The process of family redefinition following divorce includes which of the following?

1After a divorce, arrangements concerning child custody result in more or less dramatic ruptures from the former situation and new household organization. The present ideal divorce consists of a clear distinction between parentage and union, in which the continuity of the relationship of children with their two parents is central. The new alliances of separated parents, either by marriage or cohabitation, produce very different household situations: couples who live with the children of previous marriages, parents who live alone with their children, or fathers who look after their children only on weekends and holidays. Solutions are varied and there is a whole range of different post-divorce family scenarios. In this context, how does the father’s position change after divorce? And what is the influence of the other figures present in the wider family circle (stepparents, step-grandparents) in the redefinition of fatherhood?

2 This article presents an ethnographic analysis of the different experiences of divorced fathers and examines how these processes are reflected in the various conceptions of fatherhood. These examples are taken from interviews conducted in Barcelona and its metropolitan area. [1] Three questions seem significant to us. First is the process of construction of fatherhood without a shared residence with the mother. In this case, the notion of fatherhood as an additional maternal figure must be replaced by a paternal figure, often presented as being in competition with the maternal figure. Second, the figure of the divorced father is usually accompanied by other figures not considered as parents (stepparents) but who are present in the child’s life and who represent competition for the father. The biological father has to redefine his position in relation to these other people. Third and finally, the relationship with grandparents must also be taken into consideration. They play an essential role in the redefinition of fatherhood. In Barcelona, the breakup of a marriage is also associated with a certain “enlargement” of the family.

The Evolution of Divorce in Spain and Catalonia

3 Divorce and family norms have changed very rapidly in Spain. In 2005, the socialist government introduced major modifications in the divorce laws. The earlier law (1981) only allowed divorce after a legal “separation” period of two years, which meant that many separated couples did not formally divorce in order to avoid legal procedure and the consequent expense. Under the old law, divorce necessitated a declaration of guilt and was considered to be the last resort for a couple, and only when it was obvious that after a “period of reflection,” their reconciliation was no longer possible. To the contrary, the new law allows a couple to reach a negotiated solution for the custody of the children and encourages joint custody and joint parental responsibility. In this way, the “principle of freedom of the spouses, because the continuation of their life together also depends on the constant willingness of both” [2] replaced the principle of guilt and the lesser evil. In the analysis of Anna Escobedo, Lluís Flaquer, and Lara Navarro-Varas [this issue], the elaboration of the new law was accompanied by pressure from various associations of fathers, feminist groups, and political parties in pursuit of their ideological positions and interests.

4 The new law was promulgated in an atmosphere of great hostility among the conservative sectors that believed it introduced an excessively easy procedure and called it the “law of quick divorce.” Six years later, the law changed the panorama of divorces. In 2004, Spain was one of the countries with the lowest divorce rate in Europe (0.9 per 1000 inhabitants, compared to a European average of 2.0 and 2.2 in France). [3] The new law resulted in a rapid increase in divorces and for a few years, Spain became one of the countries where divorce was the commonest, reaching a rate of 2.8 in 2006, well above the European average and even higher than the countries with the highest number of divorces. Nevertheless, once the first effects of the new law had subsided, the divorce rate progressively dropped again in the years that followed reaching 2.1 in 2009, in other words a similar rate to the European average and once again below countries with the highest rates.

5 Figure 1, [4] referring to Catalonia (one of the autonomous communities with the highest divorce rates in Spain, where we conducted our research), makes it possible to understand this evolution. As we can see, before the new law, the majority of couples separated and did not formalize their divorce after the two years of separation required by law. However, after the promulgation of the new law, the number of divorces increased since many couples that were already separated then asked for a divorce in view of the new legal facilities, and those that would have previously separated decided to divorce instead. This temporary increase ended from 2007 onwards and at the time of writing this article (January 2011), the divorce rate was dropping. In the final analysis, the number of divorces increased but the total number of broken marriages conformed to what had existed before the new law.

6 However, the new situation reveals some very great differences. In Catalonia, as in the rest of Spain, 93% of broken marriages are a result of divorce without the period of separation established by the previous law (which was the case in 40% of broken marriages). Thus, the increase in the number of divorces has had certain consequences that were not taken into account by the new law. Whereas the legislation intended to encourage divorce by mutual agreement as well as shared custody, the ease of the process has produced the opposite effect: a large number of divorces (40%) continue to be the consequence of confrontational situations without a previous agreement and in the majority of cases, custody continues to be awarded to the mother, especially when the children are under seven. But the most significant change is that divorce has spread to all social classes (Treviño et al. 2000). Today, people with lower incomes increasingly divorce, and as a result, many of them must put up with more difficult economic conditions. In other words, a very progressive legislation was introduced in Spain with no provision for the social policies needed to prevent its negative impact, thus leading to deterioration in the living standards among the children concerned (Flaquer and Garriga 2009).

Father-Children Beyond Joint Residency

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 1

7 Since the 1970s, both on a social level and according to experts (law, psychology, or family mediation), it has been believed that after divorce, the relationship between the father and mother must be maintained for the wellbeing of the minor. This has given rise to a revision of concepts of parenthood in which it is considered that the roles of father and mother can be maintained well beyond joint residency (Simpson 1998). Théry (1995) considers that the uncertain and transitory nature of the conjugal couple has been replaced by the certitude of parentage, with a clear distinction between “parentage” and “union.” The first is seen as something “natural” and irreversible, and it is believed that parents and children must behave in conformity with the roles conventionally attributed to parentage, by continuing the pre-established relationship in the new situation. In this way, we can observe the process of construction of fatherhood in cooperation with a mother with whom one does not share a joint residence. In this case the notion of fatherhood as a complementary figure to motherhood is seriously challenged and must be replaced by a father figure often competing with the mother figure.

8 In the case of recomposed families, the separation brings the child and the father face to face and each one’s place must be redefined (Martial 2003, 30). To understand the reconfiguration of the divorced father, we must take into account the multiple situations relating to the status of the parents, the distance between residences, the degree of conflict within the former couple, and income (Solsona et al. 2007; Jociles and Villaamil 2008). We shall examine some examples that show very different relationships, going from the lack of ties between children and an absent father to a frequently shared existence with him. In the first case (what could be called the “model of absolute substitution”), the father practically disappears from the family relationship. Carme (age 40) [5] separated when she had three children, aged 5, 3, and 2, despite the fact that her husband did not want to separate. Since then, she has not seen him and she speaks bitterly of her separation, insisting on the fact that she wanted no more to do with him: “There was no agreement. The agreement was that I never wanted to see him again and I decided that I didn’t want my children to see him either. And he also wanted it that way, because if someone really wants to see his children, he finds a way.”

9 In the second (“model of the absent father”), the children see their father from time to time and he contributes to their expenses with child support, but the relationship with the absent father is very weak and he does not participate in essential decisions concerning their lives. This is the case of Antònia (age 36), who lives alone with her children and who says that her children’s ties to their father are minimal because he moved from Barcelona to Madrid: “If he had stayed in Barcelona, it certainly would have been possible to keep more contact between the children and their father. But, since he left, he has practically forgotten them. According to court order, he should see them every two weeks, but he only sees them when he spends a weekend in Barcelona. Then he takes them to lunch and dinner. But he can go one or two months without seeing them.”

10 The father, in this case, is seen as a faraway figure who maintains a sporadic relationship with his children and who hardly participates in decisions concerning them. The situation illustrated by figure 2 (“model of unequal shared parenting”), that of Araceli, age 42 (1), is however very different. Married for eight years with a man who had previously been divorced (2) and who already had two children (6 and 7) from another relationship (3), she lived with her husband and their child (5) and was frequently visited by her two stepchildren, age 15 and 13. But since communication between the parents was practically nonexistent, the two households followed very different educational models, with values that were frequently in contradiction: “Manel [the informant’s husband] makes no decisions concerning his children. He hides behind the fact that she’s the one who has custody and, obviously, nothing can be done about their upbringing on weekends. They tell me: ‘Mom bought us a Reebok tracksuit. Will you buy us some Reebok tennis shoes?’ Of course, we get into a series of conflicts that they use to their advantage. But there comes a time when, maintaining your integrity, you have to say: ‘No, and if that’s okay with you, that’s fine. And if not, don’t come to me because anyway you have your mother and you won’t be abandoned.’”

11 Another example that presents a more egalitarian father’s role (“model of absolute shared parenting”) concerns a couple who have been separated for two years, with a daughter in common, although the mother has a new husband. The parents decided to live in the same neighborhood so that their child can have frequent contact with both of them. The child sees her father and mother almost every day, and the two of them do some activities together. The daughter thus has two poles of reference with an interrelation between them. This tends to redefine the way the parental roles are seen: the biological father in the words of the informant, a woman of 38, also behaved “like a second mother.”

12 Well beyond these models, the recomposition of families seems like a process during which their relationships and status vary over the course of time (Thompson and Amato 1999). Take the example illustrated by figure 3. Roberto (1), a 55-year-old man residing in Barcelona, lives with his third wife Paula (3), aged 41 at the time of the interview. He has two children (25 and 19) from two previous relationships, and twin daughters (9) with his present partner. During the course of his life he, his partners, and his children have adjusted their relationships and adopted various solutions. When his first child, now aged 37, was growing up (25), he saw him only once a month. He lived with his second child (19), that of his second partner (2), for six years until his second separation, and afterwards he saw him every two weeks. And with his third partner (3), he had twin daughters (9) with whom he lived until they reached adulthood. In his life experience, Roberto did not follow a single model of fatherhood: it changed according to the many circumstances of his life. As Agnès Martial says (2003, 74), in the processes of recomposition, an individual may re-experience the formation of a couple and access the status of parent several times in the course of a lifetime. He can then have different experiences of fatherhood.

Araceli’s Reconstituted Family

Araceli’s Reconstituted Family

Roberto’s Family Relationships

Roberto’s Family Relationships

13 Despite the new law’s emphasis on shared custody, in case of disagreement the judges definitely tend to give custody to the mother, justifying it by “traditional” reasons such as the differences in the sexual division of work, the psychology of women or the idea that women take better care of children (Moncó 2010, 2). In the same way in the interviews, the women complain that the fathers take no interest in their children, whereas the men who do not have custody deplore seeing them so little. The reasons invoked to explain this remoteness are varied, but we remark above all the terms of the legal separation, geographical distance, the mother’s attitude, and the relationship with her. An informant grumbles for her part that her husband has not maintained sufficient relations with his ex-partner: “What he did wrong was not to maintain a dialogue with the mother. Sure I can understand that for people who’ve had a pretty unpleasant split, dialogue is sometimes not possible, even if you want it. It’s fine in theory: despite the separation, parents should discuss the children. But in practice, there are many feelings at play and bad ones that influence everything” (Araceli, age 42).

14 Even though the majority of court decisions continue to grant custody to one of the parties, shared custody has progressed and it introduces the problem of equitable residency for children who are minors. The solutions adopted are very varied, either by alternate semester or month, by two-week periods, weeks, or even days. The reform of the Catalonian civil code introduced in 2010 the principle according to which the end of shared living did not change parents’ responsibilities vis-à-vis their children, which must be jointly shared and exercised (Giralt 2011). To do so, they pledge in each case to create a “parental plan” taking into account the emotional ties between children and parents, as well as the children’s relations with the other people with whom they share their lives. This plan must include in detail where the children reside and the tasks for which each parent agrees to take responsibility; the way in which the organization of custody may evolve, the absent parent’s means of communication with the children, the organization of vacations, the type of education, extracurricular activities, and the way that information is shared with regard to the children’s education and health. This attempt to define the shared exercise of parenthood aims for equitable custody, but it implies at the same time a legal exercise of the regulation of fatherhood. By foreseeing all aspects of daily life in detail, are we not creating “regulation parents”? To what extent can the law regulate the complexity of relationships? By trying to reach almost absolute equality, are we not also creating “mother-father and father-mother figures”?

Stepfathers Versus Fathers: More Parents?

15 In general, studies on the role of stepfathers insist on the fact that the connection to a lineage for individuals who have lived in a recomposed family is based on biological criteria and that plural parenthood does not imply an additional symbolic affiliation (Jonas et al. 2007). The majority of authors agree on the fact that the role of the father is very distinct because it is based on what is known as “a debt of life.” Thus the parent-child tie works “in the psyche, in the child’s unconscious, and even in profound identifications” (Giampino 2008, 4).

16 Even if this differentiation between biological parenthood and social parenthood is clear (Le Gall and Martin 1993), our interviews suggest that the presence of stepfathers has a great influence on the configuration of paternal roles and can create competition between them (Desrosiers et al. 1995). If the relationship is not to be confrontational, the non-cohabiting father must authorize the child, explicitly or implicitly, to build a relationship with the stepfather, and the stepfather must be careful not to usurp the parental function (Giampino 2008, 16). The father will frequently judge the behavior of the stepfather according to what his own demands would have been had he been present, but if the stepfather succeeds in winning his stepson’s love, the father will then feel threatened in the exclusive tie that he has developed with his child (Cadolle 2007, 20).

17 For the figure of the stepfather, there are no cultural or even terminological references. Contrary to other languages (such as beau-père in French or stepfather in English), there is no specific term in Catalan or Spanish to designate this person. Strictly speaking, it would be “padrastre,” but this word is never used as a term of reference or description because of its negative connotation. In general, a first name is used, meaning a name that makes no mention of a relationship with the person, and which consequently, avoids it. However, using the first name as one would for a friend contains a contradiction: effectively, the relationship between child and adult is not a friendship between equals, and more likely its use implies a symbolic negation of the relationship (Bourdieu 1996). When one wishes to be more concrete, one can turn to terms that describe the relationship according to its position with blood relatives (marit de la mare, le novio de la mama [mother’s fiancé] or papa dels germans). At other times a new word is invented from a reinterpretation of terms or taking words used in another context defining each person’s functions. Thus, in the following case, a new word has been invented, padràs, diminutive of the Catalan padrastre: “They don’t call him padrastre (stepfather) because they find it too complicated, they call him padràs. In all the fairytales, the stepmother is Cinderella’s, a very disagreeable character; the stepfather in some fairytales too, but he isn’t always as awful. First of all, it’s Antoni (the stepfather) who wanted them to call him papa, but when the children refused someone helped out by suggesting the name padràs” (Ramon, age 38).

18 It has been frequently said that the difficulty of determining the role of the stepfather (a “false father”) is due to the dominant weight of the ideology of the nuclear family, since this figure has no place in the descriptions of the model of biological parentage (Coleman and Ganong 1990). The use of all these names shows the effort made to avoid this man taking the position of the father since the existence of the stepfather affects the redefinition of the father figure.

19 Mothers do not feel as threatened by the existence of stepmothers as fathers by stepfathers, who invoke their quality of “real father” to oppose the status of stepfather (Cadolle 2007, 16). Obviously, this is due to the fact that living with the mother is far more frequent than with the father, and that stepmothers generally get more involved than stepfathers in caring for stepchildren. But it is also justified, as this informant does, by taking the line of the difference in roles: “It’s easy to play the role of father without being the biological father, but for a mother, it’s very different. That mother’s complicity is so intimate, carrying the child for nine months, day after day, hour after hour, second after second, with a tiny thing like that inside her, and then giving birth […], that’s what separates her from the father’s feelings. He has no point of comparison” (Jacint, age 42).

20 Compared to the father, the stepfather is a person without the slightest legal tie, whose position is built little by little. It is for this reason that the stepfather can assume very distinct roles. It is also possible that the mother’s new partner is tempted to offer to act as a substitute or alternative father (Bernardini 1997, 114), or as a “second papa,” as Joel did: “When the kid started to talk, she said she had two fathers. I asked her if she wanted me to be her father and she replied that she already had a father […] but she went on calling me papa. She was quite a strange little girl and I let her, until one day she said to me that she had two papas” (Joel, age 51).

21 In the same way, Gisela, a 53-year old woman, found herself alone with a small child in Barcelona since the father took absolutely no interest in him after the separation. It is her new partner who took on the parental role and takes care of her child “as if he were his own.” She explains that her child knows who his biological father is but that it is with her present partner that “he has a relationship closer to what one usually considers to be a father’s.” According to her, the child does not want to go to his father any longer because “once he got angry because he wouldn’t let him take his toys and he came home crying and said that he didn’t want to go to his father anymore.”

22 However, the new partner generally wishes to maintain the relationship with the father not only through respect for the child’s filiation but also in order to secure his conjugal relationship and not to always have to pay for the child’s upkeep. Consequently, the role of stepfather can be thought of as secondary, like Manuel (age 43) who explained that his stepson “didn’t want in any way to be first in line.” Then the stepfather can adopt an “intermediary” relationship, as in the case of Carles (age 45) (fig. 4). This informant moved in with his partner Elisenda (1) and her children (16 and 20). Even though the relationship was good, his role was not clear because he took on parental tasks such as taking the children to school, to the doctor or on excursions; but even so, he did not feel appreciated. The daily cohabitation put him in an ambivalent position because he “felt that he wasn’t the father, and obviously there were things that he couldn’t do because of course he wasn’t, but on the other hand, there were things that he had to do because he lived with them.” The same thing happened between his biological daughter Eva (23) and her half-brothers (16 and 20), who maintained “an excellent relationship because they had the advantages of brothers and sister and the advantages of not being them.” In their family relationships, we can observe a great diversity of residential situations, since Carles’ stepdaughters also had a half-brother (6) on their father’s side and they spent time with him, their father, and their stepmother (5 and 6). All these people readjusted their lives and established, in their own words, a sort of “enlarged family.” All the adults, ex-partners, and new partners got along and met for dinners and parties. The situation became more complex with the separation of Elisenda’s ex-husband (5) since Carles’ “stepchildren” continued to see their former stepmother (6). And since this “ex” also came to the parties, Elisenda joked: “Now we have a problem and we don’t know if my ex-partner should meet up with his ex-partner (3). It would be less complicated!”

Carles’ Family Relationships

Carles’ Family Relationships

23 Situations like this place the children within a symbolic “plural parenthood”: they then receive the symbolic heritage of both parents and the guardian stepparent. The biological father can see in the figure of his children’s stepfather both a competitor in terms of masculinity (he is the new partner of his “ex”) and parenthood because of the time the stepfather spends with his children.

Grandparents and “Step-grandparents”: Taking the Father’s Place?

24 To understand the dynamics of recomposed families, it is indispensable to analyze the influence of intergenerational relationships in the divorce process. The role of “new grandparents” is fundamental in Barcelona, and this for three reasons. First, because the individuals who are now grandparents wed during Franco’s regime when divorce was not allowed and separation was unimaginable except in very exceptional cases. Second, because in Catalonia, family continuity was the essential element in the cultural configuration of families, an aspect that seems to have some continuity in urban Catalonia (Bestard and Contreras 1995; Roigé 2006). And third, and most importantly, due to the weakness of family policy in Spain, grandparents must play a very important substitution role in their grandchildren’s childcare (Flaquer and Garriga 2009). Frequently, grandparents supply indispensable help so that the new, recomposed families can function, and their role is thus decisive in the redefinition of fatherhood after divorce.

25 In the interviews, we note great inequalities between maternal and paternal grandparents. In general, the relationships with maternal grandparents are more frequent and decisive. This is the case of Oriol, a young man of 20 who lived for ten years with his mother, his maternal grandmother, and his unmarried aunt after his parents’ separation. For him, his grandmother’s role was fundamental: she gave him a stable home that he lost with his parent’s separation. The relationship with his grandmother is so strong that when his mother went to live with her new partner, he preferred to stay with her. He considers his grandmother’s home his “real home,” the place for family gatherings, and his identity and stability after the turbulence of his family relations (Segalen 2010, 104).

26 However, relationships with paternal grandparents are generally more fragile and they frequently complain that they “have lost their grandchildren” (Clara, age 76). They are encouraged to adopt the father’s viewpoint and not delegate responsibilities to his ex-partner. In this way, Francesc, who agreed at first with his ex-wife that the children would spend only two weekends per month with him, ended up demanding more frequent visits when his parents promised to take care of their grandchildren two days a week after school. What was important for him was not only that his children should be with their father but also “with their father’s family.” In other cases, it is the grandparents who organize weekends or holidays at their home so that the child can be with the father (Segalen 2010, 102). They can also become “substitute fathers,” as in the case of Petra (age 47). Since her ex-partner lives in America, the paternal grandmother exercises the custody that would normally fall to the father: “In fact, my son lived with his grandmother because when we separated, his father lived there for a while. And he has his own room. He spends part of the time with me and part of the time with his grandmother. And when he’s with her, he talks with his father practically every day on the Internet.”

27 The Catalonian civil code, reformed in 2010, established that the father and mother must facilitate the relationship of the child, boy or girl, with the grandparents and that they cannot prevent this unless there is just cause; [6] it also provides for the possibility of establishing a schedule of visits with the grandparents. Nevertheless, even if the law is clear as to the grandparents’ rights concerning their grandchildren, things are quite different in practice. Clara, a 76-year-old grandmother, tells us that even though the court granted her the right to see her granddaughter, she could only be with her very occasionally: “During this last year, I barely saw my granddaughter for a few hours.” For her it was not only a personal question, but also a duty, so that her granddaughter could know her paternal lineage. She regretted that her son was not insistent enough with his ex-wife about this necessity: “My ex-daughter-in-law does everything she can to prevent me seeing her but my son doesn’t play his part as father enough either.” The grandmother defined herself as “the guarantor of her son’s fatherhood” and reminded him “that he should be more of a father than he is.” Grandparents, in the final analysis, are the key to the redefinition of fatherhood after divorce (Segalen 2010, 102).

28 Frequently, family recompositions also mean establishing contact with the parents of the stepmother or stepfather, persons with whom there is no kind of established family relationship, but with whom more or less close ties may be formed, even going as far as exercising some grandparental responsibilities. Situations of co-residence lead to numerous questions as to the type of behavior they should adopt regarding “step-grandchildren.” Should they treat them like their own grandchildren? Should they help out with childcare and give them gifts? Will the biological father or mother allow them to develop these relationships, suspected of being detrimental to relations with the grandparents?

29 Schneider and Mietkiewicz (2001) note that in general “step-grandparents” are welcoming and show imagination in adapting to new family conditions. They can even offer conditions of security and stability based on balanced relations so that their “step-grandchildren” do not feel that their position is an unusual one. These are in any case relationships with no prescribed model, except a role of recomposition that has to be reinvented (Attias-Donfut and Segalen 1998, 142). Nevertheless, relations with their “real grandchildren” and their “false grandchildren” are based on an unequal tie: they feel greater affection for the “real” ones but keep up appearances with the “other grandchildren.” Sometimes the ties may still become strong (Schneider and Mietkiewicz 2001). Araceli explained that his two “stepchildren” got along better with his own parents than with their “real grandparents”: “The children are very happy with my parents. They have a perfect relationship, I mean, a relationship of grandparents, which they aren’t, but they love each other. I mean, they go alone with my parents to the Barça stadium, for a walk, to the amusement park […]. They adore my father, they make him go here, and there […], maybe they see for themselves that it’s a better family atmosphere on our side than on the other side. For them, he’s ‘the grandfather who takes them to football.””

30 In the cases studied, relationships with “step-grandparents” are seen as a complement to what is handed down by the father and not as an element of substitution. However, despite the fact that grandchildren clearly perceive the differences between the symbolic heritage received from their “step-grandparents” and that of their grandparents (Veron 2007, 22), the former are somehow in competition with the “real” grandparents and, indirectly, with fatherhood.

31 Lluís Flaquer (1999) spoke of the “setting star of the father” to redefine fatherhood; the model of “new fathers” is based on the idea of an absence of sexual differentiation of roles and the sharing of all tasks according to availability and not according to sex. As Cadolle argues (2007, 20), the father now develops a relationship with his child that is undoubtedly very different from the relationship that men used to have with theirs and for whom fatherhood was the handing down of a name, an inheritance, and a lineage. If the father used to be able to accept separation from his child, today this seems less and less tolerable to him. In this redefinition of the father figure, as we have seen, the competition and influence of other family figures are very present: the father sees them as an emotional threat (stepfathers), or as a reminder that he must play a more active role in his relationship with the child (grandparents).

32 These “new fathers” generally assume this redefinition of fatherhood, recommended by legislation and by professionals. However, our study in Barcelona shows that in reality it is far from possible to assume these ideals. As Cadolle says (2007, 41), the mother’s traditional predominance is reinforced by the upheaval of the contemporary family. Equality for the father and the mother rarely happens in recomposed families, mainly because of financial difficulties resulting from the lack of family policies in Spain (Escobedo, Flaquer, and Navarro, this issue).

33 The redefinition of fatherhood thus appears to be the consequence of ideological and legislative changes but also strategies of adaptation to the new circumstances experienced after divorce, including the influence of the “enlarged family” and the socio-economic consequences of divorce.