Family Development Theory

Chapter
Part of the Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development book series (ARAD)

Abstract

Family development theory sensitizes users to a variety of family-oriented ideas that provide an organized approach to the pursuit of knowledge about families with adolescents. Great attention is paid to the normal and typical experiences and events contained within this family life cycle stage. The conceptual attractiveness and practical utility of this approach is evidenced in its widespread use in the family science and family therapy literatures. In the present chapter, particular consideration is given to the main theme of boundary flexibility and associated developmental tasks (or second-order changes), as well as the timing of roles and events that take place within this developmental period. Critiques of the family developmental approach are covered as well, including current limitations associated with its empirical utility, as well as questions that have been raised about its generalizability to families with adolescents living both in contemporary Western society and in other cultures.

Keywords

Income Innate Appeal 

References

  1. Ackerman, N. J. (1980). The family with adolescents. In E. A. Carter & M. McGoldrick (Eds.), The family life cycle: A framework for family therapy (pp. 147–170). New York: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bengston, V. L., & Allen, K. R. (1993). The life course perspective applied to families over time. In P. G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods (pp. 469–499). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  3. Bianchi, S. M., & Casper, L. M. (2005). Explanations of family change: A family demographic perspective. In V. L. Bengston, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, & D. M. Klein (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theory and research (pp. 93–103). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Bucx, F., van Wel, F., Knijn, T., & Hagendoorn, L. (2008). Intergenerational contact and the life course status of young adult children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 144–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burkhead, E. J., & Wilson, L. M. (1995). The family as a developmental system: Impact on the career development of individuals with disabilities. Journal of Career Development, 21, 187–199.Google Scholar
  6. Carter, E. A., & McGoldrick, M. (1980). The family life cycle: A framework for family therapy. New York: Gardner.Google Scholar
  7. Carter, E. A., & McGoldrick, M. (1989). The changing family life cycle: A framework for family therapy. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  8. Duvall, E. M. (1957). Family development. Philadelphia: Lippincott.Google Scholar
  9. Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., et al. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage–environment fit on adolescents’ experiences in schools and families. American Psychologist, 48, 90–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  11. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  12. Glick, P. C. (1947). The life cycle of the family. Marriage and Family Living, 17, 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gutman, L. M., & Eccles, J. E. (2007). Stage–environment fit during adolescence: Trajectories of family relations and adolescent outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 43, 522–537.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Havighurst, R. J. (1944). Who shall be educated? The challenge of unequal opportunities. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  15. Havighurst, R. J. (1972). Developmental tasks and education. New York: McKay.Google Scholar
  16. Kohli, M. (2007). The institutionalization of the life course: Looking back to look ahead. Research in Human Development, 4, 253–271.Google Scholar
  17. Loomis, L. S., & Booth, A. (1995). Multigenerational caregiving and well-being: The myth of the beleaguered sandwich generation. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. MacMillan, R., & Copher, R. (2005). Families in the life course: Interdependency of roles, role configurations, and pathways. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 858–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Molinari, L., Everri, M., & Fruggeri, L. (2010). Family microtransitions: Observing the process of change in families with adolescent children. Family Process, 49, 236–250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nichols, M. P., & Schwartz, R. C. (2006). Family therapy: Concepts and methods (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  21. Pagani, L. S., Tremblay, R. E., Nagin, D., Zoccolillo, M., Vitaro, F., & McDuff, P. (2004). Risk factor models for adolescent verbal and physical aggression toward mothers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28, 528–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Preto, N. G. (1989). Transformation of the family system in adolescence. In E. A. Carter & M. McGoldrick (Eds.), The changing family life cycle: A framework for family therapy (pp. 255–284). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  23. Preto, N. G., & Travis, N. (1985). The adolescent phase of the family life cycle. In M. P. Mirkin & S. L. Koman (Eds.), Handbook of adolescents and family therapy (pp. 52–69). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  24. Rankin, S. H., & Weekes, D. P. (1989). Life-span development: A review of theory and practice for families with chronically ill members. Scholarly Inquiry far Nursing Practice: An International Journal, 3, 3–22.Google Scholar
  25. Rodgers, R. H., & White, J. M. (1993). Family development theory. In P. G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods (pp. 225–254). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Seltzer, M. M., Greenberg, J. S., Floyd, F. J., Pettee, Y., & Hong, J. (2001). Life course impacts of parenting a child with a disability. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 106, 265–286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Spillman, B. C., & Pezzin, L. E. (2000). Potential and active family caregivers: Changing networks and the “sandwich generation.”. The Milbank Quarterly, 78, 347–374.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. St John, W., & Flowers, K. (2009). Working with families: From theory to clinical nursing practice. Collegian, 16, 131–138.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Stevens, J. W. (2001). The social ecology of the co-occurrence of substance use and early coitus among poor, urban black female adolescents. Substance Use and Misuse, 36, 421–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Steinmetz, S. K. (1999). Adolescence in contemporary families. In M. B. Sussman, S. K. Steinmetz, & G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 371–424). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  31. White, J. M., & Klein, D. M. (2008). Family theories. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Matjasko, Jl, & Paz, K. A. (2005a). The role of families in developmental continuity and change in adolescence. In V. L. Bengston, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, & D. M. Klein (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theory and research (pp. 385–387). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Matjasko, J. L., & Paz, K. A. (2005b). The role of families in developmental continuity and change during adolescence. In V. L. Bengston, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, & D. M. Klein (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theory and research (pp. 385–387). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer New York 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human Development and Family ScienceThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations