Article

The Family Journal: Counseling and

Therapy for Couples and Families
Intercultural Parenting in Australia: 2017, Vol. 25(2) 187-195
ª The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permission:
Managing Cultural Differences sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1066480717697688
journals.sagepub.com/home/tfj

Dharam Bhugun1

Abstract
This study employed a qualitative and social constructionist approach to examine cultural differences in intercultural parenting
and how parents negotiated cultural differences. Semistructured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 14 intercultural
couples/parents. Thematic analysis was used to analyze data and understand the meanings of participants’ experiences. The
findings revealed that while intercultural couples experienced several similar aspects of parenting experienced by monocultural
couples, their experiences were exacerbated because of the cultural differences. The most common descriptions of differences
and uniqueness in parenting were identified as (a) discipline, (b) sleep patterns, (c) cultural taboos refood and traditional medical
practices, (d) children’s socialization process, (e) education, (f) language and communication, (g) role of children, and (h) the role
of extended families. Five major conflict resolution strategies were identified: (a) communication, (b) compromise, (c) sphere of
rule, (d) asymmetrical decision-making, and (e) individual traits. Practical implications for therapists and counsellors working with
intercultural parents/couples are discussed.

Keywords
culture, intercultural couples, parenting styles, challenges, negotiation, acculturation, social constructionism

The growth of immigration and social diversity, and advances
in global technology, has contributed to an increase in inter-
cultural marriages and relationships (Owen, 2002) and parent-
ing in Australia. In 2015, 26.5% of the total population of
Australia were born overseas (Australian bureau of Statistics,
2015). About 17% of Australian couples were in intermarriage
between overseas-born and Australian-born partners. Also,
there have been some significant changes in the birth place
of overseas-born spouses such as from India, Asia, Africa,
Middle East, and the Pacific Islands. Consequently, intercul-
tural parenting experience is emerging as an important issue
within the family structure in the Australian society.
Parenting experiences can be both challenging and reward-
ing for intercultural couples and their children. A review of the
literature showed no published studies of intercultural parent-
ing in Australia. Much of the Australian literature has focused
on parenting styles among different cultural groups and the
experiences of children. More research is needed on the par-
enting experiences of intercultural couples. Sullivan and
Cottone (2006) pointed out that little empirical research has
been conducted with intercultural couples to assist with under-
standing cultural problems and useful interventions.
This article will focus on the negotiation patterns and
decision-making processes that intercultural couples employ
to resolve their cultural differences in parenting. Intercultural
is the interactions between members of different cultures
and encompasses the different notions of ethnic, interethnic,
racial, interracial, religious, interfaith, and national dynamics
(Ting-Toomey, 1999). Intercultural couples are adults from
different cultural backgrounds in a relationship. Intercultural
parents are two intercultural adults in a relationship who
are living and raising children together (Perel, 2000; Ting-
Toomey, 1999).
Challenges Impacting on Intercultural Couples
The literature on intercultural relationship points to the fact that
parenthood can be the trigger to marital conflict (Bustamante,
Nelson, Henriksen, & Monakes, 2011; Romano, 2001) and
reignite cultural differences among couples (Romano, 2001).
Intercultural couples have the added dilemma of resolving cul-
tural differences compared to monocultural couples such
as barriers to language and communication (Waldman &
Rubalcava, 2005), conflicts over parenting styles and practices
(Romano, 2001), differences in cultural values (Garcia, 2006),
and negative family and social attitudes (McFadden & Moore,
2001). According to Perel (2000), another common conflict in
intercultural couple arises from viewing one’s view as an
1
School of Health and Human Services, Southern Cross University, Gold
Coast, Queensland, Australia
Corresponding Author:
Dharam Bhugun, Realistic Counselling, P.O. Box 4303, Ashmore Plaza,
160 Cotlew Street, Ashmore, Queensland 4214, Australia.
Email: dharam@realisticcounselling.com
188 The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families 25(2)
objective reality and discarding other’s perspectives. There are
several other assumptions regarding intercultural marriages in
that they are more stressed because of the cultural differences
and are more likely to end up in divorce than those in mono-
cultural ones (Bratter & King, 2008). Generally, society has a
greater acceptance of monocultural couples, which lends to a
greater focus on how intercultural couples deal with the outside
forces (Henderson, 2000).
Conflicts and Challenges Over Child Rearing
Most couples face some form of challenges in their relation-
ship, but intercultural couples face additional challenges as a
result of cultural conflicts over parenting (Crippen & Brew,
2007; Keller et al., 2004; Romano, 2001; Singla, 2015).
Sources of conflict include the other’s norms, values, religious
beliefs, meanings, and rituals (Romano, 2001); cultural and
racial identity of children (Bratawidjaja, 2007); naming of chil-
dren and the language they speak (Karis & Killian, 2009); and
educational goals, disciplinary styles, forms of parent–child
relationships, conflicting styles of parenting (Berg-Cross,
2001), different gender role expectations and division of house-
hold labor (Gupta, 2008), and roles and expectations of the
extended family members (Karis & Killian, 2009).
Most individuals rear their children as they were reared
themselves (Santrock, 2007; Tanaka, Kitamura, Chen,
Murakami, & Goto, 2009). As such, their parenting styles
may be as a result of their cultural view about children and
child-rearing practices (Frame, 2004). Sources of conflict
such as different beliefs and values about parenting, socia-
lization process of children, communication style, gender
and children’s roles, and parenting styles such as authorita-
tive versus authoritarian can have serious negative implica-
tions for both intercultural couples and their children. For
example, conflict in intercultural relationship and parenting
can lead to marriage distress and dissatisfaction (Bhugra &
De Silva, 2000; Hsu, 2001). Regarding children, Bradford,
Burns Vaughn, and Barker (2007) suggest that conflict in
parental values can lead to emotional disturbance to chil-
dren and diminished parenting.
Negotiation and Resolution of Intercultural Parenting
Conflict
Intercultural parents have the additional task of negotiating
parenting styles and practices compared to monocultural cou-
ples. Romano (2001) suggested that couples embrace one of
four styles of negotiating cultural differences: (1) one partner
submits to the norms of the host culture and relinquishes his or
her own practices, (2) the couple come to a compromise in
which each partner gives up some of their own culture in order
to create a balance and reduce conflict, (3) the couple is in
complete denial of the differences and forfeits their tradition
and values in search for neutral territory, and (4) they seek
consensus in which each partner exercises mutuality and
flexibility by retaining certain aspects of their culture that they
consider to be essential for their well-being.
In their study on parenting mixed race, children, Caballero,
Edward, and Puthussery (2008) found that parents dealt with
ongoing challenges about their own differences and their chil-
dren’s sense of identity and belonging by moving away from
understanding the problem as cultural differences but rather a
viewpoint shaped more by choice than ascription. They iden-
tified three approaches in the parents’ description of bringing
up their children: (1) an individual approach, where children’s
identity is not necessarily related to their particular back-
ground; (2) a mix approach, where children’s background is
seen as a rooted and factual part of who they are; and (3) a
single approach, where one aspect of children’s background is
given priority. These studies don’t seem to explain why inter-
cultural couples adopt these problem-solving strategies. There
is a need for further studies to understand why intercultural
couples select these different problem-solving strategies for
conflict resolution over parenting.
Method
The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of inter-
cultural couples raising their mixed children together. To
achieve this, the research asked the following questions:
1. What are the experiences of intercultural couples in
parenting their children?
2. What are the challenges and conflicts of intercultural
parenting?
3. What are the positive experiences of intercultural
parenting?
4. How do intercultural parents negotiate cultural
differences?
5. How can the findings inform intercultural parents and
helping professionals?
A qualitative research method was chosen for this study
because it provides a “thick” (Geertz, 1973) description of the
phenomena and accurately understands and represents the inner
experience and meanings individuals gave to events within
their social context (Minichiello, Sullivan, Greenwood, &
Axford, 2004; Patton, 2002). Also, it coordinated well with the
chosen social constructionism epistemology, as the latter
describes knowledge as an internally constructed phenomenon
that is socially and culturally decided (Gergen, 1985).
Participants
Twenty-eight participants (14 couples) from a range of cultural
and socioeconomic backgrounds from South East Queensland
participated in the study. Participants were recruited through
two media interviews with a well-known local radio station and
newspaper, an online media release, a list of contacts from
community workshops facilitated by the researcher, and snow-
ball sampling whereby selected participants were asked to refer
other intercultural couples deemed suitable for the study. A
Bhugun
demographic questionnaire completed by the participants pro-
vided an overall profile as follows: age range between 28 and
67; married between 4 and 25 years; had between one and four
children, aged between 6 months and 18 years old; education
ranging from primary to postgraduate level; and self-identified
cultural and ethnic backgrounds including Anglo-Australian,
African, Asian, Indian, Arabic, Muslim, New Zealander, and
Pacific Islanders.
Sampling Strategies
A purposive sampling strategy, including criterion and snow-
ball methods, was used to select participants for this study. The
inclusion criteria for the study were (1) one person, male or
female, is Anglo-Australian and the other partner is a non-
Anglo immigrant; (2) cultural differences in intercultural
couples including different country of origin, religion, ethnic
heritage, and racial identity; (3) participants were literate and
speak good English; (4) heterosexual intercultural couples who
were married or in a de facto relationship and living together;
(5) raising together children between the ages of 0 and 23 and
living at home; and (6) participants who were prepared to be
interviewed together.
Limitations
This study did not include intercultural couples/parents from
the Australian Indigenous community because the focus was on
those with a migrant experience. A separate study on the
experiences of intercultural parenting involving Indigenous
and White Anglo-Australians and interethnic groups may
reveal a different perspective to the result of this current study.
This study did not include same-sex couples, separated parents,
adoptive parents, single mothers and fathers, and nonresident
parents. Further studies into these particular groups of parents
are necessary to generate broader knowledge into the experi-
ences of intercultural parents.
Data Collection and Analysis
Prior to collecting data, the research proposal was submitted to
the University of Queensland and Southern Cross University
Human Research Ethics Committee for approval. Data were
collected through semistructured in-depth interviews. Partici-
pants were given the convenience of choosing the place, time,
and day of the interview. Fourteen semistructured conjoint
interviews were carried out with 14 couples (28 participants).
An interview guide was developed based on literature reviews
and the research question regarding culture and parenting. Fol-
lowing informed consent, the interviews were audio-taped and
conducted face-to-face, lasting between 60 and 90 min per
participant. The interviews were then transcribed verbatim con-
currently. Consistent with qualitative research, data analysis
for this study was conducted immediately after the first couple
of interviews were completed. The general data analysis strat-
egy outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006) was used to code and
189
understand meaning in complex data on the experiences of the
intercultural parents.
Rigor and Trustworthiness
Methodological rigor refers to good practice in the conduct
of the research (Fossey, Harvey, McDermott, & Davidson,
2002). This requires the researcher to critically reflect on
the quality of the research. In the constructionist paradigm,
findings are substantiated by replacing the notion of inter-
nal or external validity, reliability, and objectivity by cred-
ibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 296). These four criteria were
used to confirm the methodological rigor and trustworthi-
ness of this study.
Results
This study revealed several cultural differences and conflict
resolution and survival strategies for successful intercultural
parenting. Cultural differences included discipline, sleep pat-
terns, cultural taboos refood and traditional medical practices,
children’s socialization process, education, language and com-
munication, role of children, and the role of extended families.
Most immigrant parents described that they were very serious
about discipline, a characteristic modeled from the way they
were parented. The immigrant parents did not agree with the
way children are disciplined in the host society and believed
that parents need to be stricter on the children: “when the kid
damaged something they say, ‘Oh sweetie, don’t do that. Can’t
you hear me?’ And for me I don’t agree with that because we
warned them already.”
Intercultural couples described sleep patterns of children as
an area of strong cultural differences. Two participants were
more inclined to have the baby in bed with them or at least in
the same room. Their Australian partners were more concerned
about “sleep training” by having the child in another room and
letting the child cry. They also did not want to be disturbed in
the bed and their sleep:
When she was little she didn’t fall asleep by herself in the night. He
was like, ‘Just let her cry’, and I just couldn’t endure the crying. So
I always said that is it too early for her to start sleep training or
should we wait until she’s ready for that.
Breastfeeding was another point of tension among intercultural
couples and at the extended family level. One participant
described that in his culture, mothers always breastfeed their
children. He expected the same for his children and was very
upset when his wife started to bottle feed their son when she
went back to work:
There was an issue there with breastfeeding because I went back
to work and he didn’t want to feed anymore, and my milk dried
up. He wasn’t very happy about that and his mom wasn’t very
happy either.
190 The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families 25(2)
Other points of cultural differences regarded traditional medi-
cine, umbilical cord, and wearing nappies. One participant and
his mother were not happy about his wife’s lack of understand-
ing of his cultural practices:
This baby is supposed to be washed in a certain herbal medicine
which I brought from home . . . but my wife doesn’t understand and
she’s asking me, “Why is he showering in this thing?” But that is
what is important in my culture that is supposed to be done. Then
there is another thing of keeping the umbilical cord. If you don’t
keep the umbilical cord from my culture, the kids will just loiter
around they don’t become anything, so yeah.
The socialization process of children was a significant area of
contention. Three participants did not agree with their children
going out with friends or sleeping over, arguing that they care
more about what is best for the children as opposed to their
Australian partners who believed in trusting and giving respon-
sibilities to the children. One participant was very protective of
his children as opposed to his wife’s concept of building trust in
the children:
With his friends, I want to go to the beach with my friends, I just
want to catch the bus, I want to watch a movie. Of course it is not in
my culture . . . I will not let him go. It is not something that children
do outside that we do not know. I did not grow up like that
Values regarding sex before marriage was another point of
difference among two couples. They described that their values
were strongly associated with their religious values and beliefs,
complementary to the family and social values:
When they were in high school I know that in the western world,
girls specially will have sexual relationship at an early age. I have
emphasized to them about that, to treat your body as a temple, to
respect your body. Apart from the mind belief is my religious
belief of being pure before marriage and all that.
All the parents in this study described that they were keen on
their children’s education, but ethnic parents seemed to put
more emphasis on education for the children in order to boost
the children’s job opportunities, future well-being, and better
lifestyle:
That is one thing I notice in the western world they live the kids at
year level 11 and let them do what they want and follow the dream.
I really don’t approve of that and I tried to tell my workmates that.
Three participants explained that they did not want their chil-
dren to be doing what they were doing because of the lack of or
missed educational opportunities:
I’m pushing her to become a doctor because there are certain things
I’ve failed myself . . . So I’m trying to push her to see that she can
do better than me. In the African culture, study is so important.
Here you’re not really looking to the future . . . for us here it’s not
pushed so much.
Challenges regarding language and patterns of communica-
tion among intercultural parents were apparent in this study.
Five participants described that although their immigrant
partners spoke English, the style of communication was
sometimes different thus causing misunderstandings and con-
flicts for the couples:
Mandarin is a very abrupt language. So when it’s dinner time it’s
“chı̄fàn” which means eat food. That’s the sentence . . . if you use
the wrong tone when you’re saying stuff, people understand that
quite differently and certainly that’s what happened between
us . . . I felt that she was being really short and rude with me and
very abrupt, and I thought that was her fault . . . that was the chal-
lenge. That was where I would get frustrated.
Another couple experienced communication challenges regard-
ing silence:
Yes if something is too much for me, I just keep quiet . . . it’s a
cultural thing.
Slow decision-making process was another area of cultural
difference between intercultural couples:
I take long to make a decision and this is because I’m from another
culture and then coming to a different culture. So I’m thinking back
home I would be doing this like this, how do I do it here. I’m
confused because I don’t know what the Australian culture is . . . so
it’s a cultural thing for me.
Some of the differences related to the mode of communica-
tion with the children. For example, one participant did not
agree with the way her husband ordered the children around
the house:
He will go out and say get dressed and [son] will say I’m
watching this, and he will say I said now, do it now and I say
why don’t you just say how long has that show got okay in five
minutes we are going to switch that off and he will be like
because I’m the father and I’m trying to do it now and, because
I’m a teacher probably as well, I know you have got to some-
times give kids a bit of time.
Children’s role, specifically gender role relating to household
chores, and children’s rights and responsibilities in the family
context were common concerns for intercultural couples. Most
ethnic parents still believed in and ascribed to gender-related
roles. As one participant said:
Funny I’ve heard myself say to my son, you know you’re outside,
you mow the lawn, it’s a man’s job. My daughter inside, now she’s
washing the dishes and cooking. Come and watch cooking, I don’t
want my son to cook.
All the ethnic parents in this study believed that children
should be taught hard work and responsibilities alongside
rights:
Bhugun 191

I would be teaching them hard work and that is what is important survival strategies, which according to their narratives reduced
raising the children here . . . with Australia I think the culture here conflict about cultural differences in parenting. They described
is to bring up rebels. Children are too much opinionated . . . it gives the strategies as (a) communication, (b) compromise, (c) sphere
children rights and then it gives them the right to stand up to their of rule, (d) asymmetric decisions, and (e) individual traits.
parents. They don’t have any respect. They end up running out of Elements of the survival strategies can sometimes overlap each
the house when they are 14 or 13 and being in the streets which is other, given the close nature of the resolution pattern of issues.
not good.
Communication: “Sit down and talk”. All the intercultural couples
One participant described how children are not praised for
stated that they tried to resolve their cultural and personal
being good or successful in Japanese culture.
differences in parenting by actively communicating with each
other. The data revealed that most parents communicated their
Japanese parents never say their children are the best . . . or
beautiful or anything like that, but Australian people they
differences when they had children:
admire their children.
I voice what I think and he does the same. If there is an issue, we
discuss it . . . there was an issue with breast feeding because I went
Intercultural couples in this study emphasized the importance
back to work. He was not happy about it. It took me a while to
of the extended family in their lives and described same as the
explain to him and for him to understand. We had to talk about it
strength of the collective society. Intercultural couples
described getting financial, moral, and physical support from
It is recommended that intercultural couples communicate
their extended families. The data showed a significant and
and learn about each other’s culture before getting married.
consistent disparity about the level of involvement and support
Two couples communicated about their parental responsibil-
intercultural couples received from their ethnic extended fam-
ity and cultural preferences before they get married to prevent
ilies compared to their Anglo-Australian counterparts. As one
any disharmony:
participant described:
I have a lot of friends in intercultural marriages and they have big
It is different compared to here. Because there you have a lot of
problems, I think, because they were never on the same
relatives, everybody is around you, like you’ve got your grand-
page . . . that’s where we were like from the beginning very clear
mother, your grandfather, and all other relatives . . . my mother
about these are my standards, this is the way . . . so that we
never felt like she had a kid because of all the help all the time.
wouldn’t find out five years later that it’s not what we are after.

The disparity in the level of support and involvement from One couple discussed the importance of discrete communica-
Anglo-Australian extended families is expressed in this parti- tion regarding parenting differences, such as disciplinary
cipant’s statement: practices. They emphasized on being united as parents and
the use of a cultural language so that the children are not
I guess it’s not so close knit. My parents actually moved away from
exposed to the discussion:
where all the extended families are, my Nana, my aunts . . . mum
says to get away. But I don’t remember ever being, I was never left
We try not to be seen as different in front of the kids . . . we just had
in the care of my aunt or others.
a dialogue in Tongan, to try and not expose the kids too much to
what we were talking about.
Although intercultural couples enjoyed an abundance of posi-
tive extended family influences, extended family members can
Another couple described how their communication style about
also have negative influences regarding discipline.
family and personal issues was more effective during their
evening walk together:
I’m glad that we’re actually away from my family because then I
can keep control over my kids. If I was in New Zealand or Tonga,
One of the things we do, we always in the evenings go for a
my kids would not listen to me. I had that experience of my sister
walk . . . after dinner. So if there are any issues like that, what needs
coming to live with us for a year, my son was so different. He
to be done, we tend to sort it out pretty quickly.
wouldn’t listen to me . . . because my sister was here and every time
I tried to discipline him my sister would take him away.
Compromise: “Work toward what’s best for the children”. Most
participants stated that they were willing to compromise on
certain cultural and personal values to enrich their children’s
Making Intercultural Parenting Work
lives. One couple put aside their personal values and focused
Intercultural couples faced unique challenges as a result of their on their common religious values as the medium to reach a
cultural differences in parenting styles, beliefs, values, and fair compromise:
traditions. This study revealed that the participants were very
keen to make their parenting journey a positive experience. We have problems on some things where she might disagree on
Thereupon, they developed several conflict resolution and and we’ll try to come to a median for the kid’s sake . . . we have a
192 The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families 25(2)
common ground here which would be our religious value . . . and
we negotiate and compromise that way.
Differences in parenting style were also resolved by way of
compromise. One participant thought that her husband was
too hard on their son regarding teenage activities and that
he needed to be more positive and allow some grounds
for autonomy:
Sometimes [husband] was a bit over the top with what he thought
with our sons . . . like how long you let them out for, where you let
them go. I sort of emphasized how we need to be positive and we
need to encourage our son to talk . . . together we have had to sort of
meet in the middle . . . okay, he can do this but he needs to get home
at this time or whatever.
Another participant described that as a woman, she has her
opinion which should be considered in decision-making pro-
cesses for a balanced outcome and a happy relationship:
I always say what I think I don’t hold back, obviously with respect
in mind. So sometimes it can cause issues. Therefore, I think we
need to discuss things and then come to a medium where both
parties are happy. Otherwise what sort of relationship or marriage
would that be if one is always unhappy all the time and having to
give in to everything.
Asymmetric decision-making. The data analysis revealed that
some participants abandoned their cultural values in favor of
their partner’s values to prevent conflict. The asymmetric pat-
tern was manifested mainly in relationships where one partner
exercised more power in the relationship due to income, per-
sonality, and gender differences:
I know what’s in the bank and she doesn’t. She doesn’t know how
to do banking . . . I’m not going to pay the money for things I don’t
want to, like I won’t repeat a trip in Canberra which she wants with
the kids . . . so she grudgingly will accept it.
Gender was identified as a power dynamic that impacted on the
decision of some female participants to abandon their cultural
parenting practices in favor of their husband’s parenting prac-
tices. One male participant was very adamant about their
daughter sleeping in her own bedroom and being persistent
with the sleep-cry training:
That’s where they need to be guided. I think that’s a male, female
thing. Mom, “oh she’s crying, I can’t let my little angel cry” . . . her
strategy was to get up and my strategy was to stop her. I had the
same experience with my first wife who was Australian.
Sphere of influence. Some participants resolved conflicts by
understanding, acknowledging, and encouraging the experi-
ence and skills of their partners in certain domains of par-
enting. One participant admitted outright that his wife’s
style of parenting was the best and therefore encouraged his
wife do the parenting role while he focused on the external
and manual jobs:
In my culture mothers have the responsibility to raise their kids in
the right way, religion, beliefs and values, and education. I believe
that is the mother’s responsibility. And [husband] gave me the full
control on that aspect.
Individual traits. The success of intercultural relationships and
parenting was also dependent on the participant’s individual
traits and behavior within the cultural context. The overwhelm-
ing individual traits were identified as respect, flexibility, tol-
erance, and immersion. All the participants agreed that while
there were cultural differences in their parenting style and
practices, they respected each other as another person and the
qualities they bring into the relationship. Their cultural differ-
ences become secondary to respect:
It’s not being conscious of their culture first and foremost. It’s
being respectful of the other person and the culture becomes sec-
ondary to the respect in the relationship, and of the family. We are
both quite liberal and well educated, and intelligent people. And
whatever cultural expectations may have been relevant in the past,
we don’t see as relevant now.
Another participant described how he grew up in a traditional
African way, but having immersed in the Australian culture and
society, he has changed his attitude toward women and respects
his wife equally:
I grew up in a very traditional way, but I’ve come very far, as well.
I respect, I believe in equality between man and a woman. I’m not a
misogynist.
All the participants explained that there are certain issues that
can never be resolved, and the best strategy to survive them is
flexibility and tolerance. Tolerance for ambiguity and curiosity
helped participants to acknowledge cultural differences and
become flexible in their roles as parents:
You have to be flexible and give up on something. Overall it’s
learning.
Finally, differences were also described as part of the natural
fabric of intercultural relationships and parenting and might not
need a resolution:
Even if there were differences, sometimes differences just are and
might not need resolution. That is why we are two different people
working together to raise a family.
Discussion
The current study highlighted the fact that many of the experi-
ences intercultural parents encountered were quite common to
those of monocultural couples. However, their experiences
were exacerbated by unique cultural dynamics including
Bhugun
discipline, traditional practices, sleep patterns, food, chil-
dren’s socialization process, education, language and commu-
nication, gender, the role of children, and extended family
dynamics. In order to minimize challenges and conflicts in
their parental role, intercultural parents developed expertise
in cultural negotiations, thus characterizing the intercultural
parents from a strength-based perspective rather than stereo-
typed deficit assumptions.
Communication was described as the central factor for
successfully managing intercultural parenting differences.
Couples who communicated about each other’s parenting
culture and negotiated parenting roles and tasks facilitated
relational adjustments. Most couples stated that their will-
ingness to compromise on certain cultural and personal val-
ues, such as religion, was to enrich their children’s lives.
Other couples engaged into a process of mutual accultura-
tion, wherein they exposed their children to both of their
heritage and national cultures. This process benefitted both
the children and the parents as they inherited what they
called “the richness of two worlds.”
Most participants managed cultural differences by encoura-
ging the sphere of influence rule, wherein participants recog-
nized their partner’s areas of cultural expertise and knowledge.
Other participants described individual traits such as tolerance,
curiosity, respect, flexibility, and immersion as key to success-
ful intercultural parenting. Although there were cultural differ-
ences in their parenting styles and practices, the couples
respected each other as another person and the qualities they
bring into the parenting domain.
All the participants explained that there are certain issues
that can never be resolved and the best strategy to survive them
is flexibility and tolerance. Tolerance for ambiguity, curiosity,
and immersion into the host country’s culture helped partici-
pants to acknowledge and explore cultural differences and
become flexible in their roles as parents. Differences were also
interpreted as part of the natural fabric of intercultural relation-
ships and might not need a resolution.
Implications for Theory and Practice
This study provided much needed research regarding the
experiences of intercultural parenting in Australia. Although
the findings in the Australian context cannot be generalized
due to the sample size of the study, it has the potential of
transferability to the experiences of other intercultural parents,
given the thick description of participants’ experiences
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
In view of managing cultural differences, this study revealed
several conflict resolution and survival strategies developed by
intercultural couples which may influence current family the-
ories, counseling practices, and future research. This study
revealed that intercultural parenting was influenced by internal
and external contexts. Internal context related to the percep-
tions of one’s identity from an individual, couple, parent, child,
family, and religious perspective. External context related to
outside factors that impacted on the relationship and parenting
193
such as attitude of society, friends and extended family mem-
bers toward their relationship, children and family, and racism
and exclusion toward their children at school. It is therefore
important for the practitioners to understand how couples con-
struct their cultural differences.
This study revealed that the internal and external domains of
family dynamics were often sources of stressors that impact
negatively on the couples and their parenting experiences. Some
of the significant stressors related to (1) cultural differences
among couples such as language barriers, communication styles,
parenting beliefs, values, and practices, customs and traditions,
and socialization processes; (2) societal attitudes such as racism
and disapproval; (3) power relations regarding language, gender,
insider/outsider status; and (4) contextual influences such as
extended families and the environment. It is therefore crucial
for counselors/therapist to explore and identify those stressors
and guide their clients how to resolve those differences.
Practitioners need to be aware that some of the concerns by
intercultural couples and parents are common to those of non-
intercultural couples and parents, such as safety, health, edu-
cation, and socialization processes. Therefore, the provision of
services and interventions need to be balanced between cultural
needs versus individual contextual needs as opposed to the
“intercultural” aspect only.
The literature review and findings of this current study
showed that intercultural couples/parents/children enjoyed
many benefits and opportunities other than challenges in the
intercultural parenting experience. Of special interest is the fact
that intercultural couples and parents can manage and seek help
with the challenges as opposed to the benefits and opportunities
that are self-acquired, complementary, and enriching. Counse-
lors and therapists can rely on these aspects of benefits and
opportunities as sources of strengths in the relationships to
encourage and empower their clients.
Counselors and therapists would also enrich and enhance
their therapeutic approaches and provide more effective ser-
vices to their clients by exercising reflexivity, that is, setting
aside their own bias and prior assumptions about intercultural
relationship and mixed families; promoting notions of adapt-
ability, flexibility, tolerance, appreciation, acceptance, and
open-mindedness toward partners in the relationship by
respecting and learning about each other’s culture; encouraging
cultural literacy for both parents and children in the form of
psychosocial education; and emphasizing on the positives, ben-
efits, and strengths of “interculturalness.”
Some of the popular therapeutic approaches that can be used
in intercultural and mixed families’ domains are:
 narrative therapy (Molina, Estrada, & Burnett, 2004),
 cognitive–behavioral therapy (Beck, Rush, Shaw, &
Emery, 1979),
 solution-focused therapy (De Shazer & Berg, 1986), and
 strengths-based therapy (Bustamante et al., 2011).
According to Molina, Estrada, and Burnett (2004), narrative
therapy is conducive to the needs of intercultural clients. When
194 The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families 25(2)
using the narrative approach, counselors/therapists help clients
to tell a story of their experience in order to have an under-
standing of the deeper meaning of their intercultural experi-
ences and also to make new meaning of the experiences
(Molina et al., 2004). When using the cognitive–behavioral
therapy approach, counselors/therapists can help clients to
identify unrealistic beliefs and expectations, negative percep-
tions, and subconscious negative thoughts about themselves
and others in their environment (Beck et al., 1979). Therapists
and counsellors can use this approach to guide intercultural
couples/parents to build positive attributes about their intercul-
tural perceptions and experiences.
The solution-focused therapy is an effective tool that coun-
selors/therapists can use to empower intercultural clients. This
approach assumes that clients usually have some knowledge of
what would make their life better, although they may need
some help describing the details of their better life and that
everyone who seeks help already possesses at least the minimal
skills necessary to create solutions (De Shazer & Berg, 1986).
This current study revealed that intercultural couples/parents
enjoyed many benefits and opportunities in their intercultural
parenting experience such as richness and best of both world
for couples, parents, and children; cultural competency and
holistic family life; other models of parenting; job opportuni-
ties for children; extended family supports; adaptability, toler-
ance/acceptance, and open-mindedness; and rich food culture,
traditions, and customs. As such, counselors and therapists can
rely on these aspects of benefits and opportunities as sources of
strengths in the relationships to encourage and empower their
clients and help them to change any negative thoughts about
their experience (Bustamante et al., 2011).
Finally, therapists using the strengths-based approach can
guide and encourage their clients to reflect on successful cop-
ing strategies they have used that helped their differences, thus
offering them a sense of hope that their problems can be
resolved. This current research showed that intercultural cou-
ples/parents used several approaches to cope with their rela-
tionship and parenting differences, such as communication,
flexibility, and openness to their partner’s culture, respect, and
support for each other, and sometimes cultural deference
where one partner defers to the other partner’s culture. The
strengths-based approach can be used to help intercultural
couples/parents deal with challenges in a positive way. The
findings in this current study can be utilized as a useful plat-
form by counselors and therapists to increase their understand-
ing of intercultural relationship/parenting and a helpful
resource to their therapeutic approaches.
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) received no financial support for the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015). Census of population and
housing. Canberra, Australia: Author.
Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive
therapy of depression. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Berg-Cross, L. (2001). Couples therapy (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Hawthorne.
Bhugra, D., & De Silva, P. (2000). Couple therapy across culture.
Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 15, 184–192.
Bradford, K., Burns Vaughn, L., & Barber, B. K. (2007). When there
is conflict: Inter parental conflict, parental- child conflict, and
youth problem behaviours. Journal of Family Issues, 29, 780–805.
Bratawidjaja, A. (2007). The experience of being parents of mixed-
heritage children: Phenomenological analysis. Dissertation,
Kansas State University, Manhattan (UMI No. 3291371).
Bratter, J. L., & King, R. B. (2008). “But will it last?” Marital instabil-
ity among interracial and same-race couples. Family Relations, 57,
160–171. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00491.x
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Qualitative research in psychology:
Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
Bustamante, R. M., Nelson, J. A., Henriksen, R. C., Jr, & Monakes, S.
(2011). Intercultural couples: Coping with culture-related stressors.
The Family Journal, 19, 154–164. doi:10.1177/1066480711399723
Caballero, C., Edwards, R., & Puthussery, S. (2008). Parenting
‘mixed’ children: Negotiating difference and belonging in mixed
race, ethnicity and faith families. York, England: Joseph Round-
tree Foundation. Retrieved August 15, 2011, from http://www.jrf.
org.uk/bookshop/ebooks/parentngmixedchildren.pdf
Crippen, C., & Brew, L. (2007). Intercultural parenting and transcul-
tural family: A literature review. The Family Journal: Counselling
and Therapy for Couples and Families, 15, 107–115. doi:10.1177/
1066480706297783Document
De Shazer, S., & Berg, I. S. (1986). A “techniques of solution, A”. 5th
International Congress of Family Therapy, Jerusalem, Israel.
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understand-
ing and evaluating qualitative research. Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 717–732. doi:10.1046/j.1440-2002.01100.x
Frame, M. W. (2004). The challenges of intercultural marriage: Stra-
tegies for pastoral care. Pastoral Psychology, 52, 219–232.
Garcia, D. R. (2006). Mixed marriages and transnational families in
the intercultural context: A case study of African-Spanish couples
in Catalonia. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 32,
403–433. doi:10.1080/13691830600555186
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of
culture. In C. Geertz (Ed.), The interpretation of culture (pp. 3–30).
New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern
psychology. American Psychologist, 40, 266–275.
Gupta, L. (2008). A comparison of parenting behaviour between Eur-
opean American and Asian Indian parents (Dissertation, Univer-
sity of Arkansas). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and
Thesis. (UMI no. 1456092)
Henderson, D. (2000). Racial/ethnic intermarried couples and marital
interaction: Marital issues and problem solving. Sociological
Focus, 33, 421–438.
Bhugun
Hsu, J. (2001). Marital therapy for intercultural couples. In W. S.
Tseng & J. Streltzer (Eds.), Culture and psychology: A guide to
clinical practice (Vol. 99, pp. 225–242). Washington, DC:
American Psychiatric.
Karis, T. A., & Killian, D. (2009). Intercultural couples: Exploring
diversity in intimate relationships. New York, NY: Routledge.
Keller, H., Lohaus, A., Kuensemueller, P., Abels, M., Yosvi, R.,
Voelker, S., . . . Mohite, P. (2004). The bio-culture of parenting:
Evidence from five cultural communities. Parenting: Science and
Practice, 4, 25–50.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
McFadden, J., & Moore, J. L. (2001). Intercultural marriage and inti-
macy: Beyond the continental divide. International Journal for the
Advancement of Counselling, 23, 261–268. doi:10.1023/A:
1014420107362
Minichiello, V., Sullivan, G., Greenwood, K., & Axford, R. (Eds.).
(2004). Research methods for nursing and health sciences (2nd ed.).
Sydney, Australia: Pearson Education.
Molina, B., Estrada, D., & Burnett, J. A. (2004). Cultural commu-
nities: Challenges and opportunities in the creation of “Happily
Ever After” stories of intercultural couplehood. The Family
Journal: Counselling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 12,
139–147.
Owen, J. D. (2002). Mixed matches: Interracial marriage in Australia.
Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales Press.
195
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Perel, E. (2000). A tourist’s view of marriage: Cross-cultural
couples-challenges, choices, and implications for therapy. In P.
Papp (Ed.), Couples on the fault line: New directions for thera-
pists (pp. 178–204). New York, NY: Guildford.
Romano, D. (2001). Intercultural marriage: Promises and pitfalls
(3nd ed.). Yarmouth, Maine: Intercultural Press, Inc.
Santrock, J. W. (2007). A topical approach to life-span development
(3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Singla, R. (2015). Intermarriage and mixed parenting, promoting
mental health and wellbeing: Crossover love. Basingstoke, Eng-
land: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sullivan, C., & Cottone, R. R. (2006). Culture based couple therapy
and intercultural relationships: A review of the literature. The Fam-
ily Journal, 14, 221–225.
Tanaka, M., Kitamura, T., Chen, Z., Murakami, M., & Goto, Y.
(2009). Do parents rear their children as they were reared them-
selves? Intergenerational transmission of parental styles (warmth
and Control) and possible mediation of personality traits. The Open
Family Studies Journal, 2, 82–90.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York,
NY: Guilford.
Waldman, K., & Rubalcava, L. (2005). Psychotherapy with inter-
cultural couples: A contemporary psychodynamic approach.
American Journal of Psychotherapy, 59, 227–245.