The elements of the healthy intergenerational group

While each of the cross-age groups have their unique dynamics there are still unilateral principles that characterize healthy intergenerational interaction. There is no meaning attached to the order of their presentation below.

The first element of a healthy intergenerational group is the principle of bonding.

The term “bonding” was first introduced by Klaus and Kennell¹⁸⁶ and referred to the unique developmental changes thought to occur at birth and have a lasting effect on subsequent parent-child relationships and child development.¹⁸⁷ According to Saxton,¹⁸⁸ a bond is anything that ties, binds or fastens together. Bonding is a function of attachment, and is most commonly used in describing the close, intimate attachment that develops

184 Hull, John. What Prevents Christian Adults From Learning? Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1991. P.133.

185 Koehler, George E. Learning. P. 18.

186 Klaus, M. H. Kennell, J. H. Maternal-infant bonding. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. 1976.

187Goldberg, S. Parent-infant bonding: Another look. Child Development. Vol 54. 1983. Pp.1355-1382.

188 Saxton, L. The individual, marriage, and the family. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 1996.

between a primary caregiver and an infant.¹⁸⁹ With this in mind, Saxton also explained that bonds can be applicable to relationships outside of the most common caregiver-infant scenario. A paired bond is a special manifestation of a primary relationship. A paired bond may be a special relationship, asexual in nature, between family members or between companions or friends. On the other hand, a paired bond may be sexual, meaning erotic, such as the bond between lovers.

Using Saxton’s definitions, intergenerational bonds would consist of paired bonds. Intergenerational bonds are defined as the emotional closeness, the connectedness, and the kinship ties that exist among extended family members across more than one generation. When one is bonded to another, one may feel and understand the meaning or significance of this relationship. The term multi-generational bond can then be

referred to as the ties and emotional closeness that connect several generations.

The second principle indicating health in a relationship across ages is the principle of shared power. In the context of multi-generational relationships, the term power is used as the ability to influence or control events. When one group can control the other’s behavior, or the circumstances surrounding that behavior, then that party, in that context, holds some degree of social power. However, power is not an individual concept, but a relational concept. Power only makes sense in the context of the relationship between parties.

For example, how much power does any leader possess if that leader has no followers? A leader only posesses the power which the followers are willing to give him/her. The same applies in group interaction also.¹⁹⁰ In general, reseach indicates that any potential conflict is best regulated when sharing relatively balanced power. This is due to the balance between encouraging productivity due to accountability. Each side knows that it cannot act with impunity. When not in balance, the stronger party knows that it can act independently to accomplish goals. Balanced power encourages parties to

189Worobey, J. Mother-infant interaction: Protocommunication in the developing dyad 1989. In Taylor, C Alan. Perceptions of Intergenerational Bonds: The Comparison Between Grandfathers and their Adult Grandchildren. Doctoral Thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 1998.

190 Donohue, William A. Kolt, Robert. Managing Interpersonal Conflict. Sage Publications, Inc. 1992.

P.90.

work together to accomplish their goals. Balance in a group can easily be identified with a short questionaire:

1. Does each generation have an equal ability and willingness to impact the other generation’s decisions?

2. Do all generations believe that they are not required to give in to the others?

3. Does each generation realize that they cannot act independently?

4. Does each generation understand the value of balanced power in negotiating collaboratively?

5. Are all generations approximately equal in their communication skills?

6. Do all parties feel safe in negotiating with each other?

More than two negative answers to the above questions indicates one of the following:

(a) Fear of speaking their mind due to a fear of retaliation.

(b) Feelings of inadequacy due to poor communications skills.

(c) Feelings of inability or unwillingness to influence the outcome.¹⁹² Group leaders have the responsibility to stress the ”one another” commands found in the New Testament to create servanthood models within an existing group. (See the Judeo Christian roots.)

The third principle of an intergenerational group is the principle of reversible teacher/learner relationship. Traditionally in the curriculum preparation process the teacher is the controller of the educational interactions, assuming what is essentially a unilateral transmissive model. A challenge from the New Testament churches is to recognize that within Christian faith communities’ mutuality and interdependence are essential elements of the teaching/learning process, whereby ‘teachers’ and ‘students’

learn together and from each other. Thus in any activity each participant may move in and out of teaching roles. The usual assumption – that in a mixed age-group settings older people or adults will naturally adopt the role of the teacher – will need to be sensitively

191 Ibid. P. 106.

192 Donohue, William A. Kolt,Robert . Managing. Pp.162-163.

challenged and practices modified.¹⁹³ Study of Bronfenbrenner examined children ’s influence on their parents and concluded that there is reciprocal or bi-directional learning from parent to child and from child to parent.¹⁹⁴