The increase in shared residential arrangements is driven by the belief that it is in the best interest of the child. The maintenance of contact between child and parents can mitigate negative consequences of separation. However, selection mechanisms may account for a positive relationship between shared residential arrangements and child outcomes. This study examines the association between children’s residential arrangements and their school engagement, focusing on the parent–child relationship as a mediator and selection mechanisms. Structural equation models are performed on a sample of 973 secondary school pupils with separated parents from the Leuven Adolescents and Families Study (LAFS; 2008-2011). The results suggest that more parental time is related with a better parent–child relationship, and this leads indirectly to higher school engagement. However, shared residence may also have negative consequences for children and is certainly not the only residential arrangement in which children have a good relationship with both parents.
AbbottA.TsayA. (2000). Sequence analysis and optimal matching methods in sociology: Review and prospect. Sociological Methods & Research, 29(3), 3-33.
2.
AmatoP. (2004). Reconciling divergent perspectives: Judith Wallerstein, quantitative family research, and children of divorce. Family Relations, 52, 332-339.
3.
AmatoP. (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 650-666.
4.
AmatoP.GilbrethJ. G. (1999). Nonresident fathers and children’s well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 557-573.
5.
AppletonJ. J.ChristensonS. L.FurlongM. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 369-386.
6.
ArbuckleJ. L. (1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In MarcoulidesA.SchumackerR. E. (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 243-278). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
BausermanR. (2002). Child adjustment in joint-custody versus sole-custody arrangements: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Family Psychology, 6, 91-102.
8.
BjarnasonT.ArnarssonA. (2011). Joint physical custody and communication with parents: A cross-national study of children in 36 Western countries. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 42, 871-890.
9.
BoothA.AmatoP. (1991). Divorce and psychological stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 32, 396-407.
10.
BreivikK.OlweusD. (2008). Adolescent’s adjustment in four post-divorce family structures. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 44, 99-124.
11.
BrutsaertH. (1993). School, gezin en welbevinden: zesdeklassers en hun sociale omgeving [School, family and well-being: Sixth-graders and their social environment]. Leuven, Belgium: Garant.
12.
BuchananC. (1992). Adolescents and their families after divorce: Three residential arrangements compared. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2, 261-291.
13.
CavanaghS.HustonA. (2008). The timing of family instability and children’s social development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 1258-1269.
14.
CongerR. D.CongerK. J.MartinM. J. (2010). Socioeconomic status, family processes, and individual development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 685-704.
15.
DonnellyD.FinkelhorD. (1993). Who has joint custody? Class differences in the determination of custody arrangements. Family Relations, 42, 57-60.
16.
FoxG. L.KellyR. F. (2014). Determinants of child custody arrangements at divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57, 693-708.
17.
FredricksJ. A.BlumenfeldP. C.ParisA. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
18.
FurmanW.BuhrmesterD. (1985). Children’s perceptions of the personal relationships in their social networks. Developmental Psychology, 21, 1016-1024.
19.
GabadinhoA.RitschardG.MüllerN. S.StuderM. (2011). Analyzing and visualizing state sequences in R with TraMineR. Journal of Statistical Software, 40(4), 1-37.
20.
GilmoreS. (2006). Contact/shared residence and child well-being: Research evidence and its implications for legal decision-making. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 20, 344-365.
21.
GrychJ.FinchamF. (1993). Children’s appraisals of marital conflict: Initial investigations of the cognitive-contextual framework. Child Development, 64, 215-230.
22.
HarperC.MarcusR.MooreK. (2003). Enduring poverty and the conditions of childhood: Lifecourse and intergenerational poverty transmissions. World Development, 31, 535-554.
23.
Harris-ShortS. (2010). Resisting the march towards 50/50 shared residence: Rights, welfare and equality in post-separation families. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 32, 257-274.
24.
JablonskaB.LindbergL. (2007). Risk behaviours, victimisation and mental distress among adolescents in different family structures. Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42, 656-663.
25.
JensenA.-M. (2009). Mobile children: Small captives of large structures?Children & Society, 23, 123-135.
26.
KellyJ. (2006). Children’s living arrangements following separation and divorce: Insights from empirical and clinical research. Family Process, 46, 35-52.
27.
KingV.SobolewskiJ. M. (2006). Nonresident fathers’ contributions to adolescent well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 537-557.
28.
LAFS (2008-2011), LAFS Round1-4, Leuven: University of Leuven.
29.
MoY.SinghK. (2008). Parents’ relationships and involvement: Effects on students’ school engagement and performance. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 31(10), 1-11.
30.
MurrayC. (2009). Parent and teacher relationships as predictors of school engagement and functioning among low-income urban youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 376-404.
31.
MusickK.MeierA. (2010). Are both parents always better than one? Parental conflict and young adult well-being. Social Science Research, 39, 814-830.
RavivT.KessenichM.MorrisonF. J. (2004). A mediational model of the association between socioeconomic status and three-year-old language abilities: The role of parenting factors. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 528-547.
34.
SodermansA. K.MatthijsK.SwicegoodG. (2013). Characteristics of joint physical custody families in Flanders. Demographic Research, 28, 821-848.
35.
SodermansA. K.VanasscheS.MatthijsK. (2013). Post-divorce custody arrangements and binuclear family structures of Flemish adolescents. Demographic Research, 28, 421-432.
36.
SodermansA. K.VanasscheS.MatthijsK.SwicegoodG. (2014). Measuring postdivorce living arrangements: Theoretical and empirical validation of the residential calendar. Journal of Family Issues, 35, 125-145.
37.
SpruijtE.DuindamV. (2009). Joint physical custody in the Netherlands and the well-being of children. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 51, 65-82.
38.
TschannJ. M.JohnstonJ. R.WallersteinJ. S. (1989). Resources, stressors, and attachment as predictors of adult adjustment after divorce: A longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 51, 1033-1046.
39.
VanasscheS.SodermansA. K.MatthijsK. (2011). Methodologische documenten Leuvens Adolescenten en Gezinnenonderzoek. [Methodological documents Leuven Adolescents and Family Study].Leuven, Belgium: Centrum voor Sociologisch Onderzoek.
40.
WangM.-T.EcclesJ. S. (2012). Adolescent behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement trajectories in school and their differential relations to educational success. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 31-39.
