Search

The coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic has necessitated the use of health‐protective behaviors (HPB), such as social distancing, staying at home, frequent handwashing, and wearing facemasks to mitigate the transmission of disease. An investigation of interpersonal costs associated with the use of HPB can help inform strategies to promote their sustained implementation. This study examined the daily associations between the implementation of HPB and family functioning and assessed moderation by coparenting quality, economic strain, and the number of days that state‐level stay‐at‐home policies had been in effect, during the early days of the pandemic. Mothers and fathers from 155 families with children who were 9 years old, on average, completed daily reports of HPB, parental stress, and family relationship quality over eight consecutive days in April or May of 2020. Hierarchal linear models showed that HPB was associated with increased levels of parental stress and interparental conflict. Negative coparenting relations exacerbated the next‐day association between HPB and interparental conflict. HPB was also associated with increased levels of parent–child and interparental closeness, but these linkages dissipated for families who had spent more days under state‐level stay‐at‐home policies. Although crucial for public health, the implementation of HPB may have detrimental short‐term effects on daily family life. Family support and interventions are necessary to minimize the psychosocial burden of these important public health measures and increase their sustained adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

As the COVID‐19 pandemic has been highly stressful for parents and children, it is clear that strategies that promote long‐term family resilience are needed to protect families in future crises. One such strategy, the Family Foundations program, is focused on promoting supportive coparenting at the transition to parenthood. In a randomized trial, we tested the long‐term intervention effects of Family Foundations on parent, child, and family well‐being one to two months after the imposition of a national shelter‐in‐place public health intervention in 2020. We used regression models to test intervention impact on outcomes reported on by parents in a standard questionnaire format and a series of 8 days of daily reports. We also tested moderation of intervention impact by parent depression and coparenting relationship quality. Relative to control families, intervention families demonstrated significantly lower levels of individual and family problems (general parent hostility, harsh and aggressive parenting, coparenting conflict, sibling relationship conflict, and children's negative mood and behavior problems), and higher levels of positive family relationship quality (positive parenting, couple relationship quality, sibling relations, and family cohesion). For some outcomes, including coparenting conflict, harsh parenting, and child behavior problems, intervention effects were larger for more vulnerable families—that is, families with higher pre‐pandemic levels of parent depression or lower levels of coparenting relationship quality. We conclude that targeted family prevention programming is able to promote healthy parent and child functioning during unforeseen future periods of acute stress. The long‐term benefits of a universal approach to family support at the transition to parenthood indicate the need for greater investment in the dissemination of effective approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To quantify the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic and public health interventions on parent and child mental health and family relationships, we examined change in individual and family functioning in a sample of parents enrolled in a prevention trial; we examined change before the pandemic (2017–2019) when children were an average of 7 years old to the first months after the imposition of widespread public health interventions in the United States (2020) with paired t tests and HLM models. We examined moderation by parent gender, education, family income, and coparenting conflict. We found large deteriorations from before the pandemic to the first months of the pandemic in child internalizing and externalizing problems and parent depression, and a moderate decline in coparenting quality. Smaller changes were found for parent anxiety and parenting quality. Mothers and families with lower levels of income were at particular risk for deterioration in well‐being. Results indicate a need for widespread family support and intervention to prevent potential family "scarring," that is, prolonged, intertwined individual mental health and family relationship problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Study of fathers has gained significant traction over recent decades. However, the experience for men over the transition to parenthood remains focused on high‐socioeconomic and socially advantaged fathers. Researchers have yet to thoroughly investigate how fathers may uniquely experience this transition period with a history of childhood maltreatment, given that childhood abuse is known to impact several components of development and relationship functioning into adulthood. The current study endeavored to fill this gap by evaluating the associations between fathers' childhood experiences of physical and emotional abuse and their relationship functioning over the transition to parenthood in terms of both the couple relationship and social adjustment in relationships with others. Using data from 399 fathers who participated in a randomized control trial during pregnancy, the results from stepwise regressions indicate fathers with a history of emotional abuse experience particular declines in their external relationships (reductions in social support and increases in social stress) from prenatal (Wave 1) to postpartum (Wave 2) reports. However, no significant association emerged between fathers' history of maltreatment and their relationship functioning with their partners. These results underscore the importance of investigating the impact of different types of abuse on men in fatherhood. Moreover, we emphasize the need to study further fathers' social adjustment over the transition to parenthood beyond the couple relationship and broad social support to address the needs of men with a history of maltreatment in their new role as fathers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)