Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on the article by Chase and McGill from the perspective of Sibs, the only UK-wide charity dedicated to supporting siblings of disabled children and adults.

This commentary explores the implication of Chase and McGill’s findings for sibling support.

The article highlights how siblings need greater support throughout their life and argues that their views must influence the provision and development of that support.

This viewpoint focuses on the needs of adult siblings, often a forgotten group facing unique challenges and shared experiences.

The heritability of ASDs reportedly exceeds 90% (Halgin & Whitbourne, 2007; Rutter, 2005), indicating that genetic endowment strongly influences the etiology of these disorders (Halgin & Whitbourne, 2007). Research to date has suggested chromosomes 2, 7, and 15 as possible sites for genetic abnormalities associated with ASDs (Filipek et al., 1999; Halgin & Whitbourne, 2007; Muhle, Trentacoste, & Rapin, 2004; Yonan et al., 2003). However, the genetics of autism is complex and is not yet fully known (Chuthapisith, Ruangdaraganon, Sombuntham, & Roongpraiwan, 2007; Goldberg et al., 2005; Muhle et al., 2004; Ozonoff, South, & Provencal, 2005; Rutter, 2005; Szatmari, Zwaigenbaum, & Bryson, 2004).

Effective collaboration with families when a child has chronic illness or disability involves the participation of all family members. Through a review of recent literature, this chapter provides a snapshot into the unique experiences and perspectives of fathers and siblings, exploring roles, and responsibilities often assumed by each, such as protector, advocate, teacher, and caretaker. Professionals are invited to build greater awareness of the unique insights fathers and siblings can contribute to program planning. Strategies to build partnerships that benefit all family members are suggested.

Twelve percent of families in the United States have a child with a disability, yet little is known about the long-term consequences of growing up with a disabled sibling. This study builds on previous research regarding disability effects on families and offers an additional view on the linked lives of families and, in particular, siblings. Using secondary data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 Children and Young Adults, this study examines the odds of college completion among young adults with a disabled sibling during childhood. Specifically, I examine the gender differences among those who had a sibling with a disability. Women are more than 35% less likely to complete college if they had a disabled sibling during childhood; there is no significant difference by sibling disability status for boys. To understand whether children in low-resourced families are particularly penalized by having a disabled sibling, I examine whether various family resources attenuate the low graduation odds among those who had a disabled sibling. I find that having stably married parents during childhood largely eliminates the college completion gap between those with and without a disabled sibling. However, increases in mothers' education or family income do not attenuate the college completion gap. By identifying this gender disadvantage in college completion, this study shows that disabilities have consequences not just for disabled individuals but for their siblings as well, shining a light on a hidden cost of disability on families.

This article highlights some of Dronkers and Hox's significant findings about family background and sibling effects on divorce. It proposes that in addition to siblings’ common family background and genetic heritage, their interaction over the life course may influence their attitudes toward marriage and divorce. The influence of sibling modeling and interaction over the life course may vary, depending on the gender and birth order of siblings.

This study examines the effects of a family's and individual children's characteristics on the probability of having a divorce. Current research shows a clear indication of increased divorce risks if an individual's parents or siblings have experienced a divorce. Explanations include both shared family characteristics (including genetic effects) and common characteristics of the individual children involved. This study analyzes the effects of shared family background characteristics on the divorce risk of individuals. By analyzing siblings within families and including individual children's characteristics in the analysis, it is possible to separate individual-level and family-level effects.

In addition to employing a multi-level structure of individual siblings nested within families, the data cited here are censored. For all individuals, the length of the marriage and the divorce status are known, but the divorce status is interpreted differently for individuals who have or have not experienced divorce. For divorced individuals, the final divorce status is known; for individuals who have not experienced divorce, the final marriage status is unknown or censored. The proper analysis model for such data is event history (also called survival) analysis. This study therefore employs a multi-level event history model.

Our results show that there is a similarity in the divorce risks of siblings from the same family, which is not explained away by the available child and family characteristics. This finding suggests that shared genetic and social heritage play an important role in the intergenerational transmission of divorce risks.

Purpose – This chapter will discuss how the positional self and prior experiences can influence the emotional self within the research journey, for example, being a sibling and losing a sibling. It explores the researcher’s emotional experience when working with children and their families, with a specific focus on the influence of the researcher presence and the sibling equilibrium.

Methodology/Approach – The chapter draws on the dramaturgical social interactions encountered in qualitative research which explored the experiences of siblings living in the context of cystic fibrosis. The study uses narrative inquiry and creative participatory methods to elicit sibling stories and provides insight into their worlds.

Findings – The chapter reflects on specific situations encountered on entering, engaging in and leaving the field, which had a significant emotional impact. Two sibling vignettes will be presented along with a discussion of how reflective metaphorical expression can be applied as a method of processing and coping with the research context.

Originality/Value – The chapter argues that the positional self and prior experiences can influence the emotional self within the research journey, and that reflective metaphorical expression can be used as a strategy to process thoughts and gain greater understanding of a situation as well as to provide an emotional release for the researcher. It also suggests that conducting research over a longer time period, as opposed to one visit, can be beneficial in terms of participant and researcher emotional transition.

Although there has been much psychological research about children's sibling relations, it has been a neglected area of study in sociology (exceptions are Brannen et al., 2000; Kosonen, 1996; Mauthner, 2002). This paper, based on empirical research on siblings in Scotland, explores the nature of the generational power structure within families from children's perspectives. Childhood is a relational concept which forms part of the generational order. Alanen explains this as “a complex set of social processes through which people become (are constructed as) ‘children’ while other people become (are constructed as) ‘adults’” (2001, pp. 20, 21). Generational processes shape the nature of child-parent relations (Mayall, 2002). Alanen states that:one position (such as the parental position) cannot exist without the other (child) position; also what parenting is – that is, action in the position of a parent – is dependent on its relation to the action “performed” in the child position, and a change in one part is tied to change in the other (Alanen, 2001, p. 19).In other words, child-parent relations are based on the understanding that childhood is relational with parenthood (see also Mayall, 2002). Alanen (2001) argues that the social construction of childhood and adulthood involves a process, including the agency of both children and adults, which she refers to as a set of “practices”:It is through such practices that the two generational categories of children and adults are recurrently produced and therefore they stand in relations of connection and interaction, of interdependence (Alanen, 2001, p. 21).These practices of generationing may be “childing” practices through which people are constructed as children or “adulting” practices through which a distinct adult position is produced. The ways in which children in the present study talked about the differences between their relationships with their parents and their siblings indicated that there are a range of generationing practices that take place within families. They referred to particular kinds of behaviour that were acceptable to engage in with other children (in this case with their siblings) but not with their parents. Overwhelmingly the key issue which children highlighted as distinct between their relations with parents and siblings was the differential nature of power in these relationships. Whilst it is not surprising that children perceive the distribution of power to be more unequal between children and parents than between siblings, the aim of this paper is to explore the nature of this power and how it is experienced from children's point of view. In particular the paper discusses the ways in which children perceive child-parent relations compared with their sibling relationships in relation to the giving and receiving of power within the home.

Donor-conceived (DC) offspring raised in lesbian-parent and heterosexual-parent families have different historical chronologies, which are clusters of events that provide frameworks for shaping contemporary views of sperm donors and donor siblings. Using surveys collected by the Donor Sibling Registry (DSR), the largest U.S. web-based registry, we found that DC offspring from different family forms have somewhat different views about meeting both the donor and donor siblings. In general, all offspring are curious about the donor. All offspring want to know what the donor looks like and they believe that even minimal contact will help them understand themselves better. However, when compared to offspring from heterosexual-parent families, offspring from lesbian-parent families are less likely to want to have contact with the donor. For offspring from lesbian-parent families, donor conception is considered a normal and accepted part of family life and the donor is deemed irrelevant to the family’s construction. Especially among those who live with two heterosexual parents (where both parents are often assumed to be genetic relatives), offspring want to know the donor because they believe he holds the key to important information that the legal (or social) father cannot provide. Most DC offspring want to meet donor siblings although the interest is somewhat weaker among the offspring in lesbian-parent families. Offspring regard donor siblings as special relations who will not disrupt the natal family and who might even become part of a new kind of “extended family” network.