.

3) more than opinions and personal desires.

Schrodt and Shimkowski (2015) state that, high

conformity families “tend to have uniform

beliefs and values, a hierarchical family

structure, and they place family interests before

those of individual family members” (p. 3).

While high conformity oriented families do not

offer much room for individualized growth

outside of the family value set, those with low

conformity orientation value personal beliefs

and interests. These families allow and

encourage individual growth without

dependence on the family core image or value

set, but that is not to say that some family

values are not expected to be followed.

These two orientations in their

polarities, form four dyads of different family

types. Families that are both low conformity

and low conversation are laissez-faire families,

high conformity and low conversation are

protective families, both high conformity and

high conversation are consensual families, and

low conformity with high conversation are

pluralistic families. In the study done by

Schrodt and Shimkowski (2015) it was found

that "conversation orientation significantly

predicted perceptions of both supportive and

antagonistic coparental communication" (p. 9).

Families with high conversation orientation

had healthier coparenting practices. This is in

part due to "parents who believe in the value

of open and unrestrained interactions on a

wide variety of topics may be more likely to

support each other, and less likely to compete

with each other, in their parenting efforts with

the children" (Schrodt & Shimkowski, 2015, p.

9). Regardless of conformity orientation, those

with high conversation orientation, had

relationships that were perceived by children as

supportive.

However, conformity orientation does

still affect the relationship and perceptions of

it. "High conformity orientation is likely to

impede the ability of parents to resolve conflict

and model healthy conflict resolution skills for

their children...encourages conflict avoidance

in parenting" (Schrodt & Shimkowski, 2015, p.

10). This conflict avoidance may lead to

parents either acting as individuals instead of as

a coparenting team, or one parent being

dominant in making decisions for children

even after divorce. Either way, the message

and lesson to the child is not healthy

communication and may lead to poor coping

skills with the divorce and other elements later

in life.

Despite the possible negative effects

of being conformity oriented, it may be less of

a concern if paired with high conversation

orientation to form a consensual dyad. Schrodt

and Shimkowski (2015) found that “it may

matter less to supportive coparenting practices

if parents have established a relatively strong

conversation orientation within the family” (p.

9). While children in protective families may

have a hard time adjusting to divorced life in

terms of stress and communication, pluralistic

families will struggle as both parents feel free

to set the terms that they feel are important.

Unless both parents openly communicate

about rules and expectations with one another,

and not just with the children, this family type

could send mixed messages to children.

Consensual families can rely on their

conversation orientation to coparent and relay

the same expectations to children within

households that value obedience and family

values.

Ambiguity and Competency in Parent-

Child Communication

One who is communication competent

possess the ability to effectively communicate

the desired message in an appropriate way for

the receiver to understand. Being competent

in communication has both potential positive

and negative effects on the parent child

relationship. McManus and Donovan (2012)

found that “openness contributed to cohesive,

healthy functioning post-divorce families” (p.

269). However, if parents withhold

information or are perceived as doing such, it

negatively affected the relationship between

that parent and the child. McManus and

Donovan (2012) state that “when parents were

viewed as more communicatively competent,

parents’ ambiguity had greater effects on young

adults’ psychological well-being” (p. 269). This

is especially important since children may

expect parents to possess this competency due

to experience over life, despite this topic being

different than most conversations, and may

misjudge ambiguity as deliberate withholding.

While being ambiguous can be

harmful, children may feel trapped or caught

with parents who are not as competent or are

intentionally manipulative. Feeling caught is

the “experience of triangulation arising from

when parents involve children in their disputes,

request that the child take sides, mediate the

conflict” (McManus & Donovan, 2012, p.

260), or even relay messages back between

parental parties. When children feel,

manipulated or like they are caught in the

middle of fighting parents, there are negative

effects on the child psychologically.

Communicating about divorce stress is healthy,

unless it negatively affects the child’s

relationship with either parent, or has a

negative effect on the child’s own coping skills.

In essence, it may not only be how you say

something, but what you are saying. An

inability to communicate about divorce stress,

mixed with direct conflict avoidance may be a

trait that is found in low conversational

families that are experiencing the sudden

power dynamic change.

While young children may not be able

to read parental conflict as easily, Portes,

Lehman, and Brown (1999) state that an

adolescent child’s “ability to rationalize and

understand may prove detrimental to the

adolescents involved” (p. 38), as they are

gaining the ability to “see when they are being

manipulated by their parents, which may

increase their anxiety and levels of frustration

and anger with their parents” (p. 38). This

realization forces children into a state of feeling

caught, which can be detrimental to their

psyche.

Child Adjustment in Marital Transitions

Divorce does not always have long

term negative effects on children and family

units, but in Linker, Stolberg, and Green (1999)

state that as of 1991, “approximately one-sixth

of children from divorced families experience

long-term adjustment problems” (p. 84). For

children with high conversational oriented

families, or a high conversational custodial

parent, divorce can help them develop the

ability to problem-solve, cope with stress, and

adjust to adverse situations. Afifi, Huber, and

Ohs (2006), state that "the amount of affection

and empathy a parent communicates to a child

when the child is talking about his/her stress

could promote a climate of acceptance and

openness about the stress and, thus, contribute

to his/her ability to cope with it" (p. 3).

Including children in family communication

and helping them determine what is stressful

for them and how they feel they should deal

with it can have lasting effects.

For many children, the divorce will

have negative effects, even if briefly. Children

who do not adjust well may exhibit behavioral

problems, suffer from depression, develop

emotional problems like low self-esteem, and

have poor coping skills to use later in life.

Child maladjustment has several variables, but

23% are related to “social support, residential

and non-residential parent-child relationships,

and interparental conflict” (Linker, Stolberg, &

Green, 1999, p. 84). According to Afifi,

Huber, and Ohs (2006), "substantial changes in

custodial parent-child interactions often occur

after divorce and that many of them are

detrimental to the child...at least in the initial

years" (p. 4). Children will need some

information about the divorce, but it is always

important to help them understand this

information and process it in a way that is best

for them, instead of telling them how to

process it.

In divorce families will often

experience changes in communication,

changes in amount of physical time spent

together between parental units and children,

changes in family roles and the types of duties

that each party is responsible for, and possible

co-parent conflict. According to Linker,

Stolberg, and Green (1999), parental conflict

has “one of the most influential effects” (p. 85),

which can be made worse when “altered

communication patters makes co-parenting

tasks more challenging and less efficient” (p.

86). Even in families with high conversational

orientation, daily life may not be discussed

even though major choices are available. This

challenge is exhibited more strongly with the

noncustodial or nonresidential parent.

Post-Divorce-Parent-Child

Communication and Technology

For parents who are not the custodial

or residential parents, time with children is cut

substantially. While more families are doing

equal joint physical custody today, it was not

always the norm and in many cases still is not

possible. Some parents have jobs that require

the following: travel or be deployed; some jobs

may result in a parent living a long distance

from children; some parents may be

incarcerated or have other court related orders

restricting physical visitation time with the

children; some parents may not wish to reach

out to their children, etc. To this day when

there is a non-custodial parent, it is often the

father, thus most of the research discussed was

done with a non – custodial parent family type.

Non-custodial parents often miss-out

on the day to day life of their children. While

it may seem menial, research has found that

“relationships are maintained (or “talked into

being”) through regular talk and interaction,

both the strategic and the mundane”

(Rodriguez, 2014, p. 1135). Some non-

custodial parents are fortunate enough to have

a good co-parenting relationship with their ex

and be geographically located closely, with a

job that allows the time and income, to see

their children on days that are not their

assigned days. These parents can attend

sporting events, artistic and academic events,

and interact with the children on a more regular

basis than those who either do not have a good

relationship with their ex or are not

geographically located where they can increase

physical visits to their children.

Due to non-custodial parents, not

being as present as custodial parents, others

mean can be used to communicate regularly,

often technology based means. Parents can use

the telephone or internet to communicate with

children. For some the internet may be skype,

email, or chat. Since non-custodial parents

tend to feel like that they “miss out on the

basic, mundane details of their children’s lives”

(Rodriguez, 2014, p. 1141), using technology to

communicate can ease this feeling. This may

require more prompting than normal for a

conversation, as children may be more apt to

share details that they feel are significant, while

not sharing the rest of the day.

One participant in Rodriguez’s (2014)

study said, “It’s always going to be

fragmented…we’ll only see parts of each

other’s lives” (p. 1141). While technology can

assist in communication it can never replace

face-to-face interactions. There is also the

chance that the other parent will not allow

communication during their visitation times.

Sadly, for these situations, there is nothing that

the other parent can do until the child is old

enough to make their own decisions. If

possible, parents should try to work together to

allow for both parents to attend special events

for children and to communicate regularly with

the children when not physically present for

extended times.

Divorced Co-Parenting Relationships and

Communication

Co-parents can also use technology to

communicate efficiently and effectively with

one another. “One of the most important

challenges in post-divorce families is maintain

positive coparental relationships…requiring

communication between ex-partners who may

have contentious relationships” (Ganong,

Coleman, Feistman, Jamison, & Markham,

2012, p. 397). One way to do this is by using

technology. When a quick question is being

asked, and will not have a detailed answer a

phone call may be sufficient. However, if the

response is going to be detailed a text may be

more beneficial.

One thing for co-parents to keep in

mind when using technology, especially the

phone or text, is that constant contact may

come across as harassment or crossing a line.

Technology can be very beneficial, but it can

also be used to control and manipulate the

other parents, which can further deteriorate a

fragile relationship. When the parents do not

have a good relationship, the phone can

“disintegrate into arguments about on-going

disagreements and rehashing of past issues”

(Ganong et al., 2012, p. 399). However, if used

to focus on the children’s needs the phone can

be very effective for fast communication.

In relationships that are less amicable,

email may be a better use of technology.

According to Ganong, Coleman, Feistman,

Jamison, and Markham, (2012), “emails can be

sent without fear of engaging the other parents

in unwanted conversation” (p. 399) and allow

a record of any details shared and agreed upon,

and can be less emotionally charged. Using

phone conversations, once something is said it

is out there, and texts are often sent in the heat

of the moment and can be too emotionally

charge. Using emails, the sender is more likely

to edit the content and use the medium to try

to defuse the situation or reduce the likelihood

of conflict. Email is also a useful tool for those

who need to convey detailed information

regardless of the state of the relationship, and

at times a shared family calendar can relay a lot

of this information for families with multiple

children with schedule commitments.

When communication breaks down to

a point that it is affecting the children, it is time

for the parents to consider enlisting the help of

a professional. One such type of professional

help is mediation. Mediation can take place

during or after divorce. According to Gentry

(1997), “children must feel secure and

empowered to share their observations,

thoughts, wants, and feelings relative to their

parent’ divorce” (p. 316). In Gentry’s study

two games were used, Life Stories and Future

Stories, both of which are similar in nature and

helped keep the children from being bored

while disclosing similar information to each

parent separately.

For the family discussed the major

areas of contentment were, “time spent with

the children, supervision of the children when

a caregiving parent had to be absent, and

behaviors when communicating with each

other about the children’s welfare” (Gentry,

1997, p. 318). Before the games were used in

mediation, the parents agreed to not make the

children feel caught between them and that

they would not be making the final discussion

regarding any of the concerns. During the

games the parents realized that the children

loved both and wanted to spend time with

each, that they were not in denial about the

divorce, and had many good memories as a

family, but were optimistic that their parents

would navigate their relationship better in the

future (Gentry, 1997, p. 320). Since there were

no red flags that the helper felt would result in

the children being at risk, the games were used

and effective in navigating the families conflict

areas, even after divorce.

Conclusion

Despite the increase in families that are

partaking in more even joint custody, there are

still challenges faced by these families.

Communication between the co-parents and

individual parent units and children are

important. Divorce will be an adjustment for

the entire family, and may be especially hard on

children, but having a healthy relationship with

the parents can make all the difference. Even

having a healthy relationship with one parents

can have a profound impact on the child’s

coping abilities and ability to adjust in a healthy

manner.

A major component in a healthy

relationship for the children is open and honest

communication. However, parents should not

use the children as an outlet for their stress and

frustrations, which could result in over sharing

and the child feeling caught between sides.

One influential area for child adjustment is the

dynamics of the co-parental relationship. If the

co-parents can maintain a healthy relationship

amongst themselves and communicate

effectively between each other, this can be

perceived as a good relationship model for

children and reduce the stress that children

experience.

In addition to working out a good

relationship between ex-partners, a good

relationship between the child and both the

custodial and non-custodial parent should be

attempted. For the custodial parent this is

easier to do through daily maintenance

communication than for the non-custodial

parent. The non-custodial parent may need to

use technology to strengthen their relationship

maintenance with children, something that can

only be attained with the cooperation of the

custodial parent’s cooperation. In addition,

learning to be a high conversational oriented

family, if not already one, may be profoundly

beneficial.

Practicing open dialogue between the

co-parents and the parent and children will

allow for more topics to be discussed in more

depth. Further, surface conversation may be

able to maintain a relationship with the non-

custodial parent, but this limited conversation

with the custodial parent may be detrimental to

the child’s social and coping skills, which can

increase the chances of prolonged low self-

esteem. Additionally, families that are

consensual seem to have the easiest time in

having open communication without sending

too many mixed signals on what rules and

values are important. If the current family type

is liaise-faire, learning to adjust to pluralistic

will increase the chances of a child adjusting in

a healthy manner.

When one parent cannot be present

often, regardless of reason, the use of

technology can be a very effective way to

maintain communication with children. In

addition to maintaining a relationship with a

child with extended periods of absence,

technology can also be used for co-parenting in

any situation. Technology can make it easier to

coordinate a child’s schedule, to share

important information, and to converse in a

manner that is easier to control. Using

technology to communicate between co-

parents can also have its drawbacks and parents

need to be careful not to fall into those

patterns.

It may be easy to react to a text in an

emotional manner, without taking the time to

calm down after an initial interpretation of the

message. If one remembers to take a step back

and calm down, they may find that they

misunderstood the message or inflected their

current emotional state onto the message

without realizing it. In addition, phone calls

and text messages can be used to harass the

other co-parent and it’s important to ensure

that you are not doing this, intentionally or not.

When records are needed, either for court or

due to a forgetful parent, email may be the best

solution. Email is also a good solution for co-

parents who are having a harder time

communication in a non-hostile manner.

In addition to these options, having a

family calendar, such as Google calendar or

Cozi, may prove beneficial and help keep

everyone more in tune to upcoming events and

activities for the children. Divorce can have

both negative and positive effects on the

family, and even if negative effects are present

at first, they may ease with time. It is never the

child’s job to help the parent cope or be their

emotional punching bag. While open dialogue

is important, it should be limited to what the

child can process, without intentionally

withholding or being ambiguous, and should

never be used to belittle or degrade the other

parent.

It is the parent’s responsibility to foster

an environment to make the transition as easy

as possible for the children. It is the parent’s

responsibility to maintain a healthy relationship

with the children and to provide a chance for

the other parent to do the same. It is the

responsibility of the co-parents to work

together as a team for the benefit of the

children. Children can learn to be

independent, to cope with stress, to be

proficient with interpersonal communication,

to see that two people can who are different

can work together in a peaceful manner, and so

much more.

Children can be severely affected by

divorce, but they don’t need to. Tools are

available today to help facilitate a healthy

environment and relationships for divorced

families. At the end of the day, the co-parents

have a chance to teach children the skills that

will help them function better as adults. It is

the responsibility of the parents to protect their

children, while helping them grow. To allow

children to express themselves and learn to

grieve and cope with stress in a healthy

manner. At the end of the day, the co-parents

control so much of this in how they

communicate with one another and the child.

It’s about high conversational orientation,

without over-sharing or ambiguity. It’s above

learning to love a new way.

References

Afifi, T., Huber, F., & Ohs, J. (2006). Parents'

and adolescents' communication with

each other about divorce-related

stressors and its impact on their ability

to cope positively with the

divorce. Journal of Divorce &

Remarriage, 45(1-2), 1-30.

Ganong, Lawrence H., Coleman,

Marilyn, Feistman, Richard, Jamison,

Tyler, & Markham, Melinda Stafford.

(2012). Communication technology

and postdivorce coparenting. Family

Relations,61(3), 397-409.

Gentry, D. B. (1997). Facilitating parent-child

communication during divorce

mediation. Families in Society, 78(3), 316-

321.

Linker, J., Stolberg, A., & Green, R. (1999).

Family communication as a mediator

of child adjustment to divorce. Journal

of Divorce and Remarriage, 30(1/2), 83-

97.

McManus, T., & Donovan, S. (2012).

Communication competence and

feeling caught: explaining perceived

ambiguity in divorce-related

communication. Communication

Quarterly, 60(2), 255-277.

Portes, P., Lehman, A., & Brown, J. (1999).

The child adjustment inventory:

Assessing transition in child divorce

adjustment. Journal of Divorce &

Remarriage, 30(1/2), 37.

Rodriguez, S. (2014). “We’ll only see parts of

each other’s lives:” The role of

mundane talk in

maintaining nonresidential parent–

child relationships. Journal of Social and

Personal Relationships, 31(8), 1134-1152.

Schrodt, P., & Shimkowski, J. (2015). Family

communication patterns and

perceptions

of coparental communication. Commun

ication Reports, 1-12.

United States, Department of Commerce,

Census Bureau. (2012, July 31). Profile

america facts for features: Unmarried and

single Americans Week Sept. 16-22, 2012.

Retrieved June 20, 2016, from

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/r

eleases/pdf/cb12ff-18_unmarried.pdf

Jacobsen, L. A., Mather, M., & Dupuis, G.

(September 2012). Household change

in the United States. Population

Bulletin, 67(1). Retrieved from

http://www.prb.org/pdf12/us-

household-change-2012.pdf

Children Divorce Statistics. (n.d.). Retrieved

June 20, 2016, from

http://www.children-and-

divorce.com/children-divorce-

statistics.html

Marriage & divorce. (n.d.). Retrieved June 28,

2016, from

http://www.apa.org/topics/divorce/