from: Smart Marriages
When Strangers Become Family
US News Cover Story 11/29/99
By Wray Herbert
Tori La Londe hosts a large Thanksgiving gathering every year at her
home, but she's never sure who will show up. It could include any
combination of her four biological children from two marriages, her
stepson, the two foster kids she raised, or the several strays the others
bring home. Although La Londe has little contact with her two former
husbands, she has a close, enduring relationship with Jud, the stepson
she helped raise. She also has a strong friendship with Jud's mother
(when the two get together one will quip, "How's our husband?"). Once,
when she ran into Jud's grandmotherhis mother's motherthey embraced
warmly, and Jud's grandmother cheerily introduced Tori to her friends:
"This is my ex-son-in-law's wife."
Ex-wife now, which means the U.S. Census Bureau doesn't count Tori La
Londe's family as a stepfamily. Social scientists label it a broken
stepfamily, but calling her a "step" mother presiding over a "broken"
home belies the warmth and wholeness she sees in her recombinant family.
Like many Americans, she considers the collection of children and in-laws
she has inherited in her marriages as family, plain and simple. The ties
may not be biological, but they are strong nonetheless.
In fact, La Londe's extended family and other stepfamilies of various
configurations are becoming standard issue: The government estimates that
stepfamilies will outnumber traditional nuclear families by the year
2007. But a more inclusive estimate of anyone in any kind of step
relationship brings the number of people who are "steps" to about 60
percent of the population. Which means that sitting down this week to the
final Thanksgiving dinner of the 20th century will be more than 5.5
million American stepfamilies.
Their stories have become familiar in the two decades since Kramer vs.
Kramer: the uneasy navigation of strangers suddenly confronting each
other at the breakfast table, over the holidays, on the way to the
bathroom in the middle of the night. In interviews with U.S. News, they
spoke of awkward intimacies, jealous anxietiesand the strange alliances
that make stepparenting an experiment in heartbreak and joy. Many of them
are prospering, instinctively coming up with strategies that social
scientists and family experts have just begun to understand.
Name game. The challenges begin on the level of language: What do members
of new stepfamilies call themselves? Consider Kris Allen, 18, of Boulder
Creek, Calif. His mother is Kim Allen, Allen being the name she took from
her ex-husband, Kris's father. But Kris's father only became an Allen
when he himself became part of a stepfamily in his youth; his given name
was Hoops, and Kris is thinking of taking Hoops as his name. Just to make
it interesting, Kris's stepfather, Jerry Kaiser, was originally Jerry
Cohen. His widowed mother changed his name to Kaiser when she remarried,
when Jerry was 10.
As complicated as it is to deconstruct the Allen-Hoops-Kaiser-Cohen
family tree, in practice they act like any old American family. Both
parents are fully involved in family decision making and discipline, as
they have been since Jerry and Kim got together eight years ago. Kris is
a well-adjusted kid, no more directionless or cynical than the other
18-year-olds attending nearby Cabrillo College. Social scientists haven't
studied this family, but if they did they would point to a couple of
things that Kim and Jerry have done that most successful stepfamilies do.
First, they talk openly and daily, anticipating and defusing many
potential land mines. Jerry and Kim are both counselors, and the
communication skills that they teach to corporate managers are the same
ones they bring to parenting. They also developed their relationship very
slowly at first. Jerry and Kris actually became friends before Jerry and
Kim started datingKris attended a work-site day-care center where they
workedso he was excited when his mother told him that Jerry would be
moving into their house. The 10-year-old had only one question: "Where's
he going to sleep?"
The Kaiser-Allen family is typical of what psychologist James Bray calls
"neo-traditional" stepfamilies, the most successful stepfamilies he
identified in his nine-year study for the National Institutes of Health.
Their most striking characteristic is that they take a realisticand
flexibleapproach to building a family out of strangers. They know
they're not a 1950s-vintage nuclear family and don't try to be; but they
are also the type of stepfamily that after a few years most closely
resembles the traditional nuclear family, in intimacy and unconditional
support of one another.
But successful stepfamilies come in many different shapes. Brenda and
Jeff Micka of Joseph, Ore., have staked out a bold position, perhaps at
odds with what the experts counsel, but which works for them. All four of
their boysthree from his first marriage and one from herscall them Mom
and Dad. They also call their other biological parents Mom and Dadan
arrangement that the kids seem comfortable with. But the Mickas are well
aware that they have an unusual setup. For one thing, Jeff's ex lives
eight hours away in Eugene, so every other weekend the three boys have to
travel 16 hours round trip to visit their mother. Still, they've been
able to turn this awkward arrangement into an acceptable routine. For
Michael and Simone Humphrey of Overland Park, Kan., the sacrifice has
been even greater: They recently moved their new family to Kansas from
Dallas, following Michael's son and daughter and their motherhis
ex-wifewho had relocated in 1996. Says Simone: "We were flying Jennifer
and Matthew to Dallas and back once a month. It was just too much, and
too little time with them."
Every successful stepfamily has stories about compromises and adjustments
it has had to make. In the case of Drew Myers and Anne Marie
O'Connell-Myers of Westport, Conn., a major issue was religion. Anne
Marie and her daughter, Jackie, are practicing Catholics; Drew and his
four kidsBrad, Carter, Garrett, and Libbywere not churchgoers when Drew
and Anne Marie got together. Anne Marie had no interest in converting her
new family, but she did think as a matter of shared values that it was
important for all of them to attend church. So Drew and his children
began attending the Congregational Church, where they now go on the first
Sunday of each month. It was an adjustment at first for the formerly
unchurched Myers kids, but now they sometimes choose to join Anne Marie
and Jackie at their services, too.
Lifestyle change is inevitable when a new stepfamily is formed, and it
can be especially difficult for only children. In the Micka family, for
instance, Brenda's son, Cody, inherited three younger brothers overnight.
"Cody had some difficulty at first," says Brenda Micka, "going from
having me to himself to sharing a mother with three younger brothers."
But the three younger boys' adoration of their new "older brother"
brought Cody around. For 10-year-old Jackie O'Connell, the adjustment had
more to do with family finances. An only child who had lived with her
single mom since birth, she had never really wanted for anything; when
she joined the Myers clan, she inherited four siblings and a stepdad who
was used to running a disciplined family budget. "We had to negotiate
family finances," says Drew. "I was budgeting for four, and Jackie had
been used to getting what she wanted."
Baby makes three. The arrival of new half-siblings can also be
disruptive, although it doesn't have to be; indeed, it can be tonic if
the parents involve the older children in the excitement of the pregnancy
early on. That's certainly how 12-year-old Madeleine Schlefer of
Brooklyn, N.Y., sees it. She and her 9-year-old sister, Gwen, live
primarily with their mother, but her dad and stepmom live close by in the
same Park Slope neighborhood. That proximity makes it easy for the two
older sisters to stop by after school and check in on their baby sister,
Juliet, who was born 10 months ago. Meg Schlefer, the girls' stepmom,
credits their mother with helping to make Madeleine and Gwen's comings
and goings uncontentious.
RELIGION, FAMILY FINANCES, DIET, disciplinethese are all issues that
stepfamilies around the country are struggling with every day. And most
of them are doing it gracefully. Even so, there is a sizable minority of
stepfamilies in America that are not doing well at all. A variety of
studies have demonstrated that stepkids do more poorly on a variety of
measures than do kids who live in traditional, two-parent familieseven
adjusting for income level. They are more apt to repeat a grade in
school, have disciplinary problems, and drop out of school altogether. In
fact, these studies collectively indicate that stepchildren do about as
well as kids who live with a single parent, which is to say much worse
than kids in traditional nuclear families.
And that's not the worst of it. According to extensive research by Martin
Daly and Margo Wilson of McMaster University in Ontario, stepchildren are
more likely to be abused, both physically and sexually, and even more
likely to be killed by a parent100 times as likelycompared with kids
being raised by two biological parents. Another line of research
indicates that they are less likely to be provided for. For example,
American children living with a stepparent are less likely to go to
college and to receive family financial support if they do. New research
also shows that biological mothers around the world spend more of family
income on foodparticularly milk, fruit, and vegetablesand less on
tobacco and alcohol, compared with mothers raising nonbiological
children. The list goes on.
Unsolved mysteries. Just why these families fare so poorly as a group is
a matter of dispute. It's widely accepted that kids in single-parent
families have troubles at least in part because the parentusually the
motherhas money problems following divorce. Facing financial
difficulties, she is more apt to be absentactually or emotionally. But
remarriage doesn't seem to ameliorate the children's problems. And while
few doubt that the dislocating effects of the initial divorce contribute
to the situation, many experts believe that these experiences cannot
fully account for the problems.
Experts offer several ideas about what might be going on. For example,
unsuccessful stepfamilies often overromanticize the new family. What
psychologist Bray calls "romantic" stepfamilies picture themselves as the
idealized nuclear family, and they do whatever they can to fit into that
moldusually with unhappy results. The main problem, Bray says, is that
in their impatience to be seen as traditional, these families push things
that should evolve slowly. In most families, for example, family members
spend a fair amount of time apart, more and more so as the kids become
teenagers. Romantic stepfamilies, on the other hand, spend a lot of time
in forced camaraderie, and teens are especially quick to detect the
falseness. The decidedly unromantic Kris Allen wasn't even comfortable
being photographed for this article taking a walk with his parents. A
friend asked him, "So, Kris, you mean that photographer dude tried to
make you act normal doing stuff with your parents that you'd never do?"
Kris: "Yeah. Like I'd ever be walking on the beach with my parents!" In
extreme cases, stepfamilies actually pretend they are nuclear families,
hiding their step-status from schools, for example. And the bottom line
is that they break up at a higher rate than other stepfamilies.
The problem, experts say, is that stepfamilies are not nuclear
familieseven if they wish they wereand trying to squeeze into that mold
can backfire. According to historian Stephanie Coontz, author of The Way
We Really Are: Coming to Terms With America's Changing Families,
stepfamilies are not a new phenomenon in American life, but the dynamics
have changed in important ways. Before divorce rates exploded in the
1970s, stepfamilies were usually formed after the death of a parent, and
those stepfamilies could in effect create a second nuclear family. But
modern stepfamilies are mostly the product of divorce (or out-of-wedlock
births), and it's nearly impossible for these families to fit the
traditional mold. Most have to deal with ex-spousesthe "ghost at the
dinner table," in one expert's phrasingand often with the exes' new
families as well. These interactions can be complex under the most
congenial circumstances, and more often than not the circumstances are
not congenial. Meg Schlefer has found that humor goes a long way in
navigating the tricky territory of step-relationships. When she's trying
to get her stepdaughters to attend to chores, for example, she'll say:
"Your wart-covered, foul-smelling, evil stepmother asks you, 'Please
clean your room.' "
Biological nuclear families form gradually, allowing a couple time to
negotiate rules, responsibilities, and traditions before children come
along. But in stepfamilies these processes unfold helter-skelter. From
the point of view of the child, it can seem that one life has been torn
away and replaced with anotherand all without the child's vote. Jerry
Kaiser, for example, was 10 when his widowed mother remarried. Seemingly
overnight, he inherited two older siblings and had to share a room with
one of them in a strange house. Perhaps most disconcerting, he lost his
name and the name of the father he grieved for. He was Jerry Cohen one
day, Jerry Kaiser the next. He was never clear on what he was supposed to
call his stepfathernobody ever told himso he simply avoided addressing
him at all. "I got very good," Kaiser recalls, "at positioning myself in
the room so I didn't have to call him Norm or Dad."
If stepfamiles shouldn't pretend they're traditional intact families, how
should they act? Nobody really knows, including stepparents. In one
recent research project, adults were asked to rank various roles
according to their importance as sources of their sense of self. Not
surprisingly, "parent" topped the list, but "stepparent" ranked extremely
low, below such identities as neighbor, in-law, or churchgoer. Because of
the low regard accorded stepparenting, it's not surprising that many
stepparents are tempted to put more of their time and energy into other
roles, making their presence in the new family shadowy at best. But this
can set in motion a vicious circle: When a stepparent lacks a clear
mandate as the authority figure within the family, he or she may err on
the side of disciplining too muchor too little, withdrawing from that
traditional parental role completely. The result may be that the
stepchildren receive less attention, monitoring, and supervision than
children in nuclear families.
Being somewhat disengaged as a stepparent isn't always bad, however. The
third type of stepfamily to emerge from Bray's study is what he calls
"matriarchal" stepfamilies, and as the name suggests, the mother plays
the dominant parent- ing role in these families. Matriarchal stepfamilies
often come into existence when a single mom finally remarries; since she
has been carrying the full parenting load, perhaps for several years, she
often simply continues to do so. These stepfamilies usually do best when
the new stepfather takes a somewhat marginal role; this is especial- ly
true if the stepchildren are teenagers, who are just beginning the
psychological process of distancing themselves from parental authority.
Indeed, matriarchal stepfamilies are more likely to experience problems
when circumstances force the new father into a disciplinary role with
which he is unfamiliar or uncomfortable.
WHEN PAUL AND GALE HAL- pern decided to end their marriage, Paul expected
he would at least have some kind of continuing relationship with their
1-year-old daughter, Laurie. Although he was not the girl's biological
father, he felt that he had been a committed "psychological parent": He
had coached Gale through the birth and cut the umbilical cord; his name
was on the birth certificate, evidence of the couple's intention to raise
the child together. And he had been a stay-at-home dad since Laurie's
birth. Indeed, she had even called him "Daddy."
No relationship. But when Paul Halpern petitioned for visitation rights,
the California courts denied his request in what has become an
often-cited legal landmark. Because he was a stepparent during the
marriage, the dissolution of that union made him nothing more than a
"nonparent" in the eyes of the court. The judge dismissed Paul and his
claims with this terse comment: "He absolutely has no relationship to the
child bloodwise or otherwise, and I can't accept I should burden all of
the parties in this matter, including Mr. Halpern, with conflicts,
struggles, and disruptions for years to come because of Mr. Halpern's
present emotional state in connection with the child."
The Halpern case took place nearly two decades ago, but it has remained a
symbol in the legal profession of the gross disregard and lack of
protective laws that beset stepparents and stepfamilies. Sadly, the shaky
status of stepparents is just as much a fact of life today as it was in
the Halperns' time. Indeed, it is now under fresh assault: Conservative
critics have recently embraced the sweeping biological indictment of
stepfamilies proposed by evolutionary psychologists, who contend that
parents have evolved over eons to care only about the welfare of their
genetic offspring. The critics are using the scientific theory as
ammunition to lobby for stronger "pro-family" social policies. If
stepfamilies are so unnatural from a genetic point of view that they
imperil children's welfare, the argument goes, then anything that can be
done to prevent divorce and preserve traditional families ought to be.
This includes a number of ideas proffered by the nascent "marriage
movement"from pro-marriage tax policies to the so-called covenant
marriages that are intended to make divorce (and thus remarriage) more
difficult.
Biological determinists represent a minority viewpoint in family-policy
debates. Other social critics contend that if there is a genetic
predisposition that favors biological children over stepchildren, it's
just thata predispositionand predisposition is not destiny. Creating
social policies that keep unhappy families trapped in the same house,
these critics argue, would be wrongheaded and far more risky
psychologically than life in a stepfamily. What's needed, these critics
argue, is not more stigmatizing of stepfamilies, but rather policies that
strengthen stepfamilies and reduce any risks that might exist.
Changes in their legal status are one possibility. Like domestic
partners, stepparents currently have almost no legal standing in most
states, which means that even when they assume responsibility for their
stepchildrensupporting them emotionally and financially, for
examplethey have no corresponding rights. If the marriage ends, the
stepparent has no legal standing to ask for custody or visitation.
Similarly, stepchildren rarely have rightsto life insurance benefits,
for exampleor, if the marriage ends, to continued support or
inheritance. Existing family law has been challenged in various ways in
different localities, but the resulting legal rulings have been
inconsistent. In a case now pending before the Supreme Court, a child's
grandparents are suing for visitation rights, but some legal experts
believe that a ruling for the grandparents could be interpreted as an
affirmation of stepparents' rights as well.
Many family experts are now arguing for legislation that explicitly
spells out both the rights and responsibilities of stepparents, perhaps
modeled on England's Children Act of 1989. That law gives stepparents who
have been married to a child's parent for at least two years the right to
petition the court for a "residence order," which conveys many of the
same rights and responsibilities as the biological parents'. Children in
these stepfamilies in effect have legal relationships with three adults:
both biological parents and the stepparent. The theory is that giving the
stepparent enhanced status will legitimate his or her role, both in the
family and in society, and that the very process of asking for rights and
responsibilities will bolster the stepparent-stepchild bond. (The law
only went into effect in 1991, so its effects are not yet known.)
Cultural connection. Ultimately, the changes that will strengthen
stepfamilies will likely come from shifts in cultural prejudices. Such
change is slow, but there are signs that some preliminary movement along
this line is beginning to take place. For instance, Roger Coleman, a
clergyman in Kansas City, Mo., performs marriage ceremonies specifically
designed to include children when a parent remarries. In years of
officiating second marriages, he says, he became acutely aware of the
confusion and insecurities of the children, and the ceremonywhich
includes a special medallion worn by the childaims to celebrate the "new
family" and move the church beyond mere condemnation of divorce. This
year, Coleman says, over 10,000 families across the country will use the
medallion in their remarriage ceremony.
Similar changes are occurring in public schools around the country. One
of the difficulties for stepfamilies is that schools and other public
institutions have typically not recognized the stepparent as a legitimate
parent; school registration forms, field trip permission slips, health
emergency informationnone of these required or acknowledged the
stepparent. The message, whether intended or not, has been that only
biological parents count. It's a message that the stepparent and
stepchild internalize, undermining what's often an already difficult
relationship, and one which the larger community takes as another sign of
the stepfamily's illegitimacy in American society. Through the efforts of
the Stepfamily Association of America and other advocates, schools around
the country have begun changing their policies to acknowledge the
increasingly important role of stepparents.
Change is also evident in a marketplace eager to exploit this wide social
trend. In a particularly American sign of the times, the Hallmark
greeting card company, that longtime arbiter of normalcy, is about to
launch a line of cards devoted entirely to nontraditional families. The
cards never use the word "step," but most of the "Ties That Bind" line is
clearly aimed at people who have come together by remarriage rather than
biologyor, as one card puts it, "Thrown together without being asked, no
chance of escape." Some are straightforward ("There are so many different
types and ways to be a family today"), while others are more elliptical
("It's like looking at a puzzle where the pieces aren't where they used
to be"). But all are aimed at the vast and growing market of people who
don't identify with the old definitions of family, and wholike the
Mickas and Kaisers and Allens and Schlefersare finding ways to make
their new families work. Who knowssoon there may even be a card Tori La
Londe can send to her ex-husband's ex-mother-in-law.