Sfi Allsite Marsha Et Al. April 2010


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sfi Allsite Marsha Et Al. April 2010

  1. 1. A proven co-parenting intervention assessing/addressing child abuse, neglect and substance use risk factors Presentation Marsha Kline Pruett, Ph.D, M.S.L. Smith College Dept of Psychology/School for Social Work Kyle Pruett, M.D. Yale School of Medicine Lawrence Ferber, Ph.D. Contra Costa County SFI Program Alberta Psychiatric Association March 26, 2010
  2. 2. NIDA Protective Factors <ul><li>strong and positive family bonds; </li></ul><ul><li>parental monitoring of children's activities and peers; </li></ul><ul><li>clear rules of conduct that are consistently enforced within the family; </li></ul><ul><li>involvement of parents in the lives of their children; </li></ul><ul><li>success in school performance; strong bonds with institutions, such as school and religious organizations; and </li></ul><ul><li>adoption of conventional norms about drug use. </li></ul>
  3. 3. NIDA Risk Factors <ul><li>chaotic home environments, particularly in which parents abuse substances or suffer from mental illnesses; </li></ul><ul><li>ineffective parenting, especially with children with difficult temperaments or behavior disorders; </li></ul><ul><li>lack of parent-child attachments and nurturing; </li></ul><ul><li>inappropriately shy or aggressive behavior in the classroom; </li></ul><ul><li>failure in school performance; </li></ul><ul><li>poor social coping skills; </li></ul><ul><li>affiliations with peers displaying deviant behaviors; and </li></ul><ul><li>perceptions of approval of drug-using behaviors in family, work, school, peer, and community environments. </li></ul>
  4. 4. SFI Intervention effects on drug taking and alcohol abuse? <ul><li>No statistically significant direct effects on drug and alcohol use </li></ul><ul><li>Significant effects on connections between marital quality and drug/use alcohol </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Controls: increase in drug use associated with increased marital dissatisfaction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Couples groups: break connection between parents’ relationship difficulties and drug abuse, serving as buffer against the usual effects of marital satisfaction decline on drug abuse </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Bottom lines <ul><li>In Phases 1 and 2, both fathers and couples groups show correlations between marital satisfaction, parenting stress, and violent problem solving </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>All NIDA risk factors in addiction and substance abuse </li></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Family Circles <ul><li>Rachel Ebling </li></ul><ul><li> Marsha Kline Pruett </li></ul><ul><li> Savann Donovan </li></ul>
  7. 7. The Family Circles Instrument: Pictorial Representations of Father Involvement: Examples by a Mother Examples by a Father
  8. 8. Measures <ul><li>Indicators of </li></ul><ul><li>Father Involvement: </li></ul><ul><li>Father’s centrality in the family (from center to outside circle) </li></ul><ul><li>Father-child closeness </li></ul><ul><li>Other Measures of </li></ul><ul><li>Family Structure: </li></ul><ul><li>Overall family structure (cohesive, divided, triangulated, parent-child coalition, isolated child) </li></ul><ul><li>Mother-father closeness </li></ul><ul><li>Mother’s centrality in the family </li></ul><ul><li>Mother-child closeness </li></ul><ul><li># of extended family members </li></ul>Sample <ul><li>50 fathers, 42 mothers (33 in a couple relationship with one another) </li></ul><ul><li>57.6% non-Hispanic white; 35.6% Hispanic; 6.8% mixed ethnicity </li></ul>
  9. 9. Question 1a: Are there generational differences in father’s centrality between family-of-origin and current-nuclear family?
  10. 10. Question 1b: Are there generational differences in father-child closeness between family-of-origin and current-nuclear family?
  11. 11. Question 2a: Are there similar generational differences in mother’s centrality between family-of-origin and current-nuclear family?
  12. 12. Question 2b: Are there similar generational differences in mother-child closeness between family-of-origin and current-nuclear family?
  13. 13. Question 3: Do family-of-origin measures predict father involvement in the current nuclear family? NO – for predicting father’s centrality YES – for predicting father-child closeness
  14. 14. Question 3 (continued): Which family-of-origin measures predict father-child closeness in the current nuclear family? FATHERS MOTHERS Family-of-Origin Measure Father’s centrality in the family Father-child closeness r = .25, p <.09 r = .35, p<.06 Overall family structure Mother-father closeness r = .33* Mother’s centrality in the family r = .38* Mother-child closeness r = .35* # extended family members r = .41**
  15. 15. Question 4: Does mother’s relationship with the father or child explain additional variance in father-child closeness, beyond what is explained by family-of-origin experiences ? For fathers, closeness in the couple relationship explained additional variance in their closeness with their child. For mothers, closeness in their relationship with their child explained additional variance in father-child closeness.
  16. 16. According to Fathers: Proportion of Explained Variance in Father-Child Closeness
  17. 17. According to Mothers: Proportion of Explained Variance in Father-Child Closeness
  18. 18. Next Steps for Family Circles … Pictorial representations of family relationships shed new light on mothers’ and fathers’ perceptions of father involvement. To strengthen our findings, we need to increase our sample size (especially the number of Hispanic/Latino participants) and increase our use of the standard Family Circles form. WE NEED YOUR HELP TO DO THIS.