Reviews : Second Chances Judith Wallerstein and Sandra Blakeslee Bantam Press, 1989; 352pp; £14.95
| Author | Nigel Stone |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455058903600308 |
| Date | 01 September 1989 |
| Published date | 01 September 1989 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
118
package
which
could
be
used
in
many
different
settings.
Una
Padel,
SCODA
Second
Chances
Judith
Wallerstein
and
Sandra
Blakeslee
Bantam
Press,
1989;
352pp;
£14.95
.
~~ller~tein
and
Kelly’s
Surviving
the
~r~c~~Za~~
(1980),
a
five
year
follow-up
study,
was
gratefully
seized
as
a
star~
dard
reference
book
on
divorcing
families.
This
is
the
10
year
report
on
the
same
60
West
Coast
families,
the
only
research
to
examine
the
long-term
impact
of
the
divorce
phenomenon
so
extensively.
Michael
Rutter’s
endorse-
ment
is
that
’there
is
no
better
account
of
what
divorce
means
in
personal
terms’
and
who
am
I
to
disagree?
Kelly
has
given
way
to
Blakeslee,
a
journalist
who
seems
to
have
acted
as
a
ghost
writer
(the
text
is
in
first
person
singular
throughout),
giving
the
sequel
a
lively
flow
that
is
totally
jargon-free,
detailing
vividly
the
experience
of
three
families
from
their
impressively
articulate
sample.
The
consequences
for
the
parents,
who
gains
and
who
loses,
are
note-
worthy :
women
who
divorced
while
still
in
their
twenties
and
early
thirties
were
significantly
happier
and
better
off
financially
a
decade
later,
often
energized
by
their
experience,
whilst
their
older
sisters
were
likely
to
remain
unattached,
insecure
and
unable
to
change
gear
psychologically
or
socially.
Conversely,
men
in
their
30s
and
40s
were
usually
better
off
after
divorce,
whilst
most
of
the
men
who
divorced
in
their
20s
remained
seriously
derail-
ed,
9
out
of
10
second
marriages
hav-
ing
failed.
Women
who
left
abusive
or
alcohol
misusing
husbands
did
not
make
new
partnerships
with
the
same
problems.
Court-imposed
resolutions
seem
of
marginal
importance
to
these
families
and
there
are
certainly
no
ready
rubrics
to
assist
court
welfare
officers.
There
is,
however,
rich
food
for
thought
in
the
messages
from
the
1~~
children.
After
ten
years
over
two-
third
had
poor
relationships
with
their
non-custodial
fathers,
irrespective
of
whether
regular
contact
was
maintain-
ed.
The
quality
of
that
relationship
had
little
to
do
with
formulas
for
access
contact.
Good
parents
do
not
necessarily
continue
to
remain
so
after
divorce.
Fathers
develop
all
too
easily
a
pattern
of
passive,
awkward
stagna-
tion,
misreading
their
children’s
minds
and
assuming
too
glibly
that
all
is
well.
Yet
over
a
third
of
the
young
men
and
women
re-interviewed
between
ages
19
and
29
were
drifting
through
life
with
no
set
goals
and
a
sense
of
helplessness.
Perhaps
the
greatest
potential
challenge
for
court
divorce
welfare
is
the
submerged
part
of
the
iceberg
where
the
non-custodial
parent
takes
little
or
no
initiative
and
there
is
thus
no
ground
for
intervention.
DCWOs
tend,
I
suspect,
to
give
more
attention
to
the
predicament
of
the
younger
children
they
encounter
and
view
the
adolescent
as
less
deman-
ding
of
professional
anxiety.
In
fact
the
toddlers
and
pre-school
age
children
who
show
the
most
dramatic
symp-
toms
at
time
of
breakup
are
a
decade
later
doing
much
better
than
their
adolescent
sibs
who
prove
so
vulnerable
to
the
loss
of
family
struc-
ture
and
familiar
p~dfctability:
As
regards
the
merits
of
joint
custody
co-parenting,
which
has
at-
tracted
a
lot
of
premature
praise,
the
jury
is
still
out
and
the
study
has
found
no
evidence
yet
that
such
shared
ar-
rangements
have
any
significant
advan-
tages
for
children.
Does
all
this
illuminate
only
the
world
of
middle-class
Califor~ians?
Wallerstein
recognises
the
possibility
but
doubts
it
and
has
so
far
had
only
confirmation
and nods
of
recognition
from
around
the
world.
Her
interim
conclusion
is
that
we
have
vastly
under-estimated
the
long-term
magnitude
of
the
divorce
experience.
Her
quest
continues
into
the
15
year
follow-up.
Nigel
Stone
Court
Welfare
Team,
Norwich
To continue reading
Request your trial