http://tfj.sagepub.com/The Family Journal

http://tfj.sagepub.com/content/13/2/167The online version of this article can be found at:

 DOI: 10.1177/1066480704273093

2005 13: 167The Family JournalKarla Lever and Jennifer J. Wilson

Encore Parenting: When Grandparents Fill the Role of Primary Caregiver  

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of: 

  International Association of Marriage and Family Counselors

can be found at:The Family JournalAdditional services and information for    

  http://tfj.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

 

http://tfj.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:  

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:  

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:  

http://tfj.sagepub.com/content/13/2/167.refs.htmlCitations:  

What is This? 

- Mar 18, 2005Version of Record >>

at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

10.1177/1066480704273093THE FAMILY JOURNAL: COUNSELING AND THERAPY FOR COUPLES AND FAMILIES / April 2005Lever, Wilson / ENCORE PARENTING

❖ Literature Review—Practice

Encore Parenting: When GrandparentsFill the Role of Primary Caregiver

Karla LeverJennifer J. WilsonUniversity of South Carolina

This literature review explores the issues of grief and the interrup-tion of developmental stages often experienced by grandparents whoraise their grandchildren and presents a case study to illustrate thatstructural family therapy can address and combat these issues. Anevaluation of the use of structural family therapy in relation to griefand loss issues is offered.

Keywords: grief; grandparents; grandparenting; family struc-ture; developmental stages

When a parent learns that he or she is soon to become agrandparent, hopes of indulging and spoiling the new

grandchild quickly emerge. Many new grandparents getexcited about being able to “spend time together without theresponsibility of all of the day-to-day tasks. They can justhave fun” (Glass & Huneycutt, 2002a, p. 144). For the parentthat must fulfill the role of the primary caregiver for his or hergrandchildren, these hopes go unfulfilled and must beexchanged for an often-unanticipated repeat performance ofparenting.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

According to Landry-Meyer and Newman (2004), “In2000, approximately 6 million children younger than the ageof 18 in the United States lived with grandparents and otherrelatives (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000)” (p. 1005). The totalnumber of children living in the United States younger thanage 18 in 2000 was 72.1 million. In 1990, 3.5 million childrenwere living in households run by their grandparents or almost6% of all children younger than age 18 (U.S. Census Bureau,1990). These figures represent a 65% increase in grandparent-headed households in only 10 years, and the increase is likelyto continue. Grandparents find themselves as parents againdue to many factors, “some of these reasons include:increased drug abuse among parents, teen pregnancy,

divorce, the rapid rise of single-parent households, domesticviolence, mental and physical illness, AIDS, crime, childabuse and neglect, and incarceration (American Associationof Retired Persons [AARP] 1998)” (Glass & Huneycutt,2002b, p. 238). According to Kropf and Burnette (2003, p.362), no parents are present in approximately one third ofthese homes. “Thirteen percent of African American childrenare living in grandparent-headed households, compared with5.7% of Hispanic, and 3.9% of non-Hispanic White children”(Goodman & Silverstein, 2001, p. 557). Most of the grand-parents who are primarily responsible for raising their grand-children are grandmothers.

Glass and Huneycutt (2002a) reported that grandmothersraising children alone are more likely to face financial hard-ships and are more likely to be receiving public assistance orhave health coverage. The mean income for single grand-mothers raising their grandchildren is less than one third ofthe household income reported for families with two grand-parents in the home. In addition, according to Edwards(2003), children placed in homes with nonrelatives receivemore financial assistance than those placed with relatives.This disparity in services may contribute to the stress on thegrandparent, who probably did not plan for the raising of achild during his or her retirement years.

It is not surprising that many grandparents have conflict-ing feelings about becoming parents again. Often, they arehappy to be able to provide for the grandchild yet angry thatthey have been forced into raising another child. Strom andStrom (2000) discussed this conflict: “Feelings of resentmenttoward those who created the situation, guilt about things theymight have done wrong as a parent, and doubts about theirability to manage by themselves are quite common” (p. 185).The resentment, self-doubt, and guilt can be viewed as griefover the dashed hopes for their own children and worriesabout their own ability to parent another child. Mayer (2002)discussed the sense of failure that grandparent-caregivers

167

THE FAMILY JOURNAL: COUNSELING AND THERAPY FOR COUPLES AND FAMILIES, Vol. 13 No. 2, April 2005 167-171DOI: 10.1177/1066480704273093© 2005 Sage Publications

at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

may feel about the way they parented the first time, if thechild’s placement is due to the parent’s incompetence.

Often grandparent-caregivers experience a sense of beingheld to a different timetable than their peers. In a study con-ducted by Landry-Meyer and Newman in 2004, grandparentsexpressed feeling a sense of incongruence due to the inabilityto achieve developmental tasks that they believed to be appro-priate for their age group. More than 50% of participants inthis study expressed feeling an “incongruence between lifestage and parental role enactment” (p. 1015). In 1993,Jendrek discussed Seltzer’s concept of time-disordered rolesin the context of grandparent-caregivers by stating that grand-parents who must parent again have had difficulty withchanging roles from those they have been rehearsing regu-larly for a new role, which they cannot play the way expected,thus leading to unexpected stress.

The Life Cycle

The Individual Life Cycle in Context, as presented inCarter and McGoldrick (2005), outlines important develop-mental goals for each stage of life. Mayer (2002) stated thatthe average age of a grandparent-caregiver is between 50 and60 years old; therefore, both the middle adulthood and latemiddle age stages apply. Some of the reported goals for themiddle adulthood stage, ages 35 to 55, include the deepeningof friendships, recognizing their own successes as well aslimitations, accepting the choices that lead to both failuresand successes, and reevaluating “one’s work satisfaction andfinancial adequacy and consider [the] possibility of changingwork or career to achieve greater life balance” (Carter &McGoldrick, 2005, p. 38). The relevant goals for late middleage, which encompasses ages 55 to 74, include dealing withpossible physical and intellectual deficits, handling the tran-sition from work to retirement and having to “accept one’slimitations and multiple caretaking responsibilities” (Carter& McGoldrick, 2005, p. 39).

Grandparents who find themselves parenting again losethe ability to accomplish many of these tasks, most specifi-cally, accepting the choices that led to failure as they strugglewith how they may have failed as a parent; transitioning fromwork to retirement, as many must continue to work due to thenew financial requirements of reparenting; and acceptingtheir limitations, as many recognize that they “serve as asafety net between their grandchildren and the formal fostercare system” (Kropf & Burnette, 2003, p. 361). In addition,many grandparent-caregivers find themselves losing touchwith friends because their daily activities are different fromtheir peers, and they grieve this loss at a time when theyshould be deepening their friendships, which causes furtherincongruence.

According to Glass and Huneycutt (2002a), grandparent-caregivers may worry obsessively about what they mighthave done wrong and why they avoided the problems for so

long. Landry-Meyer and Newman (2004) interviewed onegrandmother who stated, “I feel guilty for not feeling like agrandmother. The typical grandmother thoughts aren’t what Ihave. I think I’m not being a good grandma” (p. 1019).Grandparent-caregivers may resent that their dreams must beput on the back burner. In addition, the guilt experienced atthis point can be over not having been a good enough parentas well as not being a good enough grandparent. The loss ofthis chance to prove themselves as a good grandparent, andtheir perception of repeating a possibly less-than-stellar per-formance as a parent, may be overwhelming for some grand-parents. The grief these caregivers carry must be consideredwhen working to rebalance the family structure.

The grandchildren frequently experience conflicting feel-ings as well. Mira Mayer (2002) wrote that the grandchild’s“internal feelings reflect a chaotic struggle over grief, sorrow,rage, distrust, apprehension, embarrassment, or some opti-mistic notion for the parents’ return” (p. 374). Grandchildrenare often open about their gratitude for their grandparents forraising them and openly state that they love them whileattempting to push grandparents away before being aban-doned again. If the grandparent is not ready to begin this newendeavor, there is a danger that the grandchildren will sensethe hesitation and view themselves “as an obstacle to grand-parent happiness” (Strom & Strom, 2000, p. 186). This con-cern may be further intensified by the uncertainty of theplacement with the grandparent if he or she has not beengranted legal custody. According to Mills (2001), the grand-child may sense the grandparent’s concern over the real possi-bility that he or she may lose contact with the grandchild if abiological parent comes to claim them at a later date. Thegrandchild may not be able to verbalize this concern and maystruggle with depending fully on the grandparent for physicaland emotional care and fighting with the grandparent, whomay be wrenched from his or her life.

According to Glass and Huneycutt (2002a, p. 142),approximately 50% of the grandchildren being raised by theirgrandparents are younger than 6 years old. Therefore, Carterand McGoldrick’s (2005) Individual Life Cycle stages thatare most likely to apply to these grandchildren are the earlychildhood, which includes ages 2 to 6, and middle childhoodstages, ages 6 to 12, although many grandchildren who areraised by grandparents will live with them until early adult-hood. Some of the important goals for the early childhoodstage are to begin to become aware of themselves in relationto others, to increase their ability to build trusting relation-ships, and to learn to follow rules. The goals for middle child-hood that most apply to this family dynamic are to build anunderstanding of their role with their family, peers, and com-munity; to increase their ability to be empathetic; and to“develop an ability to be intimate and to express anger, fear,and pain in nondestructive ways” (Carter & McGoldrick,2005, p. 37).

168 THE FAMILY JOURNAL: COUNSELING AND THERAPY FOR COUPLES AND FAMILIES / April 2005

at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Family Structure

These goals can be compromised by a sudden switch inparents or by a lack of parental involvement at any stage.When these young children become aware of themselves inrelation to the world around them, they will begin to noticethat other children have both parents and grandparents. Inaddition, these children have learned that they cannot trusttheir parents, whether living or dead, to take care of them andmay begin to doubt their ability to trust anyone, includingtheir grandparent-caregivers. The middle childhood grand-child may be confused about his or her place in the familywith regard to whom he or she can trust and who is actually incharge of raising him or her. Often these grandchildren areangry but must stifle this anger due to unspoken family rulesabout being angry with a parent or to not further hurt thegrandparent that they so depend on. In addition, simultaneousgrief may occur between the grandparent and the grandchild.

Goodman and Silverstein quoted Ehrle and Day (1994),who discussed the shift in intergenerational relationships:“Along with grieving over the loss or incapacitation of thegrandparent’s child, the grandparent must also cope with thegrandchild’s adjustment reactions to parental loss (p. 68)”(Goodman & Silverstein, 2001, p. 559).

Grandchildren who are being raised by their grandparentsmay not understand the formal family structure and, for vari-ous reasons, may choose to refer to the grandmother as“mommy,” and the grandmother may choose to call the childher own. The change in terms of endearment illustrates thebonding that must take place for the child to feel secure butadds to the blurring of the family boundaries. The new familysubsystem may feel a need to “conform and be a family persocietal expectations” (Landry-Meyer & Newman, 2004,p. 1018).

“Grandparents need to know it is okay for them to feelangry” (Glass & Huneycutt, 2002a, p. 151), as do grandchil-dren. If not, this unspoken anger from both parties can lead tofurther crisis within the family subsystem and may test thealready tenuous boundaries. The family boundaries thenbecome blurred, as do the family subsystems. It is importantthat the family boundaries be redefined quickly, with consid-eration given to the nature of the grandparent-caregiver place-ment and the extent of the biological parent’s involvement inthe child’s life.

Structural family therapy, developed by SalvadorMinuchin, focuses on “patterns of interaction within the fam-ily” (Becvar & Becvar, 2000, p. 197) and stresses appropriatehierarchies, which can be blurred in grandparent-headedfamilies. The parental subsystem may not be intact and a sin-gle grandparent may be the sole provider and disciplinarianfor the child; or one parent or other family members may takesome partial responsibility, which can be confusing for allinvolved. A healthy family has clear boundaries, but often

grandparent-caregiver families become more rigid or diffuseto deal with the crisis within the family.

CASE STUDY

The sense of loss and grief occurred within the context ofthe Jones and Smith family. The two are joined through a mar-riage between children. Mrs. Jones is the maternal grand-mother and Mr. and Mrs. Smith are the paternal grandparents.Mrs. Jones, at 46, took over the role of caregiver for hergrandchild. Mrs. Jones allowed Rachel and her mom and dadto live in her home, but the biological parents’ emotionalinstability, as well as their heavy drug involvement, encour-aged Mrs. Jones to assume the role of primary caretaker forRachel since the age of 5 months. The biological mom later“disappeared” and gave the maternal grandmother permanentcustody of Rachel when she was just reaching age 5. Mrs.Jones disclosed during the family mapping her sense of griefand loss with her daughter’s lack of involvement. “I don’teven know where she is,” she tells the therapist with a sadexpression in her eyes. She also discussed her feelings of guiltfrom the biological mother.

She called me the other day on the phone and blamed me forall her problems. She says it’s my fault that she is the way sheis. . . . I told her I had another call and when I got off the phone,I then just sat there and cried. I know it’s not my fault, but Istill somehow feel responsible. You know?

Mrs. Jones and Mr. and Mrs. Smith have attempted to beRachel’s parental subsystem, sharing financial and physicalcustody throughout her childhood. Mrs. Jones describesRachel’s early childhood as having been sent back and forthbetween the two sets of caregivers until the age of 5.

Oftentimes, the paternal grandparents would “give Rachelwhatever she wanted, so of course she wanted to stay withthem and I became the ‘bad guy,’” according to Mrs. Jones.This problematic coalition between Rachel and her paternalgrandparents increased Mrs. Jones’s feelings of being “theoutsider.” Rachel began staying with Mr. and Mrs. Smith atage 5 due to financial stressors and the promise of “freedaycare.” Mrs. Jones felt that she was fighting a losing battleand decided to “give in” to the Smiths’ request for Rachel tolive with them full-time.

I didn’t have any money and they did. They used to buy hereverything she wanted and give her whatever she wanted, andI couldn’t. I remember Rachel’s grandfather (Mr. Smith)would buy her a new dress every week. It got to the pointwhere I would go and pick Rachel up on the weekends and shewould fight with me and not want to go. Then Mrs. Smith saidthat she would be able to get Rachel in free at a daycare whereshe was working. I thought to myself that this would be goodfor Rachel. I regret ever letting Rachel go live over there.When they began to have trouble with her, they started usingmy home as consequences if Rachel was bad in school or

Lever, Wilson / ENCORE PARENTING 169

at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

didn’t do what she was supposed to. I became the badguy . . . and at first I didn’t mind. It was all for what was in thebest interest for Rachel.

Mrs. Jones described a pattern of “permissive parenting”by the paternal grandparents. Permissive parenting asdescribed here is supplying a lot of love and nurturance buthaving difficulty creating age-appropriate limits, boundaries,and consistency in parenting, which upsets the generationalhierarchy. Rachel’s disruptive and defiant behaviors slowlyincreased. However, it was not until Rachel began experienc-ing difficulties in the school setting at age 10 that a referralwas made to mental health counseling services. Rachel wentthrough several mental health clinicians over a 3-year periodand made no progress. Eventually, Department of JuvenileJustice (DJJ) involvement was pursued at age 13 as the grand-daughter’s oppositional defiant behaviors increased. Rachelwas sent to an evaluation center for 45 days. Once discharged,it was mandated that she stay with her maternal grandmother.Mrs. Jones (60 years old) discussed her increased sense ofdepression and role loss when forced to take on full custodialresponsibilities of Rachel.

I thought that I would be able to get a little rest once my chil-dren left the home . . . but I don’t get a break. She (Rachel) tellsme she hates me, and she refuses to do what I ask her to do. Ihave to take her with me everywhere I go, and there’s nowhereto leave her without the fear of her breaking probation.

Through the use of structural family therapy, severalthemes emerged concerning the concepts of grief and loss.The idea of role conflict became the first dilemma to beaddressed. The paternal grandparents had exhibited permis-sive parenting behaviors and had developed an unhealthy alli-ance with Rachel out of guilt for the biological parents’absence and abandonment of the child. Mrs. Smith shared herthoughts on the matter, as follows:

I feel guilty when I can’t give Rachel what she wants. Shealready feels abandoned by her mother. I remember Rachelwould sit by the front windows for hours waiting on her mombecause her mom had promised to come see her. She would beso excited you know . . . until she finally realized that her momwasn’t coming. That used to break my heart.

The paternal grandparents’ feelings of guilt and role conflictwere patterned more like a grandparent/grandchild relation-ship versus the parental relationship that was needed for Mr.and Mrs. Smith to draw appropriate boundaries and limits inthe home. The idea that they were now Rachel’s parents ver-sus grandparents was a difficult role shift for the paternalgrandparents. It was hard for them to re-adjust and takeresponsibility for Rachel. During the course of treatment,attempts to establish rules, limits, consequences, and rewardswere developed collaboratively with both homes; the paternalgrandparents continued forming inappropriate and unhealthyalliances with Rachel. For instance, Mrs. Smith would often

lie for Rachel in session, stating that she had complied withthe house rules when in actuality she had not and seemed con-sistently unable to keep any of the set limits, rewards, andconsequences that were agreed on during the previous ses-sion. Rachel was eventually mandated by her DJJ probationofficer not to have any contact with her paternal grandparentsdue to their lack of ability to make this role shift.

Since Rachel has been living with her maternal grand-mother full-time, her grades have increased from Ds and Fs toAs, Bs, and one F. Rachel has gotten no disciplinary notesfrom her school and has begun to work with her current thera-pist through expressive techniques on her own grief and lossissues with her biological mother and father. Once the foun-dation blocks of Rachel’s parental system were restructured,creating clear, firm, fair, friendly, and consistent emotionalboundaries and limits in the home, therapeutic interventionscould then shift from family goals to individual goals explor-ing developmental impasses and areas of stunted develop-ment. Reframing Rachel’s oppositional/defiant behaviors asincomplete developmental tasks due to family disruptionsand traumatic events established a more effective framing ofthe difficulty and empowered Rachel to begin to take owner-ship and therefore control of her life choices. Early childhoodstages of development of self in relation to the world, devel-oping trusting relationships, and learning to follow rules wereexplored and processed in treatment. Role-plays helpingRachel develop “new stories” and interactional options withpeers, teachers, and family members were employedthroughout treatment. Rachel’s inability to develop trustingrelationships was linked back to family-of-origin experi-ences. Rachel was then able to talk and process the griefassociated with her biological mom’s abandonment.

Role-timing was another grief and loss issue that wasexplored within the family sessions. Rachel’s caregivers dis-cussed the fact that they felt too old to be dealing with a 14-year-old. Both sets of caregivers discussed their expectationsto be in the phase of empty nest and retirement at this age.Both grandmothers were 60 years old and the grandfather wasage 66. Bodily aches and pains as well as feelings of constantfatigue most of the time were discussed and related to itsinterference with following through with consistent parent-ing skills in the home. Both grandmothers drew social secu-rity due to disability status and were unable to work. Less than$200 dollars per month was given for child support as finan-cial aid. The reality of not having enough money to giveRachel the basics was often a focus of treatment. This lack offinancial stability leads to a feeling of guilt and shame thatwas then integrated into the caregivers’ ability to draw firmboundaries with the client in the home.

Mrs. Jones also disclosed that she was unable to make timefor the things she wanted to do because she continuously hadto monitor Rachel and was unable to lean on the paternalgrandparents for support. Her sense of identity loss wasexplored.

170 THE FAMILY JOURNAL: COUNSELING AND THERAPY FOR COUPLES AND FAMILIES / April 2005

at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

I haven’t been able to go to church for the last three Sundaysbecause Rachel refuses to go. I haven’t been able to go tokaraoke night with my friends without taking Rachel with me,and sometimes she acts so oppositional while we’re there thatI have to leave. Sometimes I want to sit down and do somecrafts or just have some peace and quiet, you know, but I can’t.There’s always something to do . . . wash laundry, take Rachelto her karate classes, or cleaning up after Rachel. I’m tired ofbeing her maid. When do I get my time?

The therapist worked with Mrs. Jones on developing personalgoals and finding a way to begin to structure time for herselfeach week. Exploring the possibilities of going back to schoolpart-time while Rachel was in school was discussed as well asgetting Rachel a part-time job when she turned 15 to givegrandmother some more “me time” and to relieve some of thefinancial burdens in the home. Scholarships to help withRachel’s karate classes were also found through a grant. Thetherapist encouraged Mrs. Jones to reach out to her church forhelp with holidays as well as encouraging the development ofa grandparents support group in the agency to discuss themany stressors that third-generation caretakers must face.

CONCLUSION

Exploring grief and loss issues throughout the layers of thefamily system not only changed the outlook of treatment butalso gave the clinician a deeper understanding and apprecia-tion of the many obstacles that grandparents raising grand-children must confront and overcome on a daily basis. Grand-parents must leap over the hurdles of generation gaps todevelop age-appropriate limits and responsibilities for grand-children in the home. The family may struggle with appropri-ate developmental life stages because neither the grandparentnor grandchild can progress through the stages at a rate com-mensurate with their peers. The guilt about the biological par-ents’ lack of involvement and effort can create a lack ofboundaries in the home, which may permit grandchildrenfrom learning self-discipline and respect. This, in turn, maylead to the development of oppositional and/or disruptivebehaviors in home/school environments, as the generationalhierarchy is compromised. It has also become apparent thatmany grandparents raising grandchildren are receiving lim-ited assistance and receive little to no social support. Explora-tion of increased social supports for this cohort seemsimperative as this parenting population continues to growwithin our society.

REFERENCES

Becvar, D. S., & Becvar, R. J. (2000). Family therapy: A systemic integration

(4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Carter, B., & McGoldrick, M. (Eds.). (2005). The expanded family life cycle:

Individual, family, and social perspectives (3rd ed.). New York: Allyn &

Bacon.

Edwards, O. W. (2003). Living with grandma: A grandfamily study. School

Psychology International, 24(2), 204-217.

Glass, J. C., Jr., & Huneycutt, T. L. (2002a). Grandparents raising grandchil-

dren: Extent of situation, issues involved, and educational implications.

Educational Gerontology, 28, 139-161.

Glass, J. C., Jr., & Huneycutt, T. L. (2002b). Grandparents raising grandchil-

dren: The courts, custody, and educational implications. Educational

Gerontology, 28, 237-251.

Goodman, C., & Silverstein, M. (2001). Grandmothers who parent their

grandchildren: An exploratory study of close relations across three gener-

ations [Special issue]. Journal of Family Issues, 22(5), 557-578.

Jendrek, M. P. (1993). Grandparents who parent their grandchildren: Effects

on lifestyle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55(3), 609-621.

Kropf, N., & Burnette, D. (2003). Grandparents as family caregivers: Lessons

for intergenerational education. Educational Gerontology, 29, 361-372.

Landry-Meyer, L., & Newman, B. (2004). An exploration of the grandparent

caregiver role. Journal of Family Issues, 25(8), 1005-1025.

Mayer, M. (2002). Grandparents rearing grandchildren: Circumstances and

interventions. School Psychology International, 23(4), 371-385.

Mills, T. L. (2001). Grandparents and grandchildren: Shared lives, well-

being, and institutional forces influencing intergenerational relationships

[Special issue]. Journal of Family Issues, 22(5), 677-679.

Strom, R. D., & Strom, S. K. (2000). Meeting the challenge of raising grand-

children. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 51(3),

183-198.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1990). Section GP-1. Retrieved October 29, 2004, from

http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/grandparents.html

Karla Lever is a doctoral candidate in the Counselor EducationPh.D. Program at the University of South Carolina. She is a licensedprofessional counselor and is currently employed as a child andyouth therapist at a private, not-for-profit clinic in North Carolina.

Jennifer J. Wilson received her undergraduate degree in psychol-ogy from Winthrop University. She went on to pursue her Ed.S. de-gree in marriage and family therapy from the Counselor EducationProgram at the University of South Carolina (USC). She is now a2nd-year doctoral student in the Counselor Education Departmentat USC and also works full-time at Lexington County CommunityMental Health Center with an emphasis on family therapy and treat-ment.

Lever, Wilson / ENCORE PARENTING 171

at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on November 25, 2014tfj.sagepub.comDownloaded from