Parent–Child Relationships in Stepfather Families and Adolescent Adjustment: A Latent Class Analysis

• Author: Maggie L. Thorsen,Paul R. Amato,Valarie King
• Date: 01 April 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12267
• Published date: 01 April 2016

P R. A  V K The Pennsylvania State University

M L. T Montana State University∗

Parent–Child Relationships in Stepfather Families

and Adolescent Adjustment: A Latent Class

Analysis

In the current study the authors drew on

Waves I and III from Add Health to examine

the closeness of parent–adolescent relation-

ships in married mother–stepfather families

(N=1,934). They used latent class analysis to

identify family constellations dened by ado-

lescents’ relationships with all of their parents:

mothers, stepfathers, and biological nonresident

fathers. In particular, the authors (a) identi-

ed the most common underlying patterns of

adolescent–parent relationships in stepfamilies;

(b) determined the background characteristics

that predict membership in these groups; and

(c) examined how adolescents in these groups

fare with respect to depressive symptoms, delin-

quency, and substance use. The results indicate

that adolescents’ relationships can be repre-

sented with 4 latent classes. Adolescents in these

classes differ on measures of adjustment, and

many of these differences persist into the early

adult years.

Department of Sociology, 201 Oswald Tower, University

Park, PA16802 (pxa6@psu.edu).

∗Department of Sociology & Anthropology, Montana State

University,2-109 Wilson Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717.

This article was edited by Robert Crosnoe.

Key Words: development/outcomes, National Longitudinal

Study of Adolescent Health, parent–adolescent relations,

stepfamilies.

Because of high rates of divorce, nonmarital

childbearing, cohabitation, and remarriage, an

increasing number of children are growing up

apart from their biological fathers and living

with stepfathers. The transition to stepfamily liv-

ing presents a number of risks for children, and

children in stepfamilies exhibit more internaliz-

ing and externalizing problems than do children

in two-biological-parent households, on average

(Bray, 1999). And despite improvementsin chil-

dren’s standard of livingwhen custodial mothers

remarry, children in stepfather families are no

better off on most emotional and behavioral indi-

cators than are children in single-mother house-

holds (Amato, 2010; Sweeney, 2010).

A focus on average differences in children’s

adjustment, however, obscures the hetero-

geneity in outcomes among children living in

stepfamilies (Coleman, Ganong, & Russell,

2013). Why do some children in stepfamilies

thrive while others ounder? Although a variety

of factors contribute to children’s adjustment

in stepfamilies, almost all observers agree

that the role of parents is central (Bornstein,

2002). Close and supportive relationships with

parents foster children’s healthy development

in all types of families, including stepfami-

lies, yet establishing and maintaining strong

parent–child ties in stepfamilies is challenging,

especially for adolescents (Bray & Easling,

2005; Hetherington & Clingempeel, 1992;

Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 2000).

482 Journal of Marriage and Family 78 (April 2016): 482–497

DOI:10.1111/jomf.12267

Parent–Child Relationships in Adolescence 483

In this study we drew on Waves I and

III from the National Longitudinal Study of

Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health;

http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth) to

examine the closeness of parent–adolescent

relationships in married mother–stepfather fam-

ilies and the implications of these relationships

for adolescent adjustment. We focused on step-

father families because the number of children in

stepmother households is comparatively small

(Stewart, 2007), and their representation in

Add Health is too limited to conduct a detailed

analysis. The current study also was limited to

married stepfathers because adolescents in the

Add Health study who lived with their mothers

and cohabiting partners were not asked ques-

tions about their relationships with stepfather

gures. Stepfamilies that began as cohabiting

partnerships and transitioned into marriage

prior to the Wave I interview, however, were

included in the sample. Despite some sample

limitations, the Add Health data set is appropri-

ate for the current topic because it is large, is

nationally representative, and provides detailed

information on parent–child relationships in

stepfamilies. Moreover, Add Health makes

it possible to study the associations between

stepfamily relationships and multiple aspects of

adolescent adjustment.

Previous stepfamily research has focused on

children’s relationships with each parent sepa-

rately (e.g., Buchanan, Maccoby, & Dornbusch,

2000; King, 2006). In contrast, we identied

family constellations dened by adolescents’

relationships with mothers, stepfathers, and

biological nonresident fathers—an approach

broadly consistent with family systems theory.

In particular, we (a) identied the most com-

mon underlying patterns of adolescent–parent

relationships in stepfamilies; (b) determined the

background characteristics that predict these

patterns; and (c) examined how differentpatterns

of relationships are associated with symptoms

of depression, delinquency, and substance use

in adolescence (using cross-sectional data) and

young adulthood (using longitudinal data).

B

Many researchers have studied stepfam-

ily dyads, with a particular focus on the

stepfather–stepchild relationship. This research

has revealed a striking degree of variability, with

some stepfathers developing close emotional ties

with their stepchildren and others remaining dis-

engaged and emotionally distant (King, 2006).

Despite the usefulness of this research, few stud-

ies of stepfamilies have studied systems larger

than dyads. In one exceptional study, Baxter,

Braithwaite, and Bryant (2006) examined triadic

relationships among college students living with

a biological parent and a stepparent. The most

common pattern to emerge from their qualitative

analysis was one in which young adults related

to the stepparent (to whom they were moderately

close) primarily through the resident biological

parent (to whom they were very close). Other

patterns involved youth who were close to the

resident biological parent but not the stepparent,

youth who were not close to either parent, and

youth were very close to both parents, with the

last group being the least common.

Family systems theory provides a general

framework for our research. This perspective

focuses on patterns of closeness and commu-

nication between family members, how these

patterns are maintained over time, and the

implications of these patterns for individual and

family development (Broderick, 1993; Kerr &

Bowen, 1988; Minuchin, 1974). The assumption

that all parts of a family system are interrelated

shifts the focus away from particular dyadic rela-

tionships and toward more general patterns that

characterize family relationships. In the present

study we considered adolescents’ relationships

with three parental gures: (a) stepfathers, (b)

mothers, and (c) nonresident biological fathers.

Although most studies of stepfamilies have

not incorporated information on nonresident

fathers, bringing nonresident fathers into the

picture makes it possible to study systems larger

than those dened by the household. Moreover,

children’s contact with nonresident fathers has

increased in recent decades (Amato, Meyers, &

Emery, 2009), and the quality of these relation-

ships is related to multiple aspects of children’s

adjustment (Adamsons & Johnson, 2013; Amato

& Gilbreth, 1999). For these reasons, including

nonresident fathers provides a more compre-

hensive picture of parent–child relationships

in stepfamilies and how these relationships are

related to adolescent adjustment. (Adolescents

in Add Health were not asked about nonres-

idential stepmothers, so we were unable to

incorporate information on these relationships.)

Family systems theory, like virtually all

family theories, assumes that parent–child rela-

tionships are central to children’s development