Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy 2015, 36, 356–370

doi: 10.1002/anzf.1115

Challenges for Divorced Parents: Regulating

Negative Emotions in Post-Divorce
Relationships
Helena Will
en
Opaltorget Health Care Center, Gothenburg, Sweden

Emotion regulation processes in post-divorce parental relationships are analysed using thematic qualitative analysis.
In two separate interview episodes, three and five years post-divorce, 55 people were interviewed: 10 couples
and 35 individuals. Two themes emerged on how parents deal with their negative emotions after divorce. The
first theme, emotion regulation flexibility, reveals how some parents effectively regulate negative emotions follow-
ing the divorce. The second theme, emotion regulation rigidity, reveals that other parents retain feelings of anger,
hostility, and resentment following the divorce as a consequence of dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies.
This allows a deeper understanding of the processes of emotion regulation in family conflict, which may be easily
applied in most therapeutic orientations.

Keywords: divorce, emotion regulation, thematic analysis, joint custody, co-parenting

Key Points

1 Divorce therapy as an independent form of family therapy is rarely discussed in the family therapy litera-
ture.
2 Emotion regulation (Pe~na-Sarrionandia, Mikolajczak & Gross, 2015) has not been studied or utilised enough
within the context of post-divorce parenting but is highly significant for effective interactions.
3 Enduring conflict between divorced parents is sometimes related to dysfunctional emotion regulation and
has a detrimental effect on children.
4 Well-adjusted parents make flexible, functional and situation-appropriate use of the whole spectrum of
emotion regulation strategies in positive feedback loops between situations and systemically between par-
ents and between parents and children.
5 Enduring hostile interactions or negative emotions between co-parents often follow rigid patterns main-
tained by rumination and attribution of fault to the other parent.

Introduction
Taking a qualitative approach, this study explores how negative emotions are regu-
lated in post-divorce parental relationships. The analysis was informed by emotion
regulation theory developed by Gross and colleagues (e.g., Gross, Richards & John,
2006). The study was inspired by Sbarra and Emery’s (2005) suggestion that emotion
regulation deficits may contribute to divorced parents’ enduring conflicts and negative
emotions and by their call for greater theoretical anchoring for interventions between
divorced parents. There is a scarcity of research at present in this area.

Address for correspondence: helenawillen@hotmail.com

356 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

The project of which this study was a part aimed at describing and analysing post-
divorce parents’ interactions within the context of joint legal custody. In Sweden a
new law regarding joint parental custody following divorce was launched in 1998.
Joint legal custody would be the norm following divorce and if parents wanted other-
wise they would need to apply for it. The author was interested in how parents man-
aged their parental interactions on an everyday long-term basis following normative
expectations of sharing obligations and rights.
The topics studied included emotions and emotion regulation, decision making,
and distribution of costs with regard to the children. The research was carried out
at the Nordic School of Public Health in G€oteborg (unfortunately, now closed),
located on the Swedish west coast in Sweden’s second city with a little more than
500,000 inhabitants. The author was a senior lecturer and project leader and worked
with two assistants. She is now a healthcare psychotherapist in a G€oteborg suburb,
was trained in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and is now treating individuals and
couples.
This study was aimed at (i) exploring emotion regulation processes of divorced
parents within the context of their parental collaboration, and relating the findings to
post-divorce conflict, (ii) uncovering factors related to functional vs. dysfunctional
emotion regulation strategies, (iii) proposing psychological interventions, and, (iv)
suggesting theoretical implications for emotion regulation theory as applied in a real
life setting.
A divorce is often related to intense feelings of hurt, anger or sadness. This does
not make it easier to collaborate with the other parent about their children. For some,
conflict remains over years and negative emotions remain unresolved. Negative emo-
tions are found to correlate with mental and, to some degree, physical pathologies,
reduced well-being, decreased immune defences, and reduced life expectancies (Gross
& Barrett, 2013; Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton, 2001).
Furthermore, a link between divorce and lower physical and mental health, and
socioeconomic well-being has been established (Amato & James, 2010; Callens &
Croux, 2009; Hetherington, 1999). This has been observed in many countries (e.g.,
Sweden, Norway, Denmark, England and Australia) (G€ahler, 1998; Kessing, Agerbo
& Mortensen, 2003; Mastekaasa, 1994; O’Connor, Cheng, Dunn, Golding & the
ALSPAC Study Team, 2005; Sawyer et al., 2000). Considering Sbarra and Emery’s
(2005) assumption that emotion regulation deficits may be behind post-divorce con-
flict, negative, poorly regulated, emotions are likely to be one factor that links divorce
with lower health and well-being.
That ongoing serious conflict between the parents has negative consequences for
children is now widely accepted (Ahrons, 2007), and these effects on well-being for
children of divorce are long-lasting. In a longitudinal study of adult children of
divorce (Ahrons, 2007), it was found that no single factor contributed more to chil-
dren’s self-reports of well-being after divorce than the continuing amicable relation-
ship between their parents.
According to Section 3 of the Swedish Code for children and parents (1994:
1433), divorced parents in Sweden are automatically granted joint legal custody of
their children. This law may, in some cases, increase the risk that the parents’ negative
behaviour and emotions will continue after they have divorced (Day-Sclater, 1999).
Moreover, in many countries, including Sweden, it is increasingly common for
parents to share physical care of their children on at least a 30/70% basis. Rising

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 357


n
Helena Wille

percentages for parental sharing are reported, for instance, in the United States, Aus-
tralia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Denmark. In Sweden it is even
more common than in other countries that children live with each parent at least
40% of the time (Nielsen, 2011; Spruijt & Duindam, 2010; Swedish Government
Official Report, 2011).
Family mediation involves a professional assisting separated parents to negotiate a
mutually acceptable co-parenting agreement, which serves the best interests of their
children. However mediation aims at aiding parents in decisions about, for instance,
living arrangements and visitation for their children, rather than resolving emotional
issues or focusing on parental emotional dynamics.
In Sweden there is a unique form of mediation, so called cooperation talks, ‘a form
of mediation provided free of charge by the local social services (who also supply the
family court social workers). According to Newnham (2011) agreements reached this
way have the same legal status as court orders; successive governments have encour-
aged this form of dispute resolution, which is now the first port of call for most sepa-
rating parents’. These conversations may be court mandated or voluntary. The main
goal is to provide parents with support to find their own solutions with conflict
between couples not required to utilise this approach. While this type of mediation
has not been empirically tested and there is no consensus regarding its form, Swedish
law requires municipalities to provide cooperation talks (Social Services Act,
(2001:453). The general impression is that, as in other countries, high conflict cou-
ples do not benefit enough from these talks.
Internationally, effect sizes of family mediation have been moderate (Shaw, 2010).
According to Sbarra and Emery (2005) intense negative emotions have the potential
to block constructive parental cooperation in mediation. These authors argued that
the only way to get anywhere in mediation was to help parents begin to understand
the emotions lying behind their anger, get help and support elsewhere, and find a
way to control their feelings as best as possible to be able to work out a parenting
plan (Emery, 1994).
Emotions are a general focus in psychotherapy. In family therapy there is often
understanding, working through and processing of emotions, rather than focusing on
situation specific emotion regulation strategies. There is a theoretical basis for explor-
ing and reformulating emotions, and restructuring interventions in attachment theory,
family systems therapy and emotionally focused therapy (Johnson, 2008). In Cogni-
tive Behavioural Therapy for Couples (e.g., Baucom, Epstein, LaTaillade & Kirby,
2008), interventions include normalising emotions, drawing out primary emotions
and encouraging acceptance of the individual’s experience by the partner. These cou-
ple therapies are developed for distressed married couples, rather than for divorced
parental couples and interventions do not rely on emotion regulation theory.
For post-divorce parenting to work the parents’ motivation and ability to control
negative emotions are crucial. It may be necessary to work with the individual parent,
but with a systemic perspective in mind. The post-divorce family still consists of
interdependent family members, where each individual’s behaviour and well-being
affects the others in feedback loops. Lebow (2008) developed a specific divorce
therapy using an integrative approach (2008). Like most therapies that address
post-divorce issues this focused on the initial phase of divorce when ex-partners are
particularly vulnerable and emotions are intense. Goals of therapy are problem-solving
regarding their children, disengagement and anger management. If emotions go

358 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

‘deeper’ the client may need individual sessions, being aided to explore the meaning
of the divorce and being allowed to express and master feelings of hurt and anger.
Most couples seem to settle in with their new lives within a few years post-divorce.
Parenting schedules are established and the cooperation between the parents is often
amicable or business-like, however, a small fraction remains in high conflict (Hether-
ington, 1999).
This article aims to explore parents’ experiences of emotion regulation some years
into the divorced life, when negative patterns of emotional interactions are established
and can be expected to remain so for years to come and, thus, potentially, be detri-
mental for the children. Given current high divorce rates, at least in Western coun-
tries, the legislation on residential parenting post-divorce, and, not least, the
association between divorce and health and well-being, the emotional effects on par-
ents and children of such shared living arrangements may be considered a public
health issue that requires a public health approach (Salem, Sandler & Wolchik,
2013). There are strong societal incentives (including cost containment incentives) to
understand how divorced parents regulate their negative behaviour and emotions in
the shared custody context.

Theoretical Framework
A model for emotion regulation
In the dominant model of emotion regulation (Gross et al., 2006), it was proposed
that emotion generation begins with an evaluation of a trigger, which leads to a coor-
dinated set of response tendencies involving subjective experience, physiological
change, cognition, motivation and behaviour that revolve over time and facilitate an
adaptive response to the initial trigger (John & Gross, 2004). Gross, Sheppes and
Urry (2011) describe emotion regulation as the act that increases or decreases the
magnitude and/or the duration of the emotional response. Once an emotion regula-
tion goal has been defined, many different strategies may be chosen, each of which
aims to achieve that goal. Some strategies may be more appropriate in some situations
than others.
Gross and John (2007) propose that emotion regulation processes can be catego-
rised in five different phases that follow a temporal order. Four of these are classified
as antecedent strategies, that is, they are used to prevent unwanted emotions to occur:
situation selection, situation modification, attention deployment and cognitive reap-
praisal. The fifth, response modulation, is employed when undesired emotions are
already activated.
Situation selection implies that a person actively avoids or chooses situations, which
could be expected to trigger unwanted or desired emotions. For example, divorced
parents may avoid parent–teacher conferences if they know the former partner/spouse
will be in attendance because of the risk of conflict. Or divorced parents may attend
such conferences, even if the former partner/spouse attends, if they consider it essen-
tial to be informed about, and participate in, their children’s school life. With this
choice, the divorced parent is willing to risk being emotionally upset to achieve a
desired goal.
Situation modification is a strategy people choose when they want to change a
potentially unpleasant emotional situation in order to decrease or eliminate its

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 359


n
Helena Wille

emotional meaning. For example, when a divorced parent learns his or her children
are allowed to play computer games late at night at the other parent’s home, his or
her initial response may be either to voice anger and disapproval or simply to accept
the parents have different rules. However, if the parent uses the Situation modifica-
tion strategy, he or she will instead meet with the former partner/spouse to discuss
joint rules for their children at each parent’s residence.
Attention deployment is a strategy that people choose when they are unable to avoid
or resolve an emotional situation. With this strategy, people direct their attention
towards some positive aspect of the troublesome situation. For example, while a
divorced parent may be dissatisfied with his or her former partner’s care, he or she
may focus on the children’s joy in being together with the other parent rather than
on his or her perceptions of the other’s deficiencies as a parent.
Cognitive reappraisal is a strategy people choose when they re-evaluate an emo-
tional situation, either by changing the experience of a situation or by using personal
coping resources. For example, although a divorced parent may have opposed the
divorce, as he or she reappraises the family situation he or she may eventually accept
that the marriage was unsuccessful. The parent may even discover new and positive
personal opportunities in the post-divorce situation. Cognitive reappraisal has been
associated with lower levels of depression in an undergraduate sample and lower levels
of state and trait anxiety in a trauma-exposed community sample (e.g., Garnefskij &
Kraaij, 2006; Gross & John, 2003; Moore, Zoellner & Molenholt, 2008). This
research reveals the potentially adaptive nature of reappraisals. Given its potentially
positive role in the treatment of depression and anxiety symptoms, cognitive reap-
praisal has been described as a resilience strategy (e.g., Westphal & Bonanno, 2007).
Response modulation is activated late in the emotion regulation process when a
high-intensity level of emotion reappraisal is no longer possible (Tamir, John, Srivas-
tava & Gross, 2007). This strategy actually consists of a number of actions that can
be used to alter an undesired emotion or inappropriate behaviour already activated.
Expressive suppression, the most commonly used form of response modulation,
involves the inhibition of emotions. Dan-Glauser and Gross (2011) show that expres-
sive suppression can reduce facial expressivity, subjective positive emotions, heart rates,
and sympathetic activation. Among response modulation forms, emotion sharing,
aggression, substance abuse, and expressive suppression have received the most atten-
tion. It is worth noting that although it has received little attention, physical exercise
can also be used as an emotion regulation strategy (Pe~ na-Sarrionandia et al., 2015).
Expressive suppression has been correlated with many psychological disorders (Aldao,
Nolen-Hoeksema & Schweizer, 2010) and with negative interpersonal outcomes (But-
ler et al., 2003; Gross & John, 2003).
It is important to consider context when evaluating the use and the adaptation of
one of the five emotion regulation strategies. For instance, when attacked physically
or emotionally, a reasonable response is voiced anger. In other situations, such as in
negotiations, it may be more reasonable to suppress one’s anger (Tamir, 2009). Thus,
divorced parents can benefit from using the strategies flexibly. Cognitive reappraisal
may often be a better choice of strategy than the other antecedent strategies because it
allows the parents to understand and reinterpret initial negative responses in a con-
structive manner.
A recent addition to this research is findings that emotion regulation flexibility
(see reviews by Kashdan & Rottenberg, 2010) is associated with good mental health,

360 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

and as such, it has been considered to be adaptive (e.g., Westphal, Seivert & Bon-
nano, 2010). This would lead to the assumption that post-divorce parents who flexi-
bly use emotion regulation strategies are less prone to aggression and other negative
emotions and actions within the parental relationship and thus possibly having less
conflict.

Method
Research design
In this research, which takes a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were
conducted and a thematic analysis of data (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was used. This
research design with interviews was chosen because it encourages two-way communi-
cations that ensure the richness of the empirical data. The questions were constructed
so as to elicit the how, what, and why of negative emotions and of emotion regula-
tion. The analysis was generally organised around the theoretical model of the emo-
tion regulation processes (Gross et al., 2006).

Sample and recruitment

Research participant candidates were obtained from the Civil Court Register in
Gothenburg, Sweden, and from a self-help organisation for divorced parents. More
than 200 letters, followed by two reminders, were sent to these candidates. The letters
gave information about the project and included an acceptance form for return to the
researcher. The final participant group consisted of 55 people: 10 divorced couples
and 35 individuals.
All participants were parents who shared joint custody of their children although
their arrangements for physical care of their children varied. While six families had
court orders regarding their children’s residence or custody, most families had only a
memorandum in the Civil Court Register. This memorandum simply informed par-
ents that joint custody of their child/ren was to be continued.

Procedure
The couples were interviewed (separately) twice: three and five years after their
divorces, by the author of this article and two research assistants. All interviews were
digitally recorded. This timeframe for the first interviews was guided by Kelly and
Emery’s (2003) finding that divorced couples’ interaction patterns usually stabilise
and conflict diminishes three years after their divorce. In the follow-up interviews,
two years after the first interviews, additional questions were asked to explore more
deeply issues that arose in the first interview.
The interviewer explained the aims and focus of the project to the parents.
Some questions dealt with different aspects of the parental relationship. Other ques-
tions focused on negative emotions and emotion regulation. Two example questions
follow:
Q1: You just told me how upset you often are with your ex-partner’s behaviour. How
do you normally cope with these emotions?
Q2: You said that everything is working fine between you and your ex-partner. Are you
ever upset with him/her and, if you are, how do you cope with those feelings?

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 361


n
Helena Wille

Q3: In what situations do you react with anger or sadness or other negative feelings?
Q4: Do you cope differently with negative feelings in different situations or on differ-
ent topics?
Q5: Have there been any changes in how you react emotionally over time and how
you cope with your feelings in interactions with your ex-spouse?
It was hypothesised that parents who constructively and flexibly used emotion reg-
ulation strategies would express more satisfaction and well-being as compared with
parents who reported less effective emotion regulation strategies.

Analysis
Following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) guidelines, a thematic analysis of the interview
data was conducted. They describe this method of analysis as a ‘non-branded’ generic
approach to qualitative data analysis. After the interview data were transcribed, the
author and two research assistants read the transcripts. Parents’ comments on, and
descriptions of, emotions and emotion regulation were extracted and coded. An open
coding system with category codes (e.g., problem solving or change of focus) was
used. These categories were then classified according to their fit with Gross et al.’s
(2006) five theoretical strategies on emotion regulation: situation selection, situation
modification, attention deployment, cognitive reappraisal and response modulation.
Two themes on emotion regulation processes emerged. In the analysis of the find-
ings, the categories were refined to fit these themes. Codes that did not fit these
themes were examined further in order to enable a deeper understanding of emotion
regulation and to stimulate possible theoretical development.
The interview comments quoted in this article, which are representative of specific
emotion regulation strategies, reflect the wide variety in the parents’ responses. Pauses,
hums, repetitions, and so on, from their comments are excluded. All parents were
guaranteed anonymity if quoted in articles, books, etc.

Ethical approval
The Swedish Research Council for Work and Social Sciences approved this research.

Findings
Themes
The two themes of emotion regulation processes that emerged are the following:
1. processes of emotion regulation flexibility;
2. processes of emotion regulation rigidity.
These two themes are presented next. Illustrative interview comments are quoted
and conceptualised according to Gross et al.’s (2006) theoretical model of emotional
regulation and in terms of the five emotional process strategies (Gross & John, 2007).

Emotion regulation flexibility

The theme, emotion regulation flexibility, shows that some parents take flexible, situa-
tion-appropriate actions with regard to emotion regulation, deliberate on the expected
consequences of particular choices and self-attribute responsibility for negative

362 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

emotions and their regulation. With regard to situation selection, parents weigh the
consequences of their actions before engaging in a situation with the other parent. In
this way, they consider the emotional costs versus the emotional benefits.
For instance, Caroline has two daughters, ages eight and ten. She shares custody
of the girls ‘with their father, Peter, on a week/week basis. She would not risk upset-
ting this amicable situation even though she thinks the property division in the
divorce was unfair. Caroline said:
It’s not obvious he should keep the wok I bought when I left home or the table where
I ate every breakfast during my entire childhood. However, it’s been three years now,
and it works well between us. One has to focus on what is really important.
Niklas and Kicki implicitly agree that they will avoid sensitive issues. Generally,
they have a respectful and amicable relationship and are seldom irritated with each
other. Niklas said:
We both know so well which issues to avoid. We just don’t get into them. Instead we
discuss things we know we can keep at a business-like level.
If it isn’t possible or desirable to avoid an emotionally charged situation, parents
may try situation modification through problem-solving focusing on their children’s
best interests. For instance, Carl and Lina have three young children, ages eight, nine,
and 11. Their children initially lived with Lina during the week, and Carl took them
on alternate weekends. However, when Lina’ unpredictable working hours caused
friction because of frequent and sudden and annoying changes in the agreed-on
schedule, Carl insisted on a more formal and predictable week/week arrangement.
Carl said:
There was no structure; no one knew where to be. We talked about it, and decided to
try alternate living. And we agreed she had to work less when it was her week.
A situation is not always possible to change, while still potentially causing upset
emotions. Attention deployment was the strategy of choice for Caroline with regard
to the kitchen table. This allowed her to drop her claim on the kitchen table and feel
less angry about it. She instead focused on Peter’s positive behaviour as a father and
co-parent. Caroline said:
I can allow myself now to see his positive sides. He is and always was a very present
father. And the bad and irritating things . . . for most of it, I can’t be bothered.
Another example of attention deployment is Anne, who has two children, ages ten
and 12. She has to deal with a hostile and threatening co-parent who doesn’t con-
tribute financially to the family or help with childcare. Although it is difficult to say
something positive about Daniel, the children’s father, she reluctantly admits some
appreciation for his fathering. Anne said:
He has his good sides. He takes responsibility for our children in his own way. He
never hurts them or anything
Cognitive reappraisal appears as a significant strategy of emotion regulation flexi-
bility. The reappraisal is often expressed as insight. Without reappraisal, there can be
no emotional change. Caroline was shocked when her daughter tearfully complained
that her parents were not really divorced because they met so often. At this point,
Caroline understood her frequent meetings with Peter were for her benefit rather than

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 363


n
Helena Wille

for the benefit of their children. Although this insight was painful, she has had to
accept that their marriage has ended. Caroline said:
I realised that this is not about the children. I see them every second week. It is about
Peter, or the marriage or family, or whatever. It’s more about my needs.
Some parents, like Anne, have to cope with a very difficult relationship post-di-
vorce. As she gradually let go of her anger toward Daniel, Anne could feel a rather
emotionally distant pity for him. This insight made her stronger and more capable.
The past has lost its power over her emotional life. Anne said:
Given the circumstances, I think I have a good life. I’m very involved with my chil-
dren. I want to be with them. I’ve realised I have to cope on my own. And I’ve got
used to it. Actually, I hardly think about it anymore.
Hans longed for reconciliation for a long time, but when Inger remarried he
accepted their relationship was at an end. Hans said:
I think it is natural in a way. People grow apart. And that’s what happened to us.
With regard to response modulation, emotional expression vs. expressive suppres-
sion strategies are used flexibly, due to how consequences of each are appraised. For
instance, Veronica has twin teenage daughters. When one daughter developed an eat-
ing disorder, her father returned to the family home to assist with her care although
he and Veronica did not continue their marital relationship. Basically, Veronica has
cognitively reappraised the meaning of divorce and gets on relatively well with the
father. However, having him in the house is sometimes annoying. She makes a delib-
erate decision with regard to when it is meaningful to express vs. suppress emotions.
For instance, about his fathering, Veronica does not compromise and said:
I get very angry and bang my fist on the table. I say I am really angry.
As far as the money problems, Veronica refrains from comment saying:
It is really difficult, and we can’t resolve it. That’s an area I have suppressed. It is extre-
mely annoying, and I think he should pay more.
In other situations, the divorced parents generally minimise direct contact and
suppress their anger in order to avoid confrontation and additional hostility. Instead,
these parents use other means to modulate intense negative emotions (e.g., other
friendships and exercise). For instance, Inger, who is remarried, has two small chil-
dren from an ex-spouse with whom she has a relatively amicable relationship. As a
self-described rather emotional person, Inger avoids confrontations with Hans, her ex-
partner, because she thinks he is emotionally quite vulnerable. In situations when her
anger is evoked she suppress her feelings and instead vents them with her new hus-
band:
In most cases I can stop myself even when I am really irritated. I try to be nice. I know
it won’t work otherwise.

Emotion regulation rigidity

Emotional regulation is more complicated when parents, who share physical custody
of their children, disagree on important childcare issues and/or retain hostile and hurt
feelings. In such cases, anger is easily triggered in real and imagined interactions with

364 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

the co-parent. Why negative emotions persist may have different explanations. First,
it is not always due to ineffective emotion regulation. When there are concerns about
their children’s welfare most people would be anxious and angry, especially when
powerless in doing something about it. It could also be that one parent is fuelling the
conflict with bad behaviour, such as repeatedly obstructing important decisions or
blocking the other’s freedom of movement by being unpredictable. Agreed on sched-
ules may be changed at the last minute leaving the other in a constant state of uncer-
tainty. Some parents, as discussed above, are able to accept some kinds of unsatisfying
parenting from the other, not letting it nag at him or her. This appears to be easier if
the other parent choose to be uninvolved, the children’s safety is not seriously com-
promised and he or she does not obstruct parenting decisions.
However, even then, some parents cannot let go and get on with their lives, but are
stuck in bitterness, hurt and anger. These parents often blame the other for their nega-
tive emotions, are poor at consequence analysis of their behaviour and have a limited
number of emotion regulation strategies. For instance, Angelica blames the father for
their teenage daughter’s psychiatric problems, as well as for her own feelings of anger:
You can’t even begin to understand . . . I have been thinking about it . . . how another
person can cause such terrible anger.
With regard to the five emotion regulation strategies discussed here, emotionally
stuck parents often quickly got into a rage or frustration, meaning the need for
Response modulation would be immediately called for and the four antecedent strate-
gies are never applied. However, this may be an example of situation selection when
confrontations are avoided as a general strategy. When this is the case the annoying
issue remains unresolved, that is, there is no opportunity for situation modification. If
a confrontation is unavoidable it may be difficult to modify emotions when emotions
are negative and intense and again we have a need for response modulation.
With regard to attention deployment, emotionally stuck parents do just the oppo-
site. They ruminate, indulging in repetitive analyses of their divorce, of the partner’s
or the ex-spouse’s behaviour, and/or of their personal feelings. Others nurtured feel-
ings of revenge. Angelica was one of them:
I wish them [the father and his new partner] all sorts of problems . . . like having to
care for a child as troubled as Tyra.
Johanna shares the care of two children, ages eight and six, with Nils, their father,
on a week/week basis. Although she says she is satisfied with this arrangement, she is
being treated for depression, which she attributes to Nils’ dismissive behaviour and
his infidelity with her friend. Johanna said:
I’ve lots of theories about why all this happened. It’s this whole thing . . . the adultery.
I can’t get over it. I haven’t gone on with my life.
Ruminating over the past may also be a way to maintain emotional ties with the
co-parent. Angelica said:
It’s been a little difficult to let go of one another. I think that is why I’m still angry.
There has been a lot of anger.
Cognitive reappraisal in the sense that parents find some meaning and value in
their situation was not typical. However, change of feelings may occur as resignation
suggesting a feeling that things are bad, but the parent is powerless in dealing with it.

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 365


n
Helena Wille

He or she gives up. That negative emotions remain may be obvious in the following
quote by Jeanette. She said, with contempt:
He is nothing to me. My ex-partner is the biggest liar in the world.
As compared with emotion regulation flexibility, the theme of emotion regulation
rigidity does not involve a general decision regarding how to deal with intense anger.
Emotionally stuck parents often expressed anger through verbal attacks, demands or
passive–aggressive behaviour.
Jeanette has two daughters, ages eight and ten, with her ex-husband. The ten-year-
old child is multi-handicapped and requires considerable attention and care. For
years, Jeanette tried to persuade John, the father, to help with his children. However,
anger usually took over and became an unproductive expression of her intense emo-
tions. She said:
Then I phoned to yell at him. Basically, I phone to yell, and he phones when he wants
something from me.
Expressive suppression may be used in order to maintain a working relationship
with the other parent for the sake of the children or in order to maintain ties with
the co-parent. Johanna tries to suppress her anger and jealousy because of the children
and develops clinical depression. She said:
I’ve worked hard on it. We [the other woman and I] should be able to meet and say
hello in a civilised way. And we can do that now. But if I had thought only about
myself, I would have sworn and not cared. I would have moved somewhere else.
It is also difficult for Petter to deal with intense feelings. He has physical and sleep
problems as a response to conflict. He tries to suppress intense emotions during con-
frontations, although he understands that this coping measure could cause still more
problems. But he does not know how else to manage them. Petter said:
It is easier to walk away than to deal with the problems. Unfortunately.

Reliability
Braun and Clarke (2006) propose that the reliability of a thematic analysis, which
includes validity, depends on consistency among viewers, consistency over time and
events, and confidence in judgment: ‘Reliability and validity are directly affected by
the way the information is recorded and the choice of what is recorded’ (p. 147).
This study was based on tape-recorded interviews and transcribed verbatim by two
research assistants. To check accuracy of transcription the author compared these with
the recordings and thus secured reliability. However, the interviews covered a wide
variety of issues, which may have contaminated the depth of each. The author, an
experienced researcher and teacher of qualitative data analysis, and the two research
assistants coded the data and frequently compared and discussed codes.
An important issue according to Braun and Clarke (2006) is comparability of
samples. Although this study involved two different interviews at two different times,
reliability over time has not been analysed, which may be a weakness. However, the
interviewed parents come from different socio-economic classes, have different family
situations, and various co-parenting arrangements. Because of this variety, the findings

366 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

have some claims of generalisability. But it should be noted that more mothers than
fathers participated in the study, which may have produced a gender bias.

Discussion
This study aimed to (i) explore emotion regulation processes of divorced parents
within the context of their parental collaboration, and relate the findings to post-di-
vorce conflict, (ii) uncover factors related to functional vs. dysfunctional emotion reg-
ulation strategies, (iii) propose psychological interventions, and (iv) suggest theoretical
implications for emotion regulation theory as applied in a real life setting.

Emotion regulation flexibility vs. rigidity

Sbarra and Emery (2005) suggested post-divorce conflict is driven by emotion regula-
tion deficits. The findings implied that emotions and their regulation are an impor-
tant part of post-divorce shared parenting, whether there is conflict or an amicable
relationship. For most, quality and intensity of emotions changed over time, for less
conflicted parents to a more distanced relationship and investment, for others, to
more resigned, but still hostile, emotions.
Emotion regulation flexibility implies a functional and situation-appropriate use of
the whole spectrum of emotion regulation strategies as suggested by Gross and col-
leagues (e.g., Gross & John, 2007). This flexibility was facilitated by what could be
called a meta-strategy, consisting of goal setting (motivation), self-attribution of
responsibility for emotions, and learning from experience. The motivation in this case
was always what would be best for the children. In comparison, the theme of emotion
regulation rigidity implied, ‘more of the same’, such as rumination with never ending
hopes that the other parent would conform, comply or return. With time, avoidance
of contact became the main strategy, something that prevented and often sabotaged
effective co-parenting.
Flexibility in emotion regulation has been found to correlate with good mental
health (Kashdan & Rottenberg, 2010) and has been considered to be adaptive (e.g.,
Westphal et al., 2010), which is consistent with the findings of this study.
While the current study followed a theoretical model of emotion regulation
proposed by Gross and Barrett (2013) and Gross and John (2007), it analysed
emotion regulation strategies in a real life context over a prolonged period of time.
Using this approach, it was possible to trace the two themes of emotion regulation
flexibility and emotion regulation rigidity. Emotion regulation flexibility, as exempli-
fied in this research, is an approach to negative emotions that involves flexible, situa-
tion-appropriate behaviour and awareness of the expected consequences of particular
choices.

Recommendations for working with couples and families affected by divorce

In high-conflict couples it is often appropriate to enhance the emotion regulation
skills of individual partners. A parent would probably feel vulnerable and criticised in
discussions of his or her emotions and their (dysfunctional) regulation in front of the
other. However, family therapy could encourage an awareness of the effects of emo-
tion dysregulation on the whole family system, such as anger and hostility seeping
into parenting, harming the children and maintaining negative feedback loops. Thera-
peutic interventions could include cognitive and behavioural strategies, such as experi-

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 367


n
Helena Wille

menting with changing behaviour, stopping aggressive attacks or passive-aggressive

behaviour in relation to a co-parent and evaluating the consequences. This can pro-
vide information as to whether situation modification is possible and, if not, suggest
strategies that might be more helpful, such as attention deployment and cognitive
reappraisal. With regard to response modulation, which may be necessary in a crisis
situation, clients could be helped to understand and be prepared for trigger situations
and plan and practice in therapy about how to respond.

Future research
Future research could give increased attention to how emotion regulation processes
evolve over time and in real life settings. In this study it was found that the selection
of strategies interact dynamically with each other and in different contexts, and that
flexibility, rather than the preference for a particular strategy, for example, cognitive
reappraisal, is the key issue for emotional adjustment and well-being. Finding ways to
study these factors might be helpful in expanding the theory of emotion regulation.

Acknowledgement
This project was funded by The Swedish Research Council for Work and Social
Sciences. I also wish to thank Professor Emeritus Martin Richards, Centre for Family
Research, University of Cambridge, UK, and late Professor Lennart Ohlund, €
Aalesund University College, Norway, for helpful commments on earlier drafts.

References
Ahrons, C.R. (2007). Family ties after divorce: Long-lerm implications for children. Family
Process, 46, 53–65.
Aldao, A., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Schweizer, S. (2010). Emotion-regulation strategies across
psychopathology: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 217–237.
Amato, P.R., & James, S. (2010). Divorce in Europe and the United States: Commonalities
and differences across nations. Family Science, 1, 2–13.
Baucom, D.H., Epstein, N.B., LaTaillade, J.J., & Kirby, J.S. (2008). Cognitive-behavioral cou-
ple therapy, in A.S. Gurman (Ed.), Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy (pp. 31–72). Lon-
don: Guilford Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3, 77–101.
Butler, E.A., Egloff, B., Wilhelm, F.H., Smith, N.C., Erickson, E.A., & Gross, J.J. (2003).
The social consequences of expressive suppression. Emotion, 4, 48–67.
Callens, M., & Croux, C. (2009). Poverty dynamics in Europe. A multilevel recurrent discrete
time hazard analysis. International Sociology, 24, 368–396.
Code for parents and children (1949:381) http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/Dokument-Lagar/Lagar/
Svenskforfattningssamling/Foraldrabalk-1949381_sfs-1949-381/#K6 (accessed on 14 August
2015).
Dan-Glauser, E.S., & Gross, J.J. (2011). The temporal dynamics of two response-focused
forms of emotion regulation: Experiential, expressive, and autonomic consequences. Psy-
chophysiology, 48, 1309–1322.
Day-Sclater, S. (1999). Divorce - A Psychosocial Study. UK: Ashgate Publishing Group.
Emery, R.E. (1994). Renegotiating Family Relationships: Divorce, Child Custody, and Mediation.
New York: Guilford Press.

368 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

 Emotion Regulation Post-Divorce

G€ahler, M. (1998). Life After Divorce: Economic, Social and Psychological Well-Being Among
Swedish Adults and Children Following Family Dissolution. Stockholm: Swedish Institute for
Social Research.
Garnefskij, N., & Kraaij, V. (2006). Relationships between cognitive emotion regulation strate-
gies and depressive symptoms: A comparative study of five specific samples. Personality and
Individual Differences, 40, 1659–1669.
Gross, J.J., & Barrett, L.F. (2013). Emotion generation and emotion regulation: One or two
depends on your point of view. Emotion Review, 3, 8–16.
Gross, J.J., & John, O.P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes:
Implications for affect, relationships and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 85, 348–362.
Gross, J.J., & John, O.P. (2007). Individual differences in emotion regulation, in J.J. Gross
(Ed.), Handbook of Emotion Regulation (pp. 251–372). New York: Guilford Press.
Gross, J.J., Richards, J.M., & John, O.P. (2006). Emotion regulation in everyday life, in D.K.
Snyder, J.A. Simpson & J.N. Hughes (Eds.), Emotion Regulation in Couples and Families:
Pathways to Dysfunction and Health (pp. 13–35). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Gross, J.J., Sheppes, G., & Urry, H.L. (2011). Emotion generation and emotion regulation: A
distinction we should make (carefully). Cognition and Emotion, 25, 765–781.
Hetherington, E.M. (1999). Should we stay together for the sake of the children?, in E.M.
Hetherington (Ed.), Coping with Divorce, Single Parenting, and Remarriage (pp. 93–116).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
John, O.P., & Gross, J.J. (2004). Healthy and unhealthy emotion regulation: Personality pro-
cesses, individual differences, and life span development. Journal of Personality, 72, 1301–1334.
Johnson, S.M. (2008). Emotionally focused couple therapy, in A.S. Gurman (Ed.), Clinical
Handbook of Couple Therapy (pp. 107–137). London: Guilford Press.
Kashdan, T.B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of
health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 865–878.
Kelly, J.B., & Emery, R.E. (2003). Children’s adjustment following divorce: Risk and resili-
ence perspectives. Family Relations, 52, 352–362.
Kessing, L.V., Agerbo, E., & Mortensen, P.B. (2003). Does the impact of major stressful life
events on the risk of developing depression change throughout life? Psychological Medicine,
33, 1177–1184.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J.K., & Newton, T.L. (2001). Marriage and health: His and hers. Psychological
Bulletin, 127, 472–503.
Lebow, J. (2008). Separation and divorce issues in couple therapy, in A.S. Gurman (Ed.),
Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy (pp. 459–477). London: Guilford Press.
Mastekaasa, A. (1994). The subjective well-being of the previously married: The importance of
unmarried cohabitation and time since widowhood or divorce. Social Forces, 73, 665–692.
Moore, S.A., Zoellner, L.A., & Molenholt, N. (2008). Are expressive suppression and cogni-
tive reappraisal associated with stress-related symptoms? Behavioural Research Therapy, 46,
993–1000.
Newnham, A. (2011). Shared Residence: Lessons from Sweden. Child and Family Law Quar-
terly, 23, 251–267.
Nielsen, L. (2011). Shared parenting after divorce: A review of shared residential parenting
research. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 52, 586–609.
O’Connor, T.G., Cheng, H., Dunn, J., Golding, J. & the ALSPAC Study Team. (2005). Fac-
tors moderating change in depressive symptoms in women following separation: Findings
from a community study in England. Psychological Medicine, 35, 715–724.

ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy 369


n
Helena Wille

Pe~
na-Sarrionandia, A., Mikolajczak, M., & Gross, J. (2015). Integrating emotion regulation
and emotional intelligence traditions: A meta-analysis. Frontiers of Psychology, 6. Retrieved
from file:///C:/Users/Helena/Downloads/fpsyg-06-00160.pdf
Salem, P., Sandler, I., & Wolchik, S. (2013). Taking stock of parent education in the family
courts: Envisioning a public health approach. Family Court Review, 51, 131–148.
Sawyer, M.G., Arney, F.M., Baghurst, P.S., Clark, J.J., Graetz, B.W., Kosky, R.J., Nurcombe,
B., Patton, G., Prior, M.R., Raphael, B., Rey, J., Whaites, L.C., & Zubrick, S.R. (2000).
The Mental Health of Young People in Australia. The Child and Adolescent Component of the
National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being. Canberra: Australian Government Print-
ing Service.
Sbarra, D.S., & Emery, R.E. (2005). In the presence of grief: The role of cognitive-emotional
adaptation in contemporary divorce mediation, in M.A. Fine & J.H. Harvey (Eds.), Hand-
book of Divorce and Relationship Dissolution (pp. 553–574). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shaw, L.A. (2010). Divorce mediation outcome research: A meta-analysis. Conflict Resolution
Quarterly, 27(4), 447–467.
Social Services Act (2001:453), Available at: http://www.riksdagen.se/webbnav/index.aspx?
nid=3911&bet=2001:453 (Accessed 13 August 2015).
Spruijt, E., & Duindam, V. (2010). Joint physical custody in the Netherlands and the well-be-
ing of children. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 51, 65–82.
Swedish Government Official Report. (2011). [Continuous parenthood: about responsibilities,
economy and cooperation for the sake of the child] 2011:51 Fortsatt f€or€aldrar – om ansvar,
ekonomi och samarbete för barnets skull, Statens offentliga utredningar. Stockholm: Fritze.
Tamir, M., John, O.P., Srivastava, S., & Gross, J.J. (2007). Implicit theory of emotion: Affec-
tive and social outcomes across a major life transition. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 92, 731–744.
Tamir, M. (2009). What do people want to feel and why? Pleasure and utility in emotion reg-
ulation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 101–105.
Westphal, M., & Bonanno, G.A. (2007). Posttraumatic growth and resilience to trauma: Dif-
ferent sides of the same coin or different coins? Applied Psychology: An International Review,
56, 417–427.
Westphal, M., Seivert, N.H., & Bonnano, G.A. (2010). Expressive flexibility. Emotion, 10,
92–11.

370 ª 2015 Australian Association of Family Therapy

Copyright of Australian & New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy is the property of Wiley-
Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.