Cited by 23Family Dynamics and RelationshipsCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

“The troublesome other and I”: Parallel stories of separated parents in prolonged conflicts

Open access
Stokkebekk, Jan, Iversen, Anette, Hollekim, Ragnhild, Ness, Ottar·2021·Journal of Marital and Family Therapy

Abstract

This qualitative study aims to explore how noncohabiting parenting couples in prolonged conflict construct the other parent and themselves. Ten parents from five parent couples were interviewed. A dyadic analytical design was used, where parent's stories of conflict were analyzed in parallel with their co‐parent. Drawing on positioning theory, self‐identity as parents emerged as implicit counter positions in storylines, which construct the co‐parent as “the troublesome other.” Two typologies of conflicted storylines were prominent in the findings:storylines of violations of trust, positioning the co‐parents in relation to traumatic events in the past and,storylines of who is bad, positioning the co‐parent as either a disloyal co‐parent or a dysfunctional parent. The findings indicate that prolonged conflicts made it impossible to find available positions for cooperation. We argue that family therapists should aid each household toward promoting child and family resilience rather than continued efforts to solve chronic conflicts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jmft.12474

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In multidimensional systemic research, there is a need for self-reflexivity, meaning the researcher must be critically conscious of their own positioning and prejudices and of how these may influence the phenomenon being studied.

    “Hence, in multidimensional systemic research, there is a need for selfreflexivity, meaning that the researcher must be critically conscious of their own positioning and prejudices and of how these may influence the phenomenon being studied (Davies & Harré, 1990;Stokkebekk, 2022;Stokkebekk et al., 2021).”

    From Researching what we practice—The paradigm of systemic family research: Part 2 (2023) · cites this paper as Stokkebekk et al., 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stokkebekk, J., Iversen, A., Hollekim, R., & Ness, O.
Affiliations
  • University of Bergen (NO)
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Corresponding author
Stokkebekk, Jan
Venue
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-01
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
52-68
ISSN
  • 0194-472X (ISSN-L)
  • 1752-0606
OpenAlex
W3120550146
Cited by
23
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7
FWCI
5.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
separated parents, co-parenting, positioning theory, breach of trust, family resilience, family therapy
MeSH terms
Divorce, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Parenting, Qualitative Research, Family Conflict

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review