An Approach to Preventing Coparenting Conflict and Divorce in Low-Income Families: Strengthening Couple Relationships and Fostering Fathers\u27 Involvement

In the context of current concern about levels of marital distress, family violence, and divorce, the SFI study is evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention to facilitate the positive involvement of low-income Mexican American and European American fathers with their children, in part by strengthening the men\u27s relationships with their children\u27s mothers. The study design involves a randomized clinical trial that includes assignment to a 16-week couples group, a 16-week fathers group, or a single-session control group. Couples in both group interventions and the control condition include partners who are married, cohabiting, and living separately but raising a young child together. This article presents the rationale, design, and intervention approach to father involvement for families whose relationships are at risk because of the hardships of their lives, many of whom are manifesting some degree of individual or relationship distress. We present preliminary impressions and qualitative findings based on our experience with 257 families who completed the pretest, and the first 160 who completed one postintervention assessment 9 months after entering the study. Discussion centers on what we have learned and questions that remain to be answered in mounting a multisite preventive intervention to strengthen relationships in low-income families

Fathers’ and Mothers’ Attachment Styles, Couple Conflict, Parenting Quality, and Children’s Behavior Problems: An Intervention Test of Mediation

A diverse sample of 239 primarily low-income couples participated in a random controlled trial of the Supporting Father Involvement couples group intervention. In this report, we examined the value of adding measures of fathers’ attachment style and parenting to mothers’ measures in order to explain variations in children’s behavior problems. We also tested the hypothesis that the link between intervention-induced reductions in couple conflict and reductions in anxious/harsh parenting can be explained by intervention effects on parents’ attachment insecurity or on anxiety and depression. Fathers’ attachment security and parenting behavior added significantly to mothers’ in accounting for children’s internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors. Fathers’ anxious attachment style and anxiety/depression mediated the link between post-intervention reductions in parental conflict and anxious/harsh parenting. For mothers, only improvements in attachment security accounted for those links. The findings support the need for attachment researchers to consider the contributions of both parents to their children’s development

Enhancing Father Involvement in Low-Income Families: A Couples Group Approach to Preventive Intervention

To address the problem of fathers’ absence from children’s lives and the difficulty of paternal engagement, especially among lower income families, government agencies have given increasing attention to funding father involvement interventions. Few of these interventions have yielded promising results. Father involvement research that focuses on the couple/coparenting relationship offers a pathway to support fathers’ involvement while strengthening family relationships. Relevant research is reviewed and an exemplar is provided in the Supporting Father Involvement intervention and its positive effects on parental and parent-child relationships and children’s outcomes. The article concludes with policy implications of this choice of target populations and the need to develop new strategies to involve fathers in the lives of their children

Promoting Fathers\u27 Engagement with Children: Preventive Interventions for Low-Income Families

Few programs to enhance fathers\u27 engagement with children have been systematically evaluated, especially for low-income minority populations. In this study, 289 couples from primarily low-income Mexican American and European American families were randomly assigned to one of three conditions and followed for 18 months: 16-week groups for fathers, 16-week groups for couples, or a 1-time informational meeting. Compared with families in the low-dose comparison condition, intervention families showed positive effects on fathers\u27 engagement with their children, couple relationship quality, and children\u27s problem behaviors. Participants in couples\u27 groups showed more consistent, longer term positive effects than those in fathers-only groups. Intervention effects were similar across family structures, income levels, and ethnicities. Implications of the results for current family policy debates are discussed

Supporting Father Involvement: An Intervention with Community and Child Welfare–Referred Couples

Objective: To expand the evidence base of the Supporting Father Involvement (SFI) intervention to include child welfare families. Background: Taking a preventive father-inclusive approach, SFI aims to strengthen coparenting, parent–child relationships, and child outcomes. This study replicates 4 prior iterations of the program using the same 32-hour curriculum facilitated by clinically trained staff, case managers, and onsite child care and family meals. Method: Participants (N = 239) included low-income (median = $24,000) coparenting pairs, typically mothers and fathers/father figures, half of whom were Mexican American, with toddlers (median age \u3c 3 years). Questionnaires assessing multiple family domains were administered verbally over an 18-month period. Intervention effectiveness was tested through a randomized control trial with immediate treatment or waitlist–control groups using a moderated mediator structural equation model. Results: The model explained 49% to 56% of the variance in children\u27s problem behaviors (intervention and autoregressive effects). The intervention reduced couple conflict, which reduced anxious and harsh parenting, leading to better child outcomes. The intervention was equally effective for community and child welfare–referred families and family dynamics pathways were similar across conditions. Conclusion: With its intentional outreach and inclusion of fathers, SFI offers an effective intervention for lower risk child welfare–involved families. Implications: Results argue for the utility of treating community and child welfare parents in mixed-gender prevention groups that focus on strengthening multiple levels of family relationships

Family Life Course Statuses and Transitions: Relationships with Health Limitations

In this study, the author uses 25 years of data taken from the 1979 National Longitudinal Study of Youth to examine the relationship between family life course statuses and transitions and work-related health limitations. The author uses a detailed set of statuses and transitions that include marriage, divorce, cohabitation, and parenthood. The measures of health used tap health limitations in the kind and amount of work that can be performed. Using a fixed-effects estimator for dichotomous outcomes, the author finds that marriage is positively related to the health of men but negatively related to the health of women. The author also finds that parenthood is not related to the health of men but is positively related to the health of women. The results also indicate that statuses are more important for determining health limitations than are transitions

L'attaccamento va in tribunale: protezione e affidamento dei minori

In molti contesti professionali, compreso quello del Tribunale per i minorenni, si fa riferimento alla teoria dell’attaccamento e alla relativa ricerca, con fraintendimenti ampiamente diffusi che spesso si traducono in applicazioni scorrette. La finalità di questa dichiarazione di consenso è, pertanto, quella di migliorarne la comprensione, contrastare la disinformazione a riguardo e guidarne l’uso nel contesto del tribunale per i minorenni secondo una modalità basata sulle evidenze, considerando in particolare i processi decisionali circa la protezione e l’affidamento dei minori. L’articolo è diviso in due parti. Nella prima ci occupiamo dei problemi relativi all’utilizzo di teoria e ricerca sull’attaccamento nel contesto del Tribunale per i minorenni e ne discutiamo le ragioni. A questo proposito, esaminiamo le applicazioni della teoria che si ispirano al principio elettivo del superiore interesse del minore, discutiamo i fraintendimenti a riguardo e identifichiamo i fattori che ne hanno ostacolato un’accurata implementazione. Nella seconda parte, forniamo indicazioni per una sua adeguata e corretta applicazione. A tal fine, siamo partiti da tre principi di riferimento: il bisogno del bambino di caregiver familiari e non abusanti, il valore della continuità di cure sufficientemente buone e i benefici delle reti di relazioni di attaccamento. Discutiamo, inoltre, di quanto le valutazioni sulla qualità dell’attaccamento e sul comportamento di cura siano adeguate a ispirare i processi decisionali forensi rivolti ai minori. Concludiamo che la valutazione dei comportamenti di cura dovrebbe ricoprire un ruolo centrale. Nonostante non ci sia fra noi completo consenso riguardo all’utilizzo delle valutazioni sulla qualità dell’attaccamento nelle decisioni attinenti all’affidamento e alla protezione del minore, tali valutazioni si rivelano, al momento, le più adatte a individuare obiettivi e modalità degli interventi di sostegno. Infine, offriamo indicazioni per organizzare le future collaborazioni di ricerca interdisciplinare

Attachment goes to court: child protection and custody issues

Attachment theory and research are drawn upon in many applied settings, including family courts, but misunderstandings are widespread and sometimes result in misapplications. The aim of this consensus statement is, therefore, to enhance understanding, counter misinformation, and steer family-court utilisation of attachment theory in a supportive, evidence-based direction, especially with regard to child protection and child custody decision-making. The article is divided into two parts. In the first, we address problems related to the use of attachment theory and research in family courts, and discuss reasons for these problems. To this end, we examine family court applications of attachment theory in the current context of the best-interest-of-the-child standard, discuss misunderstandings regarding attachment theory, and identify factors that have hindered accurate implementation. In the second part, we provide recommendations for the application of attachment theory and research. To this end, we set out three attachment principles: the child’s need for familiar, non-abusive caregivers; the value of continuity of good-enough care; and the benefits of networks of attachment relationships. We also discuss the suitability of assessments of attachment quality and caregiving behaviour to inform family court decision-making. We conclude that assessments of caregiver behaviour should take center stage. Although there is dissensus among us regarding the use of assessments of attachment quality to inform child custody and child-protection decisions, such assessments are currently most suitable for targeting and directing supportive interventions. Finally, we provide directions to guide future interdisciplinary research collaboration