Commentary on “Reconsidering the ‘Good Divorce’” by Paul Amato et al.

• Date: 01 December 2011
• Author: Jan Pryor
• Published date: 01 December 2011
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00675.x

JAN PRYOR Victoria University of Wellington

Commentary on ‘‘Reconsidering

the ‘Good Divorce’’’ by Paul Amato et al.

The body of research addressing the outcomes

for children whose parents separate and divorce

is testament to the seriousness with which this

topic is regarded. The corpus is based, in the

main, on populations in the United States, and no

one has contributed more to this knowledge base

than Paul Amato. Studies have gone well beyond

simple comparisons with children in families

where parental separation has not occurred, to

looking for explanatory factors. A particularly

sharp focus has been and continues to be on

the contribution of the event of separation itself

(divorce often comes months or years later) to

adverse outcomes for children and adolescents.

Does most of the explanatory power lie with

that point in time when one parent leaves the

household or with the events surrounding and

associated with parental divorce?

Studies using fixed effect models are ambiva-

lent in their findings, some showing a direct

impact of separation and others not. Other

methodologies yield similarly inconclusive evi-

dence. It is, however, safe to conclude that for

at least some children the impact of parental

divorce is long term and evident in adult-

hood (Pryor & Rodgers, 2001); for others,

psychopathology is not present although they

may retain painful nonclinical effects (Laumann-

Billings & Emery, 2000). There is also undoubt-

edly a group of children for whom parental

separation is a release from a toxic context of

unresolved parental conflict and who go on to

McKenzie Centre for the Study of Families, Victoria

University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

(jan.pryor@vuw.ac.nz).

thrive after their parents have parted. There are,

too, those for whom divorce has no apparent

long-term impact; this is the group who may

have experienced a ‘‘good divorce.’’ It is likely,

however, that all children experience a range

of negative feelings at the time their parents

separate. For many, those negative feelings are

intermingled with relief (Smith et al., 1997).

Paul Amato, in this article, addresses the

question of whether a good divorce has medium-

or long-term benefits for children and finds,

overall, that there is little evidence to support

the belief that it does. As always, his logical

and analytical approach is impressive, and the

findings are beyond dispute.

The concept of a ‘‘good divorce’’ is, though,

problematic in itself if, as suggested by Ahrons

(1994) and underpinned by Family Systems

Theory, the postdivorce family is seen as

functioning rather like a healthy two-parent

family. The realities mean that the postdivorce

family cannot ‘‘emulate the behaviors and

relationships of married parents in well-

functioning families’’ (p. xxx). For example,

the majority of divorced adults re-partner,

which almost inevitably introduces complicated

dynamics for adults and children (although it is

not clear that re-partnering necessarily reduces

child-nonresident parent contact; Pryor, 2008).

Family Systems Theory also implies ap-

proaching postdivorce families by taking the

whole family as the unit of analysis. This brings

into consideration concepts of family meaning,

belonging, and identity. It is a challenge,

especially for children, to feel as if they belong

to the postdivorce constellation of ‘‘family’’

Family Relations 60 (December 2011): 525 – 527 525

DOI:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00675.x