Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing: a Birth Cohort Study - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 41
About This Presentation
Title:

Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing: a Birth Cohort Study

Description:

Source: DeKlyen, McLanahan, Brooks-Gunn, Knab (2006) Unmarried Parents' Relationship Status ... National Institute of Child Health & Development (NICHD) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:162
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 42
Provided by: saramcl6
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing: a Birth Cohort Study


1
Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing a Birth
Cohort Study
  • Sara McLanahan
  • Princeton University
  • And
  • Irv Garfinkel
  • Columbia University

2
What are fragile families and why are we
concerned?
  • Unmarried parents and their children
  • Dramatic growth one of three births in U.S.
  • Large social class disparities
  • High risk of poor child outcomes

3
Percent of Children Born Outside Marriage in US
1940-2000
4
Percent of Children Born Outside Marriage in
Industrialized Countries
5
Percent of Non-Marital First Births to Lone
Mothers
Source Chase-Lansdale, Kiernan, Friedman (2004)
6
The Questions
  • What are the capabilities of unmarried parents,
    especially fathers?
  • What is the nature of parental relationships, and
    how stable are relationships?
  • How do children fare and how does family
    structure and stability affect child wellbeing?
  • How do social policies affect family dynamics and
    child wellbeing?

7
Todays Presentation
  • How the study got started
  • Research design
  • Early findings
  • Parents capabilities and relationships at birth
  • Relationship trajectories
  • The role of unmarried fathers in childrens
    lives
  • How children are doing
  • Policy Implications

8
How We Got Started
  • Ford Foundation focus on fathers
  • Robert Wood Johnson encouraged us to include
    mothers and children
  • Other foundations added special topics, e.g.,
    immigrant children, child health, hard-to-reach
    fathers
  • NICHD proposal
  • Collaborative Studies

9
Collaborative Studies
10
Research Design
  • Probability sample of 4900 new births
  • 20 cities (populations of 200,000 or more)
  • 75 hospitals
  • 3700 non-marital births 1200 marital births
  • Data are representative of non-marital births in
    large cities (populations of 200,000 or more)
  • Interviews with mothers and fathers (at birth)
  • Follow-up interviews with both parents when child
    is 1, 3, and 5 years old
  • Child assessments at 3 and 5 years
  • Plans to re-interview at 9 years

11
Innovations and Limitations
  • High response rates
  • 88 for unmarried mothers
  • 75 for unmarried fathers (60 at the hospital)
  • Mixed methods
  • phone and in-person surveys
  • observations and administrative records
  • in-depth qualitative interviews
  • Probability sample of high risk children
  • Limitations observational data
  • Public use data
  • http//www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/data.asp

12
Early Findings
13
Capacities and Relationships at Birth High
Hopes and Low Capacities
14
Parents Characteristics
15
Mothers Race/Ethnicity
16
Parents Mental Health(One Year)
Source DeKlyen, McLanahan, Brooks-Gunn, Knab
(2006)
17
Unmarried Parents Relationship Status(Birth)
18
Unmarried Parents Marriage Expectations(Birth)
19
Relationship Quality(Birth)
20
Domestic Violence(One Year)
21
Distrust of Men (Birth)
22
Five Years Later Growing Instabilityand
Complexity
23
Relationship Stability
24
Factors Affecting Breakup
Source Carlson, McLanahan, England (2004)
25
New Partnerships(Five Years)
26
The Role of Unmarried Fathers
27
Unmarried Fathers Contributions (Birth)
28
Father Provides Financial Support
29
Father Saw Child in Past Month
30
Factors Affecting Father Involvement
31
How Children Fare (Five Years)
32
Policy Implications
33
At BirthHigh Hopes and Low Capacities POLICY
IMPLICATIONS START AT BIRTHAND BEFORE
34
Five Years LaterGrowing Instability
andDeclining Father Involvement POLICY
IMPLICATIONS START AT BIRTH AND BEFORE
35
Prevention
  • Delaying 1st Birth is criticalUK is ahead of US
    in bottom line
  • Services Sex education, Heath, Schooling
    After School
  • Child Support Enforcement
  • Paid Family Leave UK is ahead
  • Supporting Two Parent Families

36
Amelioration
  • Begin at Birth Assessment Referral
  • Home Visit by Nurse and/or Social Worker
  • Offer Comprehensive Set of Services To Both
    Parents, Together and Separately
  • Parenting training, couple relationship training,
    training
  • and employment, mental health services
  • Enforce Child Support
  • Support Two-Parent Families
  • Eliminate or reduce marriage/cohabitation
    penalties
  • UK Ahead in Home Visiting and Treatment of Two
    Parent Families
  • UK behind in CSE

37
Why Comprehensive Services?Factors Affecting
Breakup
Source Carlson, McLanahan, England (2004)
38
Supporting Two Parent Families
  • Eliminate all categorical restrictions on aid to
    two parent families (except for child support)
    TANF, Housing, Child Care, Medicaid
  • Minimize the role of income tests by maximizing
    universal benefits Paid Family Leave Child
    Allowances
  • Economies of Scale go to Beneficiaries not
    Government

39
Enforcing Child Support
  • Establish paternity in hospitals
  • Make clear both parents will have to support
    child
  • Explain how much non resident parent will pay
  • Make sure that obligation schedule does not
    overtax low income dads
  • Express Orders as a of Income
  • Unemployment, Illness Incarceration
  • Make owed no worse than proportional
  • Provide assured benefit dependent upon paternity
    establishment and match dad payments

40
Thank You
  • National Institute of Child Health Development
    (NICHD),
  • California HealthCare Foundation, Commonwealth
    Fund,
  • Ford Foundation, Foundation for Child
    Development, Fund for
  • New Jersey, William T. Grant Foundation,
    Healthcare Foundation
  • of New Jersey, William and Flora Hewlett
    Foundation, Hogg
  • Foundation, Christina A. Johnson Endeavor
    Foundation, Kronkosky
  • Charitable Foundation, Leon Lowenstein
    Foundation, John D.
  • and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, A.L.
    Mailman Family
  • Foundation, Charles S. Mott Foundation, National
    Science
  • Foundation, David and Lucile Packard Foundation,
    Public
  • Policy Institute of California, Robert Wood
    Johnson Foundation,
  • St. Davids Hospital Foundation, St. Vincent
    Hospital and Health
  • Services, and US Department of Health and Human
    Services
  • (ASPE and ACF).

41
The Fragile Families Study
  • For more information on the study design and
    reach papers, go to
  • http//www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com