Fifty-two married partners played with their 30-month-olds in both dyadic (parent-child) and whole family contexts and reported on their own coparenting activities (family integrity-promoting behavior, conflict, disparagement, and reprimand). Coparenting behavior observed in the whole family context was evaluated for antagonism, warmth and cooperation, child-adult centeredness, balance of positive involvement, and management of toddler behavior. Parallel balance and management scores were also formed using dyadic session data. Men's reported family integrity-promoting activities and women's reported conflict and reprimand activities were reliable correlates of family group process in both bivariate and discriminant analyses, with links enduring even after controlling for marital quality. Whole family- and dyad-based estimates of coparenting were altogether unrelated, and reported coparenting was tied only to behavior in family context, not to family measures created from dyad-based data.

No abstract

Results from a series of new studies clearly indicate Wfamily-hcZ dynamics can help to explain individual variabiIity in a variety of measures of early socioemotional &vebpmmt. With same ofthe morc basic questions concerning the r e h m e o j whole-jmiZy pmccsses put to rest, new mrd more complex questions now loom for thefield A bridge beween the fields of M y theory and child development reseafdl was forged a little over a decade ago when Patricia Minuchin (1985) issued an M uenrial call for greater synthesis between them. At the t i m e of Minuchink article, a handful of development reseafihers were exploring the terrain she outlined; in the decade since, the gnrwth of family development research has been nothing short of astonishing. In dozens of study laboratories thtwughout the United States and abroad, researchers are exploring how "normal" family processes affect child development. The research process includes common obstacles-forgotten appointments, cancellations and multiple rescheduhgs, endless phone calls in pursuit of late-amving questionnaire data, cranky infants, toddlers who dux to panicipate in elegantly designed lab t a s k , and previously animated couples who mysteriously grow silent when instructed to discuss together problem areas in their relationshp. Yet from the morass of self-qoned, interview, and observational data gathered during family visits, d r s have regularly uncovered links among marital, parenting, and copanmting process, and they have sometimes also u n c d links among these family pmcesses and pertinent indices of child adjustment. Until recently however, few studies of early socialization and development had ventured mto one of the final great htiers of family processes--the rich, nuanced, and distinctive set of interpersonal dynamics characteristic of whole-family p u p interaction.Research reported in this chapter was supported in part by grants (rltMH55660) from the National Institute of Mental Health (to James P. McHale) and the Frances L Hiatt School of Psychology (to Regina Kuersten and AUison Lauretti).

Results support the need for, acceptance of, and feasibility of providing integrated care for children with AD and their families. Changes to our clinical model based on study findings are discussed.