Skip to main content

Typologies of Post-divorce Coparenting and Parental Well-Being, Parenting Quality and Children’s Psychological Adjustment

Child Psychiatry & Human Development volume 47, pages 716–728 (2016)Cite this article

Abstract

The aim of this study was to identify post-divorce coparenting profiles and examine whether these profiles differentiate between levels of parents’ well-being, parenting practices, and children’s psychological problems. Cluster analysis was conducted with Portuguese heterosexual divorced parents (N = 314) to yield distinct post-divorce coparenting patterns. Clusters were based on parents’ self-reported coparenting relationship assessed along four dimensions: agreement, exposure to conflict, undermining/support, and division of labor. A three cluster solution was found and replicated. Parents in the high-conflict coparenting group exhibited significantly lower life satisfaction, as well as significantly higher divorce-related negative affect and inconsistent parenting than parents in undermining and cooperative coparenting clusters. The cooperative coparenting group reported higher levels of positive family functioning and lower externalizing and internalizing problems in their children. These results suggested that a positive coparenting alliance may be a protective factor for individual and family outcomes after parental divorce.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. Original CRS-Brief also entails an additional subscale labeled as ‘Coparenting Closeness’. Items of this subscale were not included in this study since they do no assess any coparenting component of the Feinberg’s ecological model [14] and they are not applicable to divorced coparents either.

  2. Since age differences may be expected, we divided the overall sample into two subsamples based on children’s age: 4-10 years subsample (N = 96) and 11-16 year-old subsample (N = 218). After running the three-cluster solution separately on the two subsamples, all significant and non-significant results found on both subsamples replicated those obtained in the overall sample in the associations between coparenting profiles and the outcomes variables (parents’ psychological adjustment, parenting, family functioning, and children’s psychological adjustment).

References

  1. Averdijk M, Malti T, Eisner M, Ribeaud D (2012) Parental separation and child aggressive and internalizing behavior: an event history calendar analysis. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 43:184–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sentse M, Ormel J, Veenstra R, Verhulst FC, Oldehinkel AJ (2011) Child temperament moderates the impact of parental separation on adolescent mental health: the TRAILS study. J Fam Psychol 25:97–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ängarne-Lindberg T, Wadsby M (2012) Psychiatric and somatic health in relation to experience of parental divorce in childhood. Int J Soc Psychiatry 58:16–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Robbers S, van Oort F, Huizink A, Verhulst F, van Beijsterveldt C, Boomsma D et al (2012) Childhood problem behavior and parental divorce: evidence for gene–environment interaction. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 37:1539–1548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Oldehinkel A, Ormel J, Veenstra R, De Winter A, Verhulst F (2008) Parental divorce and offspring depressive symptoms: Dutch developmental trends during early adolescence. J Marriage Fam 70:284–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Potter D (2010) Psychosocial well-being and the relationship between divorce and children’s academic achievement. J Marriage Fam 72:933–946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lansford J (2009) Parental divorce and children’s adjustment. Perspect Psychol Sci 4:140–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bastaits K, Ponnet K, Mortelmans D (2012) Parenting of divorced fathers and the association with children’s self-esteem. J Youth Adolesc 41:1643–1656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Forgatch M, Patterson G, Degarmo D, Beldavs Z (2009) Testing the Oregon delinquency model with 9-year follow-up of the Oregon Divorce Study. Dev Psychopathol 21:637–660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Feinberg M, Kan M, Hetherington E (2007) The longitudinal influence of coparenting conflict on parental negativity and adolescent maladjustment. J Marriage Fam 69:687–702

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Katz L, Low S (2004) Marital violence, co-parenting, and family-level processes in relation to children’s adjustment. J Fam Psychol 18:372–382

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pedro M, Ribeiro T, Shelton K (2012) Marital satisfaction and partners’ parenting practices: the mediating role of coparenting behavior. J Fam Psychol 26:509

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Teubert D, Pinquart M (2010) The association between coparenting and child adjustment: a meta-analysis. Parent Sci Pract 10:286–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Feinberg M (2003) The internal structure and ecological context of coparenting: a framework for research and intervention. Parent Sci Pract 3:95–131

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Konold T, Abidin R (2001) Parenting alliance: a multifactor perspective. Assessment 8:47–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mchale J (2007) When infants grow up in multiperson relationship systems. Infant Ment Health J 28:370–392

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Dush C, Kotila L, Schoppe-Sullivan S (2011) Predictors of supportive coparenting after relationship dissolution among at-risk parents. J Fam Psychol 25:356–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Solmeyer A, Feinberg M (2011) Mother and father adjustment during early parenthood: the roles of infant temperament and coparenting relationship quality. Infant Behav Dev 34:504–514

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Jones DJ, Shaffer A, Forehand R, Brody G, Armistead LP (2003) Coparent conflict in single mother-headed African American families: Do parenting skills serve as a mediator or moderator of child psychosocial adjustment? Behav Ther 34:259–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Umemura T, Christopher C, Mann T, Jacobvitz D, Hazen N (2015) Coparenting problems with toddlers predict children’s symptoms of psychological problems at age 7. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (Epub ahead of print)

  21. Chen M, Johnston C (2012) Interparent childrearing disagreement, but not dissimilarity, predicts child problems after controlling for parenting effectiveness. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 41:189–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McHale J, Rasmussen J (1998) Coparental and family group-level dynamics during infancy: early family precursors of child and family functioning during preschool. Dev Psychopathol 10:39–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sbarra D, Emery R (2008) Deeper into divorce: using actor-partner analyses to explore systemic differences in coparenting conflict following custody dispute resolution. J Fam Psychol 22:144–152

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Markham M, Ganong L, Coleman M (2007) Coparental identity and mothers’ cooperation in coparental relationships. Fam Relat 56:369–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sobolewski J, King V (2005) The importance of the coparental relationship for nonresident fathers’ ties to children. J Marriage Fam 67:1196–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sbarra D, Emery R (2005) Coparenting conflict, nonacceptance, and depression among divorced adults: results from a 12-year follow-up study of child custody mediation using multiple imputation. Am J Orthopsychiatry 75:63–75

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Lamela D, Figueiredo B (2011) Post-divorce representations of marital negotiation during marriage predict parenting alliance in newly divorced parents. Sex Relatsh Ther 26:182–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pruett M, Williams T, Insabella G, Little T (2003) Family and legal indicators of child adjustment to divorce among families with young children. J Fam Psychol 17:169–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McGene J, King V (2012) Implications of new marriages and children for coparenting in nonresident father families. J Fam Issues 33:1619–1641

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Sweeper S, Halford K (2006) Assessing adult adjustment to relationship separation: the Psychological Adjustment to Separation Test (PAST). J Fam Psychol 20:632–640

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Amato P, Kane J, James S (2011) Reconsidering the “good divorce”. Fam Relat 60:511–524

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Benson M, Buehler C, Gerard J (2008) Interparental hostility and early adolescent problem behavior. J Early Adolesc 28:428–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shimkowski J, Schrodt P (2012) Coparental communication as a mediator of interparental conflict and young adult children’s mental well-being. Commun Monogr 79:48–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schick A (2002) Behavioral and emotional differences between children of divorce and children from intact families: clinical significance and mediating processes. Swiss J Psychol 61:5–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fosco G, Grych J (2010) Adolescent triangulation into parental conflicts: longitudinal implications for appraisals and adolescent–parent relations. J Marriage Fam 72:254–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Shook S, Jones D, Forehand R, Dorsey S, Brody G (2010) The mother–coparent relationship and youth adjustment: a study of African American single-mother families. J Fam Psychol 24:243–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Maccoby E, Depner C, Mnookin R (1990) Coparenting in the second year after divorce. J Marriage Fam 52:141–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Feinberg M, Brown L, Kan M (2012) A multi-domain self-report measure of coparenting. Parent Sci Pract 12:1–21

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Diener E, Emmons R, Larsen R, Griffin S (1985) The satisfaction with life scale. J Pers Assess 49:71–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Neto F (1993) The satisfaction with life scale: psychometrics properties in an adolescent sample. J Youth Adolesc 22:125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lamela D, Figueiredo B, Bastos A (2014) The Portuguese version of the Psychological Adjustment to Separation Test-Part A (PAST-A): a study with recently and non-recently divorced adults. J Happiness Stud 15:387–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Elgar F, Waschbusch D, Dadds M, Sigvaldason N (2007) Development and validation of a short form of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire. J Child Fam Stud 16:243–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hambleton R (2005) Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In: Hambleton R, Merenda P, Spielberger C (eds) Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 3–38

    Google Scholar 

  44. Epstein N, Baldwin L, Bishop D (1983) The McMaster family assessment device. J Marital Fam Ther 9:171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Pereira G, Silva N (1998) Family assessment device, Versão experimental (Family assessment device, experimental version). University of Minho, Braga

    Google Scholar 

  46. Goodman R (1997) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 38:581–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Goodman A, Lamping D, Ploubidis G (2010) When to use broader internalising and externalising subscales instead of the hypothesised five subscales on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): data from British parents, teachers and children. J Abnorm Child Psychol 38:1179–1191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kraut R, Olson J, Banaji M, Bruckman A, Cohen J, Couper M (2004) Psychological research online: report of Board of Scientific Affairs’ Advisory Group on the Conduct of Research on the Internet. Am Psychol 59:105–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Hoeve M, Blokland A, Dubas J, Loeber R, Gerris J, Van Der Laan P (2008) Trajectories of delinquency and parenting styles. J Abnorm Child Psychol 36:223–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Mandara J (2003) The typological approach in child and family psychology: a review of theory, methods, and research. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 6:129–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kelly JB (2007) Children’s living arrangements following separation and divorce: insights from empirical and clinical research. Fam Process 46:35–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. McHale JP (1997) Overt and covert coparenting processes in the family. Fam Process 36:183–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sturge-Apple ML, Davies PT, Cummings EM (2006) Impact of hostility and withdrawal in interparental conflict on parental emotional unavailability and children’s adjustment difficulties. Child Dev 77:1623–1641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Majdandžić M, de Vente W, Feinberg ME, Aktar E, Bögels SM (2012) Bidirectional associations between coparenting relations and family member anxiety: a review and conceptual model. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 15:28–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Rettig K, Leichtentritt R, Stanton L (1999) Understanding noncustodial fathers’ family and life satisfaction from resource theory perspective. J Fam Issues 20:507–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Dorsey S, Forehand R, Brody G (2007) Coparenting conflict and parenting behavior in economically disadvantaged single parent African American families: the role of maternal psychological distress. J Fam Violence 22:621–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Clarke-Stewart A, Brentano C (2006) Divorce: causes and consequences. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  58. Leung D, Slep A (2006) Predicting inept discipline: the role of parental depressive symptoms, anger, and attributions. J Consult Clin Psychol 74:524–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Cummings M, Davies P, Campbell S (2002) Developmental psychopathology and family process: theory, research, and clinical implications. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  60. Li Y, Putallaz M, Su Y (2011) Interparental conflict styles and parenting behaviors: associations with overt and relational aggression among Chinese children. Merrill Palmer Q 57:402–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Finger B, Eiden R, Edwards E, Leonard K, Kachadourian L (2010) Marital aggression and child peer competence: a comparison of three conceptual models. Pers Relatsh 17:357–376

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Forehand R, Jones D (2003) Neighborhood violence and coparent conflict: interactive influence on child psychosocial adjustment. J Abnorm Child Psychol 31:591–604

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. David K, Murphy B (2007) Interparental conflict and preschoolers’ peer relations: the moderating roles of temperament and gender. Soc Dev 16:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Cummings M, George M, McCoy K, Davies P (2012) Interparental conflict in kindergarten and adolescent adjustment: prospective investigation of emotional security as an explanatory mechanism. Child Dev 83:1703–1715

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Leary A, Katz L (2004) Coparenting, family-level processes, and peer outcomes: the moderating role of vagal tone. Dev Psychopathol 16:593–608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Niclasen J, Teasdale T, Andersen A, Skovgaard A, Elberling H, Obel C (2012) Psychometric properties of the Danish Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: the SDQ assessed for more than 70,000 raters in four different cohorts. PLoS ONE 7:e32025

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Psychology, Education & Sports, Lusófona University of Porto, Rua Augusto Rosa 24, 4000-098, Porto, Portugal

    Diogo Lamela

  2. School of Psychology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

    Bárbara Figueiredo

  3. School of Education, Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, Viana do Castelo, Portugal

    Alice Bastos

  4. Prevention Research Center, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Mark Feinberg

Authors
  1. Diogo Lamela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bárbara Figueiredo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alice Bastos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Feinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diogo Lamela.

Appendix: Confirmatory factor analyses of the CRS-Brief [38]

Appendix: Confirmatory factor analyses of the CRS-Brief [38]

CRS-Brief is a recent published measure. Six of the seven subscales that comprised the American version of CRS-Brief were developed to measure the four coparenting components of Feinberg’s model [14]: (1) Coparenting support/undermining component was assessed by three subscales (Coparenting Support, Endorsement of Partner’s Parenting, and Coparenting Undermining); (2) The management of family relationships component was represented by one subscale (Exposure to Conflict); (3) Division of childrearing work component was examined by one subscale (Division of Labor); (4) Coparenting agreement component was assessed with one subscale (Coparenting Agreement). An additional subscale labeled as coparenting closeness was created to examine “the degree to which coparenting enhanced intimacy and strengthened the couple’s relationship” [36, p. 7].

As no Portuguese version of the CRS-Brief is available, items were translated for the current research, using international standard procedures for psychological measures adaptation [43]. As no construct validity study was available in the Portuguese language, a CFA using a maximum likelihood method was conducted to test construct validity of the CRS-Brief in the current sample. Six subscales of the original CRS-Brief were included in the initial CFA. Coparenting closeness subscale was not included in the CFA since this subscale does not measure a coparenting component and is not applicable to divorced coparents.

Initial CFA revealed an adequate fit, CFI = .95, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .08. However, considering the high intercorrelations between Coparenting Agreement, Coparenting Support, and Endorsement Partner’s Parenting subscales (from .60 to .93), two additional concurrent confirmatory models were tested.

Model 2: Items of Coparenting Agreement, Coparenting Support, and Endorsement of Partner’s Parenting subscales were comprised into a single first-order factor in the confirmatory model.

Model 3: A second-order latent factor was created, where these three subscales were conceptualized as intercorrelated first-order factors.

Model 2 revealed poor fit, CFI = .89, TLI = .84, RMSEA = .12. However, Model 3 revealed an excellent fit, CFI = .98, TLI = .97, RMSEA = .04. Comparing Model 3 fit results with those obtained by the original model of the CRS-Brief, Model 3 was found as having a better fit. Therefore, we decided to combine the Coparenting Agreement, Coparenting Support and Endorsement of Partner’s Parenting subscales into the same dimension labeled as Coparenting Agreement/support. Based on these CFA results, this Portuguese version of the CRS-Brief is comprised by four subscales: Coparenting agreement/support, Coparenting Undermining, Division of Labor, and Exposure to Conflict. These CRS-Brief’s subscales were used in the further analyses.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lamela, D., Figueiredo, B., Bastos, A. et al. Typologies of Post-divorce Coparenting and Parental Well-Being, Parenting Quality and Children’s Psychological Adjustment. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 47, 716–728 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-015-0604-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-015-0604-5

Keywords

  • Coparenting
  • Divorce
  • Externalization
  • Internalization
  • Parenting