Grandparenting and its Relationship

to Parenting

LINDA M. DREW, MARY H. RICHARD & PETER K. SMITH

Goldsmiths College, London

ABSTRACT
Grandparenthood occupiesa significantpart of the life cycleand has an important
impact on parenting. This impact can be characterized in terms of gender roles,
styles of grandparenting and indirect and direct patterns of grandparent•
parent-grandchild influence.We review parenting styles and their relationship to
recent insights in attachment theory which may illuminate processesof intergener•
ational transmission. Implications for practitioner use of attachment theory and
categoriesof functionaland dysfunctionalgrandparenting are presented. Wediscuss
two related areas in which grandparent roles are particularly under stress, grand•
parents acting as custodial parents and grandparent-grandchild contact loss in
casesof parental separation or divorce.Grandparentslegalrights to visitationin the
USAand UK and the use of mediation to help solvegrandparent-grandchildcontact
loss are summarized.

KEYWORDS
attachment, divorce, grandparents, intergenerational, parent

LIN o A M. o RE w has a masters degree from California State University, N orthridge. She is
currently a research associate and a graduate student at Goldsmiths College, University of
London. She is researching grandparents' emotional health and coping strategies when they
lose contact with their grandchildren through parental separation or divorce.

MARY R 1 c HAR o is a graduate student at Goldsmiths College, University of London. She

is researching aspects of inter-generational transmission as they relate to bully/victim status
in adolescents.

PETER K. s M 1 TH is Professor of Psychology at Goldsmiths College. He is co-author of

Understanding children's development (Blackwells, 1997, 1988, 1991), and of Cooperation in
the multi-ethnic classroom (David Fulton, 1994); editor of The psychology of grandparent•
hood (Routledge, 1991); and co-editor of School bullying: insights and perspectives (Rout•
ledge, 1994), Tackling bullying in your school (Routledge, 1994), and Theories of theories of
mind ( CUP, 1995).
CONTACT: Department of Psychology, Goldsmiths College, University of London, New
Cross, London SE14 6NW, UK.

Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry 1359-1045 (199807)3:3 Copyright© 1998

SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi) Vol. 3(3): 465-480: 004380

465

from the SAGE Social Science Collections. All Rights Reserved.

 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

GRANDPARENT Hoo o Is an important part of the life cycle for most people, both as
a personal experience and for its impact on parents and grandchildren. In the USA 70%
of middle-aged and older people will become grandparents (Tinsley, & Parke, 1984 ). The
average age of becoming a grandparent is approximately 50 years for women and a
couple of years older for men. Thus, many people will remain grandparents for some 25
years or about one-third of their life-span. The 103rd American Congress recognized the
important role grandparents play within families with the establishment of Grand•
parents' Day (Kornhaber, 1996); similarly in the UK 1992 Grandparents' Day was
officially established, by Age Concern, to celebrate the positive role grandparents and
older people play in society.
Most of our evidence on grandparenthood comes from modern urban, industrial
societies, particularly the USA, and to a lesser extent western Europe. The last few
centuries in urban-industrial societies have seen numerous changes (Le Vine, &
White, 1987). These include the demographic transition to lower birth and death rates,
and longer life-span expectancy; greater public interest and concern in children
(Le Vine, & White, 1987); and greater parental involvement in children (Vinovskis,
1987). More recently, there has been the increase in divorce rates and in numbers of
reconstituted families and stepkin; greater health and financial security in older
generations; and with this some greater ambiguity in the role of grandparents (Rossi,
& Rossi, 1990).
The research carried out in the last decade or so (Tinsley, & Parke, 1984; Bengtson,
& Robertson, 1985; Cherlin, & Furstenberg, 1986; Smith, 1991, 1994; Kornhaber, 1996)
has defined a number of issues central to the study of grandparenthood in contempor•
ary society. A partnership between parents and grandparents can be of benefit to the
entire family; conversely, conflict between generations can lead to distress for grand•
parents and loss for the grandchildren. In this article we review: the perceived gender
roles and styles of grandparents; the indirect and direct patterns of grandparent•
parent-grandchild influence, including models of parenting, intergenerational trans•
mission and recent insights from attachment theory concerning this; functional and
dysfunctional grandparenting; effects of custodial grandparenting; and the impact on
grandparents and grandchildren when contact is disrupted or lost through parental
conflict, separation or divorce. Leading on from the last issue is a discussion of grand•
parent visitation rights in the USA and UK, plus the use of education and mediation to
help solve family disputes which may involve legal proceedings.

Styles of grandparenting and perceived roles

Overall grandparents are faced with a double-bind, since they are expected to be
supportive without interfering. Variations in the grandparent role can clearly be influ•
enced by a multitude of factors, such as gender, as well as purely individual differences
of temperament, needs, personality and unique characteristics of each grandparent. A
number of researchers have come up with typologies of grandparenting, or different
styles of grandparenting.

Gender role differences

466
466
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Grandfathers and grandmothers approach their role from a different perspective, for
example grandfathers have been called the 'head' of the family and the grandmother its
'heart' (Kornhaber, & Woodward, 1981). Grandmothers anticipate and become involved
in the role sooner than grandfathers (Creasey, & Kobleski, 1991). However, Tinsley and

467
467
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Parke (1988) have found grandfathers, when involved, are able to nurture and respond
to children's needs as effectively as grandmothers. Some grandfathers have been found
to be more nurturing than they were as fathers (Komhaber, 1996).
Komhaber and Woodward (1981) found in their Grandparent Study (discussed later
in detail) that children view their grandparents in stereotypical roles: a grandfather is to
'do things with' and 'get advice from'; a grandmother is to 'take care of you' and 'teach
you a lot, and you can talk to her about everyday things'. These views held by the grand•
children might well influence how grandparents respond to their grandchildren, in
stereotypical roles. Certainly more research needs to be conducted into gender role
differences in grandparenting and the impact these roles have on the grandchildren.
Most gender-specific research to date has been carried out on grandmothers. The limited
amount of research to date on grandfathers specifically might be explained by their
unwillingness to be involved in research about family issues and unavailability due to
continued work constraints, as well as a shorter life-span.

Styles of grandparenting
Neugarten and Weinstein (1964), using interviews with 70 sets of grandparents, delin•
eated five major styles of grandparenting. 'Formal': following prescribed roles with a
clear demarcation between parenting and grandparenting responsibilities. 'Fun-seeker':
the grandparent sees the grandchildren as fun and as a source of self-indulgence or
mutual satisfaction. 'Surrogate parent': the grandparent takes over the caregiving
responsibility. 'Reservoir of family wisdom': the grandparent dispenses special skills or
resources, with authority. 'Distant': the grandparent has only infrequent contacts with
grandchildren on ritual occasions. They found the formal role to be more frequent in
grandparents over 65, whereas the fun-seeker and distant styles were more frequent in
younger grandparents.
The Neugarten and Weinstein roles are in fact a mixture of intrinsically age-related
roles (especially 'surrogate parent') with styles which may be overlapping rather than
discrete. Inclusive, discrete typologies were produced by Robertson (1977) and Cherlin
and Furstenberg (1985). Robertson assessed the personal meanings (meeting individual
needs) and the social role meanings (meeting social norms) grandparents used to
describe relationships with grandchildren; this yielded four styles, 'apportioned' (high on
both), 'remote' (low on both), 'individualized' (high on personal only), and 'symbolic'
(high on social only). Cherlin and Furstenberg (1985) distinguished two main aspects of
grandparent-grandchild relationships, measured by scales of several items: those relat•
ing to exchange of services (giving and receiving help), and those relating to exerting
parental-type influence (disciplining, advising on problems). Also, they took account of
infrequent (less than once a month) or more frequent contact. This gave them a five-fold
typology which was clearly defined. 'Detached' grandparents were low on both scales
and had infrequent contact; 'passive' grandparents were low on both scales and had more
frequent contact; 'supportive' grandparents were high on exchange of services; 'authori•
tative' grandparents were high on parent-like influence; while those high on both scales
were 'influential'.

Direct and indirect influence of grandparents

468
468
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

What influence do grandparents have on the development of grandchildren? Tinsley

and Parke (1984) distinguished between direct influences, resulting from contact and
interaction with the grandchild and indirect influences, mediated by parental behav•
iour.

469
469
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Direct influences
Many studies of grandparent-grandchild contact, as reported by either generation,
converge in suggesting that, in contemporary western industrial societies, contact is
moderately frequent (modally, once a week to once a month). In general, such contacts
are seen positively (Bengtson, & Robertson, 1985; Smith, 1991, 1994); because most
contemporary grandparents adopt a supportive or fun-seeker role rather than either
authoritative or distant, they usually do not act as disciplinarians; as a consequence,
grandparent-grandchild contacts often lack the friction sometimes found in parent-child
relationships, especially at adolescence (Matthews, & Sprey, 1984).
Examples of direct influence include baby-sitting, giving gifts, being a companion and
confidant, acting as an emotional support or 'buffer' at times of family stress, passing on
family history or national traditions, acting as a role model for aging, acting as a mentor,
these varying in importance with age of grandchild.
A different situation arises when grandparents take on the parent role or become
custodial grandparents in the absence of a parent, due to parental separation or divorce
or other reasons. We discuss these situations in more detail later.

Indirect influences
Indirect influences are those which are mediated through the agency of third parties; they
include support of the parents financially and emotionally, providing advice, information
and models of childrearing skills (Komhaber, & Woodward, 1981; Tinsley, & Parke,
1984). More recently many researchers have looked at the intergenerational trans•
mission of parenting styles, this is how grandparents, by acting as parents themselves,
will have influenced the way in which their children act as parents. The intergenerational
transmission of parenting styles has been discussed by Belsky (1984) and attachment
relationships by Van IJzendoom (1995).

Intergenerational transmission - parenting

The possibility of an intergenerational transmission of parenting style has been
supported by various studies which document a relationship between the parents' own
developmental history and the quality of their parenting of their own child (Belsky, 1984;
Heinicke, 1995). Within Belsky's (1984) model of parenting styles an important factor is
the personal functioning of parents as developed by their own childrearing experiences
with their parents.
Vermulst, de Brock and Van Zutphen (1991) utilized Belsky's model of parental func•
tioning, in a sample of 55 Dutch grandmother/mother dyads with grandchildren aged
8-12 years. They found strong grandmother/mother links for educational level, and also
for affection and conformity; and from grandmother affection to mother's psychological
well-being. In fact about one-third of the variation found in mother's parental function•
ing could be explained in terms of earlier parental functioning of the grandmother. This
study supports earlier research suggesting the importance of personality variables in
intergenerational transmission of parental functioning (Quinton, & Rutter, 1976).
Ruoppila (1991) found significant correlations between grandparental and parental
childrearing attitudes and practices in a Finnish sample. These were most marked for
grandmothers and their daughters although there also appeared to be important influ•
ences from grandfathers to their sons, in terms of attitudes to childcare. However, the
modest sample size of the Vermulst et al. (1991) study and the possibility of retrospec•

470
470
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

tive and prospective bias weakens the ability to draw wide ranging conclusions from
these studies.
Research on children's anti-social behaviour has also pointed to intergenerational

471
471
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

influences. Lefkowitz, Eron, Walder and Huesmann (1977) linked the use of physically
aggressive and punitive techniques in the grandparent-parent generation, to similar
behaviour in the parent-grandchild generation which was in turn linked to anti-social
behaviour in the grandchild. In the UK, Farrington (1993) reported intergenerational
continuities in bullying and violent behaviour, from fathers to their children. These
studies do appear to support the transmission of parenting attitudes and practices across
generations and their possible negative consequences. A growing area of research guided
by attachment theory has added to this evidence, by investigating the possibility of the
transmission of internal working models of relationships cross-generationally.

Attachmenttheory perspectives
Bowlby's theory of attachment drew on evolutionary theory and ethology to propose an
attachment behavioural system which functions to regulate infant safety and survival
(Bowlby, 1969; Bretherton, 1992). Ainsworth's discovery that 'secure' attachment was
significantly correlated with maternal sensitivity led to her development of the Strange
Situation (SS) technique for measuring infant attachment patterns (Ainsworth, Blehar,
Waters, & Wall, 1978). Three organized patterns of behaviour were observed: secure,
avoidant and resistant/ambivalent. A fourth classification of disorganized has since been
added, empirically linked to maltreated populations (Main, 1995).
As the child leaves infancy, a move to the level of mental representation is hypothe•
sized and these 'internal working models' of attachment develop as a direct result of
mother-infant interaction experience (Bowlby, 1969;Main, 1996). Main (1995) redefined
these internal working models as both conscious and unconscious rules for the organiz•
ation of information and behaviour and this has permitted investigation of attachment
in older children and adults. Research in this area has been advanced by the develop•
ment of the Adult Attachment Interview (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1985), a semi-struc•
tured interview for classifying an adults' current mental representation concerning past
parental relationships. This adult evaluation of childhood experiences becomes organ•
ized into a relatively stable 'state of mind' with respect to attachment (Main, Kaplan, &
Cassidy, 1985), and is thought to determine a parent's responsiveness to their own child's
attachment signals, thus, creating an intergenerational link (Van IJzendoorn, 1995). It is
proposed that internal working models also function to filter and channel new experi•
ences, and that individuals tend to remain on the same trajectory throughout their lives
(Van IJzendoorn, 1996).
Four AAI classifications, representing differing states of mind with respect to attach•
ment, have been identified; linked empirically to a corresponding infant attachment
category (Main, 1996).Autonomous parents tend to have secure infants; parents dismiss•
ing of their experiences tend to have avoidant infants; and parents preoccupied or
enmeshed by their own parents tend to have resistant/ambivalent infants. This provides
a traditional three-fold classification. With the introduction of the disorganized category
in infancy, a four-fold AAI classification was introduced, including an unresolved adult
category relating to the failure to resolve a loss or trauma (Main, 1995). The validity of
the AAI in predicting infant attachment status has been looked at in many studies, and
a meta-analysis of 18 studies totalling 854 parent-child dyads (Van IJzendoorn, 1995)
found a parent-to-infant match across secure vs insecure categories averaging 75%.
Patterns of caregiving in 10 of these samples were also analysed and an effect size of .72
was found between a mother's secure vs insecure AAI status and her sensitivity vs insen•

472
472
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

sitivity to infant signals. This evidence supports fairly consistent transmission of attach•
ment patterns from parent to child.
As these studies have looked at the ability of the parent's AAI to predict their child's

473
473
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

infant attachment status (i.e. two generational transmission), can we go further and
suggest that the grandparents' attachment status has an influence on the grandchild's
attachment security (i.e. three generational transmission)? One study (included in the
meta-analysis) attempted to do so by looking at three generations of the same family
(Benoit, & Parker, 1994). Mothers' AAI scores during pregnancy and when infants were
11 months old were compared with their infants' SS classification at 12 months, and the
maternal grandmother's AAI status measured at any time during the study. The mother's
AAI classification obtained during pregnancy predicted the infant's SS classification in
82% of cases while 65% of grandmother-mother-infanttriads had corresponding attach•
ment classifications in all three generations.
However, the secure category was over-represented in this study, and participants
were from mainly intact middle to upper-middle class families. The majority of studies
in van IJzendoorn's meta-analysis were carried out on mother-infantdyads and research
on the influence of fathers is rare as is that of grandfathers. Further studies are needed
using participants from wider socio-economic groups and containing higher risk families,
before firm conclusions can be drawn.
The actual life-long stability of attachment representation is still in doubt. The theory
does, however, allow for adults to work through or resolve unsatisfactory relations with
their parents thereby modifying their 'state of mind' with regard to attachment. Longi•
tudinal studies looking at stability and what factors might precipitate change are rare.
However, recently, three studies have investigated the relation between AAI status in
adolescence or young adulthood and the same individuals SS behaviour in infancy
(Jones, 1996; Main, 1996). A German study found no direct relation using a Q-sort
approach to interview analysis with adolescents (Zimmerman, Sremmer-Bombik, Span•
gler, & Grossman, 1995). A second study, by Hamilton (1995) did find 77% correspon•
dence between SS and AAI classifications with adolescents. A third by Waters and
colleagues (1995) found that 78% of young adults' AAI scores were predictable from
their infant SS classification, if individuals suffering negative life events were removed,
and a 70% match for the full sample. Main (1996) advises caution in interpreting this
evidence for stability or generational continuity, since the coherent discourse assessed in
the AAI has no direct resemblance to the corresponding exhibition of behaviour in the
Strange Situation.
These findings do, however, have important implications for practitioners. Some
researchers have already looked at the effectiveness of preventive or therapeutic inter•
ventions devised within an attachment theory framework, and a meta-analysis of 12 such
studies was undertaken by Van IJzendoorn, Juffer and Duyvesteyn (1995). These inter•
ventions were aimed at changing the quality of the infant-parent attachment relation•
ship, either by influencing parental sensitivity, or by altering parental mental
representations of attachment. Results showed that interventions were more effective in
changing parental insensitivity (d = .58) than in changing children's attachment insecur•
ity (d = .17). This appeared to be because interventions at the behavioural level may not
lead to changes in the insecure mental representations of the parents. If parents only
acquire new behavioural strategies, but remain still dismissive or preoccupied with their
own attachment biography, they may not be able to find ways to deal with the attach•
ment needs of their developing child (Van IJzendoorn et al., 1995).
Attachment theory has encouraged a significant body of empirical work which

474
474
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

supports the indirect influence grandparents may have on their children's and hence
grandchildren's development. Clear intergenerational links have emerged. More
research needs to be done on the ways in which such transmission occurs. Van
IJzendoorn et al. (1995) conclude that maternal sensitivity does not provide a complete

475
475
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

explanation (this may explain the ineffectiveness of enhanced maternal sensitivity in

changing a child's attachment insecurity); they suggest the investigation of other ways in
which parents may influence their children's attachment formations. Main (1996)
proposes clarification of the role of heritable factors in attachment, which are still unex•
amined. She suggests that as well as twin studies, AAis might be administered to pre•
adoptive parents; if the normative 75% correspondence between parents and infant is
still obtained we may then discount the influence of heritability.
With the beginnings of more longitudinal studies on the stability of attachment status
through the life cycle (Van IJzendoorn, 1996) we have begun to look at the factors which
may account for (dis-)continuity; and indeed major environmental changes may be associ•
ated with changes in attachment security. However, in order to clarify specific intergen•
erational links, more studies of the type carried out by Benoit and Parker (1994) are
needed, focusing on three generations of the same family ( and not ignoring the role that
grandfathers/fathers attachment status may play in the child's attachment security). More
interdisciplinary research of the kind already begun, linking attachment insecurity and
psychopathology may also serve to inform our search for the most effective interventions.

Functional and dysfunctional grandparenting

Attachment theory perspectives point out that the indirect influence of grandparents
may be either beneficial or malign, depending on the quality of parenting skills and
relationship models being transmitted. Various other researchers have demonstrated
that normal or effective functioning and dysfunction or pathology can be intergenera•
tionally transmitted. Halle, Schmidt and Meyer (1980) studied the role grandmothers
played in the psychological transmission of transsexualism; patients with gender dyspho•
ria stated their grandmothers were tolerant of their cross-dressing. Oliver (1993)
reviewed 60 studies of child abuse from the US and UK; he found evidence of psycho•
social transmission of abusive behaviours through the generations.
Much of the earlier research on grand parenting has veered between these positive and
negative poles. In the 1940s and 1950s,psychoanalytically oriented writings pointed out
the interfering nature of grandmothers and their detrimental influence; in the 1970s and
1980s,developmental psychologists highlighted the role of grandparents as support and
socialization agents (Tinsley, & Parke, 1984); these changes in attitude seem also to
reflect demographic and societal changes, and modal changes in perceived grandparental
roles (Smith, 1991).
Recent research may be beginning to strike a balance between reviling and revering
grandparents. Kornhaber (1996) suggests 'clinical grandparenting' is a new field investi•
gating the pathology of grandparenting, its aetiology and treatment. Kornhaber's
findings are based on a 3-year longitudinal study in which 300 grandparents and grand•
children (as well as some parents) were interviewed. The primary interest was in the roles
and styles of grandparenting, but this has led into an examination of functional and
dysfunctional styles of grandparenting.
Kornhaber suggests the conflicts, problems and related issues of grandparents and
grandparenting can be conceptualized by establishing categories. A preliminary classifi•
cation of grandparent disorders to be used in 'clinical grandparenting' was presented by
Kornhaber (1983) as 'narcissistic', 'distant' and 'insensitive'. More recently, Kornhaber
(1996) identifies altruism as the most important characteristic of functional grand•
parenting; and he classifies dysfunctional grandparenting under three main categories:

471
471
471
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

'grandparent identity disorder', 'grandparent activity disorder' and 'grandparent

communication disorder'.

472
472
472
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

'Grandparent identity disorder' is the intentional lack of involvement with a grand•

child by a biological grandparent, although the grandparent has the time and physical
ability to take an active part in the grandparent role. The grandparent may also be distant
from his or her own child (the parent), contributing to the lack of grandparental involve•
ment. Kornhaber identifies the most frequent cause of the 'grandparent identity
disorder' to be personality problems, such as narcissism, avoidance, immaturity and the
time in life the grandparent moves into this role.
'Grandparent activity disorder' is when a strong grandparenting drive or involvement
may be present; but this grandparental activity is dysfunctional and leads to conflicts,
problems and alienation. The causes of this are described by Kornhaber (1996) as due
to 'complex emotional, psychological, and attitudinal variables related to the grand•
parent's personality, attitudes, priorities, and mental and physical health' (p. 164).
'Grandparent communication disorder' stems from the grandparents' inability to
communicate openly about actions or feelings. Komhaber regards functional grandpar•
ents as partners with their grandchildren, capable of communicating effectively and
openly with them, as well as their parents.
Although in a different tradition from attachment theory, it may be interesting in
future research to see how clinical types such as these may link to AAI categories; for
example, 'identity disorder' appears to share many features with a 'dismissive' AAI
pattern; and 'activity' disorder with a 'preoccupied' or enmeshed AAI pattern. If so,
some continuity in intergenerational transmission of clinical grandparenting styles would
be predicted.
The establishment of clinical categories such as these may be helpful to clinicians as
well as physicians, therapists, attorneys, legislators and social agencies who deal with
grandparents and grandparent issues. Kornhaber (1996) encourages clinicians as well as
therapists to evaluate a grandparent's role in terms of the identity activity and communi•
cative effectiveness of the individual.
These studies support the need for including grandparents in the clinical setting,
thereby recognizing the clinical implications of grandparents' influence. Additionally,
the inclusion of the grandparent in the family clinical setting will be important in looking
into the intergenerational transmission of pathology. Ingersoll-Dayton and Neal (1991)
describe an evaluation of bringing grandparents into family therapy sessions as well as
suggesting implications for practice.
On a more positive level, there are a variety of courses for grandparents in the USA.
Strom and Strom (1989) provide an educational programme for grandparents to help
strengthen families, including components on: sharing feelings and ideas with peers,
listening to the views of younger people, learning about life-span development, improv•
ing family communication skills and focusing self-evaluation. An evaluation of this
course by Strom and Strom (1990) was positive. There are also intergenerational
programmes such as the Three Generation Project (Hansen, & Jacob, 1992); their aim
is to help both new parents and grandparents cope with shifts in family relationships that
the transition to (grand)parenthood brings.

Custodial grandparenting
As mentioned earlier, a particularly significant role for grandparents is when they are
required to act in the parental role. This is far from infrequent. A review of the US
Bureau of Census in 1990 (see Shore, & Hayslip, 1994) indicated that 4.1 % of children

473
473
473
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

under the age of 18 do not live with either parent; and many will live with grandparents.
According to the US Bureau of Census, there are more that 4 million grandparents

474
474
474
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

raising their grandchildren (Komhaber, & Forsyth, 1994); Generations United, a support
group for grandparents in the US, believe ( on the basis of involvement in actual cases)
that the actual number of grandparents raising their grandchildren in the US in 1994 may
exceed 7 million. These situations may result from parental divorce - Cherlin and
Furstenberg (1986) reported that 30% of grandparents took grandchildren into their
homes after parental divorce; or from one-parent families- Kennedy and Keeney (1988)
reviewed US census data in 1970 which indicates that in parent-absent families grand•
parents are the most common source of care, especially for preschool children. Grand•
parents also provide essential help in many single-parent families including many
African-American families (Burton, & Dilworth-Anderson, 1991; Kennedy, 1991).
Observational studies have shown that grandparents can act as a source of secure
attachment for young children. Radin, Oyserman and Benn (1991) and Oyserman, Radin
and Benn (1993) examined 64 families where teen mothers of children under 2 were
assisted by grandparents. They found that in this situation the grandmother had little
effect on the child's development, but grandfathers who got involved did have a positive
influence, probably by modelling a male role of nurturance and co-operation. These were
father-absent families, so perhaps the grandparents had a well-marked role to play.
Custodial parenting can later lead to very close grandparent-grandchild relationships,
as reported by Hodgson (1992, p. 219). 'My grandmother took me in for five years. You
can get pretty close in five years of living together'. It can be a very positive role in
African-American families (Timberlake, & Chipungu, 1992).
Grandparents experience a great deal of difficulties and negative emotions when
taking in their grandchildren, yet many report feeling useful and derive satisfaction from
the experience (Kennedy, & Keeney, 1988). In a study conducted by Minkler and Roe
(1993) of grandmothers raising grandchildren who were victims of the crack cocaine
epidemic, 89% reported feeling they were appreciated and 96% felt they were fulfilling
their duties. Many women in this study 'described with pride how they had taken in an
infant who was near death, or young children who were emotionally disturbed or
severely behind in their learning, and managed to tum things around through patience,
love, and hard work' (p. 89).
Custodial grandparenting has been found to be beneficial in many aspects to the
grandparent as well as the grandchild. However, the relationship of grandmothers with
adolescent mothers or mothers-to-be can be emotionally charged, rivalrous or conflict•
ual as well as supportive (Musick, 1994). Some grandmothers, especially paternal grand•
mothers, may be reluctant to provide long-term support of this kind for working mothers
(Cotterill, 1992). Furthermore, many grandparents who are raising their grandchil•
dren feel they have lost their developmental right to be a grandparent and are
forced into becoming a parent again; in this sense, too, these grandchildren will miss
out on the special qualities and benefit of the normative grandparent-grandchild
relationship. Shore and Hayslip (1994) reviewed a model which has been developed to
predict grandparent well-being after taking on parental responsibilities of their
grandchildren. This model presents four criteria for grandparent's psychological func•
tioning: 'psychological well-being', 'satisfaction with grandparenting', 'perceptions of the
grandparent-grandchild relationship', and the 'personal meaning of grandparenthood'.
Their results indicate that 'having parental responsibility significantly detracts from
psychological functioning in grandparents' satisfaction with grandparenting, perceptions
of the grandparent-grandchild relationship and overall well-being of grandparenthood'
(Shore, & Hayslip, 1994, p. 200).

475
475
475
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Custodial grandparenting can clearly have both positive and negative aspects, and it
is important for clinicians to be aware of this range of possibilities. Kennedy and Keeney

476
476
476
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

(1988) describe the running of a psychotherapy group for grandparents who were the
primary caregivers for children receiving mental-health treatment.

Parental separation and divorce

Another area of stress for grandparents arises when parents separate or divorce; besides
any conflict of loyalties with the parents, relations with grandchildren are likely to be
affected, sometimes positively, sometimes very negatively (Ahrons, & Bowman, 1981;
Kornhaber, & Woodward, 1981; Fischer, 1983; Matthews, & Sprey, 1984; Aldous, 1985;
Rossi, & Rossi, 1990; Jaskowski, & Dellasega, 1993; Kornhaber, 1996).
Myers and Novella (1993) review the normative aspect of grandparenting and the
impact their child's divorce might have on grandparents; and we (Drew & Smith) are
currently investigating grandparents' experiences in these situations in a UK sample
recruited through the national Grandparents' Federation. One of the clearest roles for
grandparents seems to be manifested in times of family discord, and specifically when
parents divorce; this is to act as a source of stability and continuity through a period when
their grandchildren may be experiencing uncertainty and distress in their relations with
parents. However, should the grandchild reside with the ex-son/daughter-in-law the
relationship between the grandparent and grandchild often endures a dramatic change.
This is often due to the custodial parent moving away from the grandparent, as one
grandmother we interviewed stated: 'my ex-daughter-in-law moved 100 miles away
immediately after the separation, therefore, our previously daily contact is greatly dimin•
ished'. In other cases the custodial parent will have decided to not allow the grandparent
to have contact with their grandchildren due to past anger or resentment. Often children
are used as pawns between parents who are still angry with each other and the grand•
parent-grandchild relationship is the one to suffer. As another grandparent we inter•
viewed said: 'my granddaughter lives with my ex-daughter-in-law and if she is in dispute
with my son she won't let me see my granddaughter because she knows it upsets my son'.
This sort of interruption in the grandparent-grandchild relationship removes the possi•
bility of the grandparent continuing as the source of support and balance which the child
needs during such a difficult time.
Grandparents' relationship with their adult children and grandchildren after divorce
is not always negatively affected. Johnson (1983) interviewed 48 US grandmothers
whose children had divorced around 2 years previously. Most grandmothers, especially
those under 65, saw grandchildren at least weekly; and after the divorce, the tendency
was for this rate of contact to go up, not down. This finding of enhanced contact of
younger grandmothers with grandchildren of divorced parents was confirmed by Aldous
(1985).
Gladstone ( 1989) has described how adult children can facilitate, or prevent, contact
between grandparents and grandchildren after marriage breakdown and remarriage.
Grandparental lineage is especially important here. Fischer (1983) found the two main
components which determine grandparent accessibility to their grandchildren to be the
physical proximity to the child, and the grandparent family connection to the primary
caretaker. The maternal grandmother usually has the least problems. Rossi and Rossi
(1990) found marital discord to affect all grandparent-grandchild relationships nega•
tively, except that of maternal grandmother-granddaughter. Ahrons and Bowman
(1981) found maternal grandmother-grandchild relationship not to be negatively
affected by divorce; 83.8% of mothers in their sample reported having custody of their

477
477
477
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

children, providing the maternal grandmothers with undisrupted contact with their
grandchildren.

478
478
478
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Following divorce, fathers have care of or access to children less often than mothers.
The paternal grandmother can often maintain contacts with grandchildren when the
father finds it difficult to do so. However, paternal grandparents may have to 'tread care•
fully' if the mother has care or custody, and may have problems getting access to their
grandchildren. Jaskowski and Dellasega (1993) found grandparents rated their perceived
satisfaction with the grandchild relationship more highly when their own child had
custody.
In our own ongoing research (Drew & Smith), grandparents from the national Grand•
parents' Federation in the UK have been surveyed regarding the loss of contact with
their grandchildren, primarily due to parental separation/divorce. The national Grand•
parents' Federation offers support and advice to grandparents throughout the UK who
have lost contact or have limited contact with their grandchildren for a variety of reasons
(other possible reasons including the grandchildren being taken into care and possibly
adopted, perhaps due to suspected physical/sexual abuse, neglect or endangerment, and
death or illness of a parent).
We are surveying grandparents' contact with all their grandchildren; thus, providing a
contrast between the grandchildren involved in parental separation or divorce and those
who are not. This natural control should indicate the extent to which changes are due to
dysfunctional grandparenting rather than separation/divorce per se. In addition, detailed
interviews are being conducted with a subsample of these grandparents.
Besides examining changes in role and contact with grandchildren following separ•
ation or divorce of the parents, we are also interested in how these changes affect grand•
parents' physical and mental health, and what coping strategies they adopt. Many of
these grandparents indicate that they are suffering emotionally and physically due to
the loss of contact with their grandchild. One grandmother stated: 'I have had to have
counselling for severe depression. It has also made my husband ill'. Another stated:
'Loss of contact led to a state of permanent mourning, a grieving that never left me, day
in and day out'.

Visitation rights in the USA and UK

In the USA grandparents have the right to sue for visitation with grandchildren in cases
of parental death or divorce, and in some states, in cases of step-parent adoption.
However, if the marriage is intact grandparents have no legal recourse to obtain contact
with their grandchildren. The laws are generally limiting and prevent functional grand•
parents from intervening when the parents' marriage is intact, even if their grandchil•
dren are being abused or neglected. Grandparents have pushed for laws which allow
them to sue for visitation or contact under these or any other circumstances. Such laws
have been passed in various forms in different states in the US, but in many states these
laws have since been rescinded, due to parents challenging the laws on the basis that the
statute is an infringement on their fundamental constitutional right to raise their chil•
dren as they see fit (Kornhaber, 1996).
There is a great need for uniform state visitation laws, whereby grandparent visitation
orders are honoured in every state (Kornhaber, 1996). Should a parent move to another
state, the visitation order becomes null and the grandparent would then need to go to
court in the new state and obtain a new visitation order. All of these court proceedings
are very expensive and often beyond the means of grandparents who have retired and
are on fixed incomes. Thompson, Scalora, Limber and Castrianno (1991) discuss grand•
parent visitation rights in all 50 states in relation to the direct and indirect consequences

479
479
479
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

for family functioning, as well as the role which the grandparent plays in the child's
developmental process.

480
480
480
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

In Britain, the 1989Children Act, which highlights the interests of children, also allows
any person (not just grandparents or relatives) to request a leave to seek an order for
contact with a child. This contact order may be sought during divorce proceedings or in
other situations (Douglas, & Lowe, 1990; Crook, 1994).
Unfortunately, even if a contact order has been obtained by the grandparent there is
little which holds the parent to abide by the court ruling. In theory, parents who do not
abide by the court ruling can be held in contempt of court and serve 28 days in prison.
However, this sort of action by the grandparent is likely to increase the anger of the
parents, leaving the grandparent with less chance of seeing their grandchildren in the
longer term. Additionally, any negativity which exists between the family members is
likely to become only more enhanced in the court room (Kornhaber, 1996).

Education and mediation

There is evidence that mediation is becoming more effective in resolving disputes
between families, than involving the courts (Kruk, 1994). The American Bar Associ•
ation (1989) states that although mediation takes up a great deal of time and effort,
the majority of family counsellors, attorneys and social agents have found it to be the
best option when working out family feuds. The grandparents in Kornhaber's 3-year
longitudinal research project (1996) who became involved in mediation, believed it to
be the best solution to family difficulties concerning grandparent and grandchild
contact.
Mediation is the process in which parents can become willingly involved in bringing
the grandparent and grandchild together; their participation is of vital importance. Kruk
(1994) noted the power of parents in determining whether grandparents continued their
relationship with their grandchildren after parental separation or divorce. Without the
parents' participation and willingness to include the grandparent in the child's life,
winning a contact order is only a 'Pyrrhic victory' (Kornhaber, 1996, p. 187).
In Britain there are 68 mediation centres across the country which have effectively
administered mediation sessions between grandparents and parents. The cost of media•
tion is often found to be far less expensive emotionally and financially than the cost of
the aforementioned court proceedings. The statistical report of the National Association
of Family Mediation and Conciliation Services in Britain (1995) states that 70% of medi•
ations result in agreement.

Conclusions
In recent decades, most grandparents have accepted a role in which they support parents
and provide companionship for grandchildren, without acting directly as authority
figures. This has probably eased three-generation relationships, and in general grand•
parent-grandchild contacts are reasonably frequent, pleasurable and have their own
distinctive character.
Although such overt roles have changed historically, grandparents always have had
and always will have influence on their grandchildren through the indirect transmission
of parenting styles and internal working models of relationships. Such transmission is not
absolute, and can be changed by gradual historical shifts as well as by individual life
experiences or directed interventions. Nevertheless, considerable continuity exists. Such
continuities can be beneficial, but are sometimes malign.

481
481
481
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Recent studies of grandparenting roles are also starting to explicitly examine types of
both functional and dysfunctional grandparenting. There is scope for these research
strands to come together, with increased input from recent developments in attachment

482
482
482
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

theory into three-generational models of family functioning. Such developments will

have implications for clinical help and intervention.
When there is breakdown at the parental level, grandparents have particular oppor•
tunities and particular stresses. In cases of custodial grandparenting, the satisfactions
involved need to be balanced against possible resentments, and loss of the normative
grandparent-grandchild relationship. In cases of parental separation and divorce, while
grandparent-grandchild involvement may sometimes increase, in other cases grand•
parents experience severe loss. Such loss can cause physical and mental health symp•
toms. Although legal recourse to obtain contact is often possible, in practice there are
often difficulties.
In considering issues of family breakdown and difficulties in grandparent-grandchild
contact, it may be fruitful for future research to take account of the inter-generational
transmission factors discussed earlier. Will it be the case that, when parents prevent
contact, this is often associated with continuity of types of dysfunctional grandparenting,
or types of insecure attachment; or, are such grandparents more often the victims of
wider circumstances? These questions are relevant for understanding all generations
within such families, and helping them. Most grandparents have looked forward to
grandparenting as a rite of passage, a time when they can enjoy times with their grand•
children. There is no denying the normative importance of grandparents, the assistance
which they can give to parents, and the mutual enjoyment which all three generations
can share in well functioning families.

References
Ahrons, C.R., & Bowman, M.E. (1981). Changes in family relationships following divorce of
adults: grandmother's perceptions. Journal of Divorce, 5, 49-68.
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M.C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: a
psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Aldous, J. (1985). Parent-adult child relations as affected by the grandparent status. In V.L.
Bengtson, & J.P. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood (pp. 117-132). Beverley Hills, CA:
Sage.
American Bar Association (1989). Grandparent visitation disputes (rep. no. 89-83439).
Washington, DC: Author.
Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: a process model. Child Development, 55,
83-96.
Bengtson, V.L., & Robertson, J.P. (Eds.) (1985). Grandparenthood. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
Benoit, D., & Parker, K. (1994). Stability and transmission of attachment across three
generations. Child Development, 65, 1444-1456.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss (Vol. 1). London: Hogarth.
Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth.
Developmental Psychology, 28, 759-775.
Burton, L.M., & Dilworth-Anderson, P. (1991). The intergenerational family roles of aged
Black Americans. In S.K. Pfeifer, & M.B. Sussman (Eds.), Families: intergenerational and
generational connections (pp. 311-330). Binghampton, NY: Haworth.
Cherlin, A., & Furstenberg, F.F. (1985). Styles and strategies of grandparenting. In V.L.
Bengtson, & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
Cherlin, A., & Furstenberg, F.F. (1986). The new American grandparent. New York: Basic
Books.

483
483
483
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Cotterill, P. (1992). 'But for freedom you see, not to be a baby minder': women's attitudes
towards grandmother care. Sociology, 26, 603-618.
Creasy, G.L., & Koblewski, P.J. (1991). Adolescent grandchildren's relationships with

484
484
484
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

maternal and paternal grandmothers and grandfathers. Journal of Adolescence, 14,

373-387.
Crook, H. (1994). Grandparents and the Children Act 1989. Family Law, 72, 135-138.
Douglas, G., & Lowe, N. (1990). Grandparents and the legal process. Journal of Social
Welfare Law, 2, 89-106.
Farrington, D.P. ( 1993). Understanding and preventing bullying. In Crime and justice: an
annual review of research (Vol. 17). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Fischer, L.R. (1983). Transition to grandmotherhood. International Journal of Aging and
Human Development, 16, 67-78.
George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). The Berkeley adult attachment interview.
Unpublished protocol, Dept. of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley.
Gladstone, J.W. (1989). Grandmother-grandchild contact: the mediating influence of the
middle generation following marriage breakdown and remarriage. Canadian Journal on
Aging, 8, 355-365.
Halle, E., Schmidt, C.W. Jr, & Meyer, J.K. (1980). The role of grandmothers in
transsexualism. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 497-498.
Hamilton, C.E. (1995). Continuity and discontinuity of attachment from infancy to
adolescents. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research Child
Development, Indianapolis.
Hansen, L.B., & Jacob, E. (1992). Intergenerational support during the transition to
parenthood: issues for new parents and grandparents. Families in Society: The Journal of
Contemporary Human Services (October), 471-479.
Heinicke, C.M. (1995). Determinants of the transition to parenting. In M.H. Bornstein
(Ed.). Handbook of parenting (Vol. 3, pp. 277-303). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hodgson, L.G. (1992). Adult grandchildren and their grandparents: the enduring bond.
International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 34, 209-225.
Ingersoll-Dayton, B., & Neal, M.B. (1991). Grandparents in family therapy: a clinical
research study. Family Relations, 40, 264-271.
Jaskowski, S.K., & Dellasega, C. (1993). Effects of divorce on the grandparent-grandchild
relationship. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 16, 125-133.
Johnson, C.L. (1983). A cultural analysis of the grandmother. Research on Aging, 5,
547-567.
Jones, E.E. (1996). Introduction to the special section on attachment and psychopathology:
part one. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 5-7.
Kennedy, G.E. (1991). Grandchildren's reasons for closeness with grandparents. Journal of
Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 697-712.
Kennedy, G.E., & Keeney, VT. (1988). The extended family revisited: grandparents rearing
grandchildren. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 19, 26-35.
Kornhaber, A. (1983). Grandparents are coming of age in America. Children Today, 30,
36-40.
Kornhaber, A. (1996). Contemporary grandparenting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kornhaber, A., & Forsyth, S. (1994). Grandparent power! New York: Crown.
Kornhaber, A., & Woodward, K. (1981). Grandparents/grandchildren: the vital connection.
Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Kruk, E. (1994). Grandparent visitation disputes: multigenerational approaches to family
mediation. Mediation Quarterly, 12, 37-53.
Lefkowitz, M.M., Eron, L.D., Walder, L.O., & Huesmann, L.R. (1977). Growing up to be
violent. New York: Pergamon.

485
485
485
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Le Vine, RA., & White, M. (1987). Parenthood in social transformation. In J.B. Lancaster, J.
Altmann, A.S. Rossi, & L.R. Sherrod (Eds.), Parenting across the life span: biosocial
dimensions (pp. 271-293). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Main, M. (1995). Recent studies in attachment, overview with selected implications for

486
486
486
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

clinical work. In S. Goldberg, R. Muir, & J. Kerr (Eds.), Attachment theory: social,
developmental and clinical perspectives, (pp. 407-474). London: Analytic.
Main, M. (1996). Introduction to the special section on attachment and psychopathology: 2.
overview of the field of attachment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64,
237-243.
Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, childhood, and adulthood: a
move to the level of representation. In I. Bretherton, & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points
of attachment and research (pp. 66-104). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Matthews, S.H., & Sprey, J. (1984). The impact of divorce on grandparenthood: an
exploratory study. The Gerontologist, 24, 41-47.
Minkler, M., & Roe, K.M. (1993). Grandmothers as caregivers. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
Musick, J.S. (1994). Grandmothers, and grandmothers-to-be: effects on adolescent mothers
and adolescent mothering. Infants and Young Children, 6, 1-9.
Myers, J.E., & Novella, P. (1993). Grandparents affected by parental divorce: a population
at risk? Journal of Counseling & Development, 72, 62-66.
Neugarten, B.L., & Weinstein, K.K. (1964). The changing American grandparent. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 26, 199-204.
Oliver, J.E. (1993). Inter-generational transmission of child abuse: rates, research, and the
clinical implications. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 1315-1324.
Oyserman, D., Radin, N., & Benn, R. (1993). Dynamics in a three-generation family: teens,
grandparents, and babies. Developmental Psychology, 29, 564-572.
Quinton, D., & Rutter, M. (1976). Early hospital admissions and later disturbances of
behaviour: An attempted replication of Douglas' findings. Developmental Medicine and
Child Neurology, 18, 447-459.
Radin, N., Oyserman, D., & Benn, R. (1991). Grandfathers, teen mothers and children
under two. In P.K. Smith (Ed.), The psychology of grandparenthood: an international
perspective (pp. 85-99), London: Routledge.
Robertson, J.F. (1977). Grandmotherhood: a study of role conceptions. Journal of Marriage
and the Family, 39, 165-174.
Rossi, AS., & Rossi, P.H. (1990). Of human bonding: parent-child relations across the life
course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Ruoppila, I. (1991). The significance of grandparents for the formation of family relations.
In P.K. Smith (Ed.), The psychology of grandparenthood: an international perspective.
London: Routledge.
Shore, J.R., & Hayslip, B. (1994 ). Custodial grand parenting implications for children's
development. In AE. Gottfried, & AW. Gottfried (Eds.), Redefining families:
implications for children's development (pp. 171-218). New York: Plenum.
Smith, P.K. (1991). Introduction: the study of grandparenthood. In P.K. Smith (Ed.), The
psychology of grandparenthood: an international perspective (pp. 1-16). London:
Routledge.
Smith, P.K. (1994). Grandparenthood. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting
(Vol. 3, pp. 89-112). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Strom, R., & Strom, S. (1989). Grandparents and learning. International Journal of Aging
and Human Development, 29, 163-169.
Strom, R., & Strom, S. (1990). Raising expectations for grandparents: a three generational
study. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 31, 161-167.
Thompson, RA., Scalora, M.J., Limber, S.P., & Castrianno, L. (1991). Grandparent
visitation rights: a psycholegal analysis. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 29, 9-25.
Timberlake, E.M., & Chipingu, S.S. (1992). Grandmotherhood: contemporary meaning
among African-American middle-class grandmothers. Social Work, 37, 216-221.

487
487
487
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Tinsley, B.J., & Parke, R.D. (1984). Grandparents as support and socialization agents. In M.
Lewis (Ed.), Beyond the dyad (pp. 161-194). New York: Plenum.

488
488
488
 GRANDPARENTING ANDETPARENTING
LINDA M. DREW AL.

Tinsley, B.J., & Parke, RD. (1988). The role of grandfathers in the context of the family. In
P. Bronstein, & C.P. Cowman (Eds.), Fatherhood today: men's changing roles in the family
(pp. 236-50). New York: Wiley.
Van IJzendoorn, M. (1995). Adult attachment representations, parental responsiveness, and
infant attachment: A meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Adult Attachment
Interview. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 387-403.
Van IJzendoorn, M. (1996). Commentary on Mayseless. Human Development, 39, 224-231.
Van IJzendoorn, M., Juffer, F., & Duyvcsteyn, G.C. (1995). Breaking the intergenerational
cycle of insecure attachment: a review of the effects of attachment-based interventions on
maternal sensitivity and infant security. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36,
225-248.
Vermulst, A.A., de Brock, A.J.L.L., & Van Zutphen, R.A.H. (1991). Transmission of
parenting across generations. In P.K. Smith (Ed.), The psychology of grandparenthood: an
international perspective. London: Routledge.
Vinovskis, M.A. (1987). Historical perspectives on the development of the family and
parent-child interactions. In J.B. Lancaster, J. Altmann, A.S. Rossi, & L.R. Sherrod
(Eds.), Parenting across the life span: biosocial dimensions (pp. 292-312). New York:
Aldine de Gruyter.
Waters, E., Merrick, S.K., Albersheim, L., & Toebaux, D. (1995). Attachment security from
infancy to early adulthood: a 20-year longitudinal study. Paper presented at the Biennial
Meeting of the Society for Research Child Development, Indianapolis.
Zimmerman, P., Sremmer-Bombik, E., Spangler, G., & Grossman, K.E. (1995). Attachment
in adolescents: a longitudinal perspective. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the
Society for Research Child Development, Indianapolis.

489
489
489