1
From: "Human Potential & Development."
Split Justification: Development fundamentally involves both our inner landscape (**Internal World**) and our interaction with everything outside us (**External World**). (Ref: Subject-Object Distinction)..
2
From: "External World (Interaction)"
Split Justification: All external interactions fundamentally involve either other human beings (social, cultural, relational, political) or the non-human aspects of existence (physical environment, objects, technology, natural world). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive.
3
From: "Interaction with Humans"
Split Justification: All human interaction can be fundamentally categorized by its primary focus: either on the direct connection and relationship between specific individuals (from intimate bonds to fleeting encounters), or on the individual's engagement within and navigation of larger organized human collectives, their rules, roles, and systems. This dichotomy provides a comprehensive and distinct division between person-to-person dynamics and person-to-society dynamics.
4
From: "Personal Relationships"
Split Justification: Personal relationships can be fundamentally divided based on whether their primary origin is an unchosen, inherent bond (such as family or blood ties) or a volitional, chosen connection based on mutual interests, affection, or shared values. This dichotomy accounts for all personal bonds.
5
From: "Kinship and Familial Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between family relationships primarily established through shared ancestry or bloodlines (kinship by descent) and those formed through marriage, adoption, or other social and legal compacts (kinship by alliance). This provides a mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive division for all forms of inherent and familial bonds.
6
From: "Kinship by Alliance"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between alliances that establish a spousal or domestic partnership between adults (e.g., marriage, civil unions) and those that establish a parental or guardianship role for an adult towards a child (e.g., adoption, foster care). These two categories are mutually exclusive, as a single alliance compact cannot simultaneously be both an adult partnership and a new parent-child bond, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of kinship established through formal compacts.
7
From: "Alliances Establishing Parental/Guardian Roles"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between alliances that establish a new, permanent parent-child relationship with the intention of fully integrating the child into a new family unit (e.g., adoption), and those that establish a temporary or transitional guardianship role, providing care for a child while a more permanent solution is pursued, often with an aim for reunification or placement elsewhere (e.g., foster care, temporary guardianship). These two categories are mutually exclusive as an alliance cannot simultaneously be both permanently integrating and primarily temporary/transitional, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of alliances establishing parental or guardian roles.
8
From: "Alliances for Permanent Parental Integration"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between alliances for permanent parental integration where the child being integrated is already connected to the integrating parent(s) through blood, marriage, or existing household cohabitation (intrafamilial), and those where the child is brought into the family from outside existing familial or household connections (extrafamilial). These two categories are mutually exclusive, as a child's prior relationship to the integrating parent(s) is either already established within the broader family or household context or it is not, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of alliances for permanent parental integration.
9
From: "Alliances for Extrafamilial Parental Integration"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes the institutional or legal pathway through which an extrafamilial child is permanently integrated into a family. "Alliances via Public Child Welfare Systems" refers to integrations where the state (or a governmental body) is the primary legal custodian of the child, typically after parental rights have been terminated, and facilitates the adoption process. "Alliances via Private or Independent Arrangements" encompasses situations where birth parents voluntarily place a child through a private agency or directly with prospective adoptive parents (often with legal counsel), without the child being in the primary custody of a state's welfare system. These two categories are mutually exclusive, as an extrafamilial integration process operates primarily under either state custody/facilitation or a private/voluntary arrangement, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of alliances for extrafamilial parental integration.
10
From: "Alliances via Private or Independent Arrangements"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between private adoptions where a licensed private agency acts as the primary intermediary to match birth parents and prospective adoptive parents and facilitate the legal process, and independent adoptions where birth parents directly choose and place their child with prospective adoptive parents, typically with legal counsel but without an agency intermediary. These two categories are mutually exclusive, as an adoption process primarily uses either a private agency or operates as a direct independent placement, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of extrafamilial parental integration via private or independent arrangements.
11
From: "Alliances via Independent Direct Placement"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between independent direct placements where the birth parent(s) and prospective adoptive parent(s) have a pre-existing social or familial relationship prior to the adoption process (known parties) and those where they are introduced specifically for the purpose of adoption, having no prior connection (unknown parties). These two categories are mutually exclusive, as the parties either had a pre-existing relationship or they did not, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of alliances via independent direct placement.
12
From: "Alliances via Independent Direct Placement Between Known Parties"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes independent direct placements where the pre-existing relationship that enables the connection and placement is primarily with the child being integrated (e.g., a former informal caregiver, teacher, or mentor) from those where the pre-existing relationship is primarily with the birth parent(s) who choose to place their child with known individuals (e.g., close friends, trusted community members, or distant relatives outside of immediate household/blood ties). These two categories are mutually exclusive, as the primary pre-existing relationship leading to the direct placement is focused either on the child or on the birth parent(s), and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of alliances via independent direct placement between known parties.
✓
Topic: "Alliances via Independent Direct Placement Through Birth Parent(s)' Pre-existing Relationships" (W7088)