Grandparent Visitation Rights: Emergent Psychological and Psycholegal Issues

  • Ross A. Thompson
  • Mario J. Scalora
  • Lynn Castrianno
  • Susan P. Limber


Advocates for children, parents, and other family members often regard family law reform as an attractive avenue for addressing their concerns. In contrast to other means of altering family life (e.g., through popular education, business or community programs, etc.), revisions in family law have the appeal of instituting straightforward remedies to perceived family problems that can be advanced through clear advocacy channels, implemented wholesale within a jurisdiction, and effectively enforced by recognized authorities. Moreover, because promoting family welfare and addressing the needs of children and their caregivers are popular goals in the abstract, legislators often reach rare concensus on family law reforms, especially those that propose to remedy pressing problems within their constituencies in an effective and noncostly manner.


Trigger Condition Parental Autonomy Appellate Court Child Custody Custodial Parent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ahrons, C.R., & Bowman, M.E. (1982). Changes in family relationships following divorce of adult child: Grandmother’s perceptions. In E.O. Fisher (Ed.), Impact of divorce on the extended family (special issue of the Journal of Divorce) (pp. 49–67). New York: Haworth.Google Scholar
  2. Barineau, S.L.C. (1984). Note: Grandparental rights to visitation and custody: A trend in the right direction. Cumberland Law Review, 15, 161–178.Google Scholar
  3. Bartlett, K.T. (1984). Rethinking parenthood as an exclusive status: The need for legal alternatives when the premise of the nuclear family has failed. Virginia Law Review, 70, 879–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bean, K.S. (1985–1986). Grandparent visitation: Can the parent refuse? Journal of Family Law, 24, 393–449.Google Scholar
  5. Bengtson, V.L., & Robertson, J.F. (Eds.). (1985). Grandparenthood. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Benner v. Benner, 248 P.2d 425, Cal. Dist. Ct. App. (1952).Google Scholar
  7. Biaggi, M. (1984). Grandparent visitation. Family Advocate, 6, 39–42.Google Scholar
  8. Boyles v. Boyles, 302 N.E.2d 199, 111. App. 3d (1973).Google Scholar
  9. Burton, L.M., & Bengtson, V.L. (1985). Black grandmothers: Issues of timing and continuity of roles. In V.L. Bengtson & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenting (pp. 61–77). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Chaloff, M.B. (1982). Grandparents’ statutory visitation rights and the rights of adoptive parents. Brooklyn Law Review, 49, 149–171.Google Scholar
  11. Cherlin, A.J., & Furstenberg, F.F., Jr. (1986). The new American grandparent: A place in the family, a life apart. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  12. Collins, T. (1985). Note: Grandparents’ statutory right to petition for visitation: Vermont and the national framework. Vermont Law Review, 10, 55–98.Google Scholar
  13. Commonwealth ex rel. Flannery v. Sharp, 30 A.2d 810, 812, Pa. Sup. Ct. (1952).Google Scholar
  14. Commonwealth ex rel. Miller v. Miller, 478 A.2d 451, Pa. Sup. Ct. (1984).Google Scholar
  15. Derdeyn, A.P. (1985). Grandparent visitation rights: Rendering family dissension more pronounced? American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 55, 277–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Field, T.M. (1983). Social interactions between high-risk infants and their mothers, fathers, and grandmothers. In B. Lahey & A. Kazdin (Eds.), Advances in clinical child psychology (pp. 251–283). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Field, T.M., Widmayer, S.M., Stringer, S., & Ignatoff, E. (1980). Teenage, lower-class, Black mothers and their preterm infants: An intervention and developmental follow-up. Child Development, 51, 426–436.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisk, M.C. (1989). Shut-out families go militant. The National Law Journal, 77(51), 1–25.Google Scholar
  19. Foster, H.H., & Freed, D.J. (1979). Grandparent visitation: Vagaries and vicissitudes. St. Louis Law Journal, 23, 643–675.Google Scholar
  20. Gault, D. (1973). Statutory grandchild visitation. St. Mary’s Law Journal, 5, 474–488.Google Scholar
  21. Globman v. Globman, 158 N.J. Super. 338, 386 A.2d 390 (1978).Google Scholar
  22. Goldstein, J., Freud, A., & Soinit, A.J. (1979). Beyond the best interests of the child (rev. ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  23. H.R. Con. Res. 45, 98th Cong., 1st Sess., Congressional Record, 1983, 729, 2127.Google Scholar
  24. Hagestad, G.O. (1985). Continuity and connectedness. In V.L. Bengtson & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood (pp. 31–48). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Haynie, S.M. (1986). Note: Biological parents v. third parties: Whose right to child custody is constitutionally protected? Georgia Law Review, 20, 705–745.Google Scholar
  26. Ingulli, E.D. (1985). Grandparent visitation rights: Social policies and legal rights. West Virginia Law Review, 87, 295–334.Google Scholar
  27. In re Robert D., 151 Cal App. 3d. 391; 198 Cal. Rptr. 801 (1984).Google Scholar
  28. Jackson v. Fitzgerald, 185 A.2d 724, 726, D.C. App. (1962).Google Scholar
  29. Johnson, C.L. (1983). A cultural analysis of the grandmother. Research on Aging, 5, 547–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnson, G.L. (1985). Grandparenting options in divorcing families: An anthropological perspective. In V.L. Bengtson & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood (pp. 81–96). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Johnson, C.L., & Barer, B.M. (1987). Marital instability and the changing kinship networks of grandparents. The Gerontologisi, 27, 330–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kahana, B., & Kahana, E. (1970). Grandparent-hood from the perspective of the developing grandchild. Developmental Psychology, 3, 98–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kellam, S.G., Emsminger, M.E., & Turner, R.J. (1977). Family structure and the mental health of children. Archives of General Psychiatry, 34, 1012–1022.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kivnick, H.Q. (1982). Grandparenthood: An overview of meaning and mental health. The Gerontologist, 22, 59–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kivnick, H.Q. (1985). Grandparenthood and mental health: Meaning, behavior, and satisfaction. In V.L. Bengtson & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood (pp. 151–158). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Kornhaber, A. (1985). Grandparenthood and the “new social contract”. In V.L. Bengtson & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood (pp. 159–171). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Kornhaber, A., & Woodward, K.L. (1985). Grandparents I grandchildren: The vital connection. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
  38. Lehr v. Robertson, 463 U.S. 248 (1983).Google Scholar
  39. McCarthy, F.B. (1988). The confused constitutional status and meaning of parental rights. Georgia Law Review, 22, 975–1033.Google Scholar
  40. McCready, W.C. (1985). Styles of grandparenting among white ethnics. In V.L. Bengtson & J.L. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenting (pp. 49–60). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. McGough, L.S., & Shindell, L.M. (1978). Coming of age: The best interests of the child standard in parent-third party custody disputes. Emory Law Journal, 27, 209–245.Google Scholar
  42. Matthews, S.H., & Sprey, J. (1984). The impact of divorce on grandparenthood: An exploratory study. The Gerontologist, 24, 41–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Meyer v. Nebraska, 242 U.S. 390 (1923).Google Scholar
  44. Mimkon v. Ford, 66 N.J. 426, 332 A.2d 199 (1975).Google Scholar
  45. Mnookin, R.H. (1975). Child-custody adjudication: Judicial functions in the face of indeterminacy. Law and Contemporary Problems, 39, 226–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mnookin, R.H., & Kornhauser, L. (1979). Bargaining in the shadow of the law: The case of divorce. Yale Law Journal, 88, 950–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977).Google Scholar
  48. Neugarten, B.L., & Weinstein, K.K. (1964). The changing American grandparent. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 26, 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Noll v. Noll, 98 N.Y.S. 2d 938, 940, Sup. Ct. (1950).Google Scholar
  50. Odell v. Lutz, 177 P.2d 628, 629 Cal. Dist. Ct. App. (1947).Google Scholar
  51. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925).Google Scholar
  52. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944).Google Scholar
  53. Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246 (1978).Google Scholar
  54. Robertson, J.F. (1975). Interaction in three generation families, parents as mediators: Toward a theoretical perspective. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 6, 103–110.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Robertson, J.F. (1977). Grandmotherhood: A study of role conceptions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 39, 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rorer, S.S. (1987). Grandparents’ visitation rights in Ohio: A procedural quagmire. Cincinnati Law Review, 56, 295–316.Google Scholar
  57. S. Con. Res. 40, 98th Cong, lsf Sess., Congressional Record, 1983, 129, 2127.Google Scholar
  58. Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982).Google Scholar
  59. Shandling, J.L. (1986). Note: The constitutional constraints on grandparents’ visitation statutes. Columbia Law Review, 86, 118–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Smith v. Organization of Foster Families for Equality and Reform, 432 U.S. 816 (1977).Google Scholar
  61. Smith v. Painter, 408 S.W.2d 785, 786, Tex. Civ. App. (1966), writ of error refused, 412 S.W.2d 28, Tex. Sup. Ct. (1967).Google Scholar
  62. Solomon v. Solomon, 49 N.E.2d 807, 111. App. (1943).Google Scholar
  63. Sostek, B. (1980). Grandparents’ visitation rights in Georgia. Emory Law Jorurnal, 29, 1083–1125.Google Scholar
  64. Succession of Reiss, 15 So. 151, 152, La. (1894).Google Scholar
  65. Thompson, R.A. (1983). The father’s case in child custody disputes: The contributions of psychological research. In M.E. Lamb & A. Sagi (Eds.), Fatherhood and family policy (pp. 53–100). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  66. Thompson, R.A. (1986). Fathers and the child’s “best interests”: Judicial decision-making in custody disputes. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The father’s role: Applied perspectives (pp. 61–102). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  67. Thompson, R.A., Tinsley, B.R., Scalora, M.J., & Parke, R.D. (1989). Grandparents’ visitation rights: Legalizing the ties that bind. American Psychologist, 44, 1217–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tinsley, B.R., & Parke, R.D. (1984). Grandparents as support and socialization agents. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Beyond the dyad (pp. 161–194). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  69. Tinsley, B.R., & Parke, R.D. (1987). Grandparents as interactive and social support agents for families with young infants. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 25, 259–278.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Troll, L.E. (1980). Grandparenting. In L.W. Poon (Ed.), Aging in the 1980’s (pp. 475–481). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  71. Troll, L.E. (1983). Grandparents: The family watchdogs. In T.H. Brubaker (Ed.), Family relationships in later life (pp. 63–74). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  72. Troll, L.E. (1985). The contingencies of grandparenting. In V.L. Bengtson & J.F. Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenting (pp. 135–149). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  73. Wendlandt, P. (1984). Note: Grandparent visitation statutes: Remaining problems and the need for uniformity. Marquette Law Review, 67, 730–756.Google Scholar
  74. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).Google Scholar
  75. Wiseman, D. (1986). Note: Grandparent visitation statutes: A proposal for uniformity. The John Marshall Law Review, 19, 703–734.Google Scholar
  76. Wood, V., & Robertson, J.F. (1976). The significance of grandparenthood. In J.F. Gubrium (Ed.), Time, roles, and self in old age (pp. 278–304). New York: Human Services Press.Google Scholar
  77. Zaharoff, H.G. (1981). Access to children: Towards a model statute for third parties. Family Law Quarterly, 15, 165–203.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ross A. Thompson
  • Mario J. Scalora
  • Lynn Castrianno
  • Susan P. Limber

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations