Risk and Resilience 1 Running Head: Risk, Resilience, and Single Parent Families

Risk and Resilience Factors for Children in Single Parent Families Monique Janssen University of Calgary August 11, 2008

Risk and Resilience 2 Risk and Resilience Factors for Children in Single Parent Families At this moment approximately one in five children reside in a one parent home; a number that has doubled since 1959 (Dornbusch et al., 1985). In North America about one half of all children will spend some time in a single parent family and single father families are the fastest growing family form in the United States (Source Demuth & Brown, 2004; Dornbusch et al., 1985). Currently, single father families account for 15% of all one-parent families (Demuth & Brown, 2004). These statistics interest researchers partly due to the effect living in a single parent family has on a childs development. If research suggested there was no difference between children reared in nuclear families and those reared in one-parent families, and the parents themselves were equally happy, then this research topic would be of less interest. In fact, family researchers are debating whether research on single parent families and divorce implicitly follows Freudian principles that both the mother and father are critical in the proper development of a child, and by doing so ignoring the context in which one-parent families exist (Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). However, research and census data do show that children of one-parent families are growing up with different risk factors than children in two-parent families. For instance, despite the fact that only 20% of children reside in a single parent family at any point in time, roughly half of all poor families in America are headed by a woman without a spouse present (Dornbusch et al., 1985). Additionally, many studies have found differential life outcomes for children from various family structures (Ambert, 2006a; Demuth & Brown, 2004; Dornbusch et al., 1985; Fergusson, Boden, & Horwood, 2007; McBride Murray, Bynum, Bordy, Wilbert & Stephens, 2000; McCreary & Dancy, 2004; Patterson, 2002;

Risk and Resilience 3 Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). This research has culminated in much interest as to which factors increase the risk of negative life outcomes for children of single parent families, compared to other family structures, and what factors protect children of single parents from these negative outcomes. In spite of the wealth of research on this topic it is somewhat difficult to draw conclusions on how risk and resilience factors are working on these children as single parent families vary widely by structure, length of time in the single parent family, ethnicity, access to social resources, and household size. There is also much debate as to the theoretical model of resilience. Some researchers believe that exposure to significant risk is a prerequisite for resilience, while others see life as inherently risky and resilience factors prevent the family from a downward trajectory as risks accumulate (Patterson, 2002). For the purposes of this paper the life as risk perspective will be used to examine structural and individual risk and resilience factors for children from many varieties of single parent families. Particularly dangerous risk factors include poverty, familial resources, and involvement in delinquent and relational behavior. Less is known about resilience factors as these have recently become of interest (McBride Murray et al., 2000); however, family, parent, and child characteristics will be examined. Risk Factors Using the life as risk model, children are at risk for negative outcomes simply by living. However, some factors increase this risk exponentially. Structural risk factors are those that occur on a family level and affect every child in the family across both the short and long terms. These risks are difficult to change within the family unit without outside help and are greatly affected by social policy. Individual risk factors, such as

Risk and Resilience 4 delinquent and relational behavior, occur within the context of structural risk factors but are derived by choices made by the child. Both structural and individual risk factors make it more difficult for children to have positive adult outcomes. In this section I will explore the structural risk factors of poverty and familial resources and then the individual risk factors of delinquency and relational behavior. Poverty Poverty in and of itself has been found to be a significant risk factor for children regardless of family structure. The relationship between poverty and negative life outcomes is so strong that researchers have found many of the negative effects of single parenting are actually greatly reduced or eliminated when socioeconomic status is controlled for (McBride Murray et al., 2000). In fact, children of single mothers who make an above average income are more similar to children of two parent families in many outcome measures than to children of single mothers living in poverty (Ambert, 2006a). When combined with risk factors associated with certain family structures the difficulties of poverty are compounded. Children of one-parent families are more likely to live in poverty than those of two-parent families because they are less likely to be supported by two incomes. Living in poverty is risky because it is associated with living in more dangerous neighborhoods where residency is transient. This prevents the family from developing necessary community ties, which could aid the single parent, and increases the supervision necessary to keep the child safe (Patterson, 2002). Low socioeconomic status is also linked to attendance of lower quality schools, which can

Risk and Resilience 5 impact post secondary options, making the cycle of poverty more difficult to break (Ambert, 2006a). While poverty can account for a large portion of the negative life outcomes associated with single parent families in the research literature, it is not the only factor to blame. Countries such as Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands have extensive social policies protecting children from poverty. Spruijt and Vandervalk (2000) found that single mothers in these countries did not have a higher poverty rate than married mothers, but the children of single mothers still scored more poorly on a variety of life outcomes such as employment, income, and mental health than children from two biological parent homes. Clearly, poverty is a significant risk factor for children in single parent homes but not the only risk factor. Familial Resources Financial resources are not the only resources that tend to be lower in single parent than two parent homes. When only one adult lives in the home many resources within the family are sparse as one parent typically has less time, energy, and attention available to the children than two parents would. Many parenting variables, such as discipline style, amount of supervision, monitoring, closeness, and methods of decision making have been examined between single and double parent households and the outcomes these have for adolescents. Discipline styles have been investigated for many years with a general consensus that the authoritarian parenting style is most beneficial for children (Ambert, 2006b). However, this parenting style is less likely to occur in single parent families and there is some debate as to whether it is equally beneficial for all children. For instance, McCreary

Risk and Resilience 6 and Dancy (2004) suggest that for African American children living in poverty a nononsense style of parenting comprised of high levels of warmth and control is most likely to keep the children out of trouble. Unfortunately, McCreary and Dancy (2004) found that African American single mothers were more negative towards their children and likely to use punitive discipline styles, which are related to negative child outcomes. These researchers (2004) speculated that economic stress combined with being a single parent increases family conflict and leaves less time available for parenting. Demuth and Brown (2004) found that high levels of parental involvement were negatively correlated with adolescent delinquency in a study examining differences in delinquency rates among children in one and two parent families. Using data from the 1995 National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health, a large and representative sample of the American population, Demuth and Brown (2004) found that children from two parent families were less likely to report involvement in petty property, serious property, or violent offences than those from single parent families. This effect was attributed to the fact that children in single parent families were more likely to report less closeness to their parents and their parents reported infrequent supervision and monitoring. Children from single mother families were compared to children of single fathers and children of single fathers had the highest delinquency rates. Demuth and Brown (2004) claim this reflects the low levels of involvement of single fathers in their childrens lives. Dornbusch et al. (1985) also found that parents with greater involvement in their youths life had children with lower levels of deviant behavior according to the childs school records. In this study adolescents and their parents rated who was most likely to

Risk and Resilience 7 make various decisions: parents alone, youth alone, or parent and youth together. The childrens school records were then reviewed for instances of truancy and disciplinary action. Children from single mother households reported the most youth only decision making and had more extensive school records. Single mothers were more likely to report that their children made decisions alone than were married mothers, but this relationship was stronger for sons. Clearly, parental involvement is related to adolescent delinquency and single parents find it more challenging to be involved in their adolescents life than do two parents living together. Children living in single parent homes are at risk of having parents with more punitive discipline styles, less supervision, monitoring, closeness, and joint decision making which are related to delinquent behavior during adolescence. Delinquent and Relational Behavior Delinquency during adolescence puts a child at further risk of negative outcomes in adulthood; as choices made during the teenage years can constrain options in later life. Undesirable behavior during adolescence is one of the most researched risk factors for children in single parent families and includes investigating criminal, sexual, and educational behaviors. As described in the section on familial resources, many parenting behaviors are linked to adolescent delinquency of petty property crime, serious property crime, and violent offences (Demuth & Brown, 2004; Dornbusch et al., 1985). Due to constraints on parenting inherent from one parent having less time and energy, children of one-parent families report higher frequencies of these behaviors (Demuth & Brown, 2004). Therefore, growing up in a single parent home is posing a risk for children to enter into

Risk and Resilience 8 delinquent or criminal behavior. This produces challenges in adult life because having a record and associating with negative peers can constrain employment, education, and partner options (Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). Additionally, delinquent behavior during adolescence is related to delinquent behavior as an adult. The Christchurch Heath and Development Study found that children who spent some time in single parent families were more likely to report involvement with the police from the ages 21-25 (Fergusson et al., 2007). Children reared in single parent family environments are not only more delinquent but also struggle more in school. Dornbusch et al. (1985) found that children from single parent families had school records indicating greater truancy, lower marks, and more frequent behavioral problems requiring disciplinary action. This is concerning because educational attainment in high school impacts post secondary education options and therefore later employment opportunities. Children from single parent families may be at risk for negative outcomes in later life, such as unemployment and poverty, because of these negative high school records. Single parent families also present greater risk for children when dating. Fergusson et al. (2007) found that daughters from single parent homes were at a greater risk of teenage pregnancy and this finding was replicated in the Netherlands (Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). Additionally, Spruijt and Vandervalk (2000) found that children of one-parent families caused by divorce began dating at an earlier age and were more experienced sexually than children of two parent homes. However, children of one-parent families caused by the death of a parent had dating behaviors more similar to children from two-biological parent families. In the older age range children of one-parent

Risk and Resilience 9 families from divorce tended to leave the parental home earlier, cohabitate sooner, break up their relationships more often, and have a more negative image of their personal relationships than children from other family structures. The findings from the Netherlands study are interesting because they indicate a weakness in the research on single parent families: one-parent families are multidimensional and results may apply more to one type of single parent family than another (Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). Children of different types of one- parent families are at different degrees of risk: those who have divorced parents and live in poverty have the highest risk while those who come from affluent backgrounds and are separated from a parent by that parents death are at lower risk. Resilience Research on resilience also indicates differential effects for children in different types of single parent households (Patterson, 20002; Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). However, much less research on resilience has been completed, as it is a rather recent topic of interest, coinciding with the acceptance of the life as risk model. If all children are considered to be at risk, than knowing what protects them from these risks is potentially more important than identifying the impact of each individual risk. Characteristics of the family structure, parent, and child can all help in creating positive long-term outcomes and avoiding risks for children living in single parent households. Family Structure Spruijt and Vandervalk (2000) found that outcomes for children from single parent families of divorce differ from those of single parent families separated by death. Their research indicated that children whose families were split by the death of a parent

Risk and Resilience 10 tended to have an older average age than those who entered into the single parent family structure as a result of divorce. The longer time that children separated from a parent by death had in two parent families may have acted as a resilience factor. This resilience may be increased by the fact that these children were more likely to remain in contact with both sides of their extended family than children of divorce (Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). Other studies such as Demuth and Brown (2004) and Dornbusch et al. (1985) have found that the involvement of the non-custodial parent is negatively associated with delinquent behavior. Furthermore, McBride Murray et al. (2000) found that African American children raised in mother only households had better relationships with their mothers when maternal grandmothers did the babysitting (the relationship was strongest for children of adolescent single mothers). Together, these studies indicate that contact with other family members is beneficial to the long-term outcomes of children in single parent homes. Spruijt and Vandervalk (2000) explain this phenomenon as one educator can do less than two. Ultimately, having many adults in the childs life increases attention and opportunities to forge close bonds that are indirectly linked to better outcomes. However, one must remember that research on other adult involvement in limited and many families included in single parent research actually have more than one adult living in the home, but because this person is not a biological parent the family is considered to have only one parent. Thus, many children likely have other adult influences that are unaccounted for in the research (McBride Murray et al., 2000).

Risk and Resilience 11 Parent Characteristics Parents affect the life outcomes of their children through both the family structure that they create and their personality. As mentioned in the section on delinquency, single mothers tend to supervise and monitor their children more often and are closer to them than single fathers and this is associated with lower reports of delinquency in adolescence (Demuth & Brown, 2004). Poverty was also listed as a risk factor for children in single parent families but adequate educational and financial resources improve single mothers quality of life, which has positive effects on these mothers mental health and self-esteem (Ambert, 2006a; McBride Murray et al., 2000). Mother self-esteem and mental health is correlated with positive parenting practices as these mothers tend to have specific developmental goals for their children, institute routines, have positive involvement in their childrens lives, and are more likely to be involved in their childrens schooling (Brody, Flor, & Gibson, 1999). Other parental characteristics that have been linked to positive outcomes for children in single parent homes are frequent church attendance, good parent-child communication, positive role modeling, high educational expectations, and negative parental attitudes towards deviance and substance use (Sullivan & Farrell, 1999). Ultimately, research on parental characteristics indicates that single parents who spend time with their children, communicate with them frequently, model good behavior, and are confident tend to have children with more positive life outcomes (Ambert, 2006a; Demuth & Brown, 2004; Dornbusch et al., 1985; McBride Murray et al., 2000).

Risk and Resilience 12 Non-custodial parents who remain involved in the childs life can also have positive effects on their childrens outcomes (Demuth & Brown, 2004; Dornbusch et al., 1985). Hetherington and Stanley-Hagan (1999) suggests some personality characteristics of non-custodial parents that are also helpful to childrens development. These include being in good psychological and physical health, being in low inter-parental conflict with the custodial parent, and maintaining a supportive and authoritative environment when spending time with their children. Non-custodial parents who treat their children as friends tend to undermine the custodial parents effort, which is linked with poorer outcomes (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 1999). Child Characteristics Many characteristics of the child determine how he or she will react to risk factors and can help to explain how siblings reared in the same single parent environment turn out differently (Ambert, 2006a; Demuth & Brown, 2004; Dornbusch et al., 1985; Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 1999; McBride Murray et al., 2000). One such characteristic is gender. Interesting gender effects include a small cluster of very competent girls who react positively to divorce and the increased responsibilities, independence and challenges associated with it. However, this has only been found to occur in environment with moderate levels of stress and high levels of support (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 1999). Sons of single parents have been found to be more delinquent than daughters regardless of the gender of the parent (Demuth & Brown, 2004). Characteristics of children from both genders who are resilient to rearing in oneparent families include intelligence, competency, easy temperament, high self-esteem, an

Risk and Resilience 13 internal locus of control, and a good sense of humor. These characteristics not only aid the child in avoiding the risks of being children of single parents, but also tend to evoke positive responses from others who may help them adapt to the challenges in their lives (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 1999). Additionally, children with these characteristics who go through moderate levels of stress in supportive environments were found by Hetherington (1991) to have enhanced problem solving skills later in life. A review of child characteristics that aid in resilience to rearing in single parent families indicate that children are both born with and can develop the skills to avoid risks. Those working with children in single parent families may want to encourage the development of self-esteem, an internal locus of control, humor, and other social behaviors that will help the child to attract other social supports. This should increase the childs resilience and help prevent risk factors that originate from associating with a negative peer group and having little contact with adults. Conclusion Through the course of this paper I have reviewed some risk and resilience factors associated with growing up in a single parent family. While a great deal of research exists on this topic the literature focuses on risk factors, particularly those dealing with poverty, delinquency, and relational behaviors. Research on resilience factors is comparatively newer and less detailed. Furthermore, there are many methodological issues such as length of time in single parent family, other adults present in the house, contact with noncustodial parent, gender of the custodial parent, and cultural differences in the constitution of the family that are rarely considered (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan, 1999; McCreary & Dancy, 2004; McBride Murray et al., 2000). These variables may

Risk and Resilience 14 have a large affect on the outcomes being measured. Spruijt and Vandervalk (2000) found that children of single parent families caused by death differ significantly from those of single parent families caused by divorce. Research findings also indicate that mother employment and education has a large impact on the resiliency of the children they rear alone, yet I found no research differentiating between mature adults choosing to have and raise children on their own and other types of single parents (McBride Murray et al., 2000; Spruijt & Vandervalk, 2000). Another issue is that much of the research has been completed in the United States, but the experience of children in single parent families in Canada is probably different. These problems with the research indicate many possible new research questions, which would greatly aid in further understanding the effects of growing up in a single parent family on children. Currently, I believe that research should be focused on disentangling the differential effects of living in one parent families by investigating the differences between children who see the non-custodial parent, children who are close to another adult who can act like a non-custodial parent, children of planned one parent families, those of consistent one parent families, and those who live in families where the structure changes frequently. Other areas of interest are how the characteristics of the single parent, non-custodial parent, child, and community can help or hinder positive life outcomes and the success of various interventions such as counseling for children struggling to adjust to living in a single parent family structure (Hetherington & StanleyHagan, 1999). Ultimately, current research suggests that children of one-parent families are at risk from poverty, a lack of familial resources including parent attention, and greater

Risk and Resilience 15 involvement in delinquent and relational activities. These factors increase the chances of children from single parent families growing up to have more negative life outcomes than children from two biological parent families such as lower educational attainment, less stable employment, and an increased likelihood of becoming single parents themselves. However, these negative life outcomes are not definitive for children from single parent homes and many children build on resiliency factors of family structure that has the child involved with adults other than the custodial parent, parent characteristics that provide for more effective parenting, and child characteristics that aid the child in obtaining greater social support.

Risk and Resilience 16 References Ambert, A-M. (2006)a. One Parent Families: Characteristics, causes, consequences, and issues. Retrieved July 27, 2008, from York University, Faculty of Arts Web site: http://www.vifamily.ca/library/cft/oneparent.html Ambert, A-M. (2006)b. Changing families: Relationships in context. Toronto, ON: Pearson. Brody, G.H., Flor, D.L., & Gibson, N.M. (1999). Linking maternal efficacy beliefs, developmental goals, parenting practices, and child competence in rural single parent African American families. Child Development, 70, 1197-1208. DeMuth, S., & Brown, S.L. (2004). Family structure, family processes, and adolescent delinquency: The significance of parental absence versus parental gender [Electronic version]. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41(1), 5681. Dornbusch, S. M., Calrsmith, J.M., Bushwall, S.J., Ritter, P.L., Leiderman, H., & Hastorf, A.H., et al. (1985). Single parents, extended households, and the control of adolescents [Electronic version]. Child Development, 56, 326-341. Fergusson, D.M., Boden, J.M., & Horwood, L.J. (2007). Exposure to single parenthood in childhood and later mental health, educational, economic, and criminal behavior outcomes [Electronic version]. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64(9), 1089-1095. Hetherington, E.M., & Stanley-Hagan, M. (1999). The adjustment of children with divorced parents: A risk and resiliency perspective [Electronic version]. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40(1), 129-140.

Risk and Resilience 17 Hetherington, E.M. (1991). Families, lies, and videotapes. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1, 323-348. McCreary, L.L., & Dancy, B. (2004). Dimensions of family functioning: Perspectives of low-income African American single-parent families [Electronic version]. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 690-701. McBride Murry, V., Bynum, M.S., Brody, G.H., Willert, A. & Stephens, D. (2000). African American single mothers and children in context: A review of studies on risk resilience [Electronic version]. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 4(2), 133-155. Patterson, J.M. (2002). Understanding family resilience [Electronic version]. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58(3), 233-246. Spruijt, E., DeGoede, M., &Vandervalk, I. (2000). The well-being of youngsters coming from six different family types [Electronic version]. Patient Education and Counseling, 45, 285-294. Sullivan, T.N., & Farrell, A.D. (1999). Identification and impact of risk and protective factors for drug use among urban African American adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 28, 122-136.