Men's Experiences of Grandfatherhood: A Welcome Surprise

Abstract

The present-day involvement of men in many facets of childrearing stands
in contrast to previous eras when men accepted that the major task of
fathering was to provide a secure income to support the family. This
imperative often required long hours away from the family. However,
when men whose contact with children has been limited due to work and
cultural constraints retire, their newly acquired lifestyle may bring fresh
opportunities for involvement with grandchildren. An important question
therefore concerns the impact of caring for young children on men’s
perceptions of their role as grandfathers. This interview study explores
the experiences of 19 Australian grandfathers. The analysis found themes
that relate to relationships and change, as well as themes concerning core
beliefs and existential questions. The findings demonstrate the potential
for insight into family relationships and personal growth in older age when
studying the topic of grandparenting and caring from the male perspective.

Full text

Men’s Experiences of Grandfatherhood: A Welcome Surprise
Jennifer St George, PhD, Senior Research Academic, Faculty of Health and Medicine, The
University of Newcastle; Jennifer.Stgeorge@newcastle.edu.au
Richard J. Fletcher, Richard Fletcher, PhD, Senior Lecturer, Family Action Centre, Faculty of
Health and Medicine, The University of Newcastle; Richard.Fletcher@newcastle.edu.au
See the article StGeorge, J., & Fletcher, R. (2014). Men's Experiences of Grandfatherhood: A
Welcome Surprise. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 78(4), 351-
378. at
http://baywood.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,3,5;
journal,3,314;linkingpublicationresults,1:300312,1

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 2
Abstract
The present-day involvement of men in many facets of childrearing stands in contrast to
previous eras when men accepted that the major task of fathering was to provide a secure
income to support the family. This imperative often required long hours away from the
family. However, when men whose contact with children has been limited due to work and
cultural constraints retire, their newly acquired lifestyle may bring fresh opportunities for
involvement with grandchildren. An important question therefore concerns the impact of
caring for young children on men’s perceptions of their role as grandfathers. This interview
study explores the experiences of 19 Australian grandfathers. The analysis found themes that
relate to relationships and change, as well as themes concerning core beliefs and existential
questions. The findings demonstrate the potential for insight into family relationships and
personal growth in older age when studying the topic of grandparenting and caring from the
male perspective.
Keywords: Grandparents, grandfathers, relationships, generations, individual psychology

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 3
Over the last decade or so, grandparenting has been given increasing recognition both
in the literature and in policy development with several commentators claiming that social
and demographic changes have had a substantial impact on the experience of
grandparenthood (Kemp, 2007; Ochiltree, 2006; Szinovacz, 1998). Growing amounts of
research show that grandparents are filling a gap in childcare, whether as part-time or full-
time carers of their grandchildren (Higgins, 2007). In Australia, very few children under the
age of five have no face-to-face contact with at least one grandparent; however the degree of
grandparents’ responsibility varies considerably according to family structure and
expectations (Gray, Mission & Hayes, 2005).
When studying grandparent involvement in family life, researchers have been
particularly interested in their roles and behaviours (Bengtson, 1985; Mitchell, 2008;
Waldrop et al., 1999), their grandparenting style or involvement (Goodfellow, 2003; Hoff,
2007; Mueller, Wilhelm, & Elder, 2002; Neugarten & Weinstein, 1964; Nussbaum & Bettini,
1994), and their relationships with their grandchildren (Gray, 2005; Kennedy, 1992; Roberto
& Stroes, 1992; Weston & Qu, 2009). However, for the most part, findings have focused on
grandmothers. Researchers tend to use female-tilted measures that do not account for specific
male involvement characteristics (Mann, 2007; Spitze & Ward, 1998), or grandmother and
grandfather are blended into homogenous findings, with few gender specific implications
(Harper, 2005). This tendency seems to mirror the trajectory of fatherhood research: fathers
were relatively invisible in research until the 1980s.
Yet it is important to understand the contribution of grandfathering to family life as
well as to their wellbeing. As an extension of the interest in men’s changing role in families,
systematic research into grandfathers may also reveal important and specific influences on
intergenerational family relationships. Further, understanding men’s grandfathering
experiences has the potential to support theoretical advances in explaining psychosocial

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 4
aspects of older age, and highlight important aspects of human experience not yet considered
as significant.
The extant research on grandfathers shows detail and variation, yet it is
multidimensional and mixed (Stelle, Fruhauf, Orel & Landry-Meyer, 2010; Taubman-Ben-
Ari, Findler & Shlomo, 2012). For some men, grandfathering is an unimportant role (Kivett,
1985); public function and task oriented roles are more characteristic of their activities
(Bengtson, 1985; Hagestadt & Neugarten, 1985). Yet others consider grandfathering to be
important (Mann & Leeson, 2010; Reitzes & Mutran, 2004; Wolcott, 1998). Some men
involve themselves in ‘fun-seeking’ activities with their grandchildren (Neugarten &
Weinstein, 1964), enjoy and benefit from their grandfathering (Crawford, 1981; Taubman-
Ben-Ari et al., 2012), and build ties with their grandchildren across time and circumstance
(Cunningham-Burley, 1984; Scraton & Holland, 2006). Some men experience a loosening of
expectations (Mann & Leeson, 2010), become more person-oriented and affectionate
(Peterson, 1999; Sorenson & Cooper, 2010), and are proactive concerning family
relationships (Roberto, Allen, & Blieszner, 2001). Although the literature generally
documents grandmothers as closer to grandchildren (Pollet, Nettle & Nelissen, 2007),
grandfathers are often no less satisfied in their role (Condon, Corkindale, Luszcz, & Gamble,
2013; Peterson, 1999; Reitzes & Mutran, 2004; Thiele & Whelan, 2006).
Two important factors appear to influence this varied expression of grandfatherhood.
One is the raft of social influences that have shaped successive generations of attitudes
towards men in family and work life. Being the breadwinner and providing for family life
was conventional for men in the last 3 decades of the 20th century. Such patterns are not
easily broken as people change generational commitments, due in part to a lack of role
models (Daly, 1993; Furstenberg & Weiss, 2000), and many men continue to acknowledge

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 5
women as central to relationships (Mann & Leeson, 2010; see also Goodsell, Bates &
Behnke, 2011).
Nevertheless, in the wake of the involved fatherhood movement, men are crafting new
roles and patterns of behaviour for themselves, based on their own motives and desires for
caring (StGeorge & Fletcher, 2011). Likewise, while the literature comprehensively
documents men’s emotional inexpression (e.g., Fischer & Good, 1997; Lorber & Garcia,
2010; Wong & Rochlen, 2005), there is now a more nuanced understanding of men’s
emotional capacities and expression (Lively, 2008; Wood & Eagly, 2012), especially within
families (Roger, Rinaldi & Howe, 2012). In addition, contemporary flexibility around
masculine characteristics and roles can allow men to expand their perspectives, facilitating a
certain ‘fluidity’ of identity (Doucet, 2004; Sorensen & Cooper, 2010).
A second explanation for the variation in expression of grandfathering concerns
lifecourse development. Life events affect both the priorities people make and the roles they
adopt. Retirement for example, has a significant effect on time availability and financial
commitments, as well as wellbeing and relationships (Gunnarson, 2009; Kim & Moen, 2002).
At this time of life, many men and women choose to invest in personal and social
development (Onyx & Baker, 2006; Pepin & Deutscher, 2011). And despite grandparenting
being a countertransition (the role is bestowed without grandparents’ choice), many people
choose to build upon this circumstance. The men in Condon et al.’s (2013) study for example,
wanted more contact with their grandchildren.
Here, theories of human development offer an explanation for grandfathers’ motivations
for their involvement in children’s lives. In Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development
(Erikson, 1997), one stage central to adult life is the generativity versus stagnation (7th)
phase, where adults are challenged to balance “creativity, productivity, and procreation over
stagnation and self-absorption” (Snarey, in Dollahite & Hawkins, 1998, p. 110). This most

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 6
often involves creating family. McAdams, Hart, and Maruna (1998) further suggest that this
generative work is important throughout the lifecourse. In this perspective, generativity is an
adaptive process of providing for future generations (McAdams et al.). Erikson’s 8th stage
marks a shift from generativity, to reflecting on and assessing the life lived. This may
involve acceptance, disappointment or despondence. Here McAdams et al. (1998) suggest
that adults’ reflections still contain substantial components of generative commitment and
action that are enacted through connecting with others.
This concept of generativity has been particularly useful in fatherhood research. Hawkins
and colleagues developed a conceptual ‘ethic of generative fathering’ based on Erikson’s
theory and Snarey’s empirical work on fathers (Hawkins, Dollahite & Lamb, 1998). This
generative ethic foregrounds fathers’ willingness and ability to meet children’s needs. Bates
(2009) adapted this framework to grandfathers, proposing seven ‘work ethics’ as generative
motivators for men’s interactions with children in their extended families, including
obligations such as stewardship, spiritual, and mentoring work.
Motivators for relationships in later life can be also explained by Socioemotional
Selectivity Theory (SST, Carstensen, 2006). This theory suggests that relationships and
activities that hold emotional meaning and optimise psychological wellbeing become
increasingly important as people age. Motivated by appreciation of a time-limited future,
people attach less value to breadth and frequency of social interaction, and more value to
“affectively rich interaction” (Carstensen, 1995, p. 154). Both SST and Erikson’s stages
suggest that for grandfathers, family connections will become increasingly salient goals and
that the meaning of these relationships will be packed with concern, commitment and action.
Grandfathering thus may occur as a significant life event that occurs not only in the
contemporary climate of involved fatherhood and changing conceptions of masculinity, but
also in the context of personal development.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 7
Given the sporadic evidence of similarities between grandmothers and grandfathers
identified above and the charge that grandfather contribution is underestimated (Arthur,
Snape & Dench, 2003; Harper, 2005) and under-researched (Mann, 2007; Stelle et al., 2011),
a study of grandfather experiences has the potential to reveal undercurrents of family life that
contribute to family and personal growth. Furthermore, the grandfather literature is
predominantly American and British, and researchers suggest that Australian grandparents
have different experiences than American or UK grandparents (Condon et al., 2013; Sims &
Rofail, 2013). Therefore, a perspective on the phenomenon of grandfatherhood may
complement previous Australian research on time with grandchildren (Weston & Qu, 2009)
or grandfather satisfaction (Peterson, 1999).
To understand this phenomenon therefore, this study explores the meaning of
grandfatherhood from an individual psychological perspective. The study focuses on the
idiographic – how the men experience relationships with their grandchildren, and what this
experience means for their view of themselves and their world. Drawing on qualitative data
and using an interpretative approach, it explores the men’s relationships with their
grandchildren and their individual perceptions of the meaning of grandfathering. It further
examines the implications by considering the relationship of these experiences to personal
development.
Method
Procedure
Following institutional ethics approval, men were recruited from a regional area in Australia
through posters placed in public venues and word of mouth. Men were invited to participate
if they were the biological grandfather of at least one grandchild under 12 years, and for
whom they had regular care and responsibility at least fortnightly, although not as fulltime
carers of their grandchildren.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 8
The majority of the men were maternal biological grandfathers in their sixties. Most
were retired, while five still worked in some capacity. Most felt they were reasonably
comfortable financially and in good health. All men were Caucasian (none declared
Aboriginality). Religion was not requested, however, the majority of Australians are
Christian (ABS, 2011), with a further 22% self-declared as ‘no-religion.’ (See the case
summary in Table 1).
Insert Table 1 here
Data collection
Face-to-face interviews with the men took place in the men’s homes. The semi-
structured interview protocol (see Appendix) included questions about men’s current
experiences with their grandchildren (focusing on one grandchild under 12 years), and
comparisons with their previous experiences of fathering. Final questions encouraged the
men to reflect more broadly on grandfathering: whether their expectations had been met and
what they had ‘learned’ from being a grandfather. The 19 interviews were collected by the
first author and a male research assistant (5 interviews). In contrast to other researchers (e.g.,
Cunningham-Burley, 1984), we had no difficulty in conversing with the men (see also Boden,
2008). The interviews varied in length from 20 to 75 minutes, with the transcript word count
averaging 4333, ranging from 2330 to 8179 words, with no systematic differences between
the male and female interviewers concerning interview length. All men discussed their
experiences willingly, and many gave prolific descriptions of their activities and attitudes;
however, the inevitable variation in people’s ability to reflect upon and make explicit their
subjectivity required an interpretive methodological approach that would facilitate a rich
description of the men’s involvement and understanding of grandfathering.
Approach

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 9
In order to understand the meaning that men make of their experience of grandfatherhood, we
followed the principles of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (Smith, Larkin &
Flowers, 2008). This approach has two main aims: the first is to try to understand the
participant’s experience of the particular phenomenon, what it is like to be a grandfather.
This aim leads the researcher to study the particular details of the individual’s experience,
leading not to a first person account of grandfathering, but a third-person, psychologically
informed description (Larkin, Watts, & Clifton, 2006). The description is not a verbatim
record of the individual’s thoughts, but a descriptive account developed by the researcher
who then creates themes that relate to thoughts, feelings, expectations and so on. The second
aim of the approach is to develop an interpretative analysis of this initial thematic account, by
positioning it in relation to a broader psychological and social context, for example, its
relationship with psychological theories, or to the contexts and structures of family life.
Analysis
Strategies used to develop this interpretative phenomenological account included designing
an interview protocol to encourage reflection on subjective experiences, focusing particularly
on activities and mental/emotional responses to those activities (Shinebourne, 2011). In
analysis, the text is read and annotated, the researcher searching for those things that
‘mattered’ to the participants, their thoughts, relationships, values, principles for example.
We also studied participant reflection and rumination in order to enrich the description with
psychological processes. The next analytical steps involved transforming the notes into
themes that attempted to capture the essential quality or psychological essence of the text.
These stages thus were more abstract while still grounded in the participants’ experiences.
In this study, hierarchical themes were developed for each case (cumulative coding) , and
when all transcripts were analysed, patterns across cases (integrative coding) were identified
by comparing themes for similarity or divergence, seeking at the same time higher-order

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 10
master themes as well as identifying non-shared themes. This process keeps the researcher
committed to the idiographic as well as bringing to light the abstract, higher-order constructs
shared between participants.
Enhancing rigour of the study
Hermeneutic interpretivist methods are concerned with the construction of meaning
by researcher and participants, and to this end, constraints, as ‘expressions of rigour’ (de Witt
& Ploeg, 2006), are exercised to protect the analysis and interpretation from subjectivism.
Discourse between authors throughout the project focused on attunement to the data in the
early analyses, by questioning the fit between coding categories and participants’ accounts
(through comparing readings of the transcripts with emergent nodes for each case).
Discussion of the superordinate and master themes focused on concreteness, where the
authors considered the correspondence of the themes to the practicalities of everyday life, for
example, the obligation and powerful family patterns themes. Review of the final
interpretive structure also included joint consideration of resonance, that is, the experiential
effect of the interpretation on the authors.
We also undertook steps to demonstrate consistency in coding for the final thematic
structure through negotiated agreement (Campbell, Quincy, Osserman & Pedersen, 2013).
Both authors read and annotated the interviews and through discussion developed the themes
in the cumulative coding stage. Once the final themes were developed in the integrative
coding stage (by the first author
1
), agreement between coders on coding structure was
assessed on 4 (20%) randomly selected interviews. We used Kurasaki’s (2000) method of
coding comparison, where coding matched if both coders coded the text at the code, within a
range of five lines. Using proportion agreement (calculated by dividing the number of coding
agreements by the number of agreements and disagreements combined), we achieved a first
1
The first author is the primary ‘knowledgeable coder’ (Campbell et al., 2013) in this study. This is based on
her experience in qualitative methods and immersion in the grandfather literature.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 11
set of reliabilities of Connection (.70), Dedication (.46), Joy (.62), Learning (.64), and Shift
(.76), (ratings were averaged across the 4 transcripts). After discussion on code definitions
and conceptual boundaries of the themes, a final reliability averaged across the 5 themes was
.96. This agreement is relatively high. This may be attributed to the level of discussion and
negotiation in the early stages, as well as to the broadness of the themes at the point of
calculation. Although coding and interpretive decisions were jointly considered through team
discussion, the validity of the study is not claimed as final; other cogent and persuasive
interpretations are possible from researchers with different horizons.
Evidence for the themes is provided through interview quotes or in-vivo comments
(indicated in double quotation marks). All quotations use pseudonyms.
Findings
The men who took part in this study were on the whole unused to discussing their
experiences as grandfathers, doubting their capacity to offer or “tell you” any useful
information. As a lifecourse “countertransition”, a role change produced by the role changes
of others (Quadagno, 2014), and thus to an extent unplanned, they appeared to have few
expectations of the personal and social consequences of grandfatherhood. Yet, as the findings
show, all appeared to make deliberate, thoughtful choices concerning their activities and
attitudes about grandfathering. In this study, two core themes capture both the experiences of
grandfathering, and the meaning of these experiences to grandfathers as well as to the broader
picture of personal development. The first core theme, Glad dedication, consists of three
subthemes. Grandfathers’ central activity was Connection with their grandchildren. This
child-focused connection was underpinned by a passionate Dedication to the family unit that
delivered a sense of Joy they had never before experienced. The second core theme, More
than generational change, concerns the men’s opportunities to reconsider the importance of
family, of emotions and relationships, demonstrating a Shift in perspective. For the majority

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 12
of men, the shift as a catalyst reinforced their dedication to family; for a few of these men, the
unexpected connection led to a more explicit questioning of their core beliefs. The subtheme
Personal Concerns captures the difficulties the men encountered as grandparents. (See Table
2 for thematic structure).
Insert table 2 about here
Glad dedication
Connection. Grandfathers were centrally occupied with their connection to their
grandchildren. They sought to build this connection through activity that was child-centred
and harmonious. For some, this interaction was purposefully opening children to the world,
showing and teaching them “good things” and new ideas; for others, a gentle hold of
discipline and responsibility through talking and play was most important. Other men,
enjoying the relinquishment of responsibility to the child’s parents, adored spoiling the
grandchildren, engaging them in the delight of shared transgressions: rough and tumble play,
teasing, “letting them be”: “Being a Pop, I think my role is to spoil them something wicked,
to be different to their dads and hope they love me for it” (Ernest).
Grandfathers insisted on the importance of “being there”, giving grandchildren time and
undivided attention, listening and affirming the importance of the child inside the family.
Even though some of the men’s extended families were large, there was a strong sense of
commitment to sharing love equally across the grandchildren, not singling any out as
favourites, for “everyone’s the same”. The men also discussed the importance of providing an
emotionally safe environment for the children. They described the importance of earning the
trust of the child through involvement and consistency, aware that the relationship could not
be taken for granted.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 13
I wouldn’t want to be a distant figure in her life. It will only do that, if you give yourself
to it. If you are there when they get home from school or if you are there to do a puzzle
with her, you have to give them time. It’s not by default, I am fully aware of that. (Bob)
As Bob’s words illustrate, men’s concerns were not for baby sitting and caretaking; they
deliberately extended themselves towards the children through a range of child-focused
positive activities and emotions.
Family of origin patterns also influenced men’s intentions for connecting with
grandchildren; some recalled strong grandmothers and “hands on” grandfathers bringing
them into the family circle.
I think that I have to say that I tried to model my relationship with my grandkids on the
relationship I had with my grandfathers…So that was pretty important to me to make sure
I had good relationship with my grandkids. (Harry)
The urge to be closely connected with grandchildren could also be motivated by a need to
change family patterns, to give to children what the men themselves had not experienced
from grandfather or father. As David described his experiences: “I wouldn’t want to be a
grandfather like my grandfather; I wouldn’t like to be a grandfather like my father, so...I
didn’t want to do those things so I had to do the opposite.” Instead, they offered their
grandchildren unconditional support and deep involvement, “I’ve pushed a pram for every
one of them: every one I’ve been involved with, every one” (Lance).
Tight boundaries. Nevertheless, this unconditional love still had its boundaries –
grandfathers were particularly observant of their responsibilities of care and discipline in light
of their position as “back up” to the parents:
You tend to be in the background. If they ask you something, you help them with, but
you don’t come out and tell them something that they should be doing as a father should.
You tend to be sort of in the background but always ready there with anything you can

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 14
help them with, you know? Advice, work, whatever, but that’s what it tends to be, as a
grandfather. You’re more in the background. (Sam)
Sam here articulates an experience common to many grandfathers; as is also discussed in the
literature (e.g., Sorensen & Cooper, 2010; Tan, Buchanan, Flouri, Attar-Schwartz & Griggs,
2010); these grandfathers were sensitive to their own adult children’s responsibility and
decision-making on matters of values and discipline. Grandfathers took a cautious care
approach that stepped back from hard and fast rules for the grandchildren:
Because there’s things that you can’t do because you’re not the parent: you stay out of it,
see? What I’d probably do with my own children you can’t do with them, and you just try
and keep it balanced. (Lance)
Lance’s comment illustrates the acknowledged distinction between parents’ task of raising
children, which entails teaching, discipline and 24-hour responsibility, and grandparents’
opportunity for loving and caring, yet still being able to “give them back.” Giving back the
child at the end of the day absolved the men of ultimate responsibility and freed up their
ability to care without the onus of raising the child to adulthood.
Dedication to family. Underpinning the importance of the child were grandfathers’
beliefs in the importance of, and emotional commitment to, the family. Family was
considered a lifelong involvement, a continuum, where, with good relationships, members
could watch each other grow, “watching history unfold”. Family was a close-knit hub that
members wanted to keep strong, where the younger generation was “part of the plans”. Men
were committed to “helping out” their own adult children, making themselves “always
available” and fitting in. Some considered this support as their core purpose, others a moral
obligation to the grandchildren, perhaps having perceived some vulnerability in the child’s
immediate family:

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 15
Because when they [the grandchildren] come here, they come into the exact opposite.
Ours is a very ordered, predictable environment here. They know they can come in the
door and it’ll always be exactly the same. They can do exactly the same things every
day...So my obligation then is to provide them with something that’s constant, predictable,
no surprises, no shocks, and so on. They get enough of those at home (Rick).
As Rick’s comment illustrates, the paradox of caring is its personal cost: for some, dedication
was tinged with sadness caused by family breakdown, dysfunction or illness. Yet the drive to
link lives, to enhance family solidarity, or to strengthen family patterns, along with the men’s
emotional and ethical determination, demonstrates that this commitment was not only
intentional and purposeful but also an active interpersonal engagement.
A lot of people all of the time always say that I’m mad, I’m silly for doing what I do for
the kids. And I say, “I’m not silly.” It’s them that’s silly. They like to go away [on
vacation], they’ve got their own life to lead they reckon; they go away. I go with the kids,
see? (Lance)
Joy. While the previous theme of family dedication arose through a conjunction of beliefs
and values about family bonds, intentions to support, and actions that involved children in
their lives, this third theme is a representation of the emotional response associated with
warm connections to grandchildren. Expressed in different ways, the men reflected on the
joy of being loved, of being acknowledged as central to the child’s life, and of feeling love:
“I’m really acutely aware of the joy that that child brings” (Bob), it “brings an unconscious
joy” (Alex). For some there was a sense of “soaking up” the child’s trust and love; for others,
it was pleasure in simply being together in a timeless way. It appeared that the men were
highly sensitive to the moment by moment interaction and enjoyed the simple process of
relationship.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 16
And so I say to her, “Oh I like purple too”. And she says, “You like purple too because
you love me don’t you?” And you know, that’s it. And so quite often I’ll say something
and she’ll say, “That’s because you love me” …And she sort of comes out and says, “You
do that because you love me don’t you?” ...And it makes me feel very, very happy
(Ernest).
As the above extract shows, Ernest is elated by the simple reciprocity of the relationship. He
is being loved for who he is, and what he does for the child, a love based on the quality or
tenor of the relationship. Joy in relationship was sparked also by the types of interactions
discussed earlier – the teasing, the looser hold on discipline. “But you’re still not the first
line of discipline and you love the fact that they can turn you around their little finger and get
you to do anything they like” (Sam). Relaxing the discipline of home rules and duties
delighted both receiver and giver. As also demonstrated in Ernest’s comments above, some
men were able to articulate both the joy and its effect on their own sense of self:
I think the joy of seeing, in my case my blood grandchildren from when they were really,
really born, and they were like little prunes, I was quite taken with that. Yes, it does have
an effect on you: I find it hard to explain because it’s an internal thing (Alex).
It makes you feel a bit more complete, I’ve said once or twice, if I died tomorrow it
wouldn’t worry me because you know… you’ve done everything you could do, well not
everything you could do, but you die contented; not that I want to! (Curt)
Curt’s comments point inwards to the fulfilment of his own life purpose and goals; a notion
similar to the Greek concept of eudaimonia. Here Curt is discussing his own feelings about
the meaning of his life rather than his happiness at having experienced or obtained
something. Comments from numerous men revealed these positive interpretations of
existence, “It’s just a state of being”; some reflecting a concept of self, “I’m a good Pop”;
others reflecting the life itself, “a charmed life”, “a wonderful life”, “in fact, I don’t know

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 17
what I’d do without them” (Lance). Being a “good Pop” for David for example, entailed
choosing to connect, being responsible, understanding children and learning to accept them.
At the same time, he happily revealed that the grandchildren “always want to come here” and
fight over one-on-one time with Pop. This relationship with his grandchildren, invested with
intention and understanding, had reciprocal benefits in terms of satisfaction or happiness,
these emotions in turn imbuing his life with meaning and purpose.
More than generational change
Generative contexts: then and now. While the men’s stories were contextualized in
stories of ‘then and now’, the men’s age appeared to have no clear relationship with the
data’s thematic structure. For example, both the youngest and the oldest men expressed
similar views on social change. More potent were the social norms of fathering and worklife.
Employment had dominated family life; for many this meant long work-shifts and a stressful
life. At the same time, attitudes to child-rearing meant that for the most part, men had left
this to their wives, a well-recognized social pattern (Bryant & Zick, 1996). Yet, the passage
of time and social change were forces that both troubled and stimulated grandfathers’
generative activities.
On the one hand, some social changes were unsettling. The men pointed to a range of
vicissitudes: dwindling respect for elders, escalating social malaise, lax ‘modern’ parenting
leading to reckless children, and limited environments for carefree active play. Clearly for
some men, this was a clash of worlds: “It’s just a changed world and I think you’ve just got to
go along with it and it mightn’t always suit you” (David).
On the other hand, some differences were positive. Most had more time and money given
their changed work schedules. They also appreciated the emotional candor of the new era:
they found that children easily gave and expected affection and that acknowledgement of
children’s needs and individuality generally had increased. They also welcomed changes in

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 18
attitudes to grandparents: recollections of their own ‘frosty’ and distant grandfathers
contrasted with their personal experiences of being loved, valued and acknowledged.
A shift in perspective. Being a grandfather enabled the men to gain a new perspective on
their fathering, and for some, an awareness of their inner self. The men all agreed that being a
grandfather was certainly not what they had expected if they had expected anything at all.
Most of them had “never thought about it.” However, the turn of the emotional wheel was in
several ways startling. The surprise element was the depth of feeling associated with
grandchildren. The strength and impact of the relationship engendered the realization, over
time or suddenly, of the primacy of connection, “Life’s short, and people are important.” For
some, and at its deepest, this explicit surprise generated reflections on the wonder of life:
Like when R was born, I was sort of beside myself, this is just wonderful…And it was
quite amazing. That was a major shock…Because it was our first grandchild, we were just
beside ourselves; we thought it was wonderful (Ernest).
It’s significant and it has surprised me it’s impacted on this house, because prior to having
a grandchild, well that’s something that’s just going to happen and I felt almost more
emotionally attached to her from the moment she was born, than any of my children
(Bob).
There was also the sense that the grandchildren were catalysts for breaking out of restrictive
norms and for understanding the human condition:
I was brought up in the years, like a lot of older men, where you didn’t show affection,
you didn’t show hurt, you didn’t show pain, you didn’t show anything: you were the
stalwart of the family and such. And I think the grandchildren seem to undermine all
that and bring you down to your knees, and then realize that you’re just a human person
after all, and you’re no different to the next bloke, and all the things you were shown
were necessarily that time in my…upbringing, was wrong. (Alex)

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 19
In his comments, Alex draws attention to the universality of connection and compassion,
pointing at the same time to the effects of male socialization on his emotional expression.
His shift occurs through this realization.
Less explicit discussions about learning also pointed to shifting standpoints. Some
indicated new dispositions of humility, tolerance, or patience, adapting their usual styles of
interaction to the needs of their new and highly-valued grandchildren. In the excerpt below,
Nathan discusses a number of these learning points.
Be prepared to listen, listen is very important. You might want to be interrupting and
telling them but, give them the opportunity to talk, to complain, to whatever… I’m
probably very much the type of person that wants to resolve problems, and once I’ve
resolved it I’m quite happy to help you. So I’m ready with answers for all sorts of
problems, and whether they’re appropriate or not is probably beside the point…[So now],
to sort of hold back and say, “Come on, let other people have a go”….And realize also that
our way’s not the only way.
In his description of this adaptation, he reveals traits that had perhaps been useful to him in
other circumstances. But his experience over the relatively short lifetime of his grandchildren
has motivated a more receptive approach, an approach not adopted when fathering his own
children. More implicit still, others realized their life was changing because of their close
connections with their grandchildren: “That’s not to say that I didn’t enjoy life before that
because I did, but it gave me different things to laugh at, you know, and different things to
learn, different experiences” (Greg). Vince’s “second bite of the cherry” as a grandfather
gave him an opportunity to gain what might have been lost:
So if you were a new father now it would be good, much better really, to be able to spend
more time with your kids than I possibly did 30 years ago. That’s probably the
difference. Now, that I’m retired and being able to spend time with the grandkids

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 20
sometimes makes me think I wish I’d have been able to do this 30 or 40 years ago.
(Vince)
Changing perspectives on life were also evidenced through generative thoughts such as “the
new spring” of life, “watching history unfold,” and discussion of the evolution of
relationships within the family.
Thus, the experience of change was variable. For a few, there was no difference between
grandfathering and fathering: they acted in similar ways, and there was no significant change
in their outlook. For a few, the shift came as a sudden unexpected emotional call that
triggered reflections on the meaning of life, while for others, there was a more gradual
realization of reciprocated trust and connection. Either way, the realization of the connection
offered a life purpose, prompting most to re-order priorities and find new strategies for
interpersonal engagement.
Personal concerns. Although there was variation in the men’s personal circumstances, as
shown in Table 1, there were few ramifications overtly discussed. Sam (the least well) and
Karl (fulltime worker) both expressed how their circumstances enhanced their relationship
with their grandchildren: Sam learned through his “one big health issue...to be more
tolerant”, to be more relaxed with his grandchildren. As a result, he was pleased to say that
“kids radiated to me”, much to others’ surprise. Karl found that his grandchildren adapted to
his disposition once he learned to be “honest with them” about his tiredness or irritability.
There were rare expressions of the inevitability of death: Rick did suggest that he might “pop
off’ any time and, like Jack, worried about leaving the grandchildren “in the lurch”. And for
two families, there was concern for the children’s welfare in the environment they were
returning to; here there was an underlying expression of emotional pain associated with a
degree of helplessness, “sometimes it’s just hard, you have to switch off and walk away”
(Perez). This response is intricately tied to the men’s position as not ultimately responsible

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 21
for the children’s wellbeing, taking a cautious care approach, knowing that they had to “give
them back”.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to analyze the phenomenon of grandfathering, focusing on a small
sample of men’s activities, thoughts, and reflections as grandfathers, in order to build an
interpretive account that linked individual and collective experiences to higher-order
concepts. In so doing, we found themes that related to relationships and personal fulfilment,
as well as themes that related to existential concerns.
The most significant shared feature of grandfathers’ relationship to their grandchildren
was their ‘glad dedication’. The intention of simply “being there”, along with their cautious
care approach, echoes Sorensen and Cooper’s (2010) findings. The fine details in this study
show that grandfathers’ highly child-focused activities were not simply baby-sitting or child
care, but emergent, reciprocated relationships. Most men were immersed in the joy of being
loved and being free to love the children outside prior parameters of parenting discipline and
duties. Freedom from the responsibility of bringing up the child allowed the men to focus
purely on the moment-by-moment relational interaction, rather than the discipline inherent in
parenting. Their play encompassed a ‘here-and-now’ quality, a concept familiar to play
therapists (Behr, 2003). This simple intimacy may benefit grandchildren, giving them
multiple opportunities for secure relationships, where the attachment is not paired with
discipline (see Schaffer and Emerson (1994) for a discussion).
Embedded in the overarching theme of ‘glad dedication’ were strong traces of a generative
fathering ethic. Dollahite and Hawkins (1998) use this concept to provide a coherent
explanation for men’s involvement in their children’s lives. In this framework, children’s
fundamental and universal needs trigger men’s responsibilities and desires to respond. While
mooted as a fathering ethic, the authors note that such triggers are lifespan concerns that call

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 22
for responses from men across their lifecycle or generational position (see also Ehlman &
Ligon, 2012 and McAdams et al., 1998). The men in this study were certainly demonstrating
this response across generations, towards both their adult children and their grandchildren.
The men were free to develop strong relationships with their children’s children, and in
discussing this particular set of family members, there was no hint of the gatekeeping that
problematizes other families’ intergenerational relationships (e.g., Sims & Rofail, 2013).
Nevertheless, there were negative associations with the role. As raised in the Personal
Concerns section, some issues impacted on the extent of men’s involvement and their
attitudes. Availability to the grandchild, either through health or time was one issue; this
seemed to be negotiated fairly simply through agreement and compromise. More
problematic for a couple of men was recognising the dysfunction in their grandchild’s family,
yet being relatively powerless to change the child’s life course. The demarcation of
responsibility was clear and their anguish was not unlike the feelings expressed by
grandfathers becoming fulltime carers in Bullock’s (2005) study. For other men, this (lack of
ultimate) responsibility was less problematic, as there was jocularity and relief about
‘handing them back’ at the same time as being cautious about the extent of their discipline
and rule-making. This cautious care approach, where grandparents want to help but are wary
of interfering has been well- documented: Mason, May and Clarke (2007) highlight the
quandary it presents, Thomas (1990) calls it a ‘double-bind’.
For some men, the results of this relational work prompted an unexpected expansion of
their emotional framework. Although explicitly expressing dedication and commitment, the
depth of feeling and the reciprocity in the relationship with the grandchildren were both
unforeseen and delightful. However, when this connection transcended traditional
expectations, as also experienced by men in Roberto et al.’s (2001) study, the feelings were
catalysts for rethinking lives and priorities. Rather than an identity transformation, the

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 23
difference appeared to be a widening of what they counted as existing, a widening of their
understanding of life purpose and meaning. This is considered to be ontological change.
Ontological change occurs when people experience things that force them to see themselves
differently, to change their core beliefs about themselves or the world (Raskin, 2011).
Grandfathers variously accomplished this through their own reflexivity and prior reflections
on life, or through the provocation of the interview. For most, their experiences contradicted
their previous and implicit assumptions, bringing about self-conscious reflection and changes
in self-understandings (see also McGowan & Blakenship, 1994). Thus, where the shift in
perspective occurred, it was seemingly triggered by bonds formed between family
generations.
The findings of this study show that the junction of gender with generation is an
instructive site for understanding men and families. Grandfathering strengthened the
psychological wellbeing of the men, being an opportunity for many of eudaimonic self-
realisation: making sense of the past, understanding their purposes for living, and expressing
this in their own unique way. The preponderance of emotional themes, the privileging of
emotional relationships, and even men’s willingness to talk about this can perhaps be
explained by SST (Carstensen, 2006). Aware of their place in time, the men chose to
privilege emotional contact. The desire to live in the moment may be linked, albeit tacitly in
this study, to the sense of a finite future.
Yet the themes of the study hint at a more complex development. They reflect the desire
for generativity and care at the same time as showing the men’s capacity to reflect and
philosophise about life in order to make the most of their present moment. In terms of human
development, this capacity closely represents gerotranscendence (Tornstam, 1989). While
Erikson’s theory describes people’s acceptance of the life lived, gerotranscendence suggests
that as people mature, they are more likely to redefine their reality. In this view, people’s

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 24
perspective on time motivates them to reconsider attachments to family, seeing themselves as
part of a generational stream rather than an individual link. Gerotranscendence also suggests
a movement towards self-understanding, and an open mind toward personal and social
relationships (Tornstam, 2005).
There are limitations to the study, the most apparent being the small purposive sample,
resulting in a collection of men who valued family connections, and who were ready to
reflect on fathering and discuss their interactions with grandchildren. Like Thomas (1990),
we asked the men to reflect on a particular child in order to stimulate reflection on recent
interactions and encourage concrete descriptions. This may have inadvertently prompted the
men to discuss the child with whom they had the closest relationship, thus positively skewing
their responses and or increasing their willingness to talk.
There is also discussion of the effect of gender and age differences on interviews
(Arendell, 1997; Sallee & Harris, 2011), although there are no clear conclusions about those
effects (Davis et al., 2010). In our study, 14 interviews were collected by a female
researcher, and both data collectors were approximately the same age as the younger
participants, and 20-30 years younger than the oldest. There was no apparent effect on the
loquacity of the participants by gender (see Table 1). Possibly more important than age and
gender is the effect of the researcher’s interviewing skills (such as non-directive questioning,
non-intrusive probing, and listening skills) on the quality of the data. Such effects were
reduced by designing well-written interview questions, using the scripted interview protocol
for each participant, and the supervision and debriefing of assistant researchers.
Another limitation may be that most of the men were maternal biological grandfathers, a
linkage that has some evidence for closer involvement with grandchildren (Barnett et al.,
2010; Chan & Elder, 2000). Nevertheless, four participants (21%) were the paternal or step-
grandfather of the grandchild discussed in the interview; their participation in the study

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 25
would indicate a close connection to their grandchildren, and no unique themes emerged from
that group of men, nor were there patterns of representation in existing themes. Discussion
from both groups provided rich data for deeply exploring just one of many dimensions of
grandfatherhood. Other aspects will be fruitful for future research: new questions could focus
for example on linking specific fathering dispositions with grandfathering interactions, or the
nature and quality of grandfathers’ playfulness with their grandchildren.
Finally, there can be no guarantees that similar themes of dedication or shift would not be
generated among grandmothers. However, the ‘shift’ theme arises from the rupture of men’s
norms of family interaction, where women are most often family caregivers and emotional
supporters, and closer to grandchildren generally (Barnett, 2010; Eisenberg, 1988; Kivett,
1985; Knudsen, 2012), and men are less so. Therefore, experiencing and expressing this
level of change would be a point of difference between men and women.
The implications for understanding grandfathers are two pronged. On one side there is the
building evidence that grandparents are an important part of family life and as such, men
should not underestimate their contribution to individual and family wellbeing. As a
snapshot of Australian family life, this research shows men as willing supporters of children’s
development. This role gives more substance to alternatives to Australian male identity,
which is traditionally “masculine, anti-domestic, muscular” (Crotty, 1999, p. ii). The ‘Aussie
battler’– working-class, hardworking, breadwinner not caregiver – is one example of this
masculinity. But there is receptivity to new constructions of Australian fatherhood. Young
men in Thompson, Lee and Adams (2013) for example, are keen to be involved with their
children. Nevertheless, underlying their desire were lingering assumptions of gendered
family roles in the context of assuring financial security. Perhaps when the economic
pressure is relieved, as it was for the men in our study, men are cognitively and affectively
freer to attend to relational matters. Slowly, the normative impression that female family

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 26
members are the most important to caring is being challenged by research that demonstrates
the extent and depth of males’ emotional bonds to family. Although the individuals
themselves are challenging these norms, it takes the accumulation of research findings to
demonstrate the movement within societies.
Associated with this is the implication for family services. Given the acknowledged need
of grandparents for child care, and the burden this may add to older carers, family services
will need to be prepared to include the older generation in their case work or counseling
services. Strom and Strom (1997, 2013) suggest that education for grandparents is essential
in order to support extended family wellness. They suggest that grandparents’ contribution to
family and community life should be more of an expectation and less an exception. Yet
including men in these services is still problematic. The stimulus for father-inclusive practice
in human services was the invisibility of fathers despite their obvious contribution to family
formation. Likewise, some services will need to construct their processes differently in order
to engage grandfathers in family care. Readily acknowledging the emotional work that men
can contribute to the entire family system will help practitioners generate strategies for more
holistic family connectedness.
In addition, this research reveals at least one avenue for potentiating older men’s personal
development. Using a strengths approach (Bernard, 2006), practitioners concerned for older
men’s mental health can be attuned to men’s potential to benefit from involvement with
grandchildren, and use this as a therapeutic route (Thomas, 1990).
Conclusion
Connection and close relationships were a marked change to the men’s previous perspectives
and philosophies of family life. There was less a sense of settlement and retreat in taking on
the known, familiar, role of grandfather; and more discussion of discovery: the men pointed
to unforeseen, unfamiliar experiences that contributed significantly to their sense of

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 27
wellbeing and family cohesion. Paradoxically, the relative invisibility of grandfathers and
lack of scrutiny of men’s attachment-like relationships has thrown details of family
connections and the progress of maturity into sharp relief.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 28
References
Arendell, T. (1997). Reflections on the researcher-researched relationship: A woman
interviewing men. Qualitative Sociology, 20(3), 341-368.
Arthur, S., Snape, D., & Dench, G. (2003). The moral economy of grandparenting.
Generations Review, 13(2), 10-12.
Barnett, M.A., Scaramella, L.A., Neppl, T.K., Ontai, L., & Conger, R.D. (2010).
Grandmother involvement as a protective factor for early childhood social adjustment.
Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 635-645.
Bates J. S. (2009). Generative grandfathering: A conceptual framework for nurturing
grandchildren. Marriage & Family Review, 35(4), 331-352.
Behr, M. (2003). Interactive resonance in work with children and adolescents: A theory-
based concept of interpersonal relationship through play and the use of toys. Person-
Centred and Experiential Psychotherapies, 2, 89-103.
Bengtson, V. (1985). Diversity and symbolism in grandparental roles. In V. Bengtson & J.
Robertson (Eds.), Grandparenthood (pp. 11-25). London: Sage.
Bernard, B. (2006). Using strengths-based practice to tap the resilience of families. In D.
Saleebey (Ed.), The Strengths Perspective in social work practice (4th ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Boden, A. (2008). Deconstructing the hegemony of men and masculinity (?): A focus on
old(er) men as grandfathers and intergenerational relations. In J. Hearn (Ed) GEXcel Work
in Progress Report Volume V: GEXcel Theme 2. Deconstructing the Hegemony of Men
and Masculinities (pp. 41-49). Linkoping, Sweden.
Bryant, W. K., & Zick, C. D. (1996). An examination of parent-child shared time. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 58, 227-237.
Bullock, K. (2005). Grandfathers and the impact of raising grandchildren. Journal of
Sociology and Social Welfare, 32(1), 43-59.
Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth
semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and
agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294-320.
Carstensen, L. L. (1995). Evidence for a life-span theory of socioemotional selectivity.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4(5), 151-156.
Carstensen, L. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science,
312, 1913-1915.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 29
Chan, C. G., & Elder, G. H. (2000). Matrilineal advantage in grandchild–grandparent
relations. The Gerontologist, 40(2), 179-190.
Condon, J., Corkindale, C., Luszcz, M., & Gamble, E. (2013). The Australian First-time
Grandparents Study: Time spent with the grandchild and its predictors. Australasian
Journal on Ageing, 32(1), 21-27.
Crawford, M. (1981). Not disengaged: grandparents in literature and reality, an empirical
study in role satisfaction. Sociological Review, 29, 499-519.
Crotty, M.A. (1999). Making the Australian male: the construction of manly middle-class
youth in Australia, 1870-1920. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Melbourne.
Cunningham-Burley, S. (1984). ‘We don’t talk about it.’ Issues of gender and method in the
portrayal of grandfatherhood. Sociology, 18, 325-338.
Daly, K. (1993). Reshaping fatherhood: Finding the models. Journal of Family Issues, 14(4),
510-530.
Davis, R. E., Couper, M. P., Janz, N. K., Caldwell, C. H., & Resnicow, K. (2010).
Interviewer effects in public health surveys. Health Education Research, 25(1), 14-26.
De Witt, L., & Ploeg, J. (2006). Critical appraisal of rigour in interpretive phenomenological
nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55(2), 215-229.
Dollahite, D. C., & Hawkins, A. J. (1998). A conceptual ethic of generative fathering.
Journal of Men's Studies, 7, 109-132.
Doucet, A. (2004). 'It's almost like I have a job, but I don't get paid': Fathers at home
reconfiguring work, care, and masculinity. Fathering, 2(3), 277-303.
Ehlman, K., & Ligon, M. (2012). The application of a generativity model for older adults.
International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 74(4), 331-344.
Eisenberg, A. R. (1988). Grandchildren's perspectives on relationships with grandparents:
The influence of gender across generations. Sex Roles, 19(3-4), 205-217.
Erikson, E. (1997). The life cycle completed (Extended version). New York: WW Norton.
Fischer, A. R., & Good, G. E. (1997). Men and psychotherapy: An investigation of
alexithymia, intimacy, and masculine gender roles. Psychotherapy, 34(2), 160-170.
Furstenberg, F. F., & Weiss, C. C. (2000). Intergenerational transmission of fathering roles in
at risk families. Marriage & Family Review, 29(2-3), 181-201.
Goodfellow, J. (2003). Grandparents as regular child care providers. Every Child, 9(3) 8-9.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 30
Goodsell, T. L., Bates, J. S., & Behnke, A. O. (2011). Fatherhood stories: Grandparents,
grandchildren, and gender differences. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28,
134-154.
Gray, M. (2005). Young children and their grandparents. Family Matters, 72, 10-17.
Gunnarsson, E. (2009). ‘I think I have had a good life’: the everyday lives of older women
and men from a lifecourse perspective. Ageing and Society, 29, 33-48.
Hagestadt, G. O., & Neugarten, B. L. (1985). Age and the life course. In R. H.Binstock,
& E.Shanas (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (pp. 35–61). New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Harper, S. (2005). Grandparenthood. In V. L. Bengtson and M. L. Johnson, (Eds), Cambridge
handbook of age and ageing (pp. 422−428). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hawkins, A. J., Dollahite, D. C., & Lamb, M. E. (1998). Generative conceptions of
fatherhood. PsycCRITIQUES, 43(1), 49-50.
Higgins, D. J. (2007). Families caring. Diverse care work of families in Australia. Family
Matters, 76, 4-7.
Hoff, A. (2007). Patterns of intergenerational support in grandparent-grandchild and parent-
child relationships in Germany. Aging & Society, 27, 643-665.
Kemp, C. L. (2007). Grandparent-grandchild ties. Reflections on continuity and change
across three generations. Journal of Family Issues, 28(7), 855-881.
Kennedy, G. E. (1992). Quality in grandparent/grandchild relationships, International
Journal of Aging & Human Development, 35(2), 83-98.
Kim, J. E., & Moen, P. (2002). Retirement transitions, gender, and psychological well-being;
A life-course, ecological model. Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 57(3), 212-
222.
Kivett, V. R. (1985). Grandfathers and grandchildren: Patterns of association, helping and
psychological closeness. Family Relations, 34, 565-571.
Knudsen, K. (2012). European grandparents' solicitude: Why older men can be relatively
good grandfathers. Acta Sociologica, 55(3) 231–250.
Kurasaki, K. S. (2000). Intercoder reliability from validating conclusions drawn from open-
ended interview data. Field Methods, 12(3), 179-194.
Larkin, M., Watts, S., & Clifton, E. (2006). Giving voice and making sense in interpretative
phenomenological analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 102-120.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 31
Lively, K. (2008). Emotional segues and the management of emotion by women and men.
Social Forces, 87(2), 911-936.
Lorber, W., & Garcia, H. A. (2010). Not supposed to feel this: Traditional masculinity in
psychotherapy with male veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47(3), 296-305.
Mann, R. (2007). Out of the shadows? Grandfatherhood, age and masculinities. Journal of
Aging Studies, 21, 281-291.
Mann, R., & Leeson, G. (2010). Grandfathers in contemporary families in Britain: Evidence
from qualitative research. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 8, 234-248.
McAdams, D. P., Hart, H. M., & Maruna, S. (1998). The anatomy of generativity. In D. P.
McAdams & E. de St. Aubin (Eds.), Generativity and adult development. How and why
we care for the next generation. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
McGowan, T. G. & Blakenship, S. (1994). Intergenerational experience and ontological
change. Educational Gerontology: An International Quarterly, 20, 589-604.
Mitchell, W. (2008). The role played by grandparents in family support and learning:
considerations for mainstream and special schools. Support for Learning, 23, 126-135.
Mueller, M. M., Wilhelm, B., & Elder, G. H. (2002). Variations in grandparenting. Research
on Aging, 24, 360-388.
Neugarten, B., & Weinstein, K. (1964). The changing American grandparent. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 26, 199-204.
Nussbaum, J. F., & Bettini, L. M. (1994). Shared stories of the grandparent-grandchild
relationship. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 39, 67-80.
Ochiltree, G. (2006). The changing role of grandfathers. AFRC Briefing, 2, 1-9.
Onyx, J., & Baker, E. (2006). Retirement expectations: gender differences and partner effects
in an Australian employer-funded sample. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 25(2), 80-83.
Pepin, G., & Deutscher, B. (2011). The lived experience of Australian retirees: 'I'm retired,
what do I do now?'. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 74(9), 419-426.
Peterson, C. C. (1999). Grandfathers' and grandmothers' satisfaction with the grandparenting
role: Seeking new answers to old questions. International Journal of Aging and Human
Development, 49(1), 61.
Pollet, T. V., Nettle, D., & Nelissen, M. (2007). Maternal grandmothers do go the extra mile:
Factoring distance and lineage into differential contact with grandchildren. Evolutionary
Psychology, 5, 832-843.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 32
Quadagno, J. S. (2014). Aging and the life course: an introduction to social gerontology (6th
ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Raskin, J. D. (2011). On essences in constructive psychology. Journal of Theoretical and
Philosophical Psychology, 31, 223-239.
Reitzes, D. C., & Mutran, E. J. (2004). Grandparenthood: Factors influencing frequency of
grandparent–grandchildren contact and grandparent role satisfaction. Journal of
Gerontology, 59B(1), S9-S16.
Roberto, K. A., Allen, K. R, & Blieszner, R. (2001). Grandfathers’ perceptions and
expectations of relationships with their adult grandchildren. Journal of Family Issues, 22,
407-426.
Roberto, K., & Stroes, J. (1992). Grandchildren and grandparents: Roles, influences, and
relationships. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 34, 227-239.
Roger, K. M., Rinaldi, C. M., & Howe, N. (2012). Mothers' and fathers' internal state
language with their young children: An examination of gender differences during an
emotions task. Infant and Child Development, 21(6), 646-666.
Sallee, M. W., & Harris III, F. (2011). Gender performance in qualitative studies of
masculinities. Qualitative Research, 11, 409-429.
Schaffer, R. H., & Emerson, P. E. (1994). The development of social attachments in infancy.
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 29(3), 1-77.
Scraton, S., & Holland, S. (2006). Grandfatherhood and leisure. Leisure Studies, 25, 233-250.
Shinebourne, P. (2011). The theoretical underpinnings of Interpretative Phenomenological
Analysis (IPA), Existential Analysis, 22, 16-31.
Sims, M., & Rofail, M. (2013). The experiences of grandparents who have limited or no
contact with their grandchildren. Journal of Aging studies, 27(4), 377-386.
Smith, J. A., Larkin, M., & Flowers, P. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis:
Theory, method and research. London: Sage.
Sorensen, P., & Cooper, N. J. (2010). Reshaping the family man: A grounded theory study of
Grandfatherhood. Journal of Men’s Studies, 18, 117-136.
Spitze, G., & Ward, R. A. (1998). Gender variations. In M. E. Szinovacz (Ed.), Handbook on
grandparenthood (pp. 113–127). London: Greenwood Press.
Stelle, C., Fruhauf, C. A., Orel, N., & Landry-Meyer, L. (2010). Grandparenting in the 21st
century: Issues of diversity in grandparent–grandchild relationships. Journal of
Gerontological Social Work, 53(8), 682-701.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 33
StGeorge, J., & Fletcher, R. (2011). Fathers online: Learning about fatherhood through the
Internet. Journal of Perinatal Education, 20(3), 154-162.
Strom, R., & Strom, P. (2013). Grandparents and reciprocal learning for family harmony. In
P. Hughes (Ed.), Achieving Quality Education for All (pp. 139-145): Springer Netherlands.
Strom, R., & Strom, S. (1997). Building a theory of grandparent development. International
Journal of Aging & Human Development, 45(4), 255-286.
Szinovacz, M. E. (1998). Grandparents today: A demographic profile. The Gerontologist,
38(1), 37-52.
Tan, J., Buchanan, A., Flouri, E., Attar-Schwartz, S., & Griggs, J. (2010). Filling the
parenting gap? Grandparent involvement With U.K. adolescents. Journal of Family Issues,
31, 992-1015.
Taubman-Ben-Ari, O., Findler, L., & Shlomo, S. B. (2012). Personal growth and the
transition to grandfatherhood. The International Journal of Aging and Human
Development, 74(4), 265-285.
Thiele, D. M., & Whelan, T. A. (2006). The nature and dimensions of the grandparent role.
Marriage & Family Review, 40(1), 93-108.
Thomas, J. L. (1990). Grandparenthood and mental health: Implications for the practitioner.
Journal of Applied Gerontology, 9(4), 464-479.
Thompson, R., Lee, C., & Adams, J. (2013). Imagining fatherhood: Young Australian men's
perspectives on fathering. International Journal of Men's Health, 12(2), 150-165.
Tornstam, L. (1989). Gero-transcendence; A meta-theoretical reformulation of the
Disengagement Theory. Aging: Clinical and Experimental Research, 1(1), 55-63.
Tornstam, L. (2005). Gerotranscendence: A developmental theory of positive aging. New
York: Springer.
Waldrop, D. P., Weber, J. A., Herald, S. L., Pruett, J., Cooper, K., & Juozapavacius, K.
(1999). Wisdom and life experience: How grandfathers mentor their grandchildren.
Journal of Aging and Identity, 4(1), 33-46.
Weston, R., & Qu, L. (2009). Relationships between grandparents and grandchildren, Family
Matters, 81, 58-60.
Wolcott, I. (1998). Families in later life. Dimensions of retirement. Working Paper No. 14,
Australian Institute of Family Studies: Melbourne.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 34
Wong, Y. J., & Rochlen, A. B. (2005). Demystifying men's emotional behaviour: new
directions and implications for counseling and research. Psychology of Men &
Masculinity, 6(1), 62-72.
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2102). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities
in behavior. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.),Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology (Vol 46, pp. 55-124). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 35
Table 1: Case summary of participants
Person
Age^
Work
Typea
Financial Comfortb
Health
Relationship To
Target GCc
Hours/Wk
Care
Age Of GC
# GC
Interviewer
# Words ~
Alex
61-70
Retired
Prosperous
Fair
? Step
12-120
9
4
Male
3930
Bob
51-60
FTW
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
8
2
1
Female
4570
Curt
61-70
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
16
2
7
Female
2910
David
61-70
PTW
Very Comfortable
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
20
7
6
Female
3315
Ernest
61-70
Retired
Very Comfortable
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
11
0.5
8
Female
8179
Fred
71-80
Retired
Just Getting Along
Good
Mtrnl Biol
20
8
7
Female
3796
Greg
51-60
Retired
Just Getting Along
Very Good
Ptrnl Step
120
4
9
Female
3604
Harry
71-80
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Ptrnl Biol
30
4
6
Female
4613
Ian
61-70
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
12
9
7
Female
3720
Jack
71-80
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
24-120
9.5
1
Female
4814
Karl
61-70
FTW
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
6
4
2
Male
2330
Lance
71-80
Retired
Very Comfortable
Very Good
Ptrnl Biol
75
13
8
Female
3969
Mark
61-70
Retired
Very Comfortable
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
10
2
3
Female
5696
Nathan
81+
PTW
Very Comfortable
Very Good
Ptrnl Biol
8
10
3
Female
5747
Perez
61-70
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Good
Mtrnl Biol
12
12
10
Male
5083
Rick
71-80
PTW
Very Comfortable
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
8-120
10
2
Female
5497
Sam
51-60
Retired
Just Getting Along
Poor
Mtrnl Biol
12
6
4
Female
4211
Ted
51-60
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Very Good
Mtrnl Biol
18
7
4
Male
2978
Vince
61-70
Retired
Rsnbly Cmfrtbl
Good
Ptrnl Biol
72
7
7
Male
3373
Notes. ^Participants were not asked for their specific age; they selected their age category from a series of 10-year ranges. ~ An independent
samples t-test indicates that there is no significant difference between the two interviewers in the number of words transcribed, t(17) = 1.61, p =
.125, Female Mean = 4617, SD = 1348; Male Mean = 3539, SD = 1041. Abbreviations in the table: aFTW: full-time work; PTW: part-time
work; bRsnbly Cmfrtbl: Reasonably comfortable; cGC: grandchild/ren; Mtrnl Biol: Maternal biological; Ptrnl Biol: Paternal biological

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 36
Table 2 Thematic structure of the data
Master Theme & Super-
Ordinate Themesa
Subthemesa
Example Emergent Themeb
Glad Dedication
Joy (17)
Receiving
Being Loved (Ernest)
Soaking It Up (Karl)
Connection (19)
Child-Centred
Connecting By Flow
Connection Most
Important
From The Beginning (Bob)
Gentle Hold (Vince)
Letting Kids Be (Sam)
Dedication (13)
Grandfathering An
Obligation
Core Purpose (David)
Helping His Kids (Nathan)
Overpowering Duty Of Care (Rick)
Tight Boundaries (14)
Handing Them Back
Cautious Care
Not Pop’s Role (Ernest)
Not The Enforcer (Ted)
Fill In The Gaps (Lance)
Shift
Surprise (5)
An Unexpected Life (Nathan)
Surprise (Harry)
Learning (6)
Learning Humility (Bob)
Learning Tolerance (Rick)
Same As Fathering (8)
Rerun Of Fathering (Ian)
Generative contexts
Passage Of Time (17)
Clash Of Worlds
The Difference Is…
Adapt To New World (David)
Kids Different These Days (Jack)
Trouble For Kids (Perez)
Youth Opens (Mark)
Part Of The New Age (Sam)
Personal Concerns (7)
Health
Family Pain
Being Older Is Harder (Curt)
Responsibility Is Draining (Nathan)
Notes: a created through integrative coding; b created through cumulative case coding.
Numbers in brackets beside themes show distribution across the sample.

MEN’S EXPERIENCES OF GRANDFATHERHOOD 37
Appendix: Interview protocol
1. I’d like to talk to you about your family. I thought it would be good to start with you
telling me a bit about being a grandparent to X.
a. How often do you see X – what are the reasons for caring for X -
b. What do you do with X – caregiving, transport
2. Can you describe a typical day with X?
a. What are the things you love doing with X, even if it isn’t often?
b. Can you tell me about the most enjoyable experience you have had with X?
c. How similar or different is your relationship with X compared to your
relationships with your other grandchildren?
3. How different is looking after X compared to looking after X’s parent at the same age?
a. What did you do then that you do not do now?
b. What do you now that you did not do then?
4. Have your thoughts changed about fathering do you think since you were a new dad?
a. What things made you change do you think?
5. So what do you think is the difference between being a father and a grandfather?
6. Did becoming a grandfather change your life?
a. If so in what ways? (neg, pos)
7. Who influenced you most about being a grandfather?/ Has anyone been helpful to you as
a grandfather in this time?
a. What were your own grandfathers like?
8. What helps you manage any things you had to deal with as a grandfather?
9. So how would you describe the grandfather you are now?
10. What are the most important lessons you have learned about being a grandfather?
11. Had you imagined that grandfathering would be like this?
12. Is there anything else you would like to mention?