Adult Children Move Out: Family Meals and Reflections on Parental Self-sacrifice at the Moment of Transition

Abstract

This article examines the differentiation and change in the shared eating practices of parents and their adult children, linking theories of sacrifice with empirical research. Drawing on 26 qualitative, in-depth dyadic interviews, the authors analyse the transformation of expectations sensed by the parents before and after their adult children leave home. While the article confirms the significance of meals for family relationships, it further develops the findings in transition to the empty nest phase of family life. First, it examines the understanding of different aspects and distribution of everyday sacrificing in an intergenerational family, as well as the dynamics introduced by the life course transition connected with adult children moving out. Second, it analyses how this transition carries in consequence a transformation in the food-related practices of the parents of adult children, who tend to pay less attention to the quality, variety, and regularity of their dinners once their children have moved out. Third, it explores children’s visits to their family home that can trigger or modify old self-sacrifice patterns. Finally, it demonstrates the perceived gains or losses resulting from parents’ long-term sacrifices connected with feeding their children.

Keywords

adult children empty nest family life course meals sacrifice

Introduction

In religious and anthropological studies, sacrifice is a rite that establishes the relationship between human beings and the sacred, in which blood and flesh are the intermediary to join the divine and the profane (Hubert and Mauss, 1981). While in religious contexts sacrifice is linked to the fundamental and metaphysical matters, contemporary psychology and sociology approach sacrifice as an inevitable element of maintaining everyday interrelationships: renouncing one’s needs or desires for the benefit of the other (Impett et al., 2005). Everyday sacrifices are studied in the context of family relationships, for example, food-related practices (Cappellini and Parsons, 2012, 2013a, 2013b), or romantic relationships, as a quantitative variable in questionnaires and diaries (Akçabozan et al., 2017; Curran et al., 2016, 2015) The studies on sacrifice in dyadic romantic relationships demonstrate the impact of sacrifice on the quality of the relationship depending on the intentions of the sacrifier, the attribution of such intentions to the partner, the strength of commitment (Whitton et al., 2007), and the social value orientation (Van Lange et al., 1997).

From a sociological perspective, most attention has been given to the concept of sacrifice in the context of preparing and serving food in families with underage children (Cappellini and Parsons, 2013a, 2013b) However, much less consideration has been given to families in the process of life-course transition. While the question of change related to a child’s birth has been explored to some extent (Akçabozan et al., 2017; Curran et al., 2016, 2015), the empty nest phase is less often analysed. The rare exceptions are Gram et al.’s (2015) studies taken from the adult children’s perspective and Hogg et al. (2004) from the mothers’ perspective. Responding to this gap, this study explores the everyday meal-related sacrifices in families that are in the process of transition to the empty nest phase. Our research demonstrates transformations in sacrifice practices after adult children leave home, focussing on how parents reflect on their earlier sacrifices, monitor their current foodwork, and construct their future life project as a couple.

Our study develops a relational, dynamic, and contextual approach to sacrifice. It presents sacrifice as a practice reflecting community values and their contradictions, which can be observed in how mothers and fathers of adult children engage in broader considerations about their past, current and future decisions related to organising family mealtimes. On the example of middle-class families living in two big Polish cities, our study will demonstrate how parents juggle between contradictory strategies and re-prioritise their efforts. First, we examine the understanding and distribution of sacrifice related to the organisation and consumption of a family meal. Second, we analyse the change in meal-related sacrifice practices following the process of adult children leaving home. Third, we explore children’s visits to their family home that can trigger or modify old self-sacrifice patterns. Finally, we demonstrate what gains or losses resulting from self-sacrifice are described by the parents in retrospect.

Sacrifice, responsibility, and family meals

Although the notion of sacrifice is well known in academic literature, it has mostly been interpreted in religious terms. As Hubert and Mauss (1981) indicated, sacrifice modifies the condition of a moral person who accomplishes it. Still, this abnegation also has a selfish aspect, ‘because the sacrifier gives up something or himself but he does not give himself’ (Hubert and Mauss, 1981: 13). Quite the opposite, if he or she gave something, it was aimed at receiving something else. Thus, the logic of sacrificing is not so very different from the universal process of giving–receiving (Mauss, 2002; Ruskola, 2005), even though it includes an essential aspect of sacralisation.

While less often analysed in a secular context, sacrifice without its religious aspect has vast interpretative potential. It can be understood as a performative aspect of dramatisation (Goffman, 1959) linked to the act of giving – when somebody emphasises what he or she loses (‘sacrifices’) to strengthen the moral pressure on fulfilling his or her expectations addressed to the receiver of the good (Bourdillon, 1980). Indirectly, it also communicates a hierarchy of values, which is expressed in the tendency to sacrifice something considered less important (DeVault, 1991). While similar to the notion of exchange, the category of sacrifice is not synonymous with it. Unlike counting outlays and costs in the division of household duties, sacrifice refers to giving something back in an irreversible, unrecoverable manner. It thus refers to the justification of an outlay of time and effort that is unequal but culturally sanctioned and considered appropriate, so that, it does not tend to be balanced, as the theory of exchange would predict. Therefore, sacrifice is a category that can be helpfully applied to analyse family relationships (Cappellini and Parsons, 2012, 2013a).

As originally sacrifice often involved food offerings, the cultural association between sacrifice and meal preparation and sharing is more potent than between sacrifice and other household duties. Although quite rare, there are works demonstrating that shared meals need mutual adjustments (Pontecorvo et al., 2001), so that, family members modify their food preferences and time schedules, thus contributing to recreating family cohesion and intimacy (Kremer-Sadlik et al., 2008). Brannen et al. (2013), who examined the conditions under which families with children were able to eat together during the working week, introduced the term of synchronicity to catch complex processes through which meals and mealtimes were coordinated. Coordination of a family meal seems a considerable challenge, as individuals and families commonly experience a constant state of busyness and time pressure (Warde, 1999) and lack of synchronicity of time schedules (Southerton, 2006). It is also very important to acknowledge gender differences and the role of mothers in the distribution of sacrifice. As cooking and shopping are highly gendered work, it is mothers who usually sacrifice their own needs and prioritise other family members’ preferences (DeVault, 1991). In return, they expect the family members to sit together, talk, eat everything, and be involved and devoted. In addition, the mothers are often assumed to get some symbolic reward, such as recognition, appreciation, and gratitude (Cappellini and Parsons, 2012). Unequal distribution of sacrifice in a family is also linked to morality and ideology. Even if the sacrifice for one’s own family is individual and carried out for personal goals, it reflects community values. As Van Nistelrooij and Visse (2018) observe, the ethics of care and taking responsibility for others could explain sacrifice quite well when people are interconnected by dependency relations. In the context of family relations, women and parents come to be assigned responsibility for care more than others (like their young children or men), even at the cost of their own self-interest or well-being. Food ideology based on sacrifice provides parents and especially mothers with good reasons for doing all the food-related labour (Cappellini and Parsons, 2012, 2013a; Ochs and Shohet, 2006). DeVault (1991) revealed the significance of cooking and serving meals for maintaining the subordinate position of women in many areas of social life. Sered (1988) demonstrated how cooking treated as a sacred act contributes to gender inequalities based on religious grounds. A particular vision of the family, consistent with the dominant ideology, is triggered when guests come to visit (Blichfeldt and Gram, 2017). The aspect of the unnecessary surplus is symbolised when some activities are performed with additional effort or care.

While existing research recognises the problem of unequal distribution of time and effort within a family, the dynamics of this phenomenon has rarely been a subject of interest. Time, age, and generation are categories that may provide a new perspective from which this problem can be investigated. Aronsson and Gottzén’s (2011) research on intergenerational dinnertime encounters demonstrated that older children took different affective stances and distinct generational positions during a meal. They sometimes acted like ‘uncivilised’ children while at other times like adults who were guardians of food morality. Other authors have also demonstrated the dynamics of family roles in the context of shared family time. While having time for children is a moral pressure on working parents, when children grow up, the moral pressure moves on to the children, who may feel obligated to spend time with their parents. In later stages of family life, family roles and responsibilities may become less important than shared quality time (Bouchard, 2014; Kremer-Sadlik et al., 2008).

As we have demonstrated, literature now recognises how negotiation processes concerning the details of planning, preparing, and consuming family meals imply certain moral justifications and contribute to redefining the individual and shared identities of family members. Some attention has also been given to the concept of sacrifice as an important element of everyday family relations, like, for example, abnegating one’s own needs and desires for others – particularly in the works of Cappellini and Parsons (2013a, 2013b). However, research to date has tended to focus on families with underage children without giving consideration to the life course dynamics. Our article focusses on the differentiation and change in the parents’ self-sacrificing practices in the context of expectations and burdens related to family meals before and after adult children leave home. Drawing extensively upon the works of Cappellini and Parsons, we aim to develop their findings in the transition to the empty nest phase of family life.

Methodology

The article is based on an empirical study undertaken in two big cities in Poland. The research material consists of 26 qualitative, in-depth dyadic interviews conducted in 2018–2019. The couples, aged 50–64, whose children (1–4) were all adults and moved out within the last 5 years or were very close to leaving home were interviewed. There were two methods for recruiting the participants: advertisements in local newspapers and the snowball method. All families were dual-income. The sample consisted mainly of white middle-class members (the majority of the sample had a college/university degree and an income around or above the average for Poland). As the population of Poland became nearly entirely ethnically homogeneous after World War II, the sample lacked ethnic diversity. The interviews lasted about 1.5 hours, and they were conducted at the interviewees’ homes. Each couple was interviewed by a couple of researchers (a man and a woman), including one of the authors of this article.

All the interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and anonymised. They were partly structured, and while the interviewers used a topic guide, they often explored specific issues more thoroughly, asking additional, in-depth questions. The interview guide focussed on changes in the everyday life of couples after their children had left home. There were five general topics: couple biography, the process of the children moving out, changes in individual practices, changes in couple practices, and relations, and changes in practices and relations related to children. Our analysis focussed mainly on the answers to the questions that referred to family visits, such as: ‘How did you usually spend time with your children before they left?’, ‘What meals did you have together?’, ‘How often do your children visit you?’, ‘What are the occasions?’, ‘Could you tell us about one such visit?’, ‘How are the meals different compared to the meals before moving out?’, ‘Do your children behave more like guests or more like household members? (do they cook, clean, open the fridge, have their own set of keys?)’, ‘How often do you visit your children?’, ‘What are the occasions?’, ‘Could you tell us about one such visit?’, ‘How comfortable do you feel?’, and ‘Do your children prepare food? (Should they?)’.

The dyadic interviews helped us see the potential disagreement between the mother and the father in a couple. They also fit in the relational approach to the research problem by juxtaposing mothers’ and fathers’ perspectives. The spouses continually corrected and supplemented each other’s statements during the interviews. All the interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analysed with the use of MAXQDA software. The analysis was a multi-staged process. While it bore a resemblance to grounded theory to some extent (the coding process was iterative and quite open), it should best be described as a reflexive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2020). On the inductive–deductive continuum of thematic Analysis (TA), our analysis was closer to the inductive end. With reference to Braun and Clarke’s (2020) six-phase framework, the first step (familiarisation) included reading interview transcripts noting all references to children’s visits and meals. Our first general idea was to analyse meal-related practices before and after the children left. The idea was based on the literature on family meals and life-course transition. In the second step, that is, coding, we focussed on the family meals and their meanings; how they are organised and synchronised; what they mean to family members; what the division of labour is; and what the role of meals in family-making is. The third step (generating initial themes) involved discovering the importance of the notion of sacrifice. While the interviewees did not always use the term itself, we observed an unequal distribution of time and effort regarding family meals as something significant for the parents, particularly for mothers. We analysed all the instances when somebody emphasised what they lost, gave, or offered to somebody else, which involved self-abnegation rather than an exchange. In this phase, we analysed sociological, psychological, and anthropological literature on sacrifice, and we moved to phase 4 (developing and reviewing themes). The material was read and coded again. We then defined and named our final themes (stage 5): the dimensions of meal-related sacrifice (time, effort, and preferences) and the four-element grid of negotiating parent-child positions regarding sacrifice and family meals.

Results

Sacrifice as a significant category in preparing family meals

Findings reveal that in general, family life involved various kinds and dimensions of sacrifice. One of the female interviewees aptly noted that parenthood involved sacrificing her entire time and effort to the family’s good.

That’s why they say that when adults have a child, they actually begin an eighteen to twenty-year investment. And this is not only a financial investment; you invest your time, your effort, you sacrifice your entire life. (DDI_P_2_M49; 1S)¹

The sacrifice related to family meals was quite commonly unevenly distributed.

Obviously, it was me who cooked and fed the entire family, as I had more time at home. (DDI_G_9_M50; 1D)

This was said by one of the interviewed mothers. The phrase ‘obviously’ demonstrates what DeVault (1991) describes as ‘natural’ abnegation embedded in the roles of mothers and wives, mainly referring to feeding, in which the idea of love and care is manifested most clearly (DeVault, 1991). In another family, the husband and the son (visiting his parents at the time of the interview and chatting with the interviewers for a short while before leaving) complain about the decreasing quality of family meals after the son moved out. They remember with nostalgia the good old days when the woman used to sacrifice herself more than she does now.

There used to be soups; now there are no soups. There used to be two dishes; now there is only one. (DDI_P_9_F59; 1S 1D)

While the feminist critique demonstrates the greater involvement of women and the greater pressure they experience, our study reveals how the perspective of a mother interweaves with the ‘we-parents’ joint perspective. The presence of the ‘we-parents’ perspective in our study is related to the research method, as both parents were interviewed simultaneously. The parents were more inclined to create a shared, coherent narrative regarding the family and its past, including presenting both of them (not only mothers) as the sacrificing subject, and they cared to present a ‘fair’ picture in which neither party was assigned an ‘undeserved’ amount of sacrifice. The mutual examination and inspection regarding the family’s distribution of sacrifice evoked emotions, such as anger, sorrow, or grief. For example, one of the mothers addresses her husband, who had just mentioned their sharing of responsibilities at home, saying,

Sharing? What sharing, Piotr? I did everything, and you came back from work, and everything was done, there was lunch almost every day. I had a pharmacy to run, I was there three or four times a week, but there was a three-course dinner, dessert, and everything every day. (DDI_G_11_M51; 1S 1D 2GC)

Anger could also be heard in another woman’s voice when she doubted the words of her husband that he had been making sandwiches for their children:

I can’t remember a single instance when you made sandwiches for the children! (DDI_P_1_M52; 3S)

While sacrifice related to family meals is linked to the role of the mother, sometimes other family members take this task. In one of the couples, the father took the entire responsibility for providing the child with warm meals, and he adjusted his schedule to his son’s schedule. The mother in this family stated clearly: ‘I don’t particularly care’. Convinced that providing children with homemade food every day was not necessary, she would give her son some money so he could eat out. The father did not want to give up his idea of a good home and a child that is well cared for, although his everyday struggles were a source of stress.

I think ok, it’s 2 p.m., he will soon be back, and he won’t have eaten anything so I need to be fast; I have to go, cook, prepare, serve and then I can go to work. (DDI_G_3_F45; 1S 1D)

Sacrificing one’s own food preferences

According to DeVault (1991), feeding the family involves providing ‘good’ food, which means considering different tastes and needs of the family members. As Cappellini and Parsons (2013b: 122) demonstrate, ‘sacrifices include the many taken for granted practices of self-abnegating her own [mother’s] desires and prioritising others’ preferences and requests’. One of the mothers in our study used to cook two dinners: one, traditional, for her husband and another, less traditional, for herself and her son and her son’s girlfriend:

Yes, it was often the case that the three of us had something bizarre to eat, and for the husband something more traditional then had to be made. (DDI_P_12_M48; 1S)

In another family, both parents agreed that their child’s preferences were the priority. Sacrificing their taste seemed natural to them:

If you have a child, you have to adjust to your child’s culinary preferences. (DDI_P_2_M49; 1S)

Another mother used to cook a lot of meat despite her own desire to eat more vegetarian meals because the son’s preferences were pivotal for her:

And this complicated our cuisine a bit because I’d rather have cooked something else while he preferred meat. (DDI_P_13_M50; 1S 1D)

In the next example, the mother cooked vegan dishes for her daughter while considering them complicated, time-consuming, and less tasty. She felt, however, that it was her duty to provide her adult child with a meal, particularly as her daughter was ‘very slim’:

Because if she [still] lived here, I’d feel obliged to make food, I’d feel she needs to eat, because she, as such a slim person . . . I’d make her all these [vegan dishes] . . . I made them for a long time, sometimes even today, I occasionally cook a pumpkin soup, and I send it to her, or those vegetarian pates, I tell you, it’s madness with these vegans! (DDI_P_6_M60; 1D)

The child’s leaving home results in relief of no longer having to adjust to their preferences. While the mother, mentioned in the example above, now prepares meat dishes again, another mother could finally give up on meat when her son and daughter-in-law moved out.

It’s noticeable because I could change my cooking entirely. I tried to before – [but] it conflicted with [my son’s and my daughter-in-law’s preferences] because they had meat; I cooked this meat. (DDI_P_2_M49; 1S)

None of the parents spoke about forcing their children to eat what they disliked. What is more, it seemed that negotiations and compromise were hardly ever the case. It seemed obvious to the parents, particularly to the mothers, that prioritising their children’s preferences was their obligation.

Sacrificing time for meal preparation and for sitting at the table together

In one of the studied families, a husband and a son used to return from work and university at different times of the day, making the woman work like in a ‘home restaurant’, which was particularly demanding. She felt as if she never left the kitchen – as soon as she had served her son and cleaned up, she had to start to prepare dinner for her husband. Each of the two men required her to devote her time to keep them company during the meal, so that every day the woman had her dinnertime twice.

When he studied here, he came back around 1:30 p.m. and said: ‘I’m hungry, mom’, and he [husband] came back at 4 p.m., so I cooked twice. The second dinner was heated up, but one needed to stand by the cooker (. . .) and I spent half a day in the kitchen, because first one, and then the other, he wants to eat with me, sit with me, and now there is only one so, yes. (DDI_P_3_M56; 1S)

After her son moved out, the woman felt relieved – she now serves only one man. The burden of sacrifice in this family was doubly disproportionate, which was rather typical for the families studied: first, it relied more on the parents than their children and, second, considering cooking and serving meals, it relied more on the mothers compared with fathers.

Family meals demand not only effort from the person who provides the food. They also require time from all participants of the meal. We distinguished two aspects of such temporal sacrifice. First, having meals is time-consuming; second, organising shared meals demands orchestrating different time schedules of the family members. While generally enjoying talking to his son, one father felt it was sometimes demanding to accompany him during every meal.

Sometimes I’d sit and he’d say: dad, come and have supper with me. I’d say: no, I won’t. And he was like oh, so only come and sit, talk to me. (DDI_P_3_F50; 1S)

Of all family members, children’s schedules were always a priority for their parents, and however complicated they were, the entire family was subordinate to them. One father recalls:

Your life revolves around him. You do your things, but when it’s 6 p.m., and he’s going to be back soon, you need to start preparing. (. . .) Theoretically, he’s out most of the day, but the day and weekly schedule revolve around him. (DDI_G_1_F50; 1S)

Parents’ sacrifice for their children was a significant part of the family system. It brought benefits, such as a sense of fulfilling one’s duty, regardless of the narratives of relief and rest that emerged in the ‘empty nest’ phase.

Children move out of their parents’ home

Children’s leaving home brings a radical transformation of the family system based on everyday sacrifice. Released from the obligation of making meals for their children, some parents give up on dinners altogether, while others cook less or make fast, thrifty food for themselves. The following excerpt demonstrates a couple who have stopped cooking altogether. The woman says:

Yes, I didn’t think of it. We have practically stopped cooking dinners. Until the children left, dinner was sacred, but when they moved out (. . .) there are no regular dinners for the two of us. (. . .) When we want to have something good, we eat out. (DDI_P_4_M54; 2S)

Although another mother continues to cook dinners, she claims to be ‘more relaxed’ about it. While providing children with a healthy, balanced, and tasty dinner seemed a crucial parental responsibility, meals for her and her husband no longer have to meet the same quality standards and, consequently, are less related to tension or stress.

But surely you are more relaxed; you don’t need to worry. You don’t have to think, you don’t have it on your plate, ‘what’s for dinner today?’, because even if there’s no dinner, my husband will eat whatever, a fried egg or something. (DDI_P_1_M52; 3S)

As we have demonstrated in the previous section, one of the factors that made family dinner’s hard work was to match different daily routines. The narratives of parents experiencing their relief in the ‘empty nest’ confirm this observation. One woman, for instance, feels at ease now, after the children moved out, because she found it aggravating to prepare dinner for people who were hungry at different times of the day:

When the kids used to come back home, you know, one at this time, the other at a different time, and everything had to be prepared quickly, but now we are alone (. . .) we don’t have to rush to have dinner ready for 3 p.m. or 4 p.m. (DDI_P_8_M48; 2S 1D 3GC)

After children leave, less is eaten, so that less needs to be cooked. As mothers cooked large amounts for so long, it is now not easy to change these amounts, and a new strategy emerges, which is to cook a considerable quantity of a one-pot dish and heat it up for 2 or 3 days, instead of cooking every day. One woman, for example, has adopted this way:

And this shopping, and preparing food, and all that – now I cook soup for three days, and that’s it, generally. I usually cook the same amount of food as I used to, but it lasts twice as long (. . .). (DDI_G_7_M48; 2D 1GC)

So has another relieved mother:

We don’t pay so much attention to food, to cooking a different dish every day. Once every few days is enough. (DDI_P_4_M54; 2S)

As we see, children’s moving out leads to a significant change in the parents’ eating routine and it brings a considerable sense of relief. Some parents radically end with their food-related self-sacrifice and they stop having dinners ultimately. Others cook less often, or they cook less varied and sophisticated dishes. Considerable relief results from the lack of necessity to negotiate between different tastes and different daily schedules. While some couples whose children moved out still wait for one another to have dinner together, they felt it is their choice to do so. On the contrary, dinner with children was experienced as a duty to be followed and thus considered stressful or at least fatiguing.

In this section, we have demonstrated how parents feel about eating without children on a daily basis. In the next section, we will analyse how children’s visits in family homes may in some cases trigger tension and a sense of obligation again.

Children’s visits

We have found that there were four potential scenarios regarding parental sacrifice when adult children who had left home came to visit their parents: (1) parents offered their sacrifice and children accepted it, (2) parents offered sacrifice and children did not accept it, (3) parents did not offer sacrifice and children did not accept it, and (4) parents did not offer sacrifice and children accepted it. We will now elaborate on each scenario.

Parents offer sacrifice and children accept it

In this case, sacrifice is fulfilled. The object of devotion (the child) gracefully accepts the effort, time and self-abnegation offered by the parents. While parents have already given up on meal-related sacrifice after their children moved out, the child’s visit is a trigger that launches a performance pattern from the ‘full nest’ period. A meal with the child differs significantly from the parents’ daily meals. It usually demands more effort; it is more time-consuming, and it is tailored to the child’s preferences.

In one family, when her son and daughter-in-law come over, the mother always cooks something special: the dish must be extraordinary and fit everyone’s tastes:

But this is not an everyday meal, I make something everybody likes, this is something more. (DDI_P_12_M48; 1S)

The mother’s sacrifice is accepted by her son and daughter-in-law who ‘discuss with her what to cook’ and who are regularly ‘bribed’ with extraordinary meals by the parents who want them to come over (see the section ‘Gratification’).

Another mother also focusses on her children’s preferences. Preparing the family meal starts a couple of days earlier, when she begins to think what to cook and she calls the children to ask.

And there was a dinner (at the weekend), and I started thinking about what to cook on Thursday and I called them asking what they felt like eating. (DDI_P_9_M54; 1S 1D)

Not only do the children accept their mother’s sacrifice, they even demand it. Shortly after the son moved out, the mother did not call to ask what he wanted to have for dinner – it was the son who clearly stated he expected it (see scenario 3).

Another woman goes one step further. Not only does she clean the house and prepare dinner, but she also plans how to spend time with her son and daughter-in-law so no one will get bored. Before her son moved out, she never thought about it, but now she believes it is her duty to provide an enjoyable family time.

When they come to visit, I have an odd feeling that I need to sit and talk to them as if they were guests; that I need to develop a plan, maybe we should go somewhere, do something together. Before [they moved out] we would simply hang around, but now they are guests, and I feel obliged to organise it. And it makes me feel a bit tired. I say, ok, I’ll make dinner, we’ll sit down to dinner, but what about after dinner? (DDI_P_4_M54; 2S)

Right after her son moved out, another mother prepared very carefully for his every visit. Family dinner involved hard work, particularly cleaning, which she compares to preparations to the Pope’s visit (‘as if the Pope was visiting us!’). The religious allusions are also observable in her husband’s words. He explains the intensive cleaning: ‘one cleans to have one’s child’s favour’ – the parents wanted to appease the deity with their sacrifice. Her husband’s narrative also demonstrates the connection parents see between their sacrifice and love for their children. The intensity of love for their son was communicated (dramatised) by extensive cleaning.

But the fact is that the love is deep so that one would run around with a cloth [and clean]. (DDI_P_2_M49; 1S)

The son never suggested his parents did not have to work so hard to host him. However, the parents finally decided that their sacrifice had limits and cleaned a bit less. The woman says: ‘We don’t get crazy before they visit anymore’.

Parents offer sacrifice and children do not accept it

In some cases, the sacrifice offer is not accepted by the children. They refuse to come for dinner or to accept extra food to take away for later, or they simply say they do not want anything particular for dinner when mothers call to ask. One of the mothers seems disappointed when recapitulating dinner refusals from her daughter. Even though the mother offered vegan dishes that cost her a lot of effort, her daughter would not come to Sunday dinners as described earlier.

There were many refusals when I made dinners, and I made something particularly for her, on Sundays, on Saturdays. But she didn’t want to come over; there were a lot of refusals. (DDI_P_6_M60; 1D)

The mother’s narrative demonstrates that refusal of a sacrifice may be a source of harm and bitterness.

Parents do not offer sacrifice and children do not accept it

Although it seems rare, sometimes the transformation related to children’s moving out is so profound that even their visits do not get parents to sacrifice again, which causes children’s dissatisfaction. In our study, it was the case of the parents, who at the very beginning put a lot of effort into making the family dinner special, but after some time, they gave up. They seem to like their new sacrifice-free daily life and they want their son’s visit to fit in around it. However, their son is not satisfied with his parents’ new approach. When his mother confesses that his first visits were different, he complains that now he needs to ask his mom for dinner:

Mother:

At the beginning [a family dinner] was a celebration or something . . . to me, it was a celebration, I mean, I treated it like one.

Son:

And now there is no dinner at all, I have to call and remind [mom to invite me].² (DDI_P_9_M54; 1S 1D)

The mother even says that her son compares her to his friends’ mothers who, unlike her, ask their sons about their dinner preferences:

Mother:

[the son] used to call and say that (. . .) his colleagues’ moms called and asked them what they wanted to eat and that I never called him to ask what he fancied. (DDI_P_9_M54; 1S 1D)

Parents do not offer sacrifice and children accept it

In some families, sacrifice seems to have gradually faded away. As children grew up, they were treated more as partners who could contribute to shared meals. The parents of this type are very relaxed about their children’s visits. They emphasise that they prioritise comfort and joy of being together, and they do not want any extra effort to disturb it:

Father:

(. . .) there are no preparations (. . .)

Mother:

We can simply have a glass of water and talk (. . .)

Father:

Such freedom (. . .) We’re in shorts, no cleaning, no special clothes, I don’t cook anything special. I simply take things out of the fridge. (DDI_P_13_M50_F55; 1S1D)

Finally, in some instances, the sacrifice may be a subject of reflection and a source of dissonance. The growing narrative of self-care, well-being, and autonomy clashes with the archetype of the self-sacrificing mother and triggers a change.

Gratification (in retrospect): what do parents get in return?

As we mentioned above, the sacrifier often gives something to receive something else. In the case of families, outlays are long-term; they change the lives and identities of the parents and their children and they involve a long-term expectation of the ‘profit’. In the interview process, parents often seek the justification of their sacrifice. Thanks to it, their children succeeded, the family preserved strong bonds, the parents had a sense of control, and maintained the parental identity even after their children left. We will now analyse the various gains received by the sacrificing parents.

The first gain of the sacrificing parent is the sense that his or her life is meaningful or that they have lived according to their values and beliefs. One of the mothers, who worked part-time to have enough time for her children, believes that her effort resulted in her children’s success in life and work. She compares her approach and that of her friends, concluding that families with two working parents may have problems bringing up children as successfully as she did. This belief helps this mother cope with her frustration over giving up her career.

I could have had a great career. There were periods I felt terribly frustrated but summing things up and comparing our story with the stories of our friends’ children, where both parents worked very intensely and long hours, I believe that I made a good choice. We feel deep satisfaction with what our children have achieved, how they reached adulthood and what they do now. In most part, I think this is, thanks to the fact that there was time to drop them off at school without hurrying and to sit and talk. (DDI_P1_M52; 3S)

Another gift received by the sacrificing parent is the sense of control. One of the mothers metaphorically names her homemade dinners ‘mother’s tentacles’. She feels that home food, which she prepares for her sons at weekends for the following week, helps her reach her sons somehow as if the meals were an extension of her control over her sons’ lives. She is calmer knowing that her sons will eat a warm meal during the week.

Mother:

When you prepare something for the children, you always make more food. (. . .) This is an extension of my maternal ‘tentacles’ because they always take something with them when they visit.

Father:

They order a menu.

Mother:

Some jars, food containers, (with) salads. This is in part an extension of my home meals because I prepare them here at home. (. . .) But this is somehow a transfer of this substitute of home, that’s what I think. Besides, they didn’t quite escape me, because I give something from myself. . . (DDI_P_5_M52_F56; 2S)

Self-sacrifice can also bring a sense of being needed. One woman decides that now is the time to sacrifice because very soon her daughter might stop needing her.

And also, I like to feel needed, and I can’t refuse when my older daughter asks me for something, because I always say to myself: she’ll soon stop asking me for that, she won’t want me to pick her up from a party or drop her off. (DDI_P10_M50; 2D)

A significant gain for the sacrificing agent in the context of family meals is strengthening the bonds within the family. Some meals (time-consuming, extraordinary or comfort food) have the power to attract family members and bring them together. One couple cooks chicken soup to lure their daughter-in-law or some ethnic food to make their son come over.

Father:

(. . .) My wife loves to cook, cuisines from all around the world, they [their son and daughter-in-law] sometimes order something from us so that they can have some nice food.

Mother:

And our daughter-in-law needs to be bribed sometimes; she’ll come over if you tell her that there’ll be chicken soup. (DDI_P_12_M48_F49; 1S)

Another gift received by parents in return for their sacrifice is their children’s sacrifice. Children may invite the parents and cook for them; they may give up on something (even their independence) for the sake of their parents; they may also subordinate to their parents’ wishes, tastes, standards, even if they are no longer under their roof. The following is a good example of such a situation when parents of adult children resemble how it used to be when they felt obliged to have frequent visits to their parents’ homes for shared meals.

Mother:

Well, we were like prisoners of this situation because we suddenly moved out, they were left alone and we went to them for dinner every week, and we were sick of it.

Father:

Yeah, it was tiring. Really. Going there for lunch at 1 p.m., we would come home, say at 7 p.m., with plenty of food for the next few days. And that was just sitting at the table, wasn’t it? Lunch, coffee after lunch, cake. Then supper.

Mother:

Yeah, but we felt such a compulsion that they were waiting for us, that we were to come. (DDI_P_13_M50_F55; 1S 1D)

The sacrifice of children (or an expectation of such sacrifice) may be interpreted as accepting and preserving an unbalanced relationship pattern even after the children leave the family home. Former or present sacrifice by the parents may be used as an argument when parents expect sacrifice from the children – to reciprocate (balance) the outlays. Sometimes parents dramatise their own dependence and permanently demand something from their children – long and frequent visits, being invited by children to their place, frequent and absorbing help, being in touch constantly. Sometimes, even sole acceptance of the unnecessary sacrifice of the parents may be interpreted as children’s sacrifice as it reduces their freedom, while the only ‘sacrifice’ children need at this stage is that their parents accept their independence and the fact they do not want their parents to give them anything else.

Discussion

In this article, we have confirmed multiple observations regarding the significance of meals for contemporary family and intergenerational family relationships, as well as the potential of using the category of sacrifice to understand some of its inner logic. We have also revealed some of the links between everyday practices and ideologies of parenthood and familial solidarity.

The four-element grid in which parents may or may not offer sacrifice and the children may or may not accept it demonstrates the relational, dynamic, and contextual character of the family, particularly in the times of life-course transition. It may also be analysed in the context of rapid social and demographic changes that affect intergenerational solidarity. One of them is the transformation from the traditional model of asymmetrical support, interdependence, and inter-family solidarity at the expense of other social activity into the contemporary model of independence and openness to non-family relationships and support (Finch and Mason, 1993; Meulen and Wright, 2010). Whereas self-abnegation may be interpreted as a continuation of the traditional model of interdependence and focus on the relational good of the entire family, rejection of self-sacrificing behaviour may be read as transformation into the contemporary model of individuation. The four analysed situations portray the family dynamics and their matched or mismatched expectations and anticipations, examining self-sacrifice in the context of transforming familial solidarity. In model 1, both parties want to continue the traditional path of asymmetrical support and concentration of intergenerational relations. In model 2, while parents are willing to continue the unbalanced family relationship, children prefer to move to a symmetrical, unencumbered model. In model 3, while children would prefer to continue the old path, parents want to remove the disproportionate burden and focus on themselves.

While the grid above presents four clear-cut situations, the family dynamics and complexity inclines to include the hybridity of transformation from traditional to contemporary models of familial solidarity in the context of family meals (Bachórz, 2018a). It is also important to note that our research demonstrates gender imbalance in self-sacrificing behaviour in a family. The cases when fathers took the burden of meal-related sacrifice were rare.

Whereas our research results echo the quoted Western European and American studies to a considerable extent, national-level differences are also observed (Mureşan and Hărăguş, 2015; Silverstein and Bengtson, 1997). In Poland, lunches at work and school are rare, so that, family dinners are prepared earlier during the day, just after the children return from school, and it could be more difficult to synchronise them with parents’ work hours. Therefore, parents – most often mothers – would sometimes decide to limit or quit their professional engagements. It is equally important that almost all meals are prepared at home — household expenditure on eating out in Poland is among the lowest in Europe. In addition, there is a widespread belief in the higher nutritional and taste value of food produced at home. Such beliefs and practices could result in a disproportionately larger burden on older generations regarding food production and meal preparation, even when adult children have moved out (Bachórz, 2018b; Mroczkowska, 2019).

Another significant aspect of intercultural differences is the direction of familial support. In comparison with other European countries, the direction of service provision in Poland goes from parents towards adult children rather than the other way around. The older generation puts more emphasis on their own obligations, allowing adult children to benefit from these liabilities (Meil, 2011). Parental support in Poland is among the highest in Europe (Isengard et al., 2018). In communist Poland, the traditional model of strong interdependence and inter-family support was common and while the new model of independence and autonomy is growing stronger, old patterns are still observed. Moreover, in Poland, as well as in other countries with a low level of institutional social support (e.g. Italy), in case of the ‘sandwich’ generation help goes in both directions – parents support their adult children and at the same time their elderly parents.

The ideological role of mothers in Poland also justifies the greater housework burden on women despite their full-time work (Gal and Kligman, 2000; Marody and Giza, 2000). Those beliefs have roots in strong Catholic influences in the Polish tradition, which equipped the ideal Polish female ‘with the characteristics usually associated with the virgin-mother Holy Mary: modesty, virtue, purity, sacrifice, suffering’ (Rogawska, 2017:9) as well as the complicated Polish history, filled with wars and revolutions, which strengthened the archetype of Polish mothers who take the entire burden of childcare and housework on themselves. The communists continued the myth while equipping it with elements of communists ideology – the Polish mother should sacrifice for the socialist homeland and her children, and her heroism ‘manifested itself in getting food on the table for her family’ (Ibidem: 9).

Conclusion

The findings from our study add several new contributions to the current literature on the topic. While drawing upon up-to-date findings on family sacrifices, we have provided a detailed understanding of different aspects of everyday sacrifices in an intergenerational family as well as the dynamics introduced by the life course transition connected with adult children moving out. We have shown how this transition carries, in consequence, a transformation of food-related practices of adult children’s parents. We have also observed that children’s visits to their family home temporarily mobilise the parents to renew or even intensify the old patterns of sacrifice connected with feeding the family. Finally, we have demonstrated that the described transition process is varied and complex, sometimes being a contradiction as the discourse of self-care and individual well-being clashes with the strong cultural expectation of parental or, especially, maternal sacrifice. In general, we have shown that sacrifice is a complex aspect of family relations rather than an element of a dyadic game of losses and gains. Combining Van Nisterlooij’s concept of sacrifice, relational approach to family, and Cappellini’s and Parson’s studies in self-abnegation, we have taken another step towards analysing the mechanisms of unbalanced sharing practices in the context of life course transition and family transformation.

Further research on the question of sacrifice related to family meals might explore more diversity regarding sacrifice distribution within a family. It would be interesting to compare the experiences of families from other countries. It would also be intriguing to compare the parents’ and the children’s perspective. Finally, further studies might explore class differences regarding the understanding of sacrifice and the types of practices it involves in the context of life course transition.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) disclosed the receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The article is based on a research project “Till death do us part. . . Everyday life practices of couples married 20 years or more, aged 50-64” [2018/30/E/HS6/00159], funded by National Science Centre, Poland.

ORCID iD

Marta Skowrońska

Notes

Author biographies

Dorota Rancew-Sikora is a sociology professor who works at the Institute of Sociology of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Gdańsk in Poland. She was the chair of the Social Anthropology Section of the Polish Sociology Association. She is the author of several books on conversation analysis, critical discourse analysis on hunting traditions in Poland, and the meanings of tradition in contemporary societies. She also explores issues related to social mobility, migration, hospitality, human–nature relations and everyday life. Her latest article published in the Journal of Pragmatics (together with L. Remisiewicz) describes the modes of participation of 1-year-old children in their first birthday.

Marta Skowronska is an assistant professor at the Department of Social Practice Research and Theory at the Faculty of Sociology, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan. Her research focusses on everyday life, particularly in the context of home and dwelling. She is the author of two books, one of them about the secondhand goods market as a social phenomenon and the other about the relations between dwelling and comfort. She also co-edited a book analysing the practice of receiving guests at home. She is currently working on a research project exploring the stage of family life when adult children leave their family home.

References

Akçabozan

McDaniel

Corkery

, et al. (2017) Gender, sacrifices, and variability in commitment: A daily diary study of pregnant heterosexual cohabitors and their partners. Sex Roles 77: 194–208.

Aronsson

Gottzén

(2011) Generational positions at a family dinner: Food morality and social order. Language in Society 40: 1–22.

Bachórz

(2018a) Hidden resources? Households’ strategies for maintaining control over food: Between continuity and discontinuity. Studia Humanistyczne AGH 17: 97–109. DOI: doi:10.7494/human.2018.17.2.97

Bachórz

(2018b) ‘It’s just a constant exchange of containers’: Distribution of homemade food as an element of Polish family lifestyles. Etnografia Polska LXII(1-2): 131–145.

Blichfeldt

Gram

(2017) Domestic hospitality, gender, and impression management among Danish women. Food and Foodways 25: 77–97.

Bouchard

(2014) How do parents react when their children leave home? An integrative review. Journal of Adult Development 21: 69–79.

Bourdillon

MFC

(1980) Introduction. In: Bourdillon

MFC

Fortes

(eds) Sacrifice. London: Royal Anthropological Institute, pp. 1–28.

Brannen

O’Connell

Mooney

(2013) Families, meals and synchronicity: Eating together in British dual earner families. Community, Work and Family 16: 417–434.

Braun

Clarke

(2020) One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology 18: 321–352.

10.

Cappellini

Parsons

(2012) Sharing the meal: Food consumption and family identity. Research in Consumer Behavior 14: 109–128.

11.

Cappellini

Parsons

(2013a) Practicing thrift at dinnertime: Mealtime leftovers, sacrifice and family membership. The Sociological Review 60: 121–134.

12.

Cappellini

Parsons

(2013b) (Re) enacting motherhood: Self-sacrifice and abnegation in the kitchen. In: Ruvio

Belk

(eds) The Routledge Companion to Identity and Consumption. London: Routledge, pp. 119–128.

13.

Cheal

(2002) Sociology of Family Life. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

14.

Curran

Burke

Young

, et al. (2016) Relational sacrifices about intimate behavior and relationship quality for expectant cohabitors. Marriage and Family Review 52(5): 442–460.

15.

Curran

McDaniel

Pollitt

, et al. (2015) Gender, emotion work, and relationship quality: A daily diary study. Sex Roles 73: 157–173.

16.

DeVault

(1991) Feeding the Family: The Social Organization of Caring as Gendered Work. Chicago, IL; London: The University of Chicago Press.

17.

Finch

(2007) Displaying families. Sociology 41(1): 65–81.

18.

Finch

Mason

(1993) Negotiating Family Responsibilities. London: Routledge.

19.

Gabb

(2008) Researching Intimacy in Families. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

20.

Gal

Kligman

(2000) The Politics of Gender after Socialism. A Comparative-Historical Essay. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

21.

Goffman

(1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.

22.

Gram

Hogg

Stilling

, et al. (2015) Intergenerational relationships and food consumption: The stories of young adults leaving home. Young Consumers 16: 71–84.

23.

Hogg

Folkman

Maclaran

(2004) The (re-)configuration of production and consumption in empty nest households/families. Consumption, Markets and Culture 7: 239–259.

24.

Hubert

Mauss

(1981) Sacrifice: Its Nature and Function. Chicago, IL; London: The University of Chicago Press.

25.

Impett

Gable

Peplau

(2005) Giving up and giving in: The costs and benefits of daily sacrifice in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89(3): 327–344.

26.

Isengard

König

Szydlik

(2018) Money or space? Intergenerational transfers in a comparative perspective. Housing Studies 33(2): 178–200. DOI: 10.1080/02673037.2017.1365823

27.

Kremer- Sadlik

Fatigante

Fasulo

(2008) Discourses on family time: The cultural interpretation of family togetherness in Los Angeles and Rome. Ethos 36: 283–309.

28.

Mauss

(2002) The Gift. The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. London and New York: Routledge.

29.

Meil

(2011) Individualisation and Family Solidarity. Barcelona: ‘la Caixa’ Welfare Projects.

30.

Marody

Giza-Poleszczuk

(2000) Changing images of identity in Poland: From the self-sacrificing to the self-investing woman? In Gal

Kligman

(eds) Reproducing Gender: Politics, Publics, and Everyday Life after Socialism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, pp. 151–175.

31.

Meulen

Wright

(2010) The Role of Family Solidarity: Ethical and Social Issues. CESifo DICE Report 8(2): 13–17.

32.

Mroczkowska

(2019) Pork politics: The scales of homemade food in Eastern Poland. Appetite 140: 223–230. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.04.022

33.

Mureşan

Hărăguş

(2015) Norms of filial obligation and actual support to parents in Central and Eastern Europe. Romanian Journal of Population Studies IX: 49–81.

34.

Ochs

Shohet

(2006) The cultural structuring of mealtime socialisation. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 111: 35–49.

35.

Pontecorvo

Fasulo

Sterponi

(2001) Mutual apprentices: The making of parenthood and childhood in family dinner conversations. Human Development 44: 340–361.

36.

Rogawska

(2017) The perpetuation of the myth of the Polish mother in Polish nationalist discourse through selected films from the communist era. Master Thesis published, San Francisco University, San Francisco. Available at: https://scholarworks.calstate.edu/downloads/4b29b757k (accessed 17 September 2021)

37.

Ruskola

(2005) Home economics: What is the difference between a family and a corporation? In: Ertman

Williams

(eds) Rethinking Commodification: Cases and Readings in Law and Culture. New York: New York University Press, pp. 324–344.

38.

Sered

(1988) Food and holiness: Cooking as a sacred act among Middle-Eastern Jewish women. Anthropological Quarterly 61(3): 129–139.

39.

Southerton

(2006) Analysing the temporal organisation of daily life: Social constraints, practices and their allocation. Sociology 40: 435–454.

40.

Silverstein

Bengtson

(1997) Intergenerational solidarity and the structure of adult child-parent relationships in American families. American Journal of Sociology 103: 429–460.

41.

Van Lange

Agnew

ChR

Harinck

Steemers

(1997) From game theory to real life: How social value orientation affects willingness to sacrifice in ongoing close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73(6): 1330–1344.

42.

Van Nistelrooij

Visse

(2018) Me? The invisible call of responsibility and its promise for care ethics: A phenomenological view. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 22: 275–285.

43.

Warde

(1999) Convenience food: Space and timing. British Food Journal 101: 518–527.

44.

Whitton

Stanley

Markman

(2007) If I help my partner, will it hurt me? Perceptions of sacrifice in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 26(1): 64–92.