Growing up with foster siblings: Exploring the impacts of fostering on the children of foster parents

Abstract

Growing up with foster siblings, the children of foster parents have experienced fostering from a different perspective which has continued to impact them throughout their lives. In this qualitative study, the experiences of 12 daughters of foster parents (aged 20–33 years) are explored, along with how they cope with their fostering experiences. Open-ended interviews, demographic questionnaires, object sharing, photographing the object, photo-feedback, and memo-writing were included within the data collection process. Data analysis included initial coding, focused coding, and memo-writing. Dedoose, a data management system, was used to assist in analysing the multiple data sources. Findings reveal that the daughters of foster parents are exposed to multiple foster sibling relationships due to the temporary nature of foster care. To protect their emotional well-being, these participants become apprehensive about developing relationships with new foster siblings, as well as with friends and romantic partners. Participating daughters sought emotional support from their mothers who established a strong, stable, and supportive relationship with them. Recommendations for foster parents and social workers are suggested.

Keywords

Relationship foster care child welfare emotions mental health

Introduction

In Ontario, foster care is a temporary, family-like setting for maltreated children who are unable to stay with their caregivers. The foster home may also include the biological and adopted children of foster parents (herein sons/daughters). These children are exposed to multiple foster siblings who frequently enter and exit their family unit (Gross, 2007; Riggs and Willsmore, 2012). This creates an atypical family lifestyle and home environment for sons/daughters with an emotional landscape that continually changes (Armorer, 2005; Clare et al., 2006; Doorbar and Associates, 2003; Reed, 1994; Sumner-Mayer, 2003). Our knowledge about sons/daughters in the published and non-published studies, from the 1970s, has increased to suggest that these individuals are an important focus within the social work profession (Höjer et al., 2013; Merrithew, 1996; Mosleshuddin, 1999; Serbinski and Shlonsky, 2014; Swan and Twigg, 2011; Thompson and McPherson, 2011; Twigg and Swan, 2007). For the past 45 years, the studies have explored the fostering experiences of sons/daughters. For instance, sons/daughters and foster children develop relationships with each other while living together (Diepstra, 2007). These relationships often turn foster children into foster siblings or simply siblings. Like all relationships, there are factors that may impact the quality of the relationship. When fostering, positive qualities that create a bond between sons/daughters and foster siblings include participating in a variety of activities together, such as listening to music (Kraemer, 1999). Factors that result in more of a negative relationship appear to stem from sons/daughters being required to be more responsible than their foster siblings (Martin, 1993). Sometimes sons/daughters are exposed to physical aggression and acting-out behaviours, such as bullying, spitting, and/or stealing by their foster siblings (Swan, 2002). These fostering experiences can often be worked out, as in most relationships. However, the factor that causes the most stress on sons/daughters’ relationships with their foster siblings occurs when the relationship ends. Sons/daughters sometimes struggle with emotions of loss, sadness, and grief when their foster siblings leave their home, in particular in unplanned situations where no goodbyes are allowed (Tadros, 2003).

Parents of sons/daughters are perceived as a support when there is open communication (Sutton and Stack, 2012). When sons/daughters do not feel supported or understood by their parents, this can add stress to their relationship (Anderson, 2012). Examples of stress include sons/daughters not having enough one-to-one time with their parents (Younes and Harp, 2007), having to share their family members with a stranger (Clare et al., 2006), having to share their personal possessions and pets with foster children (Martin, 1993), and having a different perception of the foster family boundaries than their parents (Hatmaker, 1993). Sometimes the fostering stress is so demanding that it leads sons/daughters to no longer feel a part of their own family unit (Johnson, 1989), or that they are no longer loved by their parents (Doobar and Associates, 2003).

Doorbar and Associates (2003) reported that sons/daughters are able to cope with their diverse fostering experiences. In fact, Martin (1993) noted that sons/daughters are quite advanced in coping with the challenging behaviours of their foster siblings. They attempt to deescalate stressful situations with their foster siblings by themselves (Gross, 2007), and if that is not successful, sons/daughters will involve their parents (Spears and Cross, 2003). Some of their coping strategies are setting boundaries with their possessions (Martin, 1993), objectifying their foster siblings (Twigg, 1994), acting-out themselves (Nuske, 2010), or temporarily leaving the fostering home to get away from it all (Heidbuurt, 1995).

Research on sons/daughters reports that fostering impacts sons/daughters. A commonality across all of the studies is the theme of feelings of sons/daughters, with much attention given to how sons/daughters experience the arrivals and departures of foster siblings within their families (Martin, 1993). Few studies have tried to better understand the well-being of sons/daughters based upon specific variables, such as gender (Part, 1993). This exploratory research aims to better understand the feelings of daughters of foster parents throughout their fostering realities. The main research questions proposed in this study were: ‘How do young adult daughters make sense of their feelings when fostering for a public child welfare agency?’ and ‘How did daughters cope with their feelings when fostering?’

Method

This arts-based study was descriptive and interpretive in nature and used a constructivist grounded theory (CGT) approach. Charmaz’s (2006) work was used as the guide to implementing this CGT approach study. It is a fluid process which includes writing initial drafts and incorporating memos, while also sorting and refining concepts that emerge into categories from the participants’ stories. Sampling continues as the categories are more refined and the data collection process is more focused. Reexamination of earlier data and current data is ongoing. For this reason, both data collection and data analysis procedures are described within this section and while each part is separated to describe the approach, both processes occurred simultaneously (Oktay, 2012). These technical terms will be defined in the ‘Data analysis’ section.

While this study used a CGT approach, it also incorporated current neuroscience knowledge into the study design. The selection of data collection methods – open-ended interviews, object sharing, photo-feedback, and memo-writing – are all methods that have previously been used within qualitative studies. The inclusion of neuroscience knowledge further supports the rationale for these methods, which will be discussed shortly. Integrating the neuroscience literature helps describe the concepts and expands them as well. In doing so, the words of wisdom from the participants, coupled with insights from neuroscience, result in the development of new knowledge about daughters that can be used by foster parents and social workers. The social work profession has slowly started to incorporate neuroscience thinking as part of its biopsychosocial perspective (Farmer, 2009). This has also started to occur within child welfare research and practice. Tronick and Beeghly (2011) are linking impacts of child maltreatment to physical changes within the brain. In foster care, Hughes and Baylin (2012), as well as Siegel and Payne Bryson (2011, 2014), are combining neuroscience concepts with (foster) parenting techniques. Van der Kolk (2014) provides a case example of a daughter of foster parents, how fostering impacts her as an adult, and the neuroscience behind her experiences. The inclusion of neuroscience into social work research and practice is about the integration of a collective knowledge to enrich our understanding on how daughters experience fostering.

Sample

The recruitment of participants required the assistance of child welfare agencies within Ontario, the two public provincial foster families associations, and several local foster family associations to electronically distribute the recruitment flyer to their foster families. The purposive sample included sons/daughters who were the biological or adopted children of current foster parents who were affiliated with a public child welfare agency in Ontario, aged 18–35 years, and excluded any kinship caregivers’ own children or current or long-term foster children. Sons/daughters were selected if they were living outside of the fostering home on a temporary (e.g. staying on residence at a post-secondary institution) or permanent basis (e.g. living in their own residence). The sample included only sons/daughters who were not living in the foster home because it provided a more uniform sample and they would have experienced several similar life transitions. Participants also had to experience the arrival and departure of at least two foster siblings while residing within the foster home, so that they could have shared their feelings related to the whole fostering experience. Lastly, participants had to be proficient enough in English to participate in a verbal interview.

The sampling process took place for almost a year and there were 25 interested participants. Of those individuals, 19 fit the inclusion criteria. Interviews typically took place weeks apart from each other and this time allowed for data analysis to occur within and between participant interviews. Interviewing continued until theoretical sufficiency was achieved (Charmaz, 2006). In this study, theoretical sufficiency was defined as when the data ‘no longer sparks new theoretical insights, nor reveal new properties of [the] core theoretical categories’ (Charmaz, 2006: 113). Specifically, only the core theoretical categories reached theoretical sufficiency and the other categories did not.

Participants

At the end of the sampling process, 12 daughters of foster parents consented to participate. Three sons participated and were included within the original research (Serbinski, 2014); however, for the purposes of this article only the daughters’ responses will be reviewed. Consequently, the sample, data collection, and data analysis were based solely upon the daughters’ experiences. The majority of the daughters were single, Caucasian, and in their early 20s (20–25 years), who self-identified as having a religious affiliation and permanently moved out of the fostering home, and these participants tended to come from two-parent families who fostered for 11 +years within a rural or suburban area. The daughters estimated a range of 3–289 foster siblings lived with them. This means that these daughters had 689 foster siblings, with an average of 57 foster siblings per participant. This estimation excluded placements that were classified as respite, relief, or emergency placements; otherwise, the estimated number of foster siblings would have drastically increased. Daughters estimated that their foster siblings, from newborn to adolescents, lived with them in their homes from 5 to 60 months. This sample description is consistent with a recent national demographic survey on foster families in Canada (Leschied et al., 2014).

Data collection tools, process, and rationale

Prior to data collection, an independent ethics committee at the Office of Research Ethics, University of Toronto, approved this study:

Stage 1 – Screening process. Interested individuals who contacted the researcher were given a description of the study over the telephone about what was involved, confidentiality, risk/benefits, compensation, and what happens with the results. If individuals were still interested in participating, they completed a 2 minutes screening interview. If potential participants matched the inclusion criteria, an interview date was arranged within a public place, such as a local coffee shop, or within the participant’s home.

Stage 2A – Consents, demographic questionnaire, and compensation. During the scheduled, in-person, 1.5 h interview time, the participant started by reviewing and signing the consent forms. The participant was provided copies of these forms for her own records, as well as a small honorarium for participating. Next, daughters were asked to complete the demographic questionnaire. The background information helped to develop the context for the study (Charmaz, 2006). The questions asked daughters about themselves (e.g. ‘Are you temporarily or permanently moved out of your parents’ home?’), their parents (e.g. ‘What year did your parents start fostering in Ontario?’), and their foster siblings (e.g. ‘How many foster children have been placed with your family since you have started fostering?’).

Stage 2B – Object sharing, photographing the object, photo-feedback, and interview. The participant was asked to talk about an object that means something for them about their fostering experience and that they were asked to bring it to the interview (Freeman and Mathison, 2009). The only stipulation was the object could not be anything that was identifying due to confidentiality reasons (e.g. photographs of foster children). If a participant did not bring an object with them, she was asked to illustrate in words or pictures, something in fostering that had meaning for her, on a dry erase board provided by the researcher. The participant was asked to share with the researcher about her object and how it connects to her fostering experience. After the participant shared her story about the object, the researcher asked follow-up questions to make sure she actually understood the participant’s experience.

The rationale for object sharing was derived from neuroscience, but the use of objects is not new to social work research (Freeman and Mathison, 2009). The task of locating an object engages the right brain hemisphere of daughters to elicit memories and emotions associated with growing up in a foster family. All of the daughters’ emotions, perceptions, bodily sensations, behaviours, and images are collectively stored within this full experience (Siegel, 2012). Daughters retrieve the information stored in their memories about their past and current fostering experiences in order to make informed decisions about what fostering was for them in the past, present, and what they anticipate it will mean in their futures (Hanson and Mendius, 2009). Object sharing provided daughters with a physical object to talk about during the interview (Tammivaara and Enright, 1986). While object sharing was used as a tool to obtain data, the free flowing, informal conversation process allowed daughters to share their experiences as they wished (Charmaz, 2006). This allowed the researcher to construct concepts from the data provided by the participants.

During the interview, daughters were asked to take a digital photograph of the object they shared during the interview with the researcher’s camera (Harper, 2002). The digital image was transferred to a tablet in order to increase the image size. This allowed participants to see their object from a different perspective. Photography has been used throughout the years in social work to expose the experiences of individuals and communities through art (Hurworth, 2003). The rationale for photographing the objects was rooted within neuroscience. Photography requires the brain to process information holistically through visual-spatial, nonverbal, and intuition information (Siegel and Payne Bryson, 2011). This is more of the right-brain domain trait, so the photographs would elicit additional emotions from daughters throughout the interview process. The photographs also enriched the data analysis and dissemination process by allowing the viewer of the images to subjectively experience how the daughters felt about fostering.

Daughters were also invited to complete a photo-feedback exercise of writing a caption for their photographs (Tucker and Dempsey, 1991). They were asked to provide written answers to two questions: ‘When in your fostering experience did this “object” happen?’, and ‘What feeling(s) were identified?’ The rationale for photo-feedback was derived from neuroscience. Engaging more of the left-hemisphere processing of the brain through written and verbal language, daughters talked about their fostering experiences through its parts, instead of ‘fostering’ as a whole. This was noted through the left brain hemisphere’s focus on linear, logical, linguistic, and literal preferences (Siegel and Payne Bryson, 2011), within the daughters’ fostering experiences.

After the daughters shared their story about their object, photographed it, and completed the photo-feedback exercise, the informal conversation continued between the researcher and participant. This time was used to further explore the participant’s fostering experiences with particular emphasis being made on emerging categories identified within the data analyses process. Probe questions were included in the interview guide but were modified or not all asked based upon the categories that emerged from the data (Charmaz, 2006). The probe questions aimed to explore the research questions more in-depth, including the transitions with the fostering experience (e.g. ‘Tell me about when your family started fostering.’), feelings (e.g. ‘Tell me about how your body felt when you had that feeling.’), relationships (such as, ‘How has s/he been helpful?’), and coping with fostering (e.g. ‘How has fostering and the feelings involved impact your adult life?’). The interview ended with one standardized question: ‘Is there anything else you think I should know to understand your fostering experience better?’ Before the interview was terminated, the researcher thanked the participant for sharing her fostering stories and asked how she was feeling about the interview process. No participants indicated feeling discomfort. Many of the participants shared that they were delighted by the opportunity to be recognized as an important part of the fostering process, were glad to share their stories, and hoped that their stories would make a difference in the lives of other children of foster parents.

The rationale for the open-ended interview was to elicit thick, rich data from the daughters about their fostering experiences. The researcher approached each individual with a sense of curiosity, openness, and non-judgmental attitude while being in the moment. The researcher was aware of her own body movements, tone of voice, facial expressions, eye contact, and the questions she was asking. This focused attention on the daughters was intended to create a safe, respectful, and trusting researcher–participant relationship.

Lastly, the researcher wrote memos based upon the raw data, empirical evidence, discussions with mentors, and personal observations that were incorporated into the analysis process (Charmaz, 2006).

Stage 3 – Member checking and prolonged engagement. Each daughter was invited to participate in a member-checking session about three weeks post-interview. This session included a review of her interview transcript for content and to discuss themes that emerged within the data analysis process. Nine participants consented to this member-checking process. There were no issues with the reviewed transcripts, so this maintains the integrity within the data analysis process (Carlson, 2010).

Data analysis

Demographic questionnaires, photographs, captions, interview transcripts, and research notes were included in the data analysis process. All quantitative data from the demographic questionnaires were entered into a spreadsheet. Data were cleaned and checked for accuracy and then analyzed using descriptive statistics. The interviews were all audio-recorded. The interview data were transcribed into a word processor and edited for any identifying information (e.g. names). Data analysis was first conducted through a manual analysis without the assistance of any computerized software. After the codes and concepts started to emerge, the cleaned data were input and analyzed using Dedoose, an evidence-informed data management system for social science research (www.dedoose.com).

A constant comparative approach with first and second coding cycles was used within the coding process, after the manualized analysis occurred (Charmaz, 2006). The first analytic step was to code. In this study, this meant that the researcher reviewed the data and labelled it according to emerging categories and summaries of information provided by daughters. All codes were elicited from the data. Two CGT data analysis strategies were used during the first coding cycle: word-by-word coding and line-by-line coding (Charmaz, 2006). The researcher used a word-by-word coding process, whereby she systematically went through each word within the transcripts. This focused the researcher’s attention on the feelings that were mentioned (e.g. ‘happy’, ‘sad’), but also the flow of words and information from the participants (e.g. ‘I felt it in my body’). Line-by-line coding occurred when the researcher reviewed each line of data within the transcripts, even if they weren’t compete sentences, and labelled it according to emerging categories. Line-by-line coding was helpful to identify action codes (e.g. ‘I have looked for my foster sibling on Facebook’) and descriptive codes (e.g. ‘I just want to know if my foster sibling is safe’). Initial coding highlighted ideas that would have otherwise been missed if the data were only reviewed in sections (Charmaz, 2006). In particular, this process identified many of the feelings daughters experienced while fostering. Additionally, incident-to-incident coding occurred with similar events (e.g. daughters’ feeling excited about the arrival of their first foster sibling) and dissimilar events (e.g. daughters’ feelings about post-placement contact with their foster sibling). The researcher compared data within each transcript, but also between transcripts.

The second coding cycle process was focused coding. In this study, this meant the researcher used the most frequently identified codes within the initial coding to carefully review larger sections of the data (Charmaz, 2006). Several codes obtained through word-by-word coding, line-by-line coding, and incident-to-incident coding were combined with similar codes, and then synthesized to form key codes. These revised codes were then used to review all transcripts again. The second coding cycle process built upon the identified feelings of the daughters, but also focused on when daughters had these feelings, such as the arrival or departure of a foster sibling, or living as a foster family.

Memo-writing was used to document the research activities and analytic processes, but also helped to identify themes that were incomplete and required further probing within additional interviews. The researcher re-reviewed, re-coded, and re-defined the emerging data from this study until theoretical sufficiency was obtained. This was achieved when the identified feelings while fostering linked to daughters’ relationships with their foster siblings and how they coped with their fostering experiences. The categories were reached after nine participants; however, the researcher continued to sample until 12 daughters, just to ensure that no new information emerged. Finally, to ensure the trustworthiness of this study, prolonged engagement with the participants, triangulation of data, peer debriefing/support, reflexivity of the researcher, member checking, negative cases, audio-taping the interview, and the researcher keeping an audit trail were conducted.

Results

A wealth of information was collected within this study; however, only two themes reached theoretical sufficiency. These themes were drawn from the daughters’ self-narratives, reflections, and constructions of their experiences made during the interview. The data displayed their sense-making processes of fostering and their relationship to others. Direct quotations from the daughters are used to connect concepts from the raw data to the researcher’s interpretations of the data.

Theme 1: Daughters ‘can get attached, but only up until a certain point’ with foster siblings, friends, and romantic partners

Daughters tended to share more positive emotions with the arrival of the family’s first foster child, whereas more neutral or negative emotions were associated with the subsequent arrival of foster children. For instance, daughters shared feelings of being ‘excited-curious’, ‘super-excited’ and having ‘curiosity’ with their first foster child. One daughter, aged 24, shared, ‘I was more excited-curious because I don’t think that my parents would expose us to anyone dangerous. There really was no fear’. By the time that the daughters had their second and additional foster children enter their home, their emotion words shifted to ‘apprehensive’, ‘upsetting’, ‘shocking’, ‘stressing’, ‘worrying’, and ‘normal’. Another daughter, aged 23, shared, ‘You soon learn that [fostering] wasn't so exciting’. Exploring this theme further with participants revealed that it was not the entrance of the new foster child that had daughters feeling apprehensive. It was more related to the departure of their foster siblings. Repeatedly, daughters reported that their fostering siblings would leave their homes, after a couple of days, months, or even years, without any sense of closure. Daughters used many feeling words to describe this part of fostering: ‘devastated’, ‘heartbroken’, ‘upset’, ‘brutal’, ‘weird’, ‘sad’, ‘hard’, ‘didn’t feel’, ‘disappointed’, and ‘grieving’. Additionally, it was noted within the researcher notes that when the daughters talked about their foster siblings leaving, they displayed various bodily expressions, such as tearing up or crying, changes in their tone of voice, slouching their shoulders, and reduced eye contact. A daughter, aged 20, shared one of her most profound fostering experiences:

[Foster sister] came for one night. We went shopping together. She was like an older sister picking out outfits. Then the next day, I came home from school and I was like, ‘Where is she?’ My mom is like, ‘She is not here. She has gone home to her grandmother’s house.’ ‘Why? Doesn’t she like me? What happened?’ That was the first experience that not everyone stays forever.

Understanding that ‘not everyone stays forever’, this daughter concluded early on in her fostering experience that ‘You can get attached, but only up until a certain point’ to the foster children in your family. Another daughter, aged 33, shared a similar experience about losing a foster sibling forever:

I can still picture her. I can still hear her laugh. I still know her favourite toy. I know that all. I probably felt the biggest burn when she left … In my mind, I didn’t understand that I was going to have this person for awhile and then they would be gone forever. That took a bit to get accustomed to.

The rationale: If you emotionally connect with a foster sibling, get close, spend time with them, like them, you are putting yourself at risk of emotional heartbreak when they leave your family. This phrase and sentiment was reiterated from all of the participants.

Fostering taught daughters about relationship patterns. As a result of the feeling that one’s foster sibling will eventually be ‘gone forever’, many of the participating daughters disclosed that they use caution in developing relationships with friends. There is always a lingering feeling that their friends will eventually, and most likely suddenly, leave them, similar to what happened with their foster siblings. As a result of fostering, a daughter, aged 28, believes that all relationships tend to end abruptly:

Everyone has a best friend and I never really had that. I know that people only stay in your life for a temporary time. You just don't want to get close because if you do and they leave, you loose out on someone that you really wanted as a friend.

Another daughter, aged 26, talked about not connecting with friends because she had foster siblings coming and going all of her life, so it was considered normal to her until someone suggested otherwise:

A lot of people that I know have grown up with friends and stayed close. I don’t have that. I have never really thought of that being weird until someone brought it up to me. I have had people coming and going all of my life, so isn’t that normal? Apparently, not.

Lastly, another daughter, aged 33, was not able to get close with friends because she couldn’t trust that they would be around for a long period of time. She was friends at a superficial level with many of them, but none were emotionally close to her: ‘I would never allow [friends] close enough. I would never ever share anything. I kept everything very internal. I felt very isolated. I felt like I wouldn’t trust at all’. Overall, this study found that daughters struggled in developing friendships within childhood and this continues into their adulthood.

Many of the participating daughters also disclosed that they struggled with more intimate relationships. Daughters talked about how relationships always have an expiry date attached to them – a day, a week, a year, a few years. A daughter, aged 21, struggled with dating because it never felt like a permanent relationship: ‘Just getting into romantic relationships, but feeling like it won’t be permanent. Like, we love you, but you are leaving in two years. It is always that thought in the back of your mind’. She further shared that she often ‘sabotaged’ her relationships because she felt that she was getting too emotionally close to her romantic partners. Another daughter, aged 24, had a similar experience with the fear that her partner would leave:

When I met my husband it was really, really hard because there was a fear that he would leave. When we were dating, I thought that he was going to leave and that he didn’t care. He was like, ‘No. I am not going to leave!’ It took a long time to build that trust and it was really hard to get where I am today.

Again, this daughter attributed the ‘fear that he would leave’ to how frequently her foster siblings left her.

Theme 2: Daughters rely on their mothers for emotional support

Daughters experience the temporary, transitional nature of foster care that has been previously reported within the literature by foster children (Beatty, 2007). The arrival and departures of children in and out of their families and homes can be quite challenging for anyone. Added to the fostering stress can be the exposure of violence, loss of parental attention, destruction of personal property, and sharing of personal space. This can be emotionally taxing on the daughters. Built within the chaotic nature of fostering, daughters have primarily sought the support of their mothers. While participants did find support from their fathers, non-fostering siblings, grandparents, neighbours, and school teachers, they perceived their mothers as close, stable, informative, and understanding individuals who listened to what they had experienced.

The secret to daughters feeling heard by their mothers and relying on them for emotional support primary revolves around the quality of the parent–child interactions. When mothers held regular family meetings, daughters felt seen and soothed by their mothers, within a safe environment, to honestly discuss their fostering experiences. One daughter, aged 33, talked about the functional elements of the family meeting: ‘We always had regular family meetings to see how things were going and make sure everyone was comfortable’. Further to creating a safe space to share her feelings, mothers also tended to accept/tolerate the feelings and experiences of their daughters. A daughter, aged 28, shared that ‘I didn’t always agree with her answers, but I always felt able to discuss things with her’. Mothers gave space and listened to their daughters, but also specifically set time aside for their daughters on a regular basis. One-on-one time was necessary to preserve the mother–child relationship and maintain their interpersonal connections. The time set aside was special for daughters, even if it coincided with other chores in the foster home. One daughter, aged 24, shared,

My mom had to specifically make time to spend with all of us individually. So even if it was grocery shopping, she would take us out for a milkshake afterwards. It was kind of like, ‘I am still here and I care about you, but we are able to care for other children’.

These moments made daughters feel important, heard, and understood. Mothers really listened to their daughters and even helped them process their fostering experiences. One daughter, aged 33, felt that, ‘Honestly, as a child my mom walked me through everything. She took a lot of time processing with me, communicating and teaching, and that is probably what got me through it’.

While fostering and since moved out of the fostering home, daughters tended to describe their mothers as their ‘best-friends’. A daughter, aged 24, tearfully shared,

Me and my mom are so close. She is like my best-friend. I think that a lot of it is because I look up to her so much. I am sorry if I start tearing up. She has raised me to be the person that I am, and I couldn't image it being any different.

Many of the daughters continue to have frequent contact with their mothers through telephoning, texting, and emailing since moving out from the fostering home. The primary reason for their extremely close relationships with their mothers was attributed to their fostering experiences. When foster siblings were coming and going at various lengths of time, daughters self-identified mothers as the only stable relationship in their lives. The predictability and permanency of the mother–child relationship was the central factor that anchored daughters to their mothers for emotional support.

Discussion

To better understand the concepts that emerged within this study, a neuroscience lens has been applied to the findings within this section.

Theme 1 revisited: Developing the fostering schema

Daughters connected with their foster siblings, friends, and romantic partners up until a certain point and then were prevented from emotionally getting too close. Daughters shared that the constant arrival and departure of foster siblings created a ‘normal’ operational definition of what happens in relationships. People come into your life, stay for an unpredictable about of time, and then leave. Previous research found that the frequent arrivals and departures of foster siblings impacted daughters who did not address their feelings by making it difficult for them to connect with future foster siblings (Walsh and Campbell, 2010). The significance of loss between daughters and their foster siblings has been explored within previous research (Lemieux, 1984; Poland and Groze, 1993; Swan, 2002; Wilkes, 1974).

By revisiting this finding constructed from the data and integrating it with our current neuroscience knowledge, we find that daughters are doing what anyone would do who experiences multiple relationship losses throughout their childhood: they protect themselves from the emotional pain (van der Kolk, 2014). Fostering is a meaningful event within the lives of daughters. It includes a landscape of intense emotions and therefore daughters are more likely to draw upon fostering memories to determine how relationships function. The theme ‘you can get attached, but only up until a certain point’ is a schema that emerged from the participating daughters’ narratives about fostering and their relationships. The fostering schema is repeated continually throughout the course of the family fostering. This fostering schema is hard-wired into the daughters’ brains and stored within their memory. As a result of repeatedly activating their emotional state of mind while fostering, the daughters retrieved and activated her fostering schema and this led her to proceed into the relationship with the next foster sibling with apprehension and caution.

This study also discovered that daughters believed that the arrival and departure of foster siblings within their lives has impacted their relationships with friends and romantic partners. Daughters are transposing their fostering schema onto their non-fostering relationships with their friends and romantic partners. This has not been identified in the previous literature. Participating daughters sometimes struggled in developing and maintaining non-fostering relationships. They anticipate that similar things may happen in those relationships because it happened in past relationships with their foster siblings. This is further clarified by what we know through the brain sciences. The brain has a natural tendency to generalize (Siegel, 2012) and it tries to predict familiar experiences and attempt to anticipate what will happen next from the environment (Schacter et al., 2007). This is exactly what has been reported by the daughters within this study about their perceptions of friendships and significant others, as a result of fostering.

Theme 2 revisited: Daughters rely on their mothers for emotional support

Fostering is full of new experiences and sometimes it can be overwhelming for daughters. Turning to their mothers, it appears that these relationships provide daughters with a safe connection to process their feelings (Doorbar and Associates, 2003; Heidbuurt, 1995). Being playful, such as playing video games together, is an important part of healthy parent–child relationships because it requires attuned communication and a sense of openness between the individuals (Hughes and Baylin, 2012). Cultivating a home environment where daughters, and other members within the foster home, can talk and share their feelings creates an atmosphere where repairs to relationship ruptures can take place (Tronick, 1989). Demonstrating a sense of curiosity about their daughters’ fostering experiences, mothers are able to co-regulate their daughters’ feelings with thoughts (Hughes and Baylin, 2012). Past research (Diepstra, 2007; Fox, 2001) has shown that daughters try to self-regulate first, and then they seek the support of their mothers, typically for more complicated issues that they could not resolve on their own. Current knowledge within the field of neuroscience finds that the brain may seek external support to help with an individual’s emotion regulation (Siegel and Hartzell, 2003). The emotion regulation process starts with early parent–child interactions whereby parents have co-regulation with their child and it slowly progresses to more self-regulation. Thus, it is not out of the ordinary that daughters within this study would seek the support of their mothers to help regulate their emotions to better understand their sometimes difficult fostering experiences (Gross, 2008). When a daughter is experiencing intense emotions and stress related to fostering, it can alert their sympathetic nervous system and activate their fight, flight, or freeze response. If daughters are left in a high state of arousal (such as fear that their foster sibling may show aggression to persons within the home), it can make it difficult for them to think in the moment (Sprenger, 2007). If daughters do not learn to regulate their own emotions, or seek co-regulation from a support individual while fostering, their brain/body may be left in a state of hyper vigilance (Siegel, 2012). In order to calm themselves, daughters may need to borrow their mother’s prefrontal cortex (PFC) to provide a critical thinking lens on the fostering incident. This was best illustrated in the ‘Results’ section of this article by a daughter, aged 33, who borrowed her mother’s PFC when she had her ‘mom [walk her] through everything’ and ‘process’ with her. From this study, it is believed that the mother–child interactions of acceptance and being present in the moment together created co-regulation, but also helped daughters to cope with their fostering realities.

Limitations of research

Criteria used in evaluating the quality of a grounded theory study were initially used in the construction of this study design (Saini and Shlonsky, 2012). Regardless of these efforts, the study is limited by the sample size of 12 participating daughters. This limitation was unavoidable as there was no direct method of connecting with daughters. It was anticipated that over 1000 foster families would have seen or received the recruitment flyer across Ontario. Even with such a widespread distribution of the recruitment flyer, there was only a small response.

The small sample size can raise issues pertaining to credibility and transferability. The credibility that the results are from the perspective of the daughters could have been more thoroughly addressed within the study design. A third interview with participants should have occurred once theoretical sufficiency was obtained at the end of the study. Unfortunately, this additional interview was not feasible due to a lack of funding. To minimize the possible issues with credibility, member checking was used to ensure the legitimacy of the participants’ experiences. During these member-checking sessions, all participants confirmed the themes and categories were accurate. The transferability of this study’s results to other fostering settings may be limited; consideration should be given by foster parents and social workers as to how applicable the data are to their own fostering community. This limitation is unavoidable within this exploratory study because it can’t account for all the diversity within the fostering communities. For instance, fostering experiences may vary depending upon the supports/resources that are available to the fostering family. To minimize this potential transferability issue, this article has been transparent on its research process.

Concluding remarks

All life experiences impact humans and even physically changes our brains (Cozolino and Santos, 2014). Fostering includes a variety of experiences, but this study suggests that the temporary, unpredictable, and poor communication around the arrival and departure of foster siblings leaves a lasting imprint into the brains, bodies, and minds of daughters. Daughters learn about many of their interpersonal relationships through their experiences with their foster siblings. Relationships can be rewarding; however, they are frequently unstable. Relationships can end abruptly and without any advanced warning, and rarely is ongoing contact post-placement made available. To protect themselves from unpleasant feelings, the participating daughters developed a fostering schema. This is an important finding because it lends itself well to recommendations on what the foster team can do to be more supportive of daughters. Be with the daughter in the moment and allow her to honestly express herself without fear of judgment. It is developing a relationship with her based upon connection, rather than correction. For foster mothers, this means holding regular family meetings, spending quality alone time with your own children, and listening to your children’s emotions. For social workers, this means developing a positive working relationship with them by talking with them more than once per year. This process may not prevent the daughter’s fostering schema from developing; however, the development of a strong connection with a supportive individual(s) for daughters is priceless.

Daughters within this study indicated that fostering has impacted their relationships with friends and romantic partners. Their fostering memories are transposed onto non-fostering relationships. For foster mothers, this means encouraging your daughters to spend time with their friends outside of the foster home. Minimize how frequently you rely on them for relief, respite, and daily childcare responsibilities. While the participating daughters took their roles/responsibilities seriously, it is important to teach them balance between work and play. For social workers, this means talking to the foster parents about how they support their own children. Exploring options on how to get their children involved in non-fostering activities. The additional friends and less fostering responsibilities may not prevent the daughters’ fostering schema being transposed onto their future non-fostering relationships, but expanding their supportive network is always useful.

The daughters’ fostering schema included their foster siblings, friends, and romantic partners; however, their mothers did not seem to be included in this schema. In part, daughters experienced the arrivals and departures of multiple foster siblings, social workers, support staff, biological parents, and kin/kith coming in and out of their homes. Outside of the fostering home, the friends of daughters were also seen as coming in and out of their lives through the natural transitions of school changes and families moving to different neighbourhoods. Throughout life’s changes, it was the daughters’ mothers who were the stable and constant figure in their lives. For foster mothers, this means it is important to emotionally take care of yourselves, so that you can provide the emotional support to your children. For social workers, this means supporting foster parents in the way that they need it, so that they can support their own children. In doing so, this will create an environment where daughters can emotionally survive and thrive while fostering.

This study contends that fostering is a relational and embodied experience for the children of foster parents, and fostering provides them with a template for relationships throughout their lives. It is important for foster parents and social workers to demonstrate healthy relationship patterns, while also providing opportunities for daughters to build lasting relationships with their foster siblings and friends. Daughters connect with their foster siblings, but also need the support of their mothers, and so their mothers need to be supported by social workers, and social workers need to be supported by their agencies. These relationship are worthy of attention, time, and resources by all within the fostering team.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Much gratitude is extended to Robert MacFadden (thesis supervisor), and Deborah Goodman and Ramona Alaggia (thesis supervisory committee members) for their curiosity and support throughout my doctoral journey. A special thank you to Dena Taylor for kindly volunteering her time to edit this manuscript.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:

This manuscript is part of a larger doctoral study which was supported by the generous contributions from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2011–2014), Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work PhD Funding Commitment (2010–2011), Royal Bank Graduate Fellowship in Applied Social Work Research (2010–2011), and School of Graduate Studies, University of Toronto (2012–2013). No restrictions regarding access to or disclosure of information has been placed on the researcher by these contributing bodies.

References

Anderson

(2012) The experience of biological children in the foster home. PhD Thesis, John F. Kennedy University, USA.

Armorer

(2005) Experiences of biological children of Black and Hispanic parents who foster. PhD Thesis, Walden University, USA.

Beatty

(2007) What am I supposed to feel? The emotionally-lived experiences of foster parents’ own children. Master’s Thesis, York University, Toronto.

Carlson

(2010) Avoiding traps in member-checking. The Qualitative Report 15(5): 1102–1113.

Charmaz

(2006) Contstructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis, Washington, DC: Sage.

Clare

Peaty

(2006) ‘Children who foster’ – The impact on the children of foster carers when foster children reside in foster families, Report, Perth: Foster Care Association of Western Australia Inc. and Centre for Vulnerable Children and Families, University of Western Australia, November.

Cozolino

Santos

(2014) Why we need therapy – and why it works: A neuroscientific perspective. Smith College Studies in Social Work 84: 157–177.

Diepstra

(2007) A qualitative examination of the perceived impact of foster care on biological children of foster parents: An exploratory study. PhD Thesis, Michigan State University, USA.

Doorbar

. Associates (2003) We’re here too: The view on fostering of the natural children of foster parents. Report, Hampshire Foster Care Association, UK.

10.

Farmer

(2009) Neuroscience and Social Work Practice: The Missing Link, London: Sage.

11.

Fox

(2001) The significance of natural children in foster families. Social Work Monographs 184: 1–52.

12.

Freeman

Mathison

(2009) Researching Children’s Experiences, New York: The Guildford Press.

13.

Gross

(2008) Emotion regulation. In: Lewish

Haviland-Jones

Feldman Barrett

(eds) Handbook of Emotions, 3rd ed. New York: The Guildford Press, pp. 497–512.

14.

Gross

(2007) Biological children in therapeutic foster families: A phenomenological study. PhD Thesis, Capella University, USA.

15.

Hanson

Mendius

(2009) Buddha’s Brain: The Practical Neuroscience of Happiness, Love, and Wisdom, California: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.

16.

Harper

(2002) Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies 17(1): 13–26.

17.

Hatmaker

(1993) The integration of foster children into caregiving families: An exploratory study of foster home dynamics. PhD Thesis, University of Oregon, USA.

18.

Heidbuurt

(1995) All in the family home: The biological children of parents who foster. Master’s Thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada.

19.

Höjer

Sebba

Luke

(2013) The impact of fostering on foster carers’ children: An international literature review. Report, Rees Centre (Research in Fostering and Education), University of Oxford, October.

20.

Hughes

Baylin

(2012) Brain-Based Parenting: The Neuroscience of Caregiving for Healthy Attachment, New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

21.

Hurworth

(2003) Photo-interview for research. Social Research Update 40: 1–4.

22.

Johnson

(1989) How a self help group can help natural children cope with stress of fostering in the family. OACAS Journal 33(6): 2–9.

23.

Kraemer

(1999) Therapeutic foster care: A case study exploring the impact on the foster parent’s biological or adopted child. Master’s Thesis, Southern Connecticut State University, USA.

24.

Lemieux

(1984) The effects of foster placement on the biological children of foster parents: An exploratory investigation. PhD Thesis, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA.

25.

Leschied

Rodger

Brown

(2014) Rescuing a critical resource: A review of the foster care retention and recruitment literature and its relevance in the Canadian child welfare context. Report for the Child Welfare League of Canada, Canada, October.

26.

Martin

(1993) Foster care: The protection and training of carers’ children. Child Abuse Review 2(1): 15–22.

27.

Merrithew

(1996) Foster care delivery and the needs of birth children of foster parents. Master’s Thesis, University of Southern Maine, USA.

28.

Moslehuddin

(1999) The impact of fostering on the biological children of foster carers: A review of literature. Children Australia 24(4): 49–54.

29.

Nuske

(2010) Balancing contradictions: The experiences of biological children of foster families. Children Australia 35(3): 32–37.

30.

Oktay

(2012) Grounded Theory, Toronto: Oxford University Press.

31.

Part

(1993) Fostering as seen by the carers’ children. Adoption and Fostering 17(1): 26–31.

32.

Poland

Groze

(1993) Effects of foster care placements on biological children in the home. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 10(3): 153–164.

33.

Reed

(1994) We live here too: Birth children’s perspectives on fostering someone with learning disabilities. Children and Society 8(2): 164–173.

34.

Riggs

Willsmore

(2012) Experiences of disenfranchised grief arising from the unplanned termination of a foster placement: An exploratory South Australian study. Adoption and Fostering 36: 57–66.

35.

Saini

Shlonsky

(2012) Systematic Synthesis of Qualitative Research, Toronto, Ontario: Oxford University Press.

36.

Schacter

Addis

Buckner

(2007) Remembering the past to imagine the future: The prospective brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 8(9): 657–661.

37.

Serbinski

(2014) Growing up in families that foster: Exploring the (e)motions of young adult sons and daughters of foster parents. PhD Thesis, University of Toronto, Canada.

38.

Serbinski

Shlonsky

(2014) Is it that we are afraid to ask? A scoping review about sons and daughters of foster parents. Children and Youth Services Review 36C: 101–114.

39.

Siegel

(2012) The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press.

40.

Siegel

Hartzell

(2003) Parenting from the Inside Out: How a Deeper Self-Understanding Can Help You Raise Children Who Thrive, New York: Penguin Group (America) Inc.

41.

Siegel

Payne Bryson

(2011) The Whole-Brain Child: 12 Revolutionary Strategies to Nurture Your Child’s Developing Mind, New York: Bantam Books Trade Paperback.

42.

Siegel

Payne Bryson

(2014) No-Drama Discipline: The Whole-Brain Way to Calm the Chaos and Nurture Your Child’s Developing Mind, New York: Bantam Books Trade Paperback.

43.

Spears

Cross

(2003) How do ‘children who foster’ perceive fostering? Adoption and Fostering 27(4): 38–46.

44.

Sprenger

(2007) Becoming a “Wiz” at Brain-Based Teaching: How to Make Every Year Your Best Year, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

45.

Sumner-Mayer

(2003) The inner workings of foster families: Implications for family therapy. PhD Thesis, Syracuse University, USA.

46.

Sutton

Stack

(2012) Hearing quiet voices: Biological children’s experiences of fostering. British Journal of Social Work 43(3): 1–17.

47.

Swan

(2002) The experience of foster caregivers’ children. Canada’s Children 9(1): 13–17.

48.

Swan

Twigg

(2011) Experiences of foster carers’ children: An overview of the research. In: Kufeldt

McKenzie

(eds) Child Welfare: Connecting Research, Policy, and Practice, 2nd ed. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 201–213.

49.

Tadros

(2003) Caring for children who care: Acknowledging the importance of the natural children of foster parents. Children Australia 28(3): 17–21.

50.

Tammivaara

Enright

(1986) On eliciting information: Dialogues with child informants. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 17(4): 218–238.

51.

Thompson

McPherson

(2011) The experience of living with a foster sibling, as described by the birth children of foster carers: A thematic analysis of the literature. Adoption and Fostering 35(2): 49–60.

52.

Tronick

(1989) Emotions and emotional communication in infants. American Psychologist 44: 112–119.

53.

Tronick

Beeghly

(2011) Meaning making and infant mental health. American Psychologist 66(2): 107–119.

54.

Tucker

Dempsey

(1991) Photo-interviewing: A tool for evaluating technological innovations. Evaluation Review 15(5): 639–654.

55.

Twigg

(1994) The unknown soldiers of foster care: Foster care as loss for the foster parents’ own children. Smith College Studies in Social Work 64(3): 297–312.

56.

Twigg

Swan

(2007) What research tells us about the experience of foster carers’ children. Adoption and Fostering 31(4): 49–61.

57.

Van der Kolk

(2014) The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma, New York: Viking Penguin.

58.

Walsh

Campbell

(2010) To what extent does current policy and practice pay adequate attention to the needs of the sons and daughters of foster carers, particularly in the context of planned or unplanned placement endings?. Report for The Fostering Network.. Report no. PLR0910/103). 26 February, UK.

59.

Wilkes

(1974) The impact of fostering on the foster family. Child Welfare 53(6): 373–379.

60.

Younes

Harp

(2007) Addressing the impact of foster care on biological children and their families. Child Welfare 86(4): 21–40.