Suchergebnisse

Family science is at the forefront of understanding the multiple and interconnected risk and protective factors (e.g., poverty vs. wealth, racism and discrimination, privilege) that affect families and the contexts in which they live. In this article, we use the metaphor of spider and web to suggest that family science theorizing is missing an integral piece of the puzzle—the designer of the contexts that have become the field's object of study and intervention (Krieger, 1994). Who or what is this designer? Recognizing that the answer is necessarily complex, we propose a metaphorical spider of insidious influence: White supremacy. Pairing understandings garnered from decades of critical theorizing with a review of the family science literature, we hypothesize about the web of causation and interrogate this culprit. Finally, we offer implications for the consciousness and intentional addition of White supremacy to family science theorizing and methods.

AbstractWe hypothesized that the goodness‐of‐fit between profiles of observed, caregiver‐provided ethnic–racial socialization (ERS), and child self‐regulation (i.e., inhibitory control) would differentially associate with child behavioral outcomes. Conversations between 80 caregivers (45% Latinx; 55% Black) and their children (M age = 11.09; 46% female) were rated for ERS. Measures included an inhibitory control composite (ages 2.5–3.5) and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; age 12). Three profiles were determined: Comprehensive (n = 34), Reactive (n = 8), and Pragmatic (n = 38). Only youth with low inhibitory control in preschool appeared to benefit from Pragmatic ERS, whereas youth with normative or high inhibitory control in early childhood displayed lower internalizing and externalizing behaviors when they had Comprehensive or Reactive rather than Pragmatic caregivers.