Stepfamilies Doing Family: A Meta‐Ethnography

• Date: 01 June 2018
• Author: Charlotte Pylyser,Ann Buysse,Tom Loeys
• Published date: 01 June 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12293

Stepfamilies Doing Family: A Meta-Ethnography

CHARLOTTE PYLYSER*

ANN BUYSSE*

TOM LOEYS

†

The present review examines how stepfamily members without a shared history co-construct

a shared family identity and what family processes are relevant in this stepfamily forma-

tion. Three databases (Web of Science, PsycInfo, and ProQuest) were system atically

searched, resulting in 20 included qualitative studies. The meta-ethnography approach of

Noblit and Hare allowed synthesizing these qualitative studies and constructing a compre-

hensive framework of stepfamilies doing family. Three interdependent family tasks were

identified: (a) honoring the past, (b) marking the present, and (c) investing in the future.

Stepfamily members’ experiences of these family tasks are strongly affected by the domi-

nant societal perspectives and characterized by an underlying dialectical te nsion between

wanting to be like a first-time family and feeling the differences in their family structure at

the same time. These findings clearly demonstrate the family work that all stepfamily

members undertake and provide a broader context for interpreting stepfamilies’ co-construction

of a new family identity.

Keywords: Family Processes; Qualitative Research; Review; Stepfamilies

Fam Proc 57:496–509, 2018

Ganong and Coleman (2004) define stepfamily as a family “in which at least one of the

adults has a child (or children) from a previous relationship” (p. 2). Demographic

trends in the past decades, such as divorce and an increase in cohabiting unions and non-

marital childbearing, have led to an increased likelihood for adults and children to spend

part of their lives in a stepfamily (Eurostat, 2015; Papernow, 2013). Because of the impor-

tance of the institution of family in people’s everyday lives (Weigel, 2008), a greater und er-

standing of how adults and children without a shared history become a family is needed.

The high diversity of family types in our contemporary Western society (Eurostat, 2015;

Galvin, 2006) challenges scholars across different disciplines to reflect on definitions of fam-

ily. Holstein and Gubrium (1999) distinguish between the essentialist definition of “the fam-

ily,” considering family as if it were an actual observable entity with clear boundaries, and

the postmodern concept of “family.” The latter conceptualizes family as a more fluid and

ambiguous concept, constructed through social interaction by the use of language, and thus

possibly changing from person to person and from time to time (Gergen, 1994; Weigel, 2008).

Within this social constructionist perspective, the current review is based on two theo-

ries, which both consider family as a verb rather than as a noun: “doing family” and

*Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational

Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

†

Department of Data Analysis, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Ghent, Ghent,

Belgium.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Charlotte Pylyser, Department of Experi-

mental Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Henri Dunant-

laan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium. E-mail: charlotte.pylyser@ugent.be

The authors would like to thank the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) for financial support (Grant

G020115N).

496

Family Process, Vol. 57, No. 2, 2018 ©2017 Family Process Institute

doi: 10.1111/famp.12293