Protector and friend: Turning points and discursive constructions of the stepparent role

• Published date: 01 July 2022
• Author: Bailey M. Oliver‐Blackburn,Dawn O. Braithwaite,Vincent R. Waldron,Robert Hall,Lucas Hackenburg,Braedon G. Worman
• Date: 01 July 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12642

RESEARCH

Protector and friend: Turning points and discursive

constructions of the stepparent role

Bailey M. Oliver-Blackburn

1

|Dawn O. Braithwaite

2

|

Vincent R. Waldron

3

|Robert Hall

2

|Lucas Hackenburg

2

|

Braedon G. Worman

2

1

Applied Communication, University of

Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock,

Arkansas, United States

2

Communication Studies, University of

Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska,

United States

3

Communication Studies, Arizona State

University, Phoenix, Arizona, United States

Correspondence

Bailey M. Oliver-Blackburn, Applied

Communication, University of Arkansas at

Little Rock, 2801 S. University, Ross Hall

120, Little Rock, AR, 72204, USA.

Email: bmoliver1@ualr.edu

Abstract

Objective: To understand turning points (TPs) in the devel-

opment of positive stepparent–stepchild communication

and relationships.

Background: Scholars stress the importance of communica-

tion in co-constructing healthy stepparent–stepchild relation-

ships. The researchers focused on positive stepparenting via

understanding transformational turning point (TP) events

across time. Research questions explored how stepparents with

an overall positive relationship with a stepchild characterize

TPs and the discursive constructions of the stepparent role.

Method: The team analyzed 877 pages of data from 37 in-

depth interviews with stepparents who described self-

identified TP events, reflected in visual graphs of 279 TPs.

Results: Data were coded into 11 TP types, focused on struc-

tural and role changes for stepparents, co-constructed over

time. The top three TP types were changes in household com-

position, communicating support through offering protection

and being present/available, and role change, most frequently

by functioning as a parent versus friend. All the TPs highlight

discursive work to forge positive stepparenting roles.

Conclusions: The findings extend earlier studies of step-

children’s experiences and communication practices that gro-

und resilience to manage relational resources through

investments of quality time and enactment of social support.

Implications: Applications suggest support for stepparents to

have quality interactions with stepchildren and training to

develop healthy communication practices and facilitate

resilience.

KEYWORDS

family communication and interaction, parent–child relationships,

qualitative: discourse/narrative analysis, remarriage and stepfamily,

resilience

Received: 22 January 2021Revised: 6 October 2021Accepted: 27 November 2021

DOI: 10.1111/fare.12642

© 2022 National Council on Family Relations.

1266 Family Relations. 2022;71:1266–1285.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/fare

Scholars, clinicians, and lay authors have focused on understanding stepfamily relationships

overthepast20 years,addressingchallengesthesefamiliesencounter(e.g.,Ganong&

Coleman, 2017; Papernow, 2013). Understanding stepfamily challenges is important, as they

have become a prevalent family form in the 21st century. The Pew Research Center (2015)

reported that less than half (46%) of children in the United States are living in first marriage,

two-parent households and 16% live in a stepfamily at a given time.

Researchers have documented numerous internal stepfamily challenges, including con-

flicting expectations, loyalty divides, and role ambiguity, especially for stepparents who may

lack the awareness, knowledge, or skills to effectively navigate the turbulent waters of

stepparent–stepchild communication (e.g., Afifi, 2003; Ganong & Coleman, 2017). Many step-

parents find it particularly difficult to manage inherent contradictions of the stepparent–child

relationship, such as closeness and distance. Stepparents may face expectations to form relation-

ships with their stepchildren and may desire this themselves, while their stepchildren or partner

may prefer them to have more reserved or detached relationships (Baxter et al., 2004). Struggles

over the stepparent role are also located externally, as stepparents are nested within, and often

caught between, larger family networks of partners, nonresidential parents, biological siblings,

stepsiblings, and external family members, all of whom may influence expectations and roles

(DiVerniero, 2013; Ganong & Coleman, 2017).

Researchers’proclivity to focus on stepfamily deficits sometimes results in them missing

opportunities to focus on stepfamilies that successfully address their challenges and thrive.

Although stepfamilies differ across structures and experiences, Papernow (2013) argued, “strong

stepfamilies face the same challenges as struggling ones do. It is how stepfamilies meet chal-

lenges that determines their success”(p. 24, emphasis in original). Thus, some contemporary

researchers have stressed the importance of stepfamily adaptation and positive relational devel-

opment. For example, Schrodt (2006) found that stepchildren from bonded and functional step-

families (with higher levels of involvement, flexibility, and expressiveness) experienced fewer

mental health symptoms and perceived higher levels of competence regarding their parent and

stepparent. Baxter et al. (2004) argued the importance for all members of the stepfamily to “put

forth efforts toward affinity seeking and maintenance, both at the beginning of stepfamily life

and especially over time as the family develops”(p. 462). Although stepfamilies have different

needs across time, Baxter et al. (1999) cautioned against simple answers that call for stepfam-

ilies to enact specific behaviors at particular stages in stepfamily development.

Scholars have stressed the important role of stepparent communication in the success of the

entire stepfamily and especially in the stepparent–stepchild dyad (Braithwaite et al., 2022). Step-

parents who adopt a warm and authoritative parenting style experience better outcomes. For

example, Ganong et al. (2019) provided evidence that stepparent affinity-seeking behavior

improves relational quality. In contrast, Papernow (2018) noted that stepparents are disadvan-

taged when they take on disciplinary roles and advised “connection not correction”(p. 37).

Schrodt et al. (2008) identified relational consequences of stepparents and stepchildren engaging

in everyday talk, and Waldron et al. (2018) saw the positive role of communicating forgiveness

in resilient stepparent–stepchild relationships. We contend that scholars should continue to

explore how positive stepfamilies interact and co-construct adaptive, successful family identity,

focusing specifically on the key role of the stepparent. Thus, our central purpose was to under-

stand the development of positive stepparent–stepchild interaction and relationships.

DISCURSIVE CO-CONSTRUCTION OF STEPFAMILY

DEVELOPMENTAL PROCESSES

We centered our study in a perspective that calls focus to how communication contributes to

how families are created, enacted, resisted, and changed in social interaction (Baxter, 2014).

TURNING POINTS IN POSITIVE STEPPARENT RELATIONSHIPS1267