The Groves Conference on Marriage and Family: History and Impact on Family Science

Demography

Demographic shifts have been important to understanding and anticipating marriage and family changes. Paul Glick, Groves Academy member and long-time U.S. Census Bureau family specialist, has shown how families were represented across the life course and developed the first analysis of the rise of cohabitation. He presented at many Groves Conferences and was often a questioner when others presented innovative ideas. At Groves in 1976 he argued that demographic change may come before the ideological change (Settles, Van Name, Cole, Glick, & McCauley, 1976). Marriage, divorce, remarriage, and cohabitation were the topics in that workshop. Also discussed at length were trends in foster care [Barbara Settles & Judith Van Name]; single parenting; the who and when of marriage and no-fault divorce [Paul Glick]; older child, disabled, foster family, single-parent and open adoption [Elizabeth Cole]; and college student cohabitation [Brooke McCauley]. The facts of family change become clear in Groves Conference programs and family literature, but as Dr. Glick had shown in his census analyses, one can often see a shift before the change is realized. Cole reported a revolution in adoption practice and how small changes made big differences in outcomes. Foster care was also undergoing dramatic changes especially in directing more attention to tracking and monitoring the foster child’s placements and finding more permanency—even if it meant termination of parental rights. Cohabitation research moved beyond college students, and Dr. Glick found within the data sets ways to see the trends in other age groups.

Two conferences were especially shaped by the changing demography of American families. The 1996 conference in San Diego “Passing the Torch: The Study of Intergenerational Relations for the 21st Century” identified new aspects of families across the life Page  252course. Judith Fischer, with her doctoral students from Texas Tech University Todd Gomez, Judy Kimberly, Boyd Pidcock, and Anna Tacon, organized the meeting. The purpose of this conference was to expand understanding of intergenerational relations. A poster session was held for young professionals to present their work. A panel of Groves’ parents and their adult children (some of whom were, or became, Groves members themselves) was moderated by Eleanor Macklin and provided an experiential exploration. Vern Bengtson gave a keynote address presenting his longitudinal research on multigenerational families and looking to the future of such relationships. A performance of three short dramas on eldercare by nurse Julie Russell demonstrated issues in caregiving and bioethical decisions that are more common as the population ages.

Among the workshops were Eleanor Macklin, Gypsie Van Antwerp, and Jill Rohbracker on Gay and Lesbian couples who had become parents; Marcia Lasswell on belonging to a “dynasty” family; Carmen Knudson-Martin on individual development and intergenerational relatedness; Marc Baranowski on grandparenting; Mary Jane Van Meter on intergenerational boundary ambiguity; Catherine Chilman on ecological perspective across the lifespan; Davor Jedlicka and Glenn Jennings on intergenerational emotional processes; Nancy Kingsbury on fertility trends; Barbara Settles, Carolyn Grasse-Bachman, and James E. Davis on developing community and peer support for young parents; Randal Day on father involvement; Gordon Barnes, Michael Farrell, David Patton, and Anne George on adolescents and parents over time; Roger Rubin and Carol Werlinich on teaching intergenerational relationships; Beth Norrell on multicultural perspectives; Jo Lynn Cunningham on schools and children; and Margaret Feldman and Catherine Chilman on the world-wide paradigm shift in intergenerational relationships. Eight round tables addressed specific problems in intergenerational relationships. This lifecourse perspective was especially inclusive of members’ own work and the discussions and informal talk was particularly productive.

In 1999 Roma Stovall Hanks and Jean Pearson-Scott organized “Late Life/New Life: Creative Aging in Changing Families and Communities” in St. Pete Beach, Florida. Marvin Sussman spoke Page  253about “Groves Third Age: Moving in Jump Time.” Jill Quadagno, past president of the American Sociological Association, presented an analysis of 21st-century aging research and policy using her work in the Washington, D.C. policy scene as well as her own research. A panel on Florida’s innovative aging research and programming included James Mortimer, William Haley, Gregory Paveza, Sandra Reynolds, and Larry Polivka. Florida has been a magnet for retirement, and the demands on supportive services have produced some interesting strategies while increasing longevity has created some unexpected challenges. One specific example discussed was trailer parks, or manufactured housing (the preferred term). The lifetimes of these homes begins to be precarious by their 20th or 25th anniversary, but compared to conventional housing there is little renovation that can make them livable for the mostly limited-income frail elderly. Charles “Gus” Whalen, president and CEO of the Warren Featherbone Company, spoke on organizational changes and families in an aging society. His work, both in his company and as president of the American Apparel Association, had led him to be concerned and focused on an aging society.

Workshops featured Felix Berardo, Gordon Streib, and Donna Berardo on living in a retirement community; Barbara Settles and Nancy Kingsbury on making plans between generations: Whose best interests?; Karen Goebel, on privacy in medical records; Pam Monroe and James Garand on welfare dependent women in later life; Tom McGloshen on older recent widows; Pauline Boss on ambiguous loss and learning to live with unresolved grief; Donna Dempster-McClain on moving into continuing care retirement communities; Margaret Feldman on aging in place in an urban renewal area; Carmen Knudson-Martin on gender and caregiving; Linda Haas on aging and social policy in Sweden; Anne Rankin Mahoney on decade birthday reflections; Jean Pearson–Scott on family constructions of older adults; Jo Lynn Cunningham, Connie Steele, and Virginia Hayes Sibbison on life after 65; Robert Lewis on marriage and family enrichment through massage; John Curtis and R. Blaine Emerson on storytelling as a function of family preservation; Deborah Gentry on family violence intervention; and Roma Stovall Hanks on connecting the generations and new roles for grandparents. Roundtables were held by Enzo Pastore on the National Committee to Preserve Social Page  254Security and Medicare; Patricia Tanner Nelson on multigenerational rural families; Betsy Garrison and Pamela Monroe on writing across the curriculum; James Peters on writing in retirement; Roger Rubin on parenting in late life; Boyd Pidcock, Larry Forthum, and Judith Fischer on temperament-related risk factors for male adult children of alcoholics; and Todd Gomez and Judith Fischer on evaluation of a substance abuse academic program minor.

The conference ranged from specific programs and practical problems for the aged to process and creative options in aging. This approach reflected new developments in the field of human development and the somewhat awkward approach to seeing the family’s social connections to the aged as anything more than caregivers. Aging as a process, having many facets and transitions and for many people outliving their plans and resources, was beginning to emerge (Hanks & Pearson-Scott, 1999). Aging not only as generativity but also as a well lived and creative part of life was reflected throughout the sessions. As Jessie Bernard said in her books on the female world, people, especially women, have been gifted with a new bagful of years in which to have second chances (Settles & Liprie, 1983a). Quality of life is desired more than sheer quantity of years, but years give options to try different possibilities. The great demographic transitions of the 20th and 21st centuries have set the stage for reexamining the stereotypes and expectations of elders and their connections to younger people in society.

Technology

Utopian aspirations were influenced by rapid technological and scientific advancements. Changes in both daily and work life experiences were dramatic. In our research for this book we were struck by how much the ways of communicating and documenting events had changed. The early conference leaders requested a small postage fee ($3.50) from members on the mailing list, who received postcard invitations and ditto or mimeographed letters, programs, and announcements. Not until later do the archives reveal a few computer-generated records from the 1980s (Settles, 1980-86).

Films were shown at early meetings, and sex and family life education were supported by the use of audio and visual technologies. Slides, transparencies, games, drama, video, and then computers were adopted quickly. Computers, now ubiquitous, were only beginning to be recognized for their impact on everyone’s life in the 1980s.

An important Groves Conference titled “High Tech/ High Touch: Computers, Technology and Families” recognized the potential for technology’s impact on families and work. Larry and Joan Constantine (1985) were first known for their innovative analysis of group marriage and other experimental restructurings of marriage and family. The meeting in Newport, Rhode Island, which they co-chaired, was probably an even more innovative activity— foreshadowing major changes in almost everyone’s family and work lives. At the time it was a bit strange, focusing on technology with a group where social process has been of primary importance in its conferences. It was surprising how many Groves members did have something to bring to the meeting (Rubin & Settles, 1985). As many others brought their projects, we [Settles and Little] brought a car full of equipment from our early childhood lab school at the University of Delaware to demonstrate how preschoolers were beginning to use computers and understand how they could be helpful. Our department was running a computer camp in the summer for grade-school children and their parents (Settles, Klinzing, Nesterak, Little, & Morris, 1985). In another workshop Patricia Nelson of the Delaware Cooperative Extension Service reported on the advantages and disadvantages of computers in delivering parent education. In total at this conference, 49 sessions were led by Groves members. The plenary speakers included David Coker on “Information Processing Technologies: Prophylactic or Proliferators?; Craig Calhoun on “Computers, Communities and Families: Changing Patterns of Social Integration”; and Larry Constantine on “Machine as Metaphor.”

The 1985 conference happened before the Internet was available to the public—before e-mail, laptops, color printers, and cell phones. More people had access to computers at work and were imagining what might happen, but not in any way really recognizing the paradigm shift that was occurring. Larry Constantine had been Page  256a mover in computer program development before he studied family processes. He actually was being recaptured by the industry at the time of the conference and made his way to become a well known writer, consultant, and educator in that field. He capitalized on his work in theory and family therapy to help software teams develop better collaborative techniques and processes. His book Constantine on Peopleware (1995) reprises his industry news columns and addresses the human producer and clients in cheerful, simple prose. His work and the 1985 conference have influenced many of us more than may be recognized (Constantine & Constantine, 1985). For example, friendship and social networking have become major aspects of everyday life. The once-important arrival of a television in every room has given way to a huge variety of portable devices and activities that make everyone potentially reachable everywhere.

It has been difficult to research the effects on families as rapidly changing equipment, access, adoption, and new uses of communication technology have made it ephemeral. Most homes and offices now have a closet full of out-of-date, but not broken, equipment. It has been difficult to recognize the rather short life of equipment and software and records as changes continue apace. Just as in immigrant families, children may be leading their elders in coping with the new. While the specific applications reported at the 1985 conference are of little interest today, the questions about the impact of computers and other technologies remain to be answered. Few would have imagined computer mate selection, Internet sex, on-line college degrees, or shopping for a house or a car without ever leaving their keyboards. The idea of the widespread use of cell phones throughout the world and the impact this new technology would make on how family members communicate and keep in track of each other was not even imagined by those in attendance.

The preliminary program was not especially high tech, but the Groves logo was sported inside a computer screen. Hands-on experiences were featured by encouraging demonstrations and featuring an Electronic Midway where members could share applications and also have a commercial session to see new ideas and equipment. Sharing of information; use of technology in publishing; running offices, therapy, research, education, and teleconferencing Page  257were included. A mix of technology awareness, applications, and the systemic impact on families and social groups was featured. Social life at the meeting featured a lovely seaside location, with boats and seafood and the old mansions filled with several tech activities. The presidential speech by Pauline Boss converted into video entertainment by her husband Dudley Riggs. Another evening, the Groves party had dancing to music videos shown on a giant-screen, Dolby-stereo TV.

Another meeting with its roots in technological advances explored new genetic findings and their implications for families and family programs. Marcia Lasswell (1998) organized the conference titled “The Impact of Human Genetics on Families: Psychosocial Implications” (see chapter 5, this volume). Some aspects of the conference had implications for decision making and definitions of family, friends, and relationships. For example, questions were raised regarding genetically designed children, informing family members about genetic defects, partner selection based on genetic information, alternative choices in conception, processes and parental obligations, the purposes of prenatal testing, consequences of disease elimination, privacy issues, and the how and why of sharing genetic risk factors with others.

We do not know how these questions will be resolved or how new relationships may be developed or severed legally or socially. Linking up the new trend of “friending” in Facebook to understanding the subtle differences among social relationships suggests much more needs to be understood. Just as we are “Skyping” our family and friends, its use in Groves Conferences becomes more evident. At the Groves Board meeting in 2011, Skype was an integral part of the meeting. Perhaps we will do more to make our conferences available in real time to members who cannot come to a specific meeting. In terms of families this burgeoning technology, coupled with globalization, provides options for families and friends to be in contact instantly and anytime, but may also mean a limiting of privacy, thinking time, and expanding work days. For a long period, our view of technology was “sci fi “dramas, odd-speaking robots, and moving sidewalks (Settles, 1999). However today, beyond personal communication and media viewing, we also need to look Page  258at larger applications in work, war, rehabilitation, and monitoring human beings.

Peace and Pacifism

Peace and pacifism have often been valued in utopian movements and groups. Quakers, Shakers, Mennonites, and old-order Amish were among the many groups that have stood for peaceful solutions and opposed war. The backdrop of the World Wars and other military operations and terrorism kept a concern for peace processes at the fore. Groves programs have noted these events occasionally in meetings and policy propositions. In the publication celebrating the 50th anniversary of Groves, a proposal written by Lester “Kirk” Kirkendall (1984) called on the President Reagan to be more cognizant of peace options.

At the 1995 Groves Conference in Lexington, Kentucky, a field trip explored the Pleasant Hill Shaker community. While Shaker life is only historical today, Quaker life in the 20th century still had pacifism as a major goal (Koepke & Skinner, 1995). At the Perdido Beach Groves meeting, the local tour included a village in Alabama known for the Quaker refusal to serve in the military (McKenry & Bell-Scott, 1993). Later, in the 1994 Costa Rica meeting, some Groves members visited the cloud forest, including the Quaker community Monteverde (Settles & Ingianna, 1994). Its inhabitants had migrated after WWII to avoid the draft. They were the same group who were from the Alabama town seen earlier. Groves also had a major session at the Universidad de Pax in San Jose, Costa Rica, where Nona Cannon spoke of her international work in peace education.

There was one meeting which specifically looked at peace and families. It happened at a moment when there were high hopes that the changes in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union might produce an opportunity to reinvest American cold-war commitments into more peaceful options. The 1990 Groves Conference was held at Big Sky Ski Resort in Big Sky, Montana. Majestic mountains surrounded the lodge and conference center to frame a peaceful setting for focusing on the role of the family in creating and maintaining a peaceful Page  259world. The conference was organized by Charles Cole and Carmen Knudson-Ptacek and featured four major addresses by world authorities on peace. The opening session was chaired by Roger Rubin, the Groves Conference President, and featured a welcome by the program co-chairs, followed by the first major address presented by Charles Cole framing the role of the family in shaping world efforts to create global peace. The first invited speaker was Johanna Maybury who discussed the historical connections between religion and war. Joe Kresse, the Vice President and Director of Beyond War, visualized a world without war. Groves member, Margaret Feldman, a long-time proponent of peace, chaired the session.

After the plenary address, eight workshops were concurrently held with small groups of members addressing various topics including Roma Hanks, Kris Jeter, Marvin Sussman, Anne McCreary Juhasz, and Laura Palmer on ways of thinking and living that promote peace; Lucy Pearson and Brenda Thames on teaching the survival skills of communication, cooperation, and conflict resolution; Eleanor Macklin, Jerry Ackerman, and Eric Macklin on making peace with the Earth; Margaret Feldman on families in time of economic conversion to a peace-time economy; Julia Malia and Diane Flynn on transforming fear into creative/assertive energy; Reva Parker and Carmen Knudson-Ptacek on family therapy for a world in social crisis; Johanna Murbury on finding common ground beyond domination; and Edith Lewis and David Baptiste on the impact of social justice, social change, and conflict upon the prospects for peace among families of color.

The focus then changed to the geopolitical changes and human relations undergirding the possibilities for world peace featuring a plenary address by Don Clark, a former State Department expert on the politics of peace. Following the plenary, 13 roundtable discussion groups created opportunities for members to address applications of peace and the family. They included Susan Herrick’s group on the theoretical and political implications of definitions of the family on peace; Michael Farrell, on the war on drugs and implications for building a peaceful environment for families; Judith Fischer on a 12-step program for peace; Alice Pearson and Lou Ella Curry on social work and law enforcement teaming together to promote peace in the Page  260family; Paul Glick on families of women in men’s occupations; Jean Veevers on covert control mechanisms in dyads and consequences of unequal manipulative skills; Paula Dail on families and poverty, the war at home, and the role of the grassroots in peacemaking; Robert Ryder on co-evolution of war in family and society; Jeri Hepworth on encouraging peaceful solutions to community controversy: the example of AIDS; Frosty Rich on Jung, archetypes, and peace; Anne Mahoney on rethinking relationships between siblings; Roger Ferris, Anna and Charles Cole on the marriage enrichment/peace connection and building skills for cooperative partnerships; and Elaine Stahl on her Feldman award-winning research.

A second set of concurrent workshops included Barbara Settles, Roma Hanks, Sally Foulke, and Mary Lou Liprie on models for peace in family consensus building; Paul Giblin on peacemaking in the family and an autobiographical approach on the spiritual connection; Darleen Joyce on Eastern European families in transition; Dana McDermott Murphy and Harriet Heath on analyzing the parenting process as a means of facilitating peace with the family; Margaret Feldman and Janet Mann on peace, public policy, and implications for families; Charlotte Wallingan, Patsy Skeen, Ligaya Paguio, and Brenda Boyd on family members’ perceptions of nuclear issues and coping by working for peace; Jo Lynn Cunningham, Connie Steele, Frosty Rich, Dale Brotherson, Charles Cole, and Carmen Knudson-Ptacek on separateness and togetherness in families and societies; and David Cook on developing family-centered, community-based services for families. Following a morning of workshops Roger Rubin presented the presidential address “American Families: Pax 2000.”

Betty Bumpers, a president and founder of Peace Links presented the final plenary address as the Harold Feldman Memorial Lecture on “Developing Global Citizens.” Bumpers, the wife of U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers of Arkansas, shared her story of founding Peace Links through her contacts with leaders throughout the world. She demonstrated how ordinary families serve a vital role in creating a worldwide peace link effort. Members of Groves reflected on how they could take peace home with them and make peace-making a life-long process by creating a nurturing environment within families and communities. Among the memorable ideas from this Page  261meeting was a discussion of national defense and how states and regions are locked into certain roles and economic relationships to the military establishment. For example, the conference was in a beautiful, rural mountain community far from big cities and potential targets for aggression, but very close to the silo system for the U.S. nuclear deterrent which was scattered across the region. The concept that the defense budget might not grow at the rate it had been when Russia and eastern European countries seemed a threat was entertained. Could one fund other priorities especially in family support? Many of the sessions were built on assumptions that such priorities were negotiable. What turned out to be more practical were the propositions for changes on the family level. Building a safe and nonviolent family life was something we could envision and support in our work without the big issue of political will being mobilized.

Cole and Rueter’s (1993) paper on “The Family Peace Connection: Implications for Constructing the Reality of the Future” provided a model for family professionals in supporting skills for peaceful living and problem solving. “Peace is fragile and must be nurtured by encouraging the development of autonomous, whole persons who are highly differentiated and possess the capacity to be interdependently connected to the whole of humanity” (Cole & Rueter, 1993, p. 279).

Religion and Spirituality

Part of the heritage of the Groves Conference is an early interest and participation in the program by religious leaders of many groups. Ernest Groves was seminary-educated and was briefly the pastor of a church in Maine. Throughout his career he contributed leadership to the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America (E. Groves, n. d.). Their concerns were particularly related to pastoral counseling and supporting marriage and family life. Chapter 3, this volume, describes how such interests built a movement in marriage and family counseling and contributed to the development of the profession. Later, religious and spiritual leaders in family studies formed occasional workshops, and some plenary speakers and Page  262conference activities included aspects of religious participation. For example, the Groves Conference on peace included a Quaker service on Sunday (Cole & Knudson-Ptacek, 1990).

Michael Farrell and Julia Malia organized a conference that addressed “Families, Religions, and Spirituality in the Postmodern Era” at Chautauqua, New York, in the Athenaeum Hotel in June 2002 before the regular season for the Chautauqua Institute. The hotel had a long porch and rocking chairs reminiscent of the old Carolina Inn in Chapel Hill (see cover photo) where the atmosphere included friendly, informal conversation and small groups pursuing interests in more detail. The Chautauqua site was also interesting in its own development as a center in the 19th century for educating Sunday school teachers and promoting the presentation and discussion of important issues in society. For over 125 years, the institution not only was a religious retreat but also sponsored a program of literary and scientific circles across the nation. The arts and music were also featured, and a circuit across the country took lectures and culture to communities all over the United States. The great size and scope of this movement is difficult to imagine now; however, this part of New York State also produced many other social movements and utopian groups.

The first plenary speaker for the Groves Conference was Eric Seeman, a historian from University of Buffalo, State University of New York, who explored Shakers, sexuality, and the family in the Burned Over District of Western New York. He pointed out the intensity of concerns and utopian experiments in the region. A wide variety of religious and spiritual persuasions were addressed by workshops and speakers. Stephen Warner and Rhys Williams compared growing up in Muslim, Hindu, and Christian families in the United States; David Dollihite spoke to Abrahamic religions and families; Leslie Koepke and Jan Hare examined everyday practices of Shamans among the Hmong; Ravi Dhindsa looked at the status of women in the Sikh religion; Michael Mbito and Julia Malia spoke about male circumcision and future generations of Kenyans in the U.S.; Virginia Heffernan presented on the role of Marriage Encounter, Cana clubs and scriptural sharing for Roman Catholic married couples.

Other workshops and speakers dealt with how religious and spiritual matters enter into family science practice and programs. Gordon Streib and Donna Dempster-McClain examined retirement communities; Edith Lewis and Jon Swanson discussed families of color; Karen Arms was concerned with reconciling differences in family member’s beliefs; Thomas McGloshen focused on issues in ordination to ministry of gay individuals; Christine Readdick and Amanda Thackery presented findings on children’s relational perceptions of God in families in charismatic faith communities; Jean Pearson-Scott noted coping and spirituality in family caregiving in the later years; Roma Hanks explored grandparents’ unconditional love and spiritual connections; Denise Davenporte McAdory linked spirituality, longevity and independence in African American women; Jo Lynn Cunningham, Connie Steele, Karen Goebel, and Gerald Campbell discussed faith-based programs in depth; Lee Ann De Reus presented a model for women’s adult development; and Eleanor Macklin discussed the soul and its implications for the human family.

Two panel discussions addressed practical program issues. Marcia Lasswell, Eleanor Macklin and Robert Ryder focused on clinical issues related to religion and spirituality; and Barbara Settles, Roger Rubin, Harriette McAdoo, and Barbara James responded to teaching, research, and service in higher education from both ethical and secular perspectives. Judith Fischer chaired a panel on immigration, religion, and family that included Steve Hay, Thelma Longuori, Sister Elisa Rodriguez, and Loretta Silva. Penny Edgell Becker spoke about the “good family” in congregational life—in both rhetoric and practice. Because the area was so rich in utopian and social movement history, the conference also touched on abolition, women’s suffrage, and temperance with an actor who based her dramatic presentation on an impression of Susan B. Anthony. A field trip was provided to Lily Dale, a spiritualist community that dates back to 1879 and currently provides workshops and programs on the religion of spiritualism.

When reading the description of the Chautauqua Institution one notices a sense of commitment to the improvement of society and links between the arts, culture, and education with religion and Page  264community improvement (Simpson, 1999). The intimate connections among abolition, temperance, voting rights, civil rights, and the control of domestic violence as social movements have ties to religious institutions in the American context. Present-day religious fervor may be seen as a continuation, not a break, in American outlook. The range and variety of religious groups and doctrines remains a difficult research and theoretical challenge in family science. Even within groups with strong value statements on family issues much behavioral variation exists, and there is a tendency for family data to resemble overall demographic trends.

Friendship and Contact

Utopian experiments have often attempted to restructure not only the family unit but also the social ties and community context. The nuclear family was seen after World War II as a distinctly modern family that could respond to the job market and be both geographically and economically mobile. The heavy expectations for the marital dyad to handle most of each others’ needs, down-played the role of both the extended family and friends in providing social support and long-term relationships. Marvin Sussman’s dissertation research challenged this model in the 1950s and was his first presentation at Groves (Settles & Liprie, 1983b). His concept of a modified nuclear family made room for what he found in interviewing families. Families did have ongoing and regular contact with both relatives and friends. Intergenerational relationships are important both for friends and family. James Ramey also focused on intimate friendships over many years and brought into the conferences his research and contacts in this area of study.

Mary Hicks and Sally Hansen-Gandy (1991) organized the meeting, “Friendship and the Family” at Panama City, Florida, with the recognition that many Groves members see their colleagues in Groves as their relevant peer group and have strong ties with them. Time was built into the program to have the conversations people mention so often as the “Groves Way.” There were workshops on aspect of family support across the life course; Laura Smart on couple’s grief on losing a baby; Marcella Copes on single fathers’ social Page  265support; Anne McCreary Juhasz and Nancy Hogan on adolescents’ friendships; Michael Farrell on adolescents, family cohesion, and adaptability; Kenneth Davidson and Nelwyn Moore on peers as sex educators, friends or foes?; Rosemary Bleizner and Catherine Chilman on aging and friendships at times of family disruption; Linda Smith and C. Pennell on helping children during divorce; and Patrick McKenry and Sharon Price on friends in postdivorce adjustment. In terms of the profession, Charles Cole and Anna Cole discussed professional associations as a source of friendships and surrogate family support systems, and Roger Rubin analyzed the lack of research references to friends and other important people providing family support in family texts and teaching publications.

The assumptions that friends are competitive with family or that all relatives are similarly treated were not supported. Tamara Hareven and Irene Brown presented “Friendship, Family, and Kin in Historical Perspective” which emphasized that historically many of peoples’ long-term friends were also relatives by blood and marriage. Likewise, not all relatives were relevant in kin networks. Karen Werking examined the conflicts in managing cross-sex friendships in contemporary American society. The presidential address, “The Future of Friendships: Fictive Friendships, Fictive Kin, and Collegiality,” suggested that the complexities of personal contacts bring many other people into supportive and friendly relationships that persist over time (Settles, 1991). So much time is spent in work outside the home and the requirement of caregiving for children and the elderly so great that colleagues, competitors, and service providers become important social contacts and even friends. Some may become fictive kin, some good friends, others remain someone you can call on occasionally as they would do the same for you. Friendship has a strong sense of voluntary and egalitarian ties. Certainly relationships among adult “children” and their parents make more sense when there are friendly ties that show respect in both directions. While friends were not examined thoroughly, the idea that families who are stressed by caregiving and other high stress problems need a support group or network had caught on, especially in the health and disabilities service delivery systems. Since this is often a way of a shifting more responsibility on voluntary relationships, it is not clear that these activities either promote or Page  266are based on friendship. At the conference, a panel led by Charles Figley discussed strengthening military families. A play built on the theme of friendship was presented especially commissioned for the meeting written and directed by Ben Omar of the Florida State University drama department. This conference happened before the amazing online communities and contacts opened up new vistas for friendship and network development, and there is good reason to revisit many of these issues.

Seeing pets as important to human well-being is not new. Sussman collected a set of papers on pets in the family (1984). Jo Lynn Cunningham’s own commitment to pets and care of animals led Groves to “Families: Connection and Communication Within and Across Species” which she chaired in Seattle in 2010. A broad range of topics were entertained, and the discussions were fresh and opened up some innovative ways of thinking about relationships and sustainability. Cunningham described the conference as providing...

Among the program highlights were psychological parallels; close relationships within and across species; the role of animals as companions and friends; animals as home-health aides; the therapeutic effects of animals; the link between animal abuse and family violence (child, partner, and elder abuse); and environmental, economic, and ecosystemic implications of human-animal relationships. African, Asian, Latin American, and communities of color perspectives on human connections with other species were presented in a general session. Child, youth, adult and family connections with nonhuman species were explored. A unique opportunity was afforded to the participants when they visited the Chimposium at Central Washington University’s Chimpanzee and Human Communication Institute for a guided observation of a chimpanzee’s family using sign language.

Community and Global Ties

The understanding of environments and the support that individuals and families require in order to function fully and well have been conceptualized quite differently in utopian futurism. Commonly, in American experiments, separate communities were founded. Often they had principles of community that reflected the values that were being promoted for individuals, family, and friendship. Usually a religious or spiritual component was expressed. In the Jeffersonian tradition there has been a continued belief that a retreat from urban life is a good beginning for a better community and society. Agricultural and craft industries are frequently admired as a route to community integration and simplicity. Rural idealism has been a political and social rallying point in many American debates about the future. Sharing of communal resources has also been a recurrent ideal. For example, the Amish provide for each other instead of using insurance or government safety-net programs, the Hutterites farming and business economy is shared, and Mormons provide resources to families in need. Sometimes these ventures work very well. The Oneida community had great wealth as did the Shaker colonies (Clark & Ham,1983). However, many innovators went broke. Not every group found that success in being close to the earth. Just as small business is known for its fragility, utopias are easily crushed. Rules that set apart communities and give meaning to them can also be a burden. Some groups of the 19th and early 20th centuries were successful with less ambitious ventures, such as summer homes and communities with a shared land ownership and responsibilities to the town. In Delaware, for example, Arden is an arts colony and summer retreat that still carries on with a community center on shared land and and shared governance but individually owned houses. Whiteway, England, makes much of its Tolstoyan heritage but seems very similar in the way it runs today (Thacker, 1993).

While most never commit to a utopian plan for the future, as a country and a people we often try to use civil reform as a method for implementing ideas and ideals that may or may not make life better, but do effect change. Zoning and planning have been the instruments for shaping communities and lifestyles, at one level Page  268separating unlike uses such as stockyards and housing, at another keeping children out of retirement communities and the disabled out of nice family neighborhoods. Public health campaigns attempt to change behavior toward better outcomes and have been effective in some areas, such as antismoking and better care of teeth. Incentives for recycling and fewer bottles have been useful. These macrolevel goals that require individual microlevel actions are highly related to families’ everyday lives and consumption patterns.

Several Groves Academy members saw opportunities to try differently organized communities. Vera and David Mace chose to retire to a continuum-of-care retirement community in Black Mountain, North Carolina. Vera spoke of moving to a smaller apartment after David died and how much living in this community that had a commitment to arts and culture had meant to her (Mace, 1993). Margaret Feldman enjoyed a long retirement in Washington, D.C. where she lived in a cooperative apartment building in an area of urban renewal. Both her leadership in the cooperative and her efforts in the local community were an expression of her dedication to community development and collaboration. As we accompanied her around the community and downtown, we felt like it was her town (Rubin & Settles, personal visits). Marvin Sussman, in his second phase of retirement, moved to Florida so he could participate in Kashi Ashram in Sebastian. He had his own place on the Sebastian cut where he could take his little runabout boat out and see the ocean (Settles, personal visit).

The context of community and environment has been more frequently addressed by the Groves Conference over the years. Often the family economic concerns of work and jobs have been a crucial unity as in our conferences: Lexington, Nova Scotia, Alaska, Miami, Oklahoma City, Detroit, Ireland, and New Orleans. In the Lexington, Kentucky meeting “Besieged Families: Creating Collaborative Communities for Change,” the program chairs Leslie Koepke and Denise Skinner (1995) sought to focus on local support and resources needed for families. Eleanor Macklin (1997) looked at “Families Facing Changing Economic Realities” using the case studies of Nova Scotia, Canada, to draw attention to the global interplay which affects the local ability to provide opportunity. She also kept the conference Page  269informed of how some of these global/local concerns played out over time in subsequent meetings. The 2001 Alaska conference chaired by Connie and Sheri Steele addressed how Alaskan families were surviving rapid social change and incorporated the indigenous people’s challenges and other key groups’ concerns within the state and its global connections (C. Steele & S. Steele, 2001). Again, natural beauty and rich extraction resources were contrasted for their impact on opportunities.

In Miami, Florida the meeting chaired by Harriette McAdoo (2003) dealt both with the disappointment about not being able to go to Cuba, because of the political changes in Washington, D.C. upsetting the arrangements, and with the content of the global and regional limitations on families’ options. Oklahoma City, chaired by Mary Hicks and Leslie Koepke (2004), provided insights into how a community reacts to the trauma of a deadly terrorist attack (see Boss, 2004). Going to downtown Detroit, Michigan, in 2007 to explore “Social, Economic, and Environmental Justice for All Communities: Speaking Out and Standing Up for Families” did not evoke the teasing Groves often endures about the meetings being in gorgeous vacation locations. Seeing the results of rust-belt decline that has made Detroit too large for its population and attempts at too often unsuccessful redevelopment created the foundation for an integrated analysis. Lee Ann De Reus and Libby Blume took a strong social justice approach which can be seen in the Groves Monograph which summarized the conference (De Reus & Blume, 2010). Groves’ visit to Ireland was at a point when some sense of development and progress existed after years of conflict. Co-chairs Mary Hicks and Christine “Coco” Readdick (2008) arranged the program which brought the participants into academic and local communities. The rapid downturn that followed the global financial crisis raises questions about the stability of developmental projects and the vulnerability of families.

In 2009 the 75th Anniversary Groves Conference in Chapel Hill was held in the downward spiral of the global economy. Participants noted that families today have made drastic changes in their lives, not only in day-to-day living conditions but also in family forms such as increased multigenerational households, longer dependency Page  270on their parents for young adults, and postponement of marriage and childbirth. Most of those in attendance were just becoming aware of the magnitude of wholesale loss of homes to foreclosures, wide-spread unemployment, failure of large companies, a decline in family spending for necessities, and the bankruptcy of governments at the local, state, and international levels. Within a relatively short span of time, families all over the world have felt the impact of a major financial crisis in ways that have rarely occurred in recent history. Social scientists are now studying how economic trends may eventually change the lives of Americans.

Returning to New Orleans in 2011 after the hurricanes—and to the historic Monteleone Hotel where the Groves meeting room looked out on the whole inner city and the Ninth Ward—directed Groves’ attention to the difficulties and accomplishments of community and environmental rebuilding. Julia Malia (2011) brought together a discussion of the Alaskan and the Gulf oil spills with both local and academic activists and scholarly sources. The complexity of the many actors and stakeholders, the conflicts of interest and beliefs about the ideal, and the practical rehabilitation of the city and region were enlightening and sobering. Betsy Garrison and Janice Weber arranged local experiences that took the conference out beyond New Orleans to see the regional effects. Family scientists were challenged to explore their own field to predict how family life would be altered as a result of global changes, not only here but around the world.

Predicting Change

Some Groves members have made attempts to predict the future of families and the future of the field. Jessie Bernard had many research and review publications that were futurist in her analysis. Her pioneering work on academic women served to give women scholars a mirror and an understanding that their own situations were not isolated (Bernard, 1964). Her book on the future of motherhood moved from a broad review of the literature to an analysis of possible options for changing the impact of motherhood on women’s lives (Bernard, 1974). Bernard found a voice in her retirement for futuristic thinking. Her most thoughtful books on the future of Page  271marriage, families, and the female world in global perspective still resonate (Bernard, 1982, 1987). As a visiting scholar at University of Delaware, she shared her manuscript with a graduate seminar and engaged students in critiquing her work. She saw the future as full of positive promise and change, but only if the academic world took leadership (Settles & Liprie, 1983a).

A notable endeavor was spearheaded in 1984 by Lester Kirkendall and Arthur Gravatt (Kirkendall & Gravatt, 1984). They gathered leaders from the family field, many of them members of Groves, to try their hands at a more hopeful prediction at what families would look like in the year 2020. By 2010, Marcia Lasswell reported that many have enjoyed reading their predictions, not only to find that certain ideas were far off the track but also that some seem to be on track. It is a lesson not only in how often current trends do not continue in the expected future direction but also, for those trends that do continue, how rapidly some progress, while others make little if any movement in several decades. Most Groves Conference programs have looked into the future not so much as a means to make predictions but to raise possibilities in order to plan a better future for families or try to avoid negative consequences. Using the model of future-casting to create alternatives and as a guide to hoped for results is a part of the proud tradition of the Groves Conference. Members are urged to develop program themes and topics that stimulate interest and promise attendees they will learn something new.

Using current trends to predict possible end results is a tried and (mostly) true way to suggest a path that will result in the most productive conclusions possible. However, when the well known futurist Esfandiart (1977) tried his hand at suggesting what life would be like in the future, he warned of the hazards of trying to predict the course of events saying that there are only “pessidictions”: those that are seriously possible, but nothing about what we can be certain. Future Groves Conference program chairs may want to heed his words. They may also be guided by the suggestion of past president Robert Ryder, “...I think that Groves should stand for the sort of excellence that flows from care and thought rather than the guidance of trendy media-oriented variety “(Ryder, 1981).

Conclusion

In the past, Groves has done well by spreading its net to capture trends in health care, population statistics, education, welfare, law, science, religion, and economics, among others, and applying such data to show how families can be resilient in the face of changes that will affect their daily lives—now and in the future. Younger Groves members are to be encouraged to develop ideas, to bring their research to bear upon innovative programs, and to pose challenging questions about what lies ahead for families. With a wealth of creative and scholarly members, the Groves Conference can look forward to continuing its well-deserved reputation as a “cutting edge” organization for understanding families. Of course, the phrase cutting edge has many meanings and provides several avenues for stimulating conferences. Every field of study has its cutting edge, and most of them have implications for family life. Laura Singer saw that...

Finally, both process and place have been an important part of the Groves Conference and of its currently successful programs. At the 50th anniversary celebration, Cecilia Sudia suggested that...

Evelyn Duvall characterized her history with Groves this way:

References

• Bernard, J. (1969). Academic women. University Park, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Bernard, J. (1974). The future of motherhood. New York, NY: Dial press.
• Bernard, J. (1982). The future of marriage. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.
• Bernard, J. (1987). The female world in global perspective. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
• Boss, P. (2004). Integrity and survival in families and communities: Panel discussion. [Video]. Groves Conference on Marriage and Family, Oklahoma City, OK. Available from http://www.grovesconference.org/
• Clark, T. D., & Ham, F. G. (1983). Pleasant Hill and its Shakers. Pleasant Hill, KY: Pleasant Hill Press.
• Cole, C., & Knudsen-Ptacek, C. (1990,June 12-17). The family peace connection. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Big Sky, MT. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Cole C., & Rueter, M. (1993). The family peace connection. In B. H. Settles, R. S. Hanks, & M. B. Sussman (Eds.). (1993). American families and the future: Analyses of possible destinies (pp. 263-278). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
Page  274
• Constantine, L. L. (1995). Constantine on peopleware. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Yourdon Press.
• Constantine, L. L., & Constantine, J. (1985). Groves Conferrence on Marriage and Family. [Announcement]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Cunningham, J. L. (2010). Personal correspondence.
• De Reus, L. A., & Blume, L. B. (2010). Social, economic, and environmental justice: Speaking out and standing up for families. In L. B. Blume (Series Ed.), Groves Monographs on Marriage & Family.Vol. 1. Ann Arbor, MI: MPublishing.
• Farrell, M., & Malia, J. (2002, June 5-9). Families, religions, & spirituality in the postmodern era. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Chautauqua, New York. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Fischer, J., Gomez, T., Kimberley, J., Pidcock, B. & Tacon, A. (1996, March 6-10). Passing the torch: The study of intergenerational relations for the 21st century. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, San Diego, CA. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Groves, E. R. (n. d.). Adventuring with people. [Autobiography draft]. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University, Ernest R. and Gladys Groves Papers, MS 169, Box 11/8, Institute of Regional Studies.
• Groves Conference. (1984). [Script]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Hanks, R. S., & Pearson-Scott, J. (1999, June 17-22). Late life/new life: Creative aging in changing families and communities. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, St. Petersburg, FL. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Hicks, M., & Hansen-Gandy, S. (1991, March 6-10). Friendships and the family. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Panama City, FL. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Hicks, M., & Readdick, C. (2008, May 31-June 8). Globalization and family well-being. Groves Conference on Marriage and Family, Ireland, UK. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
Page  275
• Ingoldsby, B. B. (2006). Religious utopias and family structure. In B. B. Ingoldsby & S. D. Smith (Eds.), Families in multicultural perspective. (2nd ed.). (pp. 113-128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Kephart, W. M. (1982). Extraordinary groups: The sociology of unconventional life styles. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
• Kirkendall, L. A. (1986). Groves resolution on world peace and family issues. In P. W. Dail & R. H. Jewson (Eds.), In praise of fifty years: The Groves Conference on the Conservation of Marriage and the Family (p. 7). Lake Mills, IA: Graphic Publishing.
• Kirkendall, L. A., & Gravatt, A. E. (Eds.). (1984). Marriage and the family in the year 2020. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
• Koepke, L., & Skinner, D. (1995, April 5-9). Besieged families: Creating caring & collaborative communities. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Lexington, KY. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Lasswell, M. (1998, March 11-15). The impact of human genetics on families: Psychosocial implications. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Washington, D.C. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Mace, V. (1993). [Letter to Groves Conference members]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Macklin, E. (1997, June 25-29). Families facing changing economic realities. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Digby, Nova Scotia. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Malia, J. (2011, March 14-18). Families, climate, environment: Change & interchange. Groves Conference on Marriage and Family, New Orleans, LA. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• McAdoo, H. P. (2003, June 28-July 2). Cuban families: Cuba and the United States. Groves Conference on Marriage and Family, South Beach, Miami. FL. [Program]. Copy in possession of R. H. Rubin.
• McKenry, P., & Scott, P. B. (1993, March 10-14). Colors of the heart: Crossing racial, cultural, & class boundaries in caring relationships. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Perdido Beach, FL. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
Page  276
• Rubin, R. H. (2004). Alternative life styles today: Off the family studies screen. In M. Coleman & L. Ganong (Eds.), Handbook of contemporary families (pp. 23-25). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Rubin, R. H., & Settles, B. H. (1985).Visits of the public policy committee in Washington, D.C. [Notes].
• Ryder, R. (1981). Groves Conference report. [Presidential address]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Settles, B. H. (1980-1986). Membership and business meetings. [Files]. Copies in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Settles, B. H. (1991). The future of friendship. [Presidential address]. Friendships and the family. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Panama City, FL. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Settles, B. H. (1999). The future of families. In M. B. Sussman, S. K. Steinmetz, & G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook on marriage and the family (2nd ed.) (pp. 143-176). New York, NY: Plenum.
• Settles. B. H., & Ingianna, Y. (1994, March 16-20). Building support for the well being and future of the family in our Americas. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, San José, Costa Rica. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Settles, B. H., Klinzing, D., Nesterak, M., Little, M., & Morris, S. (1985, March). Computer-active preschool programs: Implications for parents and children. Presentation at the Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Newport, RI. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Settles, B. H., & Liprie, M. L. (1983a). The development of women’s studies and family sociology in higher education: An interview with Jessie Bernard, Research Scholar, Honoris Causa and Professor Emerita, The Pennsylvania State University, Distinguished Visiting Scholar, University of Delaware [Video]. Newark, DE: University of Delaware.
• Settles, B. H., & Liprie, M. L. (1983b). The development of family studies in higher education: An interview with Marvin B. Sussman, Unidel Professor of Human Behavior, University of Delaware [Video]. Newark, DE: University of Delaware.
Page  277
• Settles. B. H., Van Name, J., Cole, E., Glick, P., & McCauley, B. (1976). Trends in family formation and dissolution: Implications for family policy. In L. Glasser & P. Glasser (Chairs), Continuing the revolution: Needed programs and policies for families. Paper presented at the Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Kansas City, MO. [Transcription]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Simpson, J. (1999). Chautauqua: An American utopia. New York, NY: Abrams.
• Steele, C., Lasswell, M., & Sibbison, V. (2009, June). Celebrating Groves Conference: 75 Years of future research, theory, and practice. Groves Conference on Marriage and Family, Chapel Hill, NC. [Program]. Copy in possession of B. H. Settles.
• Steele, C., & Steele S. (2001, May 21-27). The American family we want to know: How Alaskan families are coping amid rapid social changes. Groves Conference on Marriage and the Family, Anchorage, AL. [Program]. Copy in possession of R. H. Rubin.
• Sussman, M. B. (1984). Pets and the family. New York, NY: Haworth Press.
• Thacker, J. (1993). Whiteway Colony: The social history of a Tolstoyan community. Stroude, England: Sunset Publishing.