Family is one of the key loci of transition to adulthood projects. It is both a focus of transition, that is, developing new relationships between family members as one becomes an adult, and a support though which other transitions can be achieved, for example, living independently and entry into world of full-time work. Although it is consistent with action theory to expect a multitude of transition-related joint actions, projects, and communication to occur across the family system and sub-systems within the family, empirical research using the action-project method to study family transition-to-adulthood projects has focused exclusively on the parent–youth sub-system. Thus, it is this sub-system that is the focus of this chapter. However, it is important to understand that other family relationships can be just as important. For example, when the youngest child in a family begins her transition to adulthood, joint transition projects with an older sister are likely to be a vital part of her transition process.
KeywordsCareer Development Transition Project Mutual Relationship Adolescent Child Adulthood Project
- Osgood, D. W., Foster, E. M., Flanagan, C., & Ruth, G. R. (2005a). On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
- Young, R. A., Valach, L., & Collin, A. (2002). A contextual explanation of career. In D. Brown & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 206–250). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Arnett, J. J. (2006). What does it mean to be an adult? Young people’s conceptions of adulthood. In L. Balter & C. S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Child psychology: A handbook of contemporary issues (2nd ed., pp. 471–489). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Nelson, L., Padilla-Walker, L., Carroll, J., Madsen, S., Barry, C., & Badger, S. (2007). “If you want me to treat you like an adult, start acting like one!” Comparing the criteria that emerging adults and their parents have for adulthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 665–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar