Partners in Parenting: A study on shared childrearing responsibilities between parents and nonparental adults

Abstract

This dissertation focuses on a contextual approach to childrearing: the educative civil society (ECS); the joint activities of citizens in the upbringing of children and adolescents. In the Netherlands and other Western societies, the concept of the ECS has attracted increasing attention in the run-up to the transformation process of youth and family care. In recent years, various initiatives based on the concept of the ECS have been developed. One of these is Allemaal opvoeders (Alop – Partners in parenting) in which eleven Dutch municipalities organized activities to promote the greater involvement of civil society in the upbringing. The aim of this dissertation was to contribute to a further theoretical exploration of the ECS as a contextual approach to childrearing and to explore whether there was any support for this approach by scrutinizing a program – Alop – wherein this approach was operationalized. Since little was known about parents’ and nonparental adults’ (NPAs) perspectives on shared childrearing responsibilities, an explorative overview of the international literature was conducted first (Chapter 2). In the program theory (Chapter 3) – that served as a basis for the evaluation study (Chapter 6) – a four-step ladder of social contact was introduced, which made it possible to categorize the program activities on the basis of their subgoals. With a quantitative study (Chapter 4) we explored if parents subscribe to the proverb that it takes a village to raise a child. The results showed that parents seem to appreciate the involvement of NPAs, but are reluctant in sharing their primary caregivers’ role. A focus group study (Chapter 5) was used to further explore where parents draw the line between their own and other people's responsibilities. The results are in line with the findings of the quantitative study: sharing childrearing is a delicate issue that comes with conditions. Parents were unanimous that they decide on what, when and how to teach their children, and on who they give mandate to act as secondary caregiver. This mandate seems to be defined by time, place and subject, i.e., NPAs only temporarily take over parents’ responsibility, only in specific settings such as school and sports club, and only on subjects that actually concern them. At the same time, the results give rise to a nuancing of the antithesis “private worry versus public issue”: parents believe that they do not have, nor insist on having, the monopoly on childrearing. Parents are not just willing to share childrearing responsibilities, they also emphasized the additional and compensatory value of NPAs as secondary caregivers, both for their children and for themselves as primary caregivers. Findings from our evaluation study (Chapter 6) indicate that activities aimed at strengthening the contact between parents and NPAs can provide childrearing support. In the general discussion (Chapter 7) we argue that future development requires a mixture of modesty and dare. “Modesty” because the ECS is not a panacea, and “dare” because this does not mean that the approach cannot be embraced as a promising complementary approach in youth and family care.