The Volokh Conspiracy - A Question About Wording:

I need two terms that would describe (1) a family in which the parents are living together, and rearing the children together, and (2) a family in which the parents are no longer together, and are arguing in court about who has what kind and degree of control over the childrearing. The terms need to be (A) precise, (B) instantly comprehensible, (C) not legalese, and (D) as unjudgmental, noninflammatory, and unloaded as possible.

"Married couple" and "divorced couple" are probably fine on B, C, and D, but they're unfortunately too imprecise: The issues I describe arise even with families in which the parents were never married (whether they're an unmarried heterosexual couple raising their biological children, or an unmarried homosexual couple raising an adopted child or a child who is the biological child of one of the partners).

Another option is "intact family" and "broken family," a pair that likely satisfies A, B, and C; but one reader opined that "broken family" might come across as too loaded and negative, a circumstance I'd like to avoid if it's indeed a realistic concern. I don't mind controversy, but I don't want needless controversy. My point here is to describe the families, not to be seen as badmouthing one sort.

A third option is "intact family" and "non-intact family," an option that likely satisfies A and D, but that seems too legalese and perhaps a bit harder to understand.

If you can (1) tell me whether you think "intact family" and "broken family" are satisfactory or whether they are too loaded or negative, (2) tell me whether you think "intact family" and "non-intact family" are satisfactory or whether they are too legalese, (3) give me a suggestion that you think is better, if you have one, I'd be much obliged. Many thanks!

(link)

Nobody Special:

How about "whole" and "separate"?

"Broken" sounds too much like "broken home" which many divorces don't result in.

9.23.2005 2:54pm

Bisch:

How about "divided family" or "split family"? But if the parents are separated and arguing in court over control of the kids, I don't know if "family" is really the right word to use, reardless of your modifier.

9.23.2005 3:02pm

rico:

"Intact family" and "separated family" - this is also inclusive of separated, but not divorced, couples that are arguing over their children. Also, "divided family", if "separated" has a specific marriage-related legal definition.

9.23.2005 3:04pm

Lou Wainwright (mail):

Intact sounds like breaking is just around the corner. I'd use "United" or "Stable"...neither of which are perfect in all cases, but there isn't a word that will be. For broken I'd use "Split". It's clear and non-judgmental.

The couple would typically be described as "separated", so perhaps "separated family" would work.

9.23.2005 3:05pm

Jeffrey King (mail) (www):

Unified Parents and Divergent Parents

or

Cooperative Parenting and Independent Parenting

Either way, making "arguing in court about who has what kind and degree of control over the childrearing" anything less than a tragedy comes off as a whitewash.

Medis:

It seems to me like the best words to use are "together" and maybe "split" (I think most people would understand what "split" means in this context without the term implying a judgment).

"Together family" is a little awkward, however, and if "family that is together" is too long, the best I could come up with is "joint family"--but that might have technical family law meanings that should be avoided.

Still, I like "split family" for (2).

9.23.2005 3:06pm

alkali (mail) (www):

I think "divided" is better than "separated" for this purpose because the term "separated" ordinarily includes two-household families where there is no custodial dispute. (For the same reasons, I'd prefer "divided" to "broken" or "non-intact.")

9.23.2005 3:07pm

Bob W (mail):

Nuclear family and meltdown family.

9.23.2005 3:10pm

Will Baude (www):

I tend to agree that "broken" is too judgmental-sounding and non-intact too opaque. I also think "separated family" is the appropriate opposite of intact.

9.23.2005 3:12pm

Kristian (mail) (www):

Simple/Contested <- Refers to family structure, and I don't believe is easily misunderstood and unlikely to be inflammatory (no emotional terms, no judgements about the merits, simply a description of the state of the family...)

It is somewhat difficult to find non-offensive terms for family disputes-- so emotional, even neutral sounding terms can really tweak someone.

9.23.2005 3:15pm

Guest2 (mail):

This is a minor point, but you may want to bear in mind that one meaning of "intact" is "not castrated," as in "this dog is intact." Referring to an "intact family" could thus give rise to unintended humor.

9.23.2005 3:16pm

murky (mail) (www):

As for the two kinds of couples, how about calling them "co-parents" and "parents in dispute"?

Jason W. (mail):

Maybe "nuclear family" and "distributed family"? I happen to be in the latter situation, and I think it's difficult to describe because the two parents no longer maintain a "family" relationship while the child or children of those parents maintain "family" relationships with each of them.

9.23.2005 3:21pm

HC:

Put me down as another for divided family as opposed to intact family - all the meaning of broken, none of the problems with (D).

9.23.2005 3:22pm

Scipio (mail) (www):

Parents operating as joint tenants with rights of survivorship and not as tenants in common vs. parents terminating a joint tenancy.

9.23.2005 3:30pm

PersonFromPorlock:

Um. Nuclear and Thermonuclear?

9.23.2005 3:33pm

Eugene Volokh (www):

Jason W.: How about "nuclear family" and "electron cloud family"?

Scipio: Your terminology is obviously the best one -- I'll do the global search and replace right away.

Everyone: Many thanks for the feedback, and please keep it coming!

9.23.2005 3:34pm

Julian Sanchez (mail) (www):

I'll cast my vote in favor of intact/separated as well. Divided has more connotation of acrimony (which, of course, might well be present) than separated, which emphasizes simply that they're not physically living together.

9.23.2005 3:35pm

Alex R:

The only problem with "intact family" is that I think you have to add "two-parent" to be sufficiently precise, because there are single-parent families which are by no means divided -- families in which there never was a second parent present or in which the second parent is deceased. (In context, I suppose, "intact" might be sufficient.)

Also, consider "contested" instead of "divided", though "contested" is better used to refer to custody arrangements or parental rights than to the family itself.

9.23.2005 3:38pm

Marcus1:

Intact family vs. Split-custody family

Both good and clinical, IMO. According to Google, "Split-custody family" has been used before.

9.23.2005 3:42pm

Bruno (mail):

I say "whole family" and "damaged family". Naturally, "damaged" sounds, well...damaged; but that's a fact of life. I don't believe that most reasonable people choose to separate because it's a better (i.e. more whole) way to raise children. Everyone knows that the family is damaged and they're rising above it somehow by going to court in the first place.

9.23.2005 3:43pm

Dawg:

"Separated-parent family" makes clear that it is the parents who are separated.

9.23.2005 3:44pm

Aultimer:

"Parents-together family" and "Parents-apart family" sounds very San Fran (a bad thing at UCLA?), but meets the requirements.

"Unified family" is great. But it doesn't have a good counterpart - "Divided" and "separated" aren't bad, but have a whiff of negativity. "Bifurcated" won't be clear to every audience.

9.23.2005 3:51pm

Taimyoboi:

"electron cloud family"

I think "fissioning family" would be more accurate.

9.23.2005 3:58pm

I see that my concern about the sexual meaning of "intact" didn't resonate with anyone.

Am I also the only person who gets a chuckle when someone reports that "residents of the Gulf Coast were ordered to evacuate"?

9.23.2005 4:02pm

Syd (mail):

I did too, but I wasn't going to admit it.

9.23.2005 4:26pm

Tom Anger (mail) (www):

I like "united family" and "divided family." "United" is stronger than "unified" and "intact." And "united" is a good antonym for "divided," which is (I think) just the right (non-pejorative) word for "broken."

9.23.2005 4:34pm

Thom:

I think "Intact" is perfect for the first case. Is there some reference from the culture (the first that came to mind was "Kramer v. Kramer family") that would work for the second?

9.23.2005 4:38pm

Richard Bellamy (mail):

Federalist families and Jeffersonian families?

9.23.2005 4:55pm

Anthony (mail):

I like "intact" and "divided", as "separated" does sometimes have a specific legal meaning. Also, as it seems that you're leaving out the idea of families where the parents are no longer living together, but do not dispute custodial or child-rearing arrangements, "divided" has a little more implication of there being antagonism between the two adult parties. Perhaps use a term more like "antagonistic" when referring to the parents specifically, rather than the whole family.

9.23.2005 5:09pm

John Nettleton (mail):

I would ask Dan Savage (really) if he has a term or phrase that would work here. Dan is a writer and editor who has a good ear for language. And he cares about this subject.

9.23.2005 5:10pm

Just doing my part, Prof. Volokh.

I also like united and divided; nice Lincoln-esque imagery.

9.23.2005 5:18pm

Ooh, I got another one. How about "traditional family" and "post-modern family"? Maybe that's a bit too revealing.

9.23.2005 5:20pm

Jackal (mail):

I'll follow Taimyoboi's line of thinking: fusioned family and fissioned family. Or maybe fused and fizzed?

9.23.2005 5:21pm

Fissile and fissioning, surely.

9.23.2005 5:22pm

Jim F:

(1) "Cohabitating Cooperative Parents", or "Any Cohabitating Cooperative Parents" to specify any parents, married or not, who are living together.
(2) "Non-Cohabitating, Uncooperative Parents" to specify parents who are no longer living together, and not working together to parent jointly.

9.23.2005 5:27pm

duglmac (mail):

Cohesive family vs. fractured family

9.23.2005 5:30pm

ThomasL (mail):

how about "dissolving family" for the alternative. neutrally descriptive.

9.23.2005 5:49pm

Richard Bennett (www):

Oddly enough, you aren't the first author to face this dilemma, Volokh. The convention in the industry is to refer to the Type 1 family as an "intact family" and the Type 2 family as either "divorced" or "separated", depending on whether the parents were ever actually married. If you want to specifically describe those actively litigating custody, we get into the realm of such terms as "warring parents", "battling parents", or simply "litigating parents".

Google "intact family" and you'll see some of the alternatives that have been used in family law literature.

9.23.2005 5:59pm

DanB:

Conventional vs. Schismatic

9.23.2005 6:28pm

jurisprude:

Allow me to cast my vote for "unified" or "unitary" family and "divided" family.

9.23.2005 7:06pm

Sisyphus:

I think you can satisfy all your conditions with the terms "single household family" and "dual household family." There's nothing like numbers to eliminate pesky connotations...

9.23.2005 7:25pm

J.B. Clamence (mail):

For my two cents I would endorse:

Cohabiting family versus dispersed family
(following, for the most part, Jim F's example.)

9.23.2005 7:29pm

LRY (mail):

What about intact family or dispersed and conflicted family?

9.23.2005 8:22pm

Dr. T (mail):

I like Sisyphus's suggestion, but a dual household family could also describe a three or four parent situation if one or both original parents remarried. Marcus's suggestion of split-custody family will not work, because custody may reside with just one parent.

I suggest "two parent intact family" and "two parent, two household family." The phrases are a bit cumbersome, but they precisely describe the situations.

9.23.2005 9:08pm

Paul Virkler (mail):

"intact' vs "asunder" family or
intact vs ligating family

9.23.2005 9:51pm

Mahon (mail):

I suggest "intact" and "fractured." The latter is considerably less negative than "broken." A fractured family still holds together to some degree, could conceivably heal, and requires some kind of treatment.

9.23.2005 10:33pm

arbitraryaardvark (mail) (www):

Intact and divorcing?

9.23.2005 10:58pm

treefroggy (mail):

How about "in-situ parenting", meaning in the original position, for the "intact family.

9.23.2005 11:42pm

Maybe "parentis disparare" for the second. ( my Latin sucks )

9.23.2005 11:55pm

LuceLu:

intact household and estranged household?

9.24.2005 12:58am

Yankee_Mark:

How about one-home vs. two-home?

9.24.2005 1:00am

Puberty (mail):

united, disunited family

I sort of like:

nuclear family, factionalized family

9.24.2005 1:42am

Cal Lanier (mail) (www):

Anthony made my point, but it bears repeating: your request assumes that all divorced families are in legal disputes. Not only do many divorced parents raise their children amicably, but a non-trivial percentage of intact families have legal custody issues (e.g. battering, incest, poverty), where the courts are intervening in the parents' decisions (with good reason, in these cases).

So, if you mean two-home vs. one-home, then intact and divorced/separated are the usual terms. If you want only to single out custodial disputes, then add "litigating custody" where appropriate.

9.24.2005 1:49am

lpdbw:

cleaved and cleft?

From my wasted youth studying chemistry:

(covalently) bonded and ionic?
Atomic and plasma? (plasmic?)

solid and dissolved?

9.24.2005 4:24am

Sarah (mail) (www):

Question: since the two parents are clearly trying to make this two units rather than one, why try to refer to it as a single unit at all? I've had divorced parents since I was 3 years old; I'm nearly 25 now and I can tell you that from a linguistic standpoint, nothing really works to describe the situation that way. I always settled for "my Ohio parents" and "my California parents," which is what most of my friends who have divorced natural parents do, though it's always seemed an awful lot like the "Heather has Two Mommies" way of talking about stuff.

Since you have to, though, why not try "whole" and "dissolving," since a divorce is a dissolution of a marriage and it's not as loaded as "damaged" or "broken," while making clear this isn't simply the "division" that might result from a temporary separation (that might be resolved.)

(for the original question: "non-intact" sounds stupid to me, which I guess means it's legalese; "broken" fits perfectly in the ears of this person who's been shipped across country 20 times before the age of 18 to satisfy parental desires, but those parents might be just a little distressed.)

9.24.2005 10:07am

Public_Defender:

How about:

"Families whose kids will never be my clients" and "families whose kids might be my clients."

9.24.2005 10:49am

Let's hope those clients aren't paying for you to comprehend statistics, or they're doomed to disappointment.

9.24.2005 11:11am

Cal, in a decade as a PD, I have yet to call the home of a client's parent and find both his natural parents living there. I have read only one family history of a client that includes both parents being together (and in that case, the alcoholic abusive father had died some time before his son became my client). It's a sad fact of life.

My experience is limited to felonies, so a PD who handled misdemeanors would have a different experience.

9.24.2005 12:04pm

markm (mail):

PD, do you mean that even your innocent clients always come from broken homes?

9.24.2005 1:04pm

I've had a bunch of clients who I thought were innocent of what they were convicted of, but only a few who I thought were totally innocent of anything. One way to get nailed for something you didn't do is to hang out with people who commit crimes.

I also admit that my slice of the system is skewed--I deal mostly with poor people already convicted of a felony.

But this is a thread-jack, so I'll do my best to refrain from responding to other comments on this off-topic point.

9.24.2005 1:31pm

w sol vason (mail):

TYPE A (aka broken) and TYPE B (unbroken) because 2 type A personalities generally get divorced

9.24.2005 1:51pm

the poor set-upon liberal:

"family" and "family".

I'm sorry.

9.25.2005 12:08am

eng:

traditional cohabitating parents vs. separated, litigating parents

(comma usage systematic)

9.25.2005 2:22am

PD, your first statement asserted that the difference between children of married parents and children of divorced parents differ in that the former will never, ever require the assistance of a public defender. Not "more likely to", but "never".

If you understand the difference between your one sliver of experience and the greater reality, fine. If not, I recommend a google or two on "anecdata", "plural of anecdote", etc. etc.

9.25.2005 3:58am

I said, "Families whose kids will never be my clients" not, "Families whose kids will never need a public defender."

But I stand by the general thrust of my statement. Anyone who has spent any time doing indigent defense (or prosecution) at any level will verify it. A hugely disproportionate number of defendants come from families where the biological parents are not at home with their kids.

You call that "anecdotal." People who are in the system call it a "sad fact."

9.25.2005 12:33pm

John Jenkins (mail):

As another person who has done (and is doing) indigent defense, I also can't recall anyone coming from a stable two-parent family and ending up on the docket of any of the PD's I've worked with.

Incidentally, I think that whole and split do the job: they are descriptive and carry no external connotations (intact seems to leaglistic to me).

9.25.2005 3:34pm

benning (www):

How about "Intact" and "Disintegrated"?

9.25.2005 8:28pm

Michael O'Hare (mail):

The correct terms are well known, but vary regionally

in Berkeley:

separated: "intactically challenged"
together: "less intactically challenged"

in the LA region:

separated: "split"
together: "not split yet"

9.26.2005 2:34am

"Intact family" is fine. Like others, I think "separated family" is better than "broken family." "Broken" implies that the family doesn't function as a family. Although it is difficult, some divorced families function OK. Some "intact" families are "broken," for example where there is physical or emotional abuse.

By contrast, "separated" accurately implies that the family is dispersed without commenting on how well the separated family functions.

9.26.2005 6:59am

speedwell:

"Single-household" and "muliple-household" sound good to me.

The problem I see with all these "unified" and "separated" choices is that they don't focus on the specific important criterion; that is, whether the children are in one home with both parents or in > 1 home with parents who do not live together. A third term, "disputed-custody," deals with a case in which the parents dispute custody, whether or not they live together and/or with one or more of the kids.

9.26.2005 10:09am

"Multiple." Sorry

Doesn't "two household" and "two-home" sound like folks who have a place at the beach?

9.26.2005 10:11am

Dread Justice Roberts:

Most of the suggestions fail condition A and B. A "divided" family could be divided over any number of things, including who replaced the toilet paper with the roll going the wrong way. A "separated" family may or may not be arguing, in or out of court, about control/custody of children. Further, no provision is made for whether the parents are or ever were married. "Separated" implies that the parents were married, are now separated, but not yet divorced. That's a lot of extra baggage.

The comment suggesting cohabitating/non-cohabitating cooperating/noncooperating seems to satisfy all the conditions. The former indicates whether the couple is or is not living together, the latter whether they are or are not coopoerating on child rearing, and eliminates confusion about the case not mentioned - non-cohabitating cooperating families (the vast majority of "separated" or "split" or "broken" families in my experience) where the parents do not live together but cooperate more or less on child rearing.

9.26.2005 11:42am

Jam (mail) (www):

Covenant marriage: A husband and wife, married to each other, each in their first marriage.

Covenant family: A Covenant marriage with children.

Fragmented marriage/family: When Covenant marriage/family does not apply.

======================================================

Such a sad topic. My family (husband, wife, 4 children in a Covenant family) went to Destin, Florida for a vacation. My wife's uncle has a condo and large boat. He let us stay i the condo and arranged a fishing trip for us.

We were having great fun just fishing for the bait that if that was the only thing we did it would have been enough. I was helping one of my kids reel-in a catch of bait fish when I overheard the Captain radio a friend. The Captain reported to his friend that he had a family, a real family on board for a fishing trip.

My wife overheard the comment also and I do not think that I will ever forget those words.

9.26.2005 3:42pm

jaims:

"family" and "ex-family"

9.26.2005 6:07pm

RobertA:

Intact/disrupted. This seems to be a natural pairing, particulary since "Disrupted" is defined as "To throw into confusion or disorder," which seems to describe the litigiousness and disharmony Eugene describes in his post.

9.26.2005 11:59pm

One more point: Intact/Disrupted seems to satisfy all four of Eugene's criteria: the terms are (A) precise, (B) instantly comprehensible, (C) not legalese, and (D) as unjudgmental, noninflammatory, and unloaded as possible. Of course the term "disrupted" retains some negative connotation, but that is unavoidable given the meaning of the word. However, that being said, "disrupted" still seems to be a fairly neutral, objective, and nearly clinical description of the situation Eugene describes, and it does not not have a history of pejorative use in this context.

9.27.2005 12:22am

"Fragmented marriage/family: When Covenant marriage/family does not apply."

Go focus on your own damn family, religious fanatic.

9.27.2005 2:22pm

speedwell: Thank you for your well thought-out response.

And I am the one being called a fanatic? Yeesh.

And, yes, I focus on my own family. That is why it is still whole.

I wonder what guilt fires your light?

9.28.2005 10:38am