Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T16:56:44.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘As long as it's good’: An intergenerational family perspective of bridging gaps between reality and ideality of second couplehood as a problem and as a solution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2015

CHAYA KOREN  and
SHIRAN SIMHI
CHAYA KOREN*
Affiliation:
The School of Social Work and The Center for the Study of Society, University of Haifa, Israel.
SHIRAN SIMHI
Affiliation:
The School of Social Work and The Center for the Study of Society, University of Haifa, Israel.
*
Address for correspondence: Chaya Koren, The School of Social Work and The Center for the Study of Society, University of Haifa, 199 Abba Hushi Blv., Mount Carmel, Haifa 3498838, Israel E-mail: salsterk@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Second couplehood in old age following widowhood or divorce is a phenomenon developing with the increase in life expectancy and is yet to be accepted as part of the normative ageing process. The aim of this paper is to examine how family members of three generations perceive second couplehood in old age as a new phenomenon within a changing society and a dynamic family structure. The multigenerational families of 19 second-couplehood dyads (a total of 38 multigenerational families) were recruited using criterion sampling. The second-couplehood dyads were composed of men who repartnered at age 65+ and women at 60+, with children and grandchildren from a lifelong marriage. We tape recorded and transcribed verbatim 107 semi-structured qualitative interviews with older partners, their adult children and grandchildren. Analysis was based on grounded theory and dyadic-analysis principles adapted to families. Two main themes were found that presented gaps between reality and ideality experienced by the participants regarding second couplehood: as a problem through its disadvantages, and as a solution through its advantages. The gaps in both themes were bridged by the account: ‘as long as it's good’. Findings are discussed in the context of modernisation theory, the lifecourse and the family lifecycle perspectives relating to changes in family structure and ambivalence and how to deal with them on the macro, mezzo and micro levels.

Keywords

repartneringsecond couplehoodold agefamily lifecyclelifecourse perspectivemodernisation theory
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , April 2016 , pp. 716 - 740
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aboderin, I. 2004. Modernisation and ageing theory revisited: current explanations of recent developing world and historical western shifts in material family support for older people. Ageing & Society, 24, 1, 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, K. M., Arnott, L. and Soulsby, L. K. 2013. ‘You're not getting married for the moon and the stars’: the uncertainties of older British widowers about the idea of new romantic relationships. Journal of Aging Studies, 27, 4, 499–506.Google Scholar
Brodsky, J., Shneor, Y. and Beer, S. 2013. Mashab – Elderly in Israel Yearly Statistics. Brookdale Institute and Eshel, 69–70. Available online at www.jdc.org.il/mashav and www.jdc.org.il/brookdale [Accessed 23 December 2014]. (In Hebrew)Google Scholar
Brown, S. L. and Kawamura, S. 2010. Relationship quality among cohabitors and marrieds in older adulthood. Social Science Research, 39, 5, 777–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carter, B. and McGoldrick, M. 2005. Overview: the expanded family life cycle. individual, family and social perspectives. In Carter, B. and McGoldrick, M. (eds), The Expanded Family Life Cycle: Individual, Family, and Social Perspectives. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, Massachusetts, 1–26.Google Scholar
Cohen, O. 2003. The Israeli family. In Ponzetti, James J. (ed.), The International Encyclopaedia of Marriage and Family. Volume 2, Macmillan, New York, 960–4.Google Scholar
Coleman, M., Ganong, L. H. and Rothrauff, T. C. 2006. Racial and ethnic similirarities and differences in beliefs about intergenerational assistance to older adults after divorce and remarriage. Family Relation, 55, 5, 576–87.Google Scholar
Cowgill, D. O. 1974. Aging and modernization: a revision of the theory. In Gubrium, J. F. (ed.), Late Life. Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Springfield, Illinois, 123–45.Google Scholar
Davidson, K. 2002. Gender differences in new partnership choices and constraints for older widows and widowers. Ageing International, 27, 4, 43–60.Google Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J. 2002. The dilemma of repartnering: considerations of older men and woman entering new intimate relationship in later life. Ageing International, 27, 4, 61–78.Google Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J. 2004. Remarriage, unmarried cohabitation, living apart together: partner relationship following bereavement or divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1, 236–43.Google Scholar
Duncan, S. and Phillips, M. 2010. People who live apart together (LATs) – how different are they? The Sociological Review, 58, 1, 112–34.Google Scholar
Eisikovits, Z. and Koren, C. 2010. Approaches and outcomes of dyadic qualitative analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 12, 1642–55.Google Scholar
Elder, G. H., Johnson, M. K. and Crosnoe, R. 2006. The emergence and development of life course theory. In Mortimer, J. T. and Shanaham, M. J. (eds), Handbook of the Life Course. Springer, New York, 3–19.Google Scholar
Forbat, L. and Henderson, J. 2003. Stuck in the middle with you: the ethics and process of qualitative research with two people in an intimate relationship. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 10, 1453–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hans, J. D., Ganong, L. H. and Coleman, M. 2009. Financial responsibilities toward older parents and stepparents following divorce and remarriage. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 30, 1, 55–66.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-S. 2013. Undergraduate student's knowledge about aging and attitudes toward older adults’ cultural exploration. Aging and Human Development, 77, 1, 59–76.Google Scholar
Koren, C. 2011. Continuity and discontinuity: the case of second couplehood in old age. The Gerontologist, 51, 5, 687–98.Google Scholar
Koren, C. 2014. Together and apart: a typology of re-partnering in old age. International Psychogeriatrics, 26, 8, 1327–50.Google Scholar
Koren, C. and Eisikovits, Z. 2011. Life beyond the planned script: accounts and secrecy of older persons living in second couplehood in old age in a society in transition. Journal of Society and Personal Relationships, 28, 1, 44–63.Google Scholar
Lavee, Y. and Katz, R. 2003. The family in Israel: between tradition and modernity. Marriage and Family Review, 35, 1/2, 193–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitzki, N. 2009. Parenting of adult children in an Israeli sample: parents are always parents. Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 2, 226–35.Google Scholar
Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.Google Scholar
Lowenstein, A. 2007. Solidarity-conflict and ambivalence: testing two conceptual frameworks and their impact on quality of life for older family members. Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 62B, 2, S100–7.Google Scholar
Malach Pines, A., Neal, M. B., Hammer, L. B. and Icekson, T. 2011. Job burnout and couple burnout in dual-earner couples in the sandwich generation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74, 4, 361–86.Google Scholar
Mehta, K. K. 2002. Perception of remarriage by widowed people in Singapore. Ageing International, 27, 4, 93–107.Google Scholar
Palmore, E. B. 2005. Modernization theory. In Palmore, E. B., Branch, L. and Harris, D. K. (eds), Encyclopedia of Ageism. The Haworth Press, New York, 231–2.Google Scholar
Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Third edition, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.Google Scholar
Schmeeckle, M., Giarrusso, R., Feng, D. and Bengtson, V. L. 2006. What makes someone family? Adult children's perceptions of current and former stepparents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 3, 595–610.Google Scholar
Scott, M. B. and Lyman, S. M. 1968. Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33, 1, 627–46.Google Scholar
Sherman, C. W. 2012. Remarriage as context for dementia caregiving: implications of positive support and negative interaction for caregiver wellbeing. Research in Human Development, 9, 2, 165–82.Google Scholar
SocioCultural Research Consultants 2013. Dedoose Version 4.5. Web Application for Managing, Analyzing, and Presenting Qualitative and Mixed Method Research Data, Los Angeles, CA. Available online at www.dedoose.com. [Accessed 23 April 2012 to 28 August 2013]Google Scholar
Spalter, T. 2010. Social capital and intimate partnership in later life: a gendered perspective on 60+ year old Israelis. Social Networks, 32, 4, 330–8.Google Scholar
Spradley, J. P. 1979. The Ethnographic Interview. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
Stevens, N. 2002. Re-engaging: new partnership in late life widowhood. Ageing International, 27, 4, 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.Google Scholar
Stuifbergen, M. C., van Delden, J. M. and Dykstra, P. A. 2008. The implications of today's family structures for support giving on older parents. Ageing & Society, 28, 3, 413–34.Google Scholar
Thompson, L. and Walker, A. J. 1982. The dyad as the unit of analysis: conceptual and methodological issues. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 4, 889–900.Google Scholar