Recruiting, retaining and engaging men in social interventions: lessons for implementation focusing on a prison based parenting intervention for young incarcerated fathers

Recruiting, retaining and engaging men in social interventions can be challenging. The focus of this paper is the successful implementation of a parenting programme for incarcerated fathers, delivered in a Young Offender Institution (YOI) in Scotland. Reasons for high levels of recruitment, retention and engagement are explored, with barriers identified. A qualitative design was employed using ethnographic approaches including participant observation of the programme, informal interactions, and formal interviews with programme participants, the facilitators and others involved in managing the programme. Framework analysis was conducted on the integrated data set. The prison as the setting for programme delivery was both an opportunity and a challenge. It enabled easy access to participants and required low levels of effort on their part to attend. The creation of a nurturing and safe environment within the prison classroom facilitated engagement: relationships between the facilitators and participants, and between the participants themselves were key to understanding high levels of retention and engagement. The most fundamental challenge to high engagement levels arose from clashes in embedded institutional ways of working, between the host institution and the organisation experienced in delivering such intervention work. This threatened to compromise trust between the participants and the facilitators. Whilst adding specifically to the very sparse literature on reaching incarcerated young fathers and engaging them in parenting work, the findings have transferability to other under-researched areas: the implementation of social interventions generally in the prison setting, and engaging marginalised fathers in parenting/family work in community settings. The paper highlights ways of overcoming some of the challenges faced

High and low contraceptive use amongst male young offenders: a qualitative interview study

<b>Objectives</b> There are high rates of fatherhood and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among young incarcerated men. Here we focus on a sample of men incarcerated in a Scottish Young Offender Institution, analysing their accounts of their contraceptive use. Those who report low or no use of contraception are compared with those who report high use.<p></p> <b>Methods</b> Semi-structured interviews with 40 young male offenders, aged 16–21 years. Participants were purposively sampled using answers from a questionnaire administered to 67 inmates. Data from those men (n=31) reporting either high (n=14) or low/no use (n=17) of contraception are analysed here.<p></p> <b>Results</b> Low users emphasise their desire for pleasure and appear fatalistic about both pregnancy and disease prevention. High users report a strong desire to protect themselves and their ‘manliness’ by using condoms to avoid the risk of STIs and, to a lesser extent, pregnancy. Both sets of men present themselves in a traditionally masculine way, with high users emphasising power, authority and self-control to justify their non-risk-taking contraceptive behaviour.<p></p> <b>Conclusions</b> The masculine narrative regarding self-protection, utilised by the high users, may be an effective method of intervention with potential and actual low users. Conventional masculinity valorises risk-taking but if particular forms of risk avoidance – condom use – can be legitimised as confirming one's masculinity it may be possible to persuade low users to adopt them. The opportunity to work with young men whilst incarcerated should be grasped.<p></p&gt

What Does the Term 'Gay Community' Mean to You - Understandings Among Gay Men in Glasgow and North Lanarkshire

No abstract available

The reflective component of the Mellow Bumps parenting intervention: Implementation, engagement and mechanisms of change

Understanding why parenting programmes work or do not work, and for whom, is crucial for development of more effective parenting interventions. In this paper we focus on a specific component of Mellow Bumps: reflection on one’s own childhood/past/life. We explore how this component was implemented, how participants engaged with it, the facilitating and constraining factors shaping this, whether and how it appeared to work, or not, and for whom. The paper analyses data from the Process Evaluation of the Trial of Healthy Relationships Initiatives for the Very Early years, which is evaluating two antenatal interventions delivered to vulnerable women, one of which is Mellow Bumps. Data were collected from January 2014 to June 2018 for 28 groups, 108 participants and 24 facilitators in a comprehensive and rigorous Process Evaluation designed to complement the Outcome Evaluation. Data were gathered at various time points using multiple methods, and were synthesised to triangulate findings. The reflective component was implemented with fidelity and participants engaged with it to varying degrees, dependent largely on the coherence of the group. Patchy attendance compromised the coherence of some groups, with the development of rapport, which is key to delivering reflective exercises, more difficult when group composition varied from week to week. Where there was a coherent group, powerful mechanisms of change, leading to stress reduction, included: relief through unburdening, empowerment through support given and received, reduced isolation through sharing anxieties, and control through self-care advice. A minority of highly vulnerable mothers seemed not to benefit from the reflective exercises and were marginalised within their groups. In order to minimise potential harmful effects of such exercises, allocation of participants to groups should strive to maximise group homogeneity. More research is needed to explore how very vulnerable parents can be supported in attending parenting interventions from start to finish

A realist process evaluation of Enhanced Triple P for Baby and Mellow Bumps, within a Trial of Healthy Relationship Initiatives for the Very Early years (THRIVE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: THRIVE is a three-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT) that aims to evaluate whether antenatal and early postnatal interventions, Enhanced Triple B for Baby (ETPB) plus care as usual (CAU) or Mellow Bumps (MB) plus CAU (versus CAU alone), can: 1) improve the mental health and well-being of pregnant women with complex health and social care needs; 2) improve mother-infant bonding and interaction; 3) reduce child maltreatment; and 4) improve child language acquisition. This paper focuses on THRIVE’s realist process evaluation, which is carefully monitoring what is happening in the RCT. Methods: Realistic evaluation provides the theoretical rationale for the process evaluation. We question: 1) how faithfully are MB and ETPB implemented? 2) What are the mechanisms by which they work, if they do, and who do they work for and how? 3) What contextual factors are necessary for the programmes to function, or might prevent them functioning? The mixed-methods design includes quantitative measures, which are pre- and post-training/intervention questionnaires for facilitators and mothers-to-be, and post-session evaluation forms. Qualitative data collection methods include participant observation of facilitator training and the delivery of a series of antenatal sessions in selected intervention groups (n = 3 for ETPB and n = 3 for MB), semi-structured interviews with facilitators, pregnant women, partners, and referring facilitators, and telephone interviews examining the content of the postnatal components of ETPB and MB. Discussion: The findings of this process evaluation will help researchers and decision makers interpret the outcomes of THRIVE. It will provide a greater understanding of: how the interventions work (if they do); the extent and quality of their implementation; contextual factors facilitating and constraining intervention functioning; variations in response within and between subgroups of vulnerable parents; and benefits or unintended consequences of either intervention. Few studies to date have published detailed research protocols illustrating how realist process evaluation is designed and conducted as an integral part of a randomised controlled trial

Growing up in Scotland: father-child relationships and child socio-emotional wellbeing

No abstract available

The Case for Targeted Parenting Interventions with Reference to Intergenerational Transmission of Parenting: Qualitative Evidence from Three Studies of Marginalised Mothers' and Fathers' Participation in Parenting Programmes

The idea that how you were parented is key to how you parent your own children is widely recognisable. It is present in popular cultural references, underpins much policy on families and parenting in the UK, and is supported by a substantive body of academic literature. We explore this concept of intergenerational transmission of parenting, understanding it as the context in which parenting interventions have been implemented. We draw on interview data from three Scottish samples of marginalised parents (n = 54) to explore how participants think their own parenting behaviours have been shaped by their experience of being parented and how they talk about participation in a parenting intervention in relation to this. We find that how these parents have been parented is salient in considering their own parenting behaviour, and is a key context for their engagement with the intervention. We make the case for parenting interventions targeted at marginalised parents, arguing that they are acceptable to, and useful for, these parents and may, potentially, be effective in breaking cycles of negative parenting. Policy-makers should not shy away from implementing targeted parenting programmes as part of endeavours to address negative parenting.Output Status: Forthcoming/Available Onlin

Nonresident fathers' and grandparents' early years support and middle childhood socio-emotional adjustment

Objective: This study investigates how different patterns of nonresident father support for children and mothers in the early years predict middle childhood adjustment, and whether grandparent support has compensating effects. Background: Nonresident fathers' involvement in children's lives benefits socio‐emotional adjustment, but it is unclear whether support directed at children is compromised by interparental tensions, or whether other factors may compensate for weaker patterns of father support. Method: Latent class analyses identified patterns of nonresident father support for single mothers and their 34‐month‐old child (None 35%, Low 16%, Moderate 21%, High 28%) and grandparent support (Low 15%, Moderate Maternal 33%, High Maternal 43%, High Maternal and Paternal 9%), using a sample of 648 families from the Growing Up in Scotland cohort. Effects of father support on children's internalizing and externalizing problems from age 46 to 122 months were explored (n = 352), together with moderating effects of grandparent support. Results: Low, Moderate and No father support had similar estimated effects on higher externalizing and internalizing problem levels, and steeper increases in internalizing problems. Compared to Low grandparent support, High Maternal and Paternal grandparent support reduced effects of weaker father support on both types of problem; and was more protective than High Maternal grandparent support against internalizing problems. Conclusion: Weaker patterns of nonresident father support in early childhood, characterized by low involvement and interparental tensions or by no contact, were associated with poorer middle childhood adjustment. Support from both sets of grandparents offered children most protection against the effects of weaker father support

How do pregnant women with additional health or social care needs experience parenting groups: Evidence from delivery of Enhanced Triple P for Baby and Mellow Bumps as part of the Trial of Healthy Relationships Initiatives in the Very Early Years (THRIVE)

There is still relatively little known about when, why, how and in what circumstances parenting interventions are effective. Support within the group context has been theorised as a key mechanism. This paper explores how pregnant women with additional health or social care needs participating in two group parenting interventions—Mellow Bumps or Enhanced Triple P for Babies—experienced being in a parenting group, and how this shaped how they engaged with the interventions; and it examines how group delivery may have facilitated or inhibited the effectiveness of the interventions, and for whom it did so. Session evaluation forms (n = 708) and a post-intervention questionnaire (n = 117) were completed by participants. In-depth interviews were conducted following the MB/ETPB antenatal sessions (n = 19), and 6–12 months after the birth of their baby (n = 15). Group delivery of these parenting interventions had the potential to support participants, particularly those with multiple additional health and social care needs. There are, however, important caveats including patchy attendance reducing the supportiveness of the groups, and few discernible longer terms changes. More group sessions, less patchy attendance, and more encouragement from facilitators for the women to keep in touch, and to join other community parent–child groups after the birth of their baby are likely to have increased feelings of support and connectedness