Objective To examine (a) associations among coparental interaction (cooperation, overt conflict, covert conflict) and father involvement (engagement, in‐kind financial support), (b) associations among the three dimensions of coparental interaction, and (c) associations among the two dimensions of father involvement, shortly after divorce. Background Family relationships change shortly after divorce, yet little research has examined coparental interaction and father involvement shortly after divorce and overt and covert conflict are often not included. Method Mothers and fathers from different families in a southeastern state (N = 194) participated within 3 months after divorce (Time 1) and 3 to 6 months later (Time 2). A cross‐lagged structural equation model was used to examine reciprocal associations among dimensions of coparental interaction and father involvement. Results Higher father engagement and lower overt conflict (Time 1) were associated with higher cooperation (Time 2). Covert conflict was associated with later overt conflict. In‐kind support was not associated with later father engagement or coparental interaction. No reciprocal associations among variables were found. Conclusion Coparental conflict and father engagement may be salient to the development of later coparental relationships following divorce. Implications Practitioners can help parents manage conflict and encourage father engagement to foster healthy coparental relationships after divorce.

Divorced parents are increasingly expected to carry out shared physical custody of minor children by maintaining ongoing communication with their ex-spouse. Digital and cellular technologies have created new mediums for divorced parents to carry out communication (e.g., texting, email, and social media). In this study, we identified a typology of divorced parents’ use of five communication mediums with their former spouse using latent class analysis. We also examined how parent, post-divorce relationship, and family characteristics were associated with class membership. The four classes we identified were multi-method communicators who extensively used all communication mediums; phone-facilitated communicators who had moderate usage of face-to-face communication, with higher frequency of talking on the phone or texting; text and email communicators who used minimal synchronous communication, relying on texting or emailing; and limited communication texters who had low use of all communication mediums, but when they did communicate, did so via text. Divorced coparents have widely incorporated communication technologies into their post-divorce coparenting relationships. Understanding how new communication technologies are associated with individual, relational, and family adjustment to divorce can help inform research, policy, and practice.

In this Lessons from the Field, we describe the lessons we learned from developing the Divorce Education Assessment Collaborative (DEAC) and creating a longitudinal evaluation plan for divorce education programs across geographically, programmatically, and format-diverse programs. Background: Although divorce education programs are commonly mandated for divorcing parents, variability in program content, format, and design can make it difficult to determine the efficacy of such programs. We contend developing a standardized evaluation tool, and making it freely available to programs, is essential for identifying best practices and moderators of program effectiveness. Experience: Members of the DEAC share their experiences and insights regarding successes and challenges in coordinating and collaborating to develop an evaluation tool that is concise, but provides key information

No abstract