Suchergebnisse

In most disciplines, randomized controlled trials are considered to be the gold standard for evidence in establishing the most effective interventions and treatments. Thus, using a randomized controlled trial research design was the natural and logical choice when developing the Strong Couples-Strong Children Program. This program was a 5-year community-based intervention developed to determine whether relationship education supported by wraparound services could be effective in strengthening relationship bonds among low-income, unmarried parents. However, implementing the randomized controlled trial with a population facing many complex environmental, individual, and interpersonal problems proved to be very challenging. This case study describes the kinds of barriers encountered, the modifications that were made to shift to a quasi-experimental design and how this design modification was accounted for in the analysis, lessons learned, and recommendations for those considering psychosocial, community-based interventions with economically disadvantaged and marginalized groups.

AbstractObjectiveThis qualitative study examined adult perspectives on the adjustments children face through the process of paternal incarceration and eventual release.BackgroundWhile the United States leads the world in incarceration, 95% of imprisoned individuals return to community life. Despite poor outcomes for children with incarcerated fathers, less is known as to how they fair after fathers' release. Conceptualizing paternal incarceration and reentry as linked rather than disparate events, this study examines perspectives on family separation, reunification, and children's adjustment when fathers return from prison.MethodThe sample consisted of 38 participants (19 previously incarcerated fathers, nine coparenting mothers, and 10 relatives) who shared perspectives on 63 children's adjustments. The semistructured interviews were analyzed via thematic analysis.ResultsTwo main themes were evident: (a) Paternal incarceration has a lasting toll on children that complicates reunification processes, introduces hurdles to maintaining togetherness, and is tied to changes in children's behaviors; and (b) reentry renews opportunity for father involvement that bolsters resilience despite ongoing systemic vulnerabilities.ConclusionPostrelease family reunification may present challenges for children's adjustment, though supported transitions may curb some concerns. The findings call for strengths‐oriented, needs‐focused, and evidence‐based reentry strategies that support entire family systems.

AbstractThe challenge of community and family reentry after a parent's release from prison remains an under‐addressed area of collateral damage stemming from high rates of U.S. incarceration. Many fathers released from prison return to living with family, and later attribute family connections and parent–child contact as key factors in their postrelease success. However, reentry planning is hampered by a dearth of research on family‐focused reentry services, and consequently, often omits attention to resuming family and parenting roles. To address this gap, we conducted 38 semi‐structured interviews with 19 previously incarcerated fathers, 9 co‐parenting mothers, and 10 relatives to explore service needs of fathers during reentry. Findings suggest programs not only should be multimodal, emphasizing family connections complemented by socioeconomic, self‐care, and social support services, but also should be accessible and relatable, offered within the community, and engaging for fathers and family members. Findings reinforce the importance of self‐determination and human agency while underscoring the multiple challenges fathers face upon reentry. By including the voices of those most affected by incarceration, this study advances knowledge to shape reentry programs and policies, contributes to efforts addressing criminal justice inequities, and promotes well‐being among formerly incarcerated parents and their families.

Objective: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the treatment effects of a relationship skills and family strengthening intervention for n = 726 high-risk, disadvantaged new parents. Method: Hierarchical linear modeling and regression models were used to assess intervention treatment effects. These findings were subsequently verified through two sensitivity analyses using propensity score analysis and growth curve modeling. Results: Analyses indicated 6 of 10 beneficial treatment effects were statistically significant, including relationship satisfaction, relationship quality, communication, conflict resolution, arguing, and emotional abuse. Most of these effects were verified in the more rigorous sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Study findings suggest that this intervention is effective in helping disadvantaged couples improve relationship skills and strengthen family bonds.

Record numbers of children born outside of marriage reflect a dramatic change in U.S. families; this demographic trend concerns policymakers and service providers because of the fragility of parental relationships. Dissolution of these relationships and growing up in a single-parent household leaves many children at higher risk of living in poverty— initiating a risk chain associated with less favorable academic, social, and cognitive outcomes. This article introduces Strong Couples-Strong Children, an innovative and replicable program designed to support expectant and new parents while their relationships are formative. Lessons learned from program implementation suggest that (a) face-to-face interaction served as the most effective form of recruitment; (b) partnerships with community organizations enabled the program to reach underserved populations; and (c) the family-centered model, working with both parents, required flexibility in programming.

Objective: This article describes an intervention development focusing on the early design stages of a model to improve psychosocial and behavioral health outcomes among children of fathers with incarceration and antisocial behavioral histories. Method: We use a synthesis of the literature and qualitative interviews with key informants to inform a theoretical model and the next steps in building an intervention. Results: Findings suggest gaps in effective interventions that promote father involvement among men with histories of incarceration and antisocial behavior. Considerations for future interventions include addressing the complex needs of fathers' post-incarceration, sequencing intervention components using flexible treatment approaches, and employing intentional recruitment and retention strategies. Conclusion: The negative relation between fathers' imprisonment and antisocial behavior and children's outcomes calls for interventions to promote positive father involvement. This article proposes a systematized approach to design such an intervention concluding with next steps in the planning for a future intervention study.

Abstract  This study examines the unique experiences of low‐income rural participants in an asset building program‐the Individual Development Account. Using data from the American Dream Demonstration, this study addresses three main questions: (1) What are the individual characteristics associated with saving outcomes among rural IDA participants? (2) What are the program characteristics associated with savings among rural participants? (3) What are the policy implications for supporting asset building in rural areas? To answer these questions we conduct an Ordinary Least Squares regression analysis. The results suggest that low‐income rural participants have the ability and willingness to save toward the accumulation of assets in IDAs. Looking at individual characteristics, home ownership appears to be an important predictor of savings. In addition, this study suggests that program characteristics (financial education, peer group meetings, match rate, direct deposit, and monthly saving target), not merely individual characteristics, are important in explaining saving performance for this group.

AbstractRates of parental incarceration and family homelessness continue to rise in the United States, and many families experience both of these risks concurrently. Both parental incarceration and homelessness independently relate to negative outcomes for children and families, with numerous studies documenting families' experiences of each risk independently. Despite families' increased risk for experiencing co‐occurring parental incarceration and housing instability, little is known about families' experiences within this complex context of risk. This qualitative study explores currently incarcerated parents' and their children's at‐home caregivers' perceptions of their experiences of homelessness and housing instability during the year prior to the parent's current incarceration. Through semi‐structured interviews with 16 jailed parents and caregivers, families describe their perception of their experience for themselves and for their children and identify challenges and support they encountered. Using multiperspectival interpretative phenomenological analysis, emerging group experiential themes clustered within four overarching constructs: jailed parent/caregiver‐focused, child‐focused, family‐level, and exosystem‐level experiences. Overall, families' descriptions capture the complexity of their cascading risk experiences, with impacts permeating through the family system. Implications for programming and policies addressing parental incarceration and homelessness are addressed.

This study examines the association between three forms of father–child contact during incarceration and fathers' reports of parental self-efficacy. The study's sample derives from ( n = 1,720) fathers participating in the Multisite Family Study on Incarceration, Partnering, and Parenting (MFS-IP) study. Multivariate ordinary least squares regression models were conducted to examine the study's hypotheses. Among the contact types, visits had a positive and significant effect on fathers' views of their parental efficacy after controlling demographic, familial, and carceral characteristics. This study informs practice and policy, demonstrating that contact is essential to family-strengthening services and beneficial for incarcerated fathers and families. Importantly, efforts should be made to make it easier for fathers to have contact with their children.