To think blended families don't work?

[4China]

I actually would quite like to be proved wrong here and hear lots of happy stories about it all coming together well.

I suspect it's more likely to work when the kids are very young and grow up with another person in a parent role, rather than if families are blended in later life.

My own experience of a blended family is negative and has led me to think that children hardly ever like their step-parents and step-parents don't really love stepchildren like their own (which I think is understandable) although they may care for them and do their very best by them, and that the dynamics of two families living together - some perhaps part time (like I was) - just don't work and lead to all kinds of tensions and resentments. Biological parents have to juggle spending time with their own children and forming a relationship with stepchildren. People co-parent side-by-side despite families having different parenting styles and some children being raised differently for half or a percentage of the time by another party.

Not sure if I can think of a better way to do it though because lots of people split up and lots of people fall in love with new people that they want to be with and that's understandable. I guess maybe people need to stop trying to pretend it's a thing and just parent their children separately. In my case I think half the problem was the parents having this 'rose-tinted' view of what our new family would look like and finding it hard to accept that the kids didn't like each other or their step parents!

As Atomik is unable to cite any sources. based on her extensive research, to support her conclusions - I've done some trawling for something reasonably recent that looks at the work which has been done on the issue and seeks to find a balanced conclusion. I found this. Sorry, if it's a bit long - but it is incredibly sensible.

"Compared with children growing up in intact families, outcomes across a range of measures are poorer for children who experience family breakdown, and some of these persist into adulthood. For example, they are less likely to gain educational qualifications, and more
likely to leave home and become a parent at a younger age. The differences, however, are comparatively small, with many children not affected, and most children are not adversely affected in the long term. Some children benefit from parental separation, particularly children who have witnessed or been subject to violence and abuse, or living in households where there were high levels of parental conflict.

The review has shown that dimensions of family functioning and some socio-economic factors have a greater influence than family structure on child well-being. Financial hardship and poor or disrupted parenting have a negative impact on outcomes for children growing upin intact as well as separated families. It is therefore important to avoid the risk of
stigmatising certain family forms, such as single parent families, and to focus instead on the underlying mechanisms that contribute to poorer outcomes for children.

Recent research stresses that family breakdown should be understood as a process and nota single event. Evidence shows that a number of key factors contribute to, and/or are a consequence of, family breakdown. Among these, the most significant are financial hardship, poor maternal mental health, and protracted and unresolved conflict between parents. These factors interact in complex ways and, via a chain of events, have a cumulative effect. Typically, they lead to increased stress on the part of the custodial parent (usually mothers) which, in turn, increases the risk of negative outcomes in children.

However, positive maternal mental health and mothers’ access to adequate social and financial support serve to moderate the potentially negative impact of family breakdown on children. Good communication between parents, and positive child-parent relationships are crucial to children’s well-being. Parents who are able to contain their distress and to negotiate and facilitate acceptable arrangements post-separation also help their children to adjust to family breakdown.

The findings highlight the dynamic nature of change in contemporary family life. Divorce and parental separation are more common than they once were, and an initial experience of family breakdown often heralds further changes, including those in family structure. Increasingly, children and parents are required to develop the necessary coping skills to
adjust to repeated transitions in family form. In this context, it will be important for public policy to acknowledge the realities of family life and to adopt strategies that support parentsin the task of parenting and to enhance those factors"

From dera.ioe.ac.uk/11165/1/DCSF-RR113.pdf

NB. I had to reformat this after doing copy and paste, so that's why the paragraph breaks are a bit weird and there are a couple of places where two words run into each other.

I would like to see sources backing up the claim that children with a dead parent do better than kids from second families where the parents are still together. I find that very very hard to believe. Saying that ad someone who lost a parent at 8.

A parent who is separated from his or her spouse by death rather than divorce likely has all the characteristics of a parent who has remained married, thereby conferring all the statistical advantages onto their child. I suppose we can infer that these advantages outweigh the disadvantage of parental death if this is indeed true.

As Atomik is unable to cite any sources

That is a rather pejorative description of my reluctance to provide a source.

IME experience if you provide one/a few sources the debate moves to dissecting and poking holes in a singular/tiny sample of sources and gets stuck in a cycle of top trumps over whose source "wins". It stops being about reading and thinking and becomes the far less useful "point scoring with links"

When looking at research, based on my own experience, it is human nature to be selective, in order hear what we want to hear. What is harder and less intuitive is reading to try and get a neutral-ish picture of what the research seems to be pointing at. The latter requires time and effort. And freedom from a "Aha! That'll slay X poster !" being the criteria upon which sources are selected for closer reading. Because extensive reading of relentlessly uncherry picked sources isn't aided by the need to find the right source to bop another poster over the head.

Time and space to read and evaluate at one's own pace, working on pushing down one's own biases (mine included) so some stuff isn't set aside and left unread becuase it's unappealing, will perhaps play a role in allowing us to eventually close the outcome gap between children from different family types.

A Links Duel will likely work more in favour of perpetuating the outcome gap, because ideology/validation of personal choices, or leanings... will remain the greater priority. And that isn't a game I want to participate in. I have no way of being part of the solution. But I sure as hell get to chose not to be part of the problem.

I've attributed my own quotation and given a link to the report I quoted from. Over six pages of references are provided.

I think the quotation I provided is useful because it is balanced and nuanced, looking at the complexity of family breakdown and placing it within a broader context. There's a sense in which it speaks to the situations of many people who have posted eloquently on this thread about their personal circumstances and histories.

I'd admit that it's a bit less useful to those who want to say say, 'This is right. That is wrong. And I know. End of.'

Marianne, that passage you quoted makes a lot of sense to me.

I think that there are times when a step parent can be a positive presence.

That's what I found about my step-father. Unfortunately, him living with us - I think, anyway - was a very negative thing for his biological children. It's as if we got their dad.

(Incidentally DMum did not break up his marriage, both DMum and DSF were long divorced when they met.)

What works means different things to different families.

We have been a blended family for 7 years. There have been tough times and good times. My kids are fond of DH, they do not love him and I do not expect him to love them. DSS does not like me or my kids (even thought he and DS used to be best friends till they were 11) and avoids us and does not talk to us - this has the potential to upset the family, but we manage it our way. If he does not want to participate in our family life then he does not have to.

Overall we are happy and live together in harmony. We make it work for us.

I'd have thought that the impact on mental health to the remaining spouse where one parent has died must be affected though Sarah plus they would have financial difficulty possibly and less support etc so can't be in a much different position from a divorced single parent. Interesting if the outcomes for those children are much better than from divorced families.

I echo previous posters in having decided not to have a live in relationship (or any actually who have been introduced to dcs) despite the fact exh left when dcs quite small. But I grew up in a blended family so that may have impacted on my decision. Not criticising those who do of course, but I wouldn't trust my own judgement to have that certainty, and haven't met anyone that wonderful I suppose. But even if I did, I'd try to wait till dcs are grown up before living together.

blueblue even in your own example it does sound like the set up does not work for your dss though tbh. I think it might work for some family members, especially the adults, more than it might work for others iyswim

wintersocks I think one of the differences when one parent has died, rather than divorced, can be the support that comes from the outside.

When his first wife died DH had time off work that was supported by his employers, any childcare issues were viewed very sympathetically, people felt he should get the ideal time off at Christmas etc. Dss was only a toddler and the nursery offered extra hours for free to help him get a break every now and again, they were willing to take Dss a little bit early or keep him a little bit later. Little things like that all added together gave a wonderful support package that isn't always the same when someone finds themselves a single parent for other reasons.

yes that's a good point Lalyra I hadn't thought of that. Incidentally, do people think bereaved women get the same sorts of allowances made at work/nursery etc and social support or more so men?

I agree that depression must certainly be a major factor in death of a spouse. I don't know how I would cope with that.

Agree with fafoutis. I hear online about ones that work, but I've never actually personally encountered one through friends/family.

Think kids with divorced parents can be very good about not upsetting parents further as they have already seen their parents in substantial distress (emotional/practical/financial) and don't want to cause any more guilt/upset. in some extreme cases, I think they have already seen one parent vanish from their lives and don't want to run the risk of losing another by rocking the boat.

To be fair, I have seen a few occasions where a step-parent/new partner it did make a very bad situation better- largely because financially or practically it made something that was really failing fast work out. But those weren't blended families as such.

In one case, the dad had 2 older boys, new girlfriend moved in and helped, then there was a late baby after original kids had gone to college/moved in with their own partner (and one of the boys did move in with his girlfriend straight after school, which was down to him realising that it was time to move on). In the other case, new boyfriend was happy to have a ready made family and didn't want kids of his own. He was v happy to treat the tween daughter as a mini-adult i.e. someone who had to be consulted and involved in family decisions (to an appropriate degree), not someone he needed to "parent"/discipline etc. But she was already a pretty mature and well behaved 10 year old by the time he appeared. Lastly, I knew a couple who moved in together when his two kids were off at university and her daughter wa sin her last year at school, so his kids just needed a "base". The daughter did change her mind about studying in her hometown very quickly though- it went from an option she was seriously exploring to one she just couldn't face. Her dad gave her a deposit to buy a flat away from home and she never really went back except to visit, it was never her home again.

So those situations worked out ok because they didn't involve two sets of kids living together long-term.

BlueBlueSea; 'If he does not want to participate in our family life'.

I'm guessing it's this 'him vs our family' approach that has driven him away! Well done you!

"DSS.... avoids us and does not talk to us.... Overall we are happy and live together in harmony. We make it work for us."

Massive cognitive dissonance here

Talk of "managing" and "making it work" sounds to me in this case like "making it happen, because I want it to happen" rather than "creating a situation in which all involved are happy"

As you say, it depends what you mean by "work"

Most divorces in the UK are initiated by women so mostly the women get what they want. That is not the same with death or in husband directed divorce or where the husband runs off with another woman and the wife devasted then divorces him. In our case the children were asking me to get rid of their father (there was no cheating in our marriage but he was hard to live with) so since (10 years ago) we divorced every day has been like Christmas and as I earn a lot of money looking at the quote above you can see we are probably the kind of family where it was not a negative thing to divorce. The oldest was 18 and off to university just after we divorced but the youngest were only 4 and I think those younger ones had the nicer easier life with just me here (I have not moved a man in).

We also have to remember that in cultures where women cannot divorce they will often endure appalling violence and treatment from men or pour cooking oil over themselves to die. A high staying married rate can mean damage to children brought up in unhappy homes. A high divorce can indicate happier children (in those marriages which are unahppy - despite my divorce I know lots of marriages are very happy). 50% will divorce in the UK. Some of the oher 50% will not be happy marriages but a good few are.

Bluebluesea

I found your post distressing. I feel so sad for a boy who is, my your own admission, desperately unhappy but whose parent/step parent thinks that despite his feelings, their family life is hunky dory whether he chooses to be a part of it or not.

I found your post distressing. I feel so sad for a boy who is, my your own admission, desperately unhappy but whose parent/step parent thinks that despite his feelings, their family life is hunky dory whether he chooses to be a part of it or not.

Yes.

I had two step parents at the age of 6, as my parents had split when I was two. They were both horrible! My step dad was abusive, mean and we had to do exactly as he said. My step mum was distant, it was clear she didn't want us kids around and when we had to move in with my dad when I was 11, she really resented us coming between her and her little family (as she'd had a baby by then).

Having said that I'd imagine there are some really good step parents around, but it's a hard job to do well, usually either the step kids resent the step parent, or vice versa, or both.

Now 30 years on I see my step mum socially from time to time (she's no longer with my dad but I still have the connection through my half brother and she lives nearby). We actually get on ok as friends now, something I would never have believed as a rejected teenager.

I can only talk from personal experience. There are 5 'dc' in our blended family. All are in their forties now (teens when we married), all have university degrees, are home owners, married, with children of their own. There are three teachers, an accountant and a psychologist.
This Christmas we will have a total of 6 adults (not counting us) and 7 dgc over the three days (not all at once) there will be so much laughter and chat and all the children will see one another as cousins. We don't do 'his and hers' they are ours. My first grandchild was a 'step' and I cried with happiness when I held him.
Our 9 dgc range from 18 down to 6. Three of them are my "blood" dgc the others are grandchildren of my heart.

Blue sea, do neither of you care about any of the children? Your posts smacks of adults getting what they want and sod the children not being loved or happy. They'll grow up thinking it's the norm to have a household like that. How sad.

I found your post distressing. I feel so sad for a boy who is, my your own admission, desperately unhappy but whose parent/step parent thinks that despite his feelings, their family life is hunky dory whether he chooses to be a part of it or not.

If there was this situation within a natural family no one would say the family was not working.

He is a disturbed child, our blended family is the most 'normal' secure environment he has ever known. He does not want to interact with us, he is given the choice and asked to outings etc. We are not going to make him do things with us. There is a back story here, but I am not going into it. He gets help and support for his issues.

What I was pointing out is even with problems, which are nothing to do with our 'blended' status, we manage to make it work for us. We do not let one persons problems bring down the whole family. We adapt and have our own version of 'work' as many families do.

NRTFT but surely blended families are a symptom/result (so to speak) of the initial non blended family not working? Families dont work for a huge variety of reasons and break up all the time, blended or not. Equally (not sure of the specific figures) i'd imagine that plenty of families (blended or not) do work out. Is there data showing that blended families are more likely to fail than non-blended families? Or produce more damaged children? What is the answer then, if you fail at love first time and you have kids, then no more relationships for you?

If there was this situation within a natural family no one would say the family was not working.

Yes, they would. Even in a 'natural family'.