These ideas from family stress theory are reinforced by research findings concerning the subjective experiences of parents. Of special importance are findings indicating that parental beliefs, values, attitudes, expectations, and “developmental scenarios” provide meaning for parents’ relationships with their children and help to determine how they will respond to the young. Specifically, parents make attributions about their children’s moods, motives, intentions, responsibilities, and competencies that shape the parents’ emotional responses (e.g., positive stress or distress) as well as their subsequent child-rearing approaches (Bush & Peterson, 2013; Marsiglio & Roy, 2013; Peterson & Bush, 2013). Parents tend to hold their children accountable for negative behavior when they believe that the young are intentionally misbehaving and could instead choose to exercise self-control. Parents who make such attributions are more likely to be distressed and to use punitive behavior with their children, partly because they perceive children as “knowing better.” In contrast, parents who view younger children (e.g., infants and toddlers) as being immature, not yet fully competent, or as lacking in intention for their actions often have more positive feelings and are less inclined to experience stress. Parents who experience greater negative stress, in turn, tend to become more punitive and rejecting toward children. Diminished parental stress tends to result in greater expressions of nurturance and moderate forms of reasoning, monitoring, and consistent rule enforcement. Consequently, awareness of parental beliefs and subjective definitions are critical for understanding how parents’ positive or negative stress can influence how parents respond to their children (Deater-Deckard, 2004, Deater-Deckard et al., 2005; Peterson & Bush, 2013).
A closely related means of conceptualizing how subjective appraisals can lead to parenting stress and behavior is the degree to which parents view their children’s characteristics as deviating from social standards of normality within a specific culture or ethnic group (Goodnow, 2005; Jones et al., 2009; Richman & Mandara, 2013). Parents can define their children as deviating from their expectations in either positive or negative directions, with greater deviations from accepted norms possibly leading to greater distress or satisfaction by parents (Goodnow, 2005; Jones et al., 2009; Richman & Mandara, 2013). The most frequent parental responses to perceived negative deviations (e.g., aggressive or conduct disorder behavior) are (a) adverse appraisals (e.g., psychological distress) and (b) the communication of parent’s negative feelings toward children through punitive, withdrawn, or rejecting behaviors. In contrast, some parents may experience satisfaction or positive feelings (positive stress) regarding specific developmental changes (e.g., successful school achievement), which is viewed as affirming both their own sense of parental competence and their beliefs about what is viewed as youthful competence (Peterson & Bush, 2013, 2015). Common responses to positive interpretations include parental supportive behavior and moderate control strategies, such as the use of reasoning and rule-based supervision. The specific responses of parents to children are often shaped, not only by children’s actual characteristics, but also how parents define these qualities, which may or may not reflect objective standards (Goodnow, 2005).
Conclusion
This chapter has demonstrated that scholarship on parental stress can be conceptualized with constructs from family stress theory in ways that add to our understanding of individual and relationship levels of family systems. When faced with demanding situations, parental stress or crisis are complex products of several factors: (a) the nature of the stressor or crisis event; (b) the potential recovery factors in the form of resources, coping styles, and adaptive abilities available to parents; and (c) the subjective definitions or appraisals that parents assign to the stressor events. These seemingly separate ideas are only truly meaningful when they are virtually indistinguishable and function together in real time.
Applying family stress concepts to parental stress helps us to gain greater understanding about the possible range of circumstances that can exist from highly disruptive (nonnormative) crises to chronic stress and more normative challenges. A major contribution of family stress theory is the insight it provides about how parental stress applies to both the individual and relationship or systemic levels of family life. Applying family stress theory concepts to the scholarship on parental stress helps to show more clearly (a) that parental stress is normal, (b) why the intensity of parental stress varies widely across individual parents and parent–child relationships, (c) why parents and families cope with and adapt to stress differently, and (d) how individual parenting stress and systemic stress influence the socialization performance of parents’ and the psychosocial well-being of the young. Parental stress can function to disrupt, inhibit, or energize mothers and fathers, depending on numerous individual and socioenvironmental factors. As my mother used to tell me, “the really meaningful things in life are often complicated and don’t come easily!”
Discussion Questions
1 Has parenting been romanticized in reference to how stressful it is? If romanticism is evident, give examples that support your answer.
2 Does viewing parenting from the perspective of concepts from family stress theory provide a more realistic view of what is experienced by parents? Give examples of why this is true.
3 Is parental stress something that we can and should strive to completely eliminate in parent–child relationships? Provide an argument that supports your answer.
4 How can parental stress be viewed as a systemic concept within parent–child and family relationships?
5 Please critique this statement: All stressor events or stressors are essentially the same by having inherent meanings and similar consequences for parents.
6 What are the factors of the ABC-X model that may function to modify how stressor events or stressors have different meanings and consequences for parents? Be able to give examples and describe why seemingly similar stressors can have varied meanings and consequences for different parents.
7 Describe the role of recovery factors for parental stress. Distinguish between the concepts of resources, coping, and adaptation as recovery factors for parents who experience stress.
8 Do parents often view stressful events differently? What is the role of parental definitions of stressful circumstances and what causes these differences in meaning to exist?
9 Is all parental stress bad for parents? Why or why not? Can you identify an example of parental stress that has positive developmental consequences for parents and children?
References
Allen, K. R. (2017). Family stress and resilience theory. In K. R. Allen & A. C. Henderson, Family theories: Foundations and applications (pp. 209–229). Chichester, England: Wiley Blackwell.
Ambert, A. (1997). Parents, children, and adolescents: Interactive relationships and development in context. Binghamton, NY: Haworth.
Ambert, A. (1999). The effect of male delinquency on mothers and fathers: A heuristic study. Sociological Inquiry, 69, 368–384.
Basile, L. M. (2014, July 6). Why we need to stop romanticizing the mother–daughter relationship. Huffpost. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-we-need-to-stop-romanticizing-the-mother-daughter-relationship_b_5234432
Beernink, A. E., Swinkels, S. H. N., Van der Gaag, R. J., & Buitelaar, J. K. (2012). Effects of attentional/hyperactive and oppositional/aggressive