Functional abdominal pain (FAP) in children, is a set of recurrent pain conditions without an organic cause (1), is highly prevalent and can lead to substantial impairment including decreased involvement in social, academic, and other daily activities (2–4). Based on Rome-III criteria, subtypes of FAP include functional dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome, and abdominal migraine (1). Youth with FAP who have the greatest level of impairment may be characterized by anxiety, expressed as maladaptive thinking about pain, or other family risk factors (i.e., overprotective parenting) that are potentially modifiable with behavioral intervention (5). Greater impairment has been associated with the child’s use of poor psychological coping strategies such as catastrophic thinking about pain [e.g., belief that pain will not resolve or get worse, (6)] as well as parental responses to pain, such as overprotection (i.e., checking in repeatedly about pain symptoms) or minimizing/criticism (7). Understanding how children develop maladaptive coping strategies in response to FAP involves recognition of the caregiving environment in which these coping behaviors develop (8). A recent community-based study found that the impact of child catastrophizing on disability was less pronounced in the context of high levels of adaptive parenting behaviors (e.g., promotion of children’s well behaviors) in generally healthy schoolchildren dealing with occasional pain (9). There is emerging evidence that the joint impact of parenting factors and child pain catastrophizing is relevant for understanding impairment in samples of youth with mixed chronic pain conditions (10, 11) and in youth with organic causes of abdominal pain, such as Inflammatory Bowel Disease (12) Multiple studies in pediatric chronic pain have documented the impact of parenting factors in children’s adjustment to pain. For example, parent protection and criticism have been implicated in predicting disability in youth with an array of chronic pain conditions (13–15) and more specifically in children with FAP (16–20). Some research suggests that parental overprotectiveness (i.e., limiting the child’s normal activities and/or giving the child special attention secondary to pain) and/or minimizing (i.e., criticism) uniquely influence FAP-related disability (16, 18) whereas other research did not find evidence of such relationships (20). Given the tendency for pain conditions to occur in families, it is conceivable that parents’ catastrophizing may be related to the expression of disability in youth with FAP, though this research has generally focused on the role of parent catastrophizing about their own pain versus their child’s pain (17), though there are several recent exceptions (12, 21). In youth with Inflammatory Bowel Disease, parent catastrophizing about their child pain partially explained the relationship between child pain behavior and parental protective responses; however, the relationship between these factors and child impairment was not examined (12). Yet another recent investigation has found support for the role of child pain catastrophizing underlying the association between parent catastrophizing about their child’s pain and pain related disability in a school-based sample of adolescents (21). However, it is unclear if child pain catastrophizing is related to disability in the presence of other parental responses to child pain (i.e., overprotection, criticism, or symptom monitoring) in youth with FAP. Thus, investigating multiple parenting behaviors can be beneficial to fully capture the range of responses that children with FAP may receive from their caregivers. In general, models examining the simultaneous influence of child and parenting factors in predicting impairment in youth with chronic pain have focused on mixed pediatric pain samples, youth with IBD, or healthy controls and have shown mixed results (10, 13, 15, 22, 23), with some support that catastrophizing may mediate the relationship between parenting factors and disability, particularly in youth with chronic musculoskeletal pain (10, 15). Guite and colleagues also found that child pain catastrophizing may account for the relationship between pain intensity and disability (10); thus, it may be valuable to examine if these variables operate similarly in youth with FAP. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine how pain catastrophizing in children and parental responses to their child’s pain interact to affect disability in a clinical sample of youth with FAP. We predict that child pain catastrophizing will mediate the relationship between parental responses to pain (i.e., protectiveness, encouragement/symptom monitoring, and minimization) and disability, consistent with prior literature. We also investigated the role of child pain catastrophizing in mediating the relationship between pain intensity and disability to assess whether these factors operate similarly in predicting disability in our sample as compared to prior research in youth with musculoskeletal pain (10). We undertook exploratory analysis examining the role of parent pain catastrophizing about the child’s pain in relation to parent responses to pain and disability. This project is the first part of an ongoing research program in developing tailored interventions for youth with FAP and their caregivers.