Blended families in the workplace

Lone parenthood is often a transitory state that lasts an average of five years for lone parents in the UK (Rabindrakumar, 2018). When a lone parent re-partners, a blended family is created (Letablier & Wall, 2018). However,

despite the relatively large number of blended families, they are often considered an apparently undesirable family arrangement, while the nuclear family continues to represent the dominant cultural norm of an ideal family unit (Blyaert et al., 2016; Dupuis, 2010). This might be one reason why, similarly to the concept of lone parenthood, the ‘blended family’ remains a mystery in work-family research. Also known as step-families or patchwork families in the literature, definitions regarding the nature of this family type vary due to its complexity. The most encompassing definition construes a blended family as a type of family in which at least one partner in a cohabiting or married couple has a child from a previous relationship (Ganong & Coleman, 2018). However, blended families are highly heterogeneous, and an almost infinite variation of family structures exists within the given definition. For example, one or both partners in the couple may have children from a previous relationship, who may or may not live with them. They can also be of the opposite or the same sex. Moreover, either partner may be divorced, never married, or widowed before entering the current relationship. Furthermore, they may or may not have children together. Due to this complexity blended families are notoriously difficult to study, offering another explanation as to why they remain understudied (Weaver et al., 2001). We are not even sure about numbers and formations of blended families within the United Kingdom. According to the Office for National Statistics, step-families have declined by 14 per cent between 2001 and 2011. However, we do not have any official statistics post-2011 to see the development up to the present day and the ONS provides only speculation as to why the numbers decline, one of the suggestions is that couples might not formally live together.

As a consequence of this significant gap in the work-family literature, little is known about the distinct challenges that blended families might encounter in forming and maintaining the family unit, which may differ significantly from those faced by nuclear families, and the impact this might have on the work domain. These difficulties include the relationship with co-parents and partners from previous relationships, consolidating different parenting approaches with new partners, and building relationships with step-children (Kumar, 2017).

The transition to becoming a family can be an especially challenging time for couples in blended families. While the traditional transition to parenthood in which a man and a woman become first-time parents has been extensively studied, evidencing this as a challenging time in which new identities are emerging and existing identities are shifting (e.g. Greenberg et al., 2016; Singley & Hynes, 2005), we know very little about the impact of non-traditional transitions to parenthood on parents’ work-life experiences and identities.

We know that one of the challenges blended families experience when forming are related to bringing together a number of unrelated adults and children, such as step-children, step-parents, and step-siblings into the newly formed family. Where couples in first-order relationships (i.e. couple relationships before either partner has children) form their relationship prior to becoming parents, couples in step-families have to navigate their new relationship with each other in addition to developing step-relationships with children and even ex-partners (Cartwright & Gibson, 2013).

Blended family systems are far more complex and diverse than nuclear family systems and the multiplicity of roles each family member can hold, and the lack of clarity of said roles, can result in distinct challenges. This is exacerbated by the fact that most blended family systems transcend the boundaries of a single household as co-parents, partners, and dependent biological children, and step-children can be located in multiple households (Braithwaite et al., 2003). Here, a major distinction between two types of blended families systems becomes clear, those formed post-bereavement and those formed post-divorce or separation (Gold, 2010). Blended families formed post-divorce or separation have replaced bereavement as the leading precursor to contemporary blended families and where blended families that formed post-bereavement often mimic the nuclear family system by substituting deceased biological parents, post-divorce blended families instead add parental figures (Coleman et al., 2000).

In addition to the difficulties in bringing together a number of unrelated adults and children to form a new family unit and handling ex-partners while doing so, negative connotations of blended families and lack of social support amongst other factors make blended families more fragile, unstable, and vulnerable to dissolution (Coleman et al., 2000; Kumar, 2017).

All these challenges blended families encounter may have a significant impact on the work domain, and flexible working arrangements could prove a major source of organisational support for blended families in the workplace.

However, before turning to the connection between families in transition and flexible working, we feel that it is paramount to first discuss gender relations. Flexible working arrangements are highly gendered and as a consequence have distinct drawbacks for both fathers and mothers using them or seeking to use them. In the following section, we show the consequences of this and argue that these drawbacks might be exacerbated for lone parents, re-partnered parents, and step-parents due to the complex nature of their family arrangements that do not fit within the gendered nature of flexible working arrangements.