Family structure, mother-child communication, father ... - IngentaConnect

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0965-4283.htm

HE 110,3

152

Family structure, mother-child communication, father-child communication, and adolescent life satisfaction A cross-sectional multilevel analysis Kate A. Levin and Candace Currie Child and Adolescent Health Research Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the association between mother-child and father-child communication and children’s life satisfaction, and the moderating effect of communication with stepparents. Design/methodology/approach – Data from the 2006 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children: WHO-collaborative Study in Scotland (n ¼ 4; 959) were analysed using multilevel linear regression analyses. Findings – There was an association between both mother-child and father-child communication and young people’s life satisfaction. Relationship with mother was particularly important, especially among girls. Among boys, not living in a traditional two-parent family was a predictor of low life satisfaction, even when communication with one or more parents was easy. This effect was independent of economic disadvantage. The quality of the relationship with stepparents moderated these associations very slightly and in single father families only. Research limitations/implications – Strategies at the population level are recommended to enhance an open atmosphere in the home where young people feel they are able to talk to their parents about things that are bothering them. Further work is needed to understand the needs of high risk groups such as boys living in single father households and girls living in single mother and step families. Originality/value – The mental well-being of children and adolescents is a priority area for the World Health Organization and the Scottish Government but is a relatively new field with little known and no measures as yet identified. This study considered the impact of determinants related to the family on adolescent life satisfaction. The context of lone father families, an often missed category, was considered, as was the moderating effect of step-parents. Keywords Adolescents, Family life, Quality of life, Scotland, Family roles, Developmental psychology Paper type Research paper

Introduction Mental health is a priority for the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Scottish Government (Herman et al., 2005; Scottish Executive, 2003). International and national Health Education Vol. 110 No. 3, 2010 pp. 152-168 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0965-4283 DOI 10.1108/09654281011038831

The Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study is an international survey conducted in collaboration with the WHO Regional Office for Europe. The authors would like to acknowledge the HBSC international research network in 43 countries that developed the study’s research protocol. This study was funded by NHS Health Scotland.

programmes are designed to address both negative mental health (such as depression and anxiety) and positive mental health, or mental well-being, which WHO describes as “historically misunderstood and often forgotten” (Herman et al., 2005, p. iv). Monitoring of mental health is recommended not only among adults but also children and young people. Mental well-being can be separated into two streams, the eudaimonic stream, the way in which people function in life, and the hedonic stream, the way in which they perceive their life (Keyes, 2006). Life satisfaction, a measure of hedonic well-being, is a global judgement of one’s life and is often used as an indicator of mental well-being among adults as it is relatively stable over time, compared with subjective feelings related to the moment (Pavot and Diener, 1993). As well as mental health outcomes such as depression and anxiety, life satisfaction is associated with all-cause mortality, suicide and fatal accidents (Fiscella and Franks, 1997; Helliwell, 2007; Koivumaa-Honkanen et al., 2002; 2004). More recent literature has looked at life satisfaction among children and adolescents (Gilman and Huebner, 2003). Studies have shown that there are significant relationships between life satisfaction and life experiences, parent-child relationships, stress and anxiety and risk behaviours among young people (Gilman and Huebner, 2003; Edwards and Lopez, 2006) and low life satisfaction is thought to be associated with a range of psychological and social problems (Park, 2004). In recent years, many countries across Europe and the Western world have seen secular changes in family structure (Iacovou, 2004). Consequently, 19 per cent of children in Scotland aged 11-15 years live in single parent households, 2 per cent with their father and 17 per cent with their mother (Currie et al., 2008a). While some studies have found no association between family structure and mental health (Eamon, 2002; Ruschena et al., 2005), others have found that young people living with two non-step parents are less likely to experience depressive symptoms and behavioural problems than those who do not (Aseltine, 1996; Capron et al., 2007), and in some cases this association has been explained by socioeconomic disadvantage (McMunn et al., 2001; Spencer, 2005). The stress-buffering model suggests that support from family and peers moderates the relationship between stressful life events and problem behaviours (Windle, 1992). The parent-child relationship mediates the effects of poverty on child well-being (Conger et al., 1994) and good parenting practices are believed to lessen the impact of marital conflict (Erel and Burman, 1995). Under this model, the protective impact of good parent-child relationships is likely to be especially great for young people with high exposure to stress and life changes, such as a family transition. In accordance, studies have shown that parental support “buffers” the impact of family transition on mental health (Aneshensel, 1992; Ram and Hou, 2003). However, different family set ups expose young people to a range of parental figures who may also play a part in buffering stress. Therefore, not only parental involvement is of interest but involvement of other parental figures such as stepparents, grandparents and other adult family members. Furthermore, mothers and fathers play different roles in the development of young people. These differences are especially pronounced in middle childhood and adolescence when young people undergo physical, behavioural and social changes (Collins and Russell, 1991) and this is further complicated by gender of child with

Adolescent life satisfaction

153

HE 110,3

154

distinctions in perceived family support found between mother-son, mother-daughter, father-son and father-daughter relationships (Russell and Saebel, 1997). There may therefore be a gendered difference in the protective “stress-buffering” effect of parental support across mothers and fathers and sons and daughters. Sheeber et al. (2007) found that adolescent emotional well-being was associated with father-adolescent relationships in a similar way to mother-adolescent relationships, while Meadows et al. (2006) found a stronger association with mothers’ support than with fathers’. When assessing the impact of living in a single parent family, it is therefore important to distinguish between single father and single mother families (Demuth and Brown, 2004). Previous studies have also noted child gender differences, with a stronger correlation between family support and depression among girls than boys (Schraedley et al., 1999). Although much research has investigated the impact of the mother-child relationship and fatherlessness on adolescent mental health, significantly fewer studies have considered the father-child relationship and fewer still have considered the context of the single father family. Furthermore, the field of adolescent mental well-being, as opposed to negative mental health problems, has received very little attention to date (Herman et al., 2005, p. 159). To our knowledge no analysis has been carried out previously to assess the additive and interactive effect of mother-child and father-child relationships on adolescent mental well-being across different family structures, or the additive impact of relationships with stepparents. This is important from the public health perspective as it is known that negative mental health in adolescence is related to risk behaviours (Dierker et al., 2007) and tracks from adolescence into adulthood (Aalto-Setala et al., 2002), and it may be that the same is true of mental well-being. Establishing which adolescents have the greatest mental well-being and which parental figures are most influential within various family structures may therefore be the key to promotion of a wider and long-lasting range of positive health outcomes among young people. The aims of this study are threefold: (1) to investigate the association between mother-child and father-child communication and life satisfaction of boys and girls in Scotland, in order to establish with whom communication has a stronger association; (2) to investigate whether these associations vary within differing family structures; and (3) to examine whether communication with stepparents moderates the relationship between the life satisfaction of adolescents and communication with their non-step parents. Methods Data source This paper examines Scottish data from the 2006 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study. The research protocol was approved by University of Edinburgh ethics committee. The population was stratified by education authority (the Council department responsible for publicly funded schools in their area) and school type, listed as either state or independent schools. A nationally representative sample of young people in Primary 7, Secondary 2 and Secondary 4, selected using systematic

random sampling, received questionnaires in schools across Scotland between March and June so that the average groups sampled were 11.5, 13.5 and 15.5 years of age respectively. The questionnaire was completed anonymously in class. More information on sampling of schools and recruitment of students is described elsewhere (Currie et al., 2008a).


Life satisfaction Young people were shown a picture of a ladder and asked: “Here is a picture of a ladder – the top of the ladder 10 is the best possible life for you and the bottom is the worst possible life – in general where on the ladder do you feel you stand at the moment?”. This adapted version of the Cantril Ladder (Cantril, 1965) has been used in previous studies and alongside other life satisfaction scales (Kuntsche and Gmel, 2004; Molcho et al., 2007). In a validation study of 268 young people in Scotland, the adapted Cantril Ladder showed good test-retest reliability (r ¼ 0:70), considerably better than the Student’s Life Satisfaction Scale (r ¼ 0:54) (Muldoon et al., 2009).

155

Explanatory variables Schoolchildren were asked about the family structure in their only or main home, where they lived most of the time and were given a checklist of people from which they ticked who lived there. This included mother, father, stepmother and stepfather. Respondents were re-coded as living with both parents, a step family, single mother, single father or other. The “other” category (1.4 per cent of the survey sample) was excluded from analysis. Young people were asked “How easy is it for you to talk to the following persons about things that really bother you?” A checklist which included father, mother, stepfather (or mother’s boyfriend) and stepmother (or father’s girlfriend) was then presented with response options very easy, easy, difficult, very difficult and don’t have or don’t see this person. This variable has been piloted for use with adolescents in several countries across Europe and North America (Currie et al., 2008c). Responses were re-coded to give responses of “easy” (very easy and easy), “difficult” (difficult and very difficult) and “don’t have/see” for each parental figure. The Family Affluence Scale (FAS) (Currie et al., 2008b), used as an indicator of socioeconomic status, was calculated using responses to the following three questions: (1) Does your family have a car or van? (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes, one, 2 ¼ yes, two or more); (2) Do you have your own bedroom to yourself? (0 ¼ no, 1 ¼ yes); (3) During the past 12 months, how many times did you travel away on holiday with your family? (0 ¼ not at all, 1 ¼ once, 2 ¼ twice or more). Once summed, scores were recoded as low FAS (1 or 2), medium FAS (3 or 4) and high FAS (5). Sample characteristics Of the original 6,102 young people surveyed who lived in a both parent, step or single parent family, 997 (16 per cent) were excluded due to missing data, 58 per cent of whom were boys, 40 per cent were pupils in Secondary 2, 32 per cent were in Primary 7 and 28 per cent were in Secondary 4. A further 146 had conflicting family structure and

HE 110,3

156

Table I. Description of variables used in analysis

communication data and therefore had to be excluded from analysis. The final dataset had 4,959 cases and is described in Table I. Data analysis As a preliminary analysis, mean life satisfaction scores for boys and girls were tabulated, with corresponding 95 per cent confidence intervals, by ease of communication with mother and father for each family structure. Multilevel linear regressions were carried out separately for boys and girls using the statistical package MLwiN (Rasbash et al., 2004), with outcome variable life satisfaction score. The models had three levels: stratum on which the sample was chosen (education authority and school type), school and individual. Explanatory variables age, family affluence, family structure, mother-child communication and father-child communication were included in the models. Parameter coefficients were tabulated and discussed. The relative amount of model variation explained by each was examined. An interaction term Measure

Boys

Girls

Total

n Mean age SD

2,343 13.8 1.6

2,616 13.7 1.6

4,959 13.7 1.6

Family structure (%) Both parents Step family Single mother Single father

69 10 19 2

68 12 18 2

69 11 18 2

Family affluence (%) Low FAS Medium FAS High FAS

29 33 38

27 34 38

28 34 38

Mother-child communication (%) Easy Difficult Don’t have/don’t see this person

78 21 1

80 18 1

79 19 1

Father-child communication (%) Easy Difficult Don’t have/don’t see this person

62 30 8

44 45 11

53 38 10

Stepmother-child communication (%) Easy Difficult Don’t have/don’t see this person

5 6 89

6 7 88

5 6 88

Stepfather-child communication (%) Easy Difficult Don’t have/don’t see this person Mean life satisfaction SD

7 7 86 7.6 1.7

7 9 85 7.3 2.0

7 8 86 7.5 1.8

between family structure and mother-child and father-child communication was added to investigate whether the associations between parent-child communication and low life satisfaction differed between family structures. Data for boys and girls from step, single father and single mother families were then modelled separately, adjusting for family affluence and mother-child and father-child communication. Communication with stepmother and stepfather were included in the models to assess the moderating effect, if any, of communication with stepparents.


157

Results Equivalent proportions of boys and girls reported easy communication with mother (approximately 79 per cent), however there was a significant gender difference in ease of communication with father, with 62 per cent of boys and 44 per cent of girls reporting easy communication (x 2 ¼ 153, p , 0:000). Girls were more than twice as likely to report difficult communication with father as with mother. Only a small percent of young people (1 per cent) reported having no mother/contact with mother, while 10 per cent reported having no father/contact with father, with a greater proportion of girls than boys. Mean life satisfaction was significantly higher among boys (t ¼ 5:4, p , 0:000). Although not shown here, older adolescents, both boys and girls, had a lower mean life satisfaction score and were more likely to find communication with their parents difficult. Over half of girls aged 15 years reported difficult communication with their father. Mean life satisfaction scores are presented in Table II. Standard deviations have been omitted for ease of use. Young people with difficult communication with their Mean life satisfaction score Step family Single mother

All

Both parent

Single father

Boys Communication with mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see

7.9 6.8 7.0

8.0 7.0 –

7.6 6.8 7.0

7.6 6.6 –

7.1 5.9 6.9

Communication with father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see All

8.0 7.1 7.3 7.6

8.1 7.1 – 7.8

7.7 7.0 7.2 7.4

7.6 7.1 7.4 7.4

6.9 6.6 – 6.8

Girls Communication with mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see

7.7 6.1 6.6

7.8 6.4 –

7.4 5.7 6.6

7.4 5.5 –

7.1 5.6 6.6

Communication with father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see All

8.0 6.9 6.8 7.4

8.1 7.0 – 7.5

7.6 6.9 6.7 7.1

7.7 6.9 6.8 7.1

6.6 6.9 – 6.7

Table II. Communication with mother and communication with father by family structure

HE 110,3

158

mother or father had significantly lower life satisfaction than those with easy communication, for both boys and girls (column All). Overall, having difficult communication with a parent resulted in lower life satisfaction than not having/seeing the parent, although these differences were not significant at the 95 per cent level, probably due to the small proportions falling into the don’t have/see categories. The group with lowest life satisfaction were girls with difficult communication with their mother (6.1), significantly lower than all groups except girls with no communication with their mother. Boys and girls who reported easy communication with their father had highest life satisfaction (8.0), significantly higher than all other young people, including those who reported easy communication with their mother. Results by family structure show that boys and girls from single father families had significantly lower life satisfaction (6.8 and 6.7 respectively) than those from both parent families (7.8 and 7.5 respectively). Boys and girls with easy communication with their mother or father had lower life satisfaction if they lived in a step or single parent family. Table III presents findings of linear regression models for boys and girls with outcome measure life satisfaction score. Model 1 shows that age was significant for both boys (b ¼ 20:11 with 95 per cent CI (2 0.15, 2 0.06)) and girls (b ¼ 20:19 (2 0.23, 2 0.14)). Boys and girls with high family affluence had significantly greater life satisfaction (b ¼ 0:59 (0.43, 0.76) and b ¼ 0:48 (0.31, 0.66) respectively), while those from step or single parent families had significantly lower life satisfaction compared with those from both parent families. In particular, boys in single father families had a reduction of 0.81 in life satisfaction compared to those in both parent families. When modelled separately, communication with mother and father were significant in the models, with difficult communication with either parent resulting in lower life satisfaction. The effect sizes were generally greater for girls than boys, particularly in the case of communication with mother (for “difficult” communication relative to “easy”, b ¼ 21:36 (2 1.54, 2 1.18) for girls, and b ¼ 20:88 (2 1.05, 2 0.72) for boys). Difficult communication with a parent generally resulted in a larger negative effect than having no relationship, with the exception of girls and their fathers. Having no relationship with either parent resulted in significantly lower life satisfaction, compared with easy communication, for girls only. For the most part, adding mother-child communication reduced the effect sizes of father-child communication and vice versa (Model 3). Although not shown in the tables, the boys’ and girls’ models which adjusted only for age, family affluence and family structure explained 2.8 per cent and 3.5 per cent of the residual variance respectively. Of that, family structure explained approximately 1.2 per cent for both boys and girls. Parental communication explained a further 5.8 per cent of the model variance for boys and 9.7 per cent of the model variance for girls. Communication with mother explained a greater proportion of the variation, and therefore had a stronger association with life satisfaction, than communication with father, particularly for girls. When interactions were included between family structure and mother-child and father-child communication (not shown), the interactions were not significant. This suggests that the associations between parent-child communication and life satisfaction did not differ between both parent families and other family structures for girls or boys. Interactions between age and mother-child and father-child communication were also not significant, suggesting that, although parent-child

Talk to father: Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Percentage of variance explained by addition of communication variablesa

Talk to mother: Easy Difficult Don’t have/see

Family structure: Both parents Step family Single mother Single father

Family affluence: Low FAS Medium FAS High FAS

Boys Age

(0.31, 0.64) (0.43, 0.76)

(20.52, 2 0.08) (20.45, 2 0.11) (21.35, 2 0.26)

(21.05, 2 0.72) (20.90, 0.37)

1.0 * 0.48 0.59 1.0 * 20.30 20.28 20.81 1.0 * 20.88 20.26

4.4

(20.15, 2 0.06)

Model 1 95% CI

20.11 *

b

1.0 * 20.74 20.28

1.0 * 20.30 20.26 20.91

1.0 * 0.47 0.57

20.10 *

b

3.8

(20.89, 2 0.59) (20.56, 0.002)

(20.53, 2 0.08) (20.45, 2 0.06) (21.39, 2 0.43)

(0.30, 0.64) (0.41, 0.74)

(20.15, 2 0.06)

Model 2 95% CI

1.0 * 2 0.49 2 0.23

1.0 * 2 0.66 2 0.16

1.0 * 2 0.28 2 0.24 2 0.83

1.0 * 0.45 0.56

2 0.09 *

b

5.8 (continued)

(20.65, 2 0.33) (20.50, 0.05)

(20.84, 2 0.48) (20.80, 0.47)

(20.51, 2 0.05) (20.44, 2 0.05) (21.37, 2 0.29)

(0.28, 0.62) (0.40, 0.72)

(20.13, 2 0.04)

Model 3 95% CI


159

Table III. Linear regression of life satisfaction score for boys and girls, adjusting for age, family affluence, family structure, mother-child communication, father-child communication

Table III. 1.0 * 20.36 20.39 20.52 1.0 * 21.36 20.65

Family structure Both parents Step family Single mother Single father

Talk to mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see

7.7

(21.54, 2 1.18) (21.35, 0.05)

(20.57, 2 0.14) (20.58, 2 0.21) (21.15, 0.10)

(0.10, 0.46) (0.31, 0.66)

(20.23, 2 0.14)

1.0 * 20.83 20.89

1.0 * 20.19 20.16 20.81

1.0 * 0.32 0.52

20.18 *

b

4.6

(20.98, 2 0.67) (21.17, 2 0.61)

(20.43, 0.05) (20.37, 0.06) (21.36, 2 0.26)

(0.14, 0.50) (0.34, 0.70)

(20.22, 2 0.13)

Model 2 95% CI

1.0 * 2 0.54 2 0.70

1.0 * 2 1.16 2 0.77

1 2 0.18 2 0.19 2 0.52

1.0 * 0.27 0.45

2 0.16 *

b

9.7

(20.69, 2 0.38) (20.97, 2 0.42)

(21.35, 2 0.98) (21.47, 2 0.08)

(20.42, 0.05) (20.40, 0.01) (21.14, 0.10)

(0.09, 0.44) (0.27, 0.62)

(20.21, 2 0.11)

Model 3 95% CI

and family structure only

Notes: * Wald test significant p , 0.05; a The reduction in variance as a proportion of the variance of the model which adjusts for age, family affluence

Talk to father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Percentage of variance explained by addition of communication variablesa

1.0 * 0.28 0.48

Family affluence Low FAS Medium FAS High FAS

20.19 *

Model 1 95% CI

160

Girls Age

b

HE 110,3

communication and life satisfaction both decline with age (from preliminary results), the relationship between life satisfaction and parent-child communication remains unchanged between the ages of 11 and 15 years. Interactions between mother-child and father-child communication were also not significant indicating an additive rather than a interactive relationship. When data for step and single parent families were modelled independently of each other, the addition of communication with stepparents to the models altered the effect size of mother/father communication on life satisfaction only slightly and only in single father families (Table IV). Although having only a small moderating effect on these associations, communication with stepparents had an additive effect, reducing the unexplained model variance significantly (using the likelihood ratio test) for the single father family models, where for boys, difficult communication with a stepfather was associated with lower life satisfaction, while for girls, the absence of a stepmother was associated with higher life satisfaction. Discussion Previous research examining the impact of parent-child relationships on young people’s development and mental health found that where an unsupportive relationship with parents was present, social and emotional development as well as child health could be jeopardised (Waylen et al., 2008). Research examining the impact of non-residential father involvement on child adjustment post divorce also found that, while frequency of visitations was not related to child adjustment, the quality of non-residential fathers’ involvement was associated with emotional well-being and conduct problems among adolescents (Falci, 2006). The current study shows that for both boys and girls, finding it easy to talk with their mother or father about things that bother them acts as a protective factor for mental well-being. In particular, the mother-child relationship plays an important role, in line with previous findings (Morrow, 2004), and this is especially true for girls. Furthermore, finding it difficult to communicate with a parent may be more detrimental than having no relationship with that parent, with the exception of girls and their fathers. Open and easy communication between parents and their children may, therefore, be the key to mediating the effects of unavoidable family change. Family structure was found to explain little of the variance in a study of adolescent risk behaviours (Blum et al., 2000). In this study, however, while family structure was of less importance than the quality of parent-child relationships, the impact of family structure persisted, among boys, even after adjustment for the quality of parent-child communication, indicating that despite a good relationship with one or more parents, boys’ mental well-being is affected by the family structure in which they live. This is the case even after adjustment for family affluence, indicating that this effect is not due to economic disadvantage. Almost one-third of young people in Scotland live in a family other than the traditional two parent family. While this is unavoidable, strategies designed to promote mental well-being among young people should note that, even among boys, the quality of mother-child and father-child communication were more important in explaining low life satisfaction than family structure. This highlights the importance of enhancing both mother-teen and father-teen communication. Furthermore, the associations between low life satisfaction and mother-child and father-child


161

Table IV. Linear regression of life satisfaction score for boys and girls by family structure, adjusting for age, family affluence and communication with mother, father and stepparents (20.95, 0.02) (20.97, 0.08)

1.0 20.47 20.45

(21.09, 2 0.07) (21.06, 0.16) (20.14, 1.04) (20.45, 0.71) (20.67, 0.30) (21.20, 1.00)

1.0 20.58 20.45 1.0 0.45 0.13 1.0 20.19 20.10

6.7

(21.22, 2 0.16) (21.88, 0.73)

1.0 * 20.69 20.57

5.5

(21.18, 2 0.20) (21.46, 0.23)

1.0 * 20.69 20.61

Step family 95% CI

1.0 0.03 0.07

1.0 0.05 0.18

1.0 20.22 20.12

1.0 * 20.93 –

1.0 20.22 20.07

1.0 * 20.92 –

b

5.6

(20.77, 0.82) (20.52, 0.65)

(20.69, 0.79) (20.42, 0.78)

(20.65, 0.21) (20.52, 0.27)

(21.33, 2 0.52) –

5.4

(20.64, 0.20) (20.45, 0.31)

(21.32, 2 0.53) –

Single mother 95% CI

(28.07, 2 0.48) (24.74, 2.04)

1.0 * 2 4.28 2 1.35

16.3 (continued)

(20.14, 6.60) (21.18, 4.43)

(21.39, 1.54) –

(22.51, 1.68) (21.90, 0.72)

6.1

(21.21, 1.43) –

(23.01, 0.61) (21.43, 1.36)

Single father 95% CI

1.0 3.23 1.63

1.0 0.07

1.0 2 0.42 2 0.59

1.0 0.11 –

1.0 2 1.20 2 0.03

b

162

Boys Model 1 Talk to mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Percentage of variance explained by addition of communication variablesa Model 2 Talk to mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to stepmother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to stepfather Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Percentage of variance explained by addition of communication variablesa

b

HE 110,3

(21.02, 0.09) (21.24, 2 0.12)

1.0 20.46 20.68

(20.96, 0.20) (21.30, 2 0.01) (21.01, 0.31) (20.86, 0.47) (20.56, 0.42) (21.92, 0.58)

1.0 20.38 20.66 1.0 20.35 20.20 1.0 20.07 20.67 11.3

(22.12, 2 0.94) (21.93, 1.15)

1.0 * 21.53 20.39

10.6

(22.17, 2 1.02) (22.04, 0.05)

1.0 * 21.59 20.99

Step family 95% CI

(20.90, 2 0.02) (21.04, 2 0.17)

1.0 * 20.46 20.60

1.0 20.66 20.38

12.3

(21.45, 0.14) (21.05, 0.30)

(20.60, 0.63) (20.30, 0.80)

(20.88, 0.03) (21.21, 2 0.25)

1.0 * 20.43 20.73 1.0 0.01 0.25

(22.00, 2 1.14) –

1.0 * 21.57 –

11.5

(22.04, 2 1.17) –

Single mother 95% CI

1.0 * 21.61 –

b

1.0 2 0.77 0.63

1.0 0.69 1.12

1.0 0.47 –

1.0 * 2 2.19 2 1.07

1.0 0.53 –

1.0 * 2 2.14 2 0.77

b

28.3

(22.90, 1.36) (20.99, 2.25)

(21.59, 2.97) (0.01, 2.22)

(20.53, 1.47) –

(23.75, 2 0.63) (22.13, 2 0.02)

16.1

(20.42, 1.47) –

(23.77, 2 0.52) (21.73, 0.18)

Single father 95% CI

and family structure only

Notes: * Wald test significant p , 0.05; a The reduction in variance as a proportion of the variance of the model which adjusts for age, family affluence

Girls Model 1 Talk to mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Percentage of variance explained by addition of communication variablesa Model 2 Talk to mother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to father Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to stepmother Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Talk to stepfather Easy Difficult Don’t have/see Percentage of variance explained by addition of communication variablesa

b


163

Table IV.

HE 110,3

164

communication did not differ by family structure, suggesting that population-based strategies may be equally effective across all family structures. The final aim of the study was to examine the moderating effect of relationships with other parental figures on the association between life satisfaction and mother-child and father-child communication. This study suggests that among girls living in a single father family, not having/seeing a stepmother increased life satisfaction. Among boys from single father families, finding it difficult to talk with a stepfather reduced life satisfaction significantly. This may be due to the complex family set-up, which is described by a child living with his father and having a stepfather. Non-resident mothers are more involved with their absent children than non-resident fathers, however, factors such as a new partner or step family in the non-resident mother’s life are known to affect involvement with offspring (Stewart, 1999). This may result in a strained relationship between a child and their stepfather and also affect adolescent life satisfaction. Further research is required to investigate this small, but growing, proportion of the population. The use of single-item versus multi-item measures of life satisfaction In recent years there has been a move away from global measures and towards multi-dimensional measures of subjective well-being. However, in the case of life satisfaction, global measures correlate well with multi-dimensional scales (Sousa and Lyubomirsky, 2001) and are often preferred as they allow individuals to weight life domains as they choose (Pavot and Diener, 1993). It is generally believed, even in the case of global measures, that multi-item measures are preferred to single-item scales as they tend to have higher reliability and can be assessed for internal consistency. However, validation of the single-item Cantril Ladder among Scottish school children showed higher reliability than the seven-item Student’s Life Satisfaction Scale (Muldoon et al., 2009). Limitations and recommended further work This study is limited by the cross-sectional nature of the dataset. There is no way to establish causality in the interactive relationship between parent-child communication and child well-being. However, longitudinal studies have shown that the family environment predicts adolescent emotional health, rather than the other way around (Sheeber et al., 2001). The relationship between family structure and emotional and behavioural outcomes is, however, moderated by how recently family transition has occurred (Juby and Farrington, 2001) and it is therefore recommended that this is included in future research. It is also recommended that future work includes measurements taken from other sources such as parents and teachers for external validation. This was not possible within the current study. Conclusions Strategies, which enhance the parent-child relationship, and particularly mother-child communication, are recommended at a population level. Future research should aim to identify the needs of high risk groups such as boys living in step families, single mother households, and particularly, single father households. These groups have lower life satisfaction even after adjusting for parent-child communication. There is

also a need to examine family typologies where young people, girls in particular, do not have/see their mother or father, in order to better understand the history and mechanisms of such families and design effective interventions. References Aalto-Setala, T., Marttunen, M., Tuulio-Henriksson, A., Poikolainen, K. and Lonnqvist, J. (2002), “Depressive symptoms in adolescence as predictors of early adulthood depressive disorders and maladjustment”, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 159 No. 7, pp. 1235-7. Aneshensel, C.S. (1992), “Social stress: theory and research”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 15-38. Aseltine, R.H. (1996), “Pathways linking parental divorce with adolescent depression”, Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 133-48. Blum, R.W., Beuhring, T., Shew, M.L., Bearinger, L.H., Sieving, R.E. and Resnick, M.D. (2000), “The effects of race/ethnicity, income and family structure on adolescent risk behaviours”, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 90 No. 12, pp. 1879-84. Cantril, H. (1965), The Pattern of Human Concerns, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ. Capron, C., Therond, C. and Duyme, M. (2007), “Brief report: effect of menarcheal status and family structure on depressive symptoms and emotional/behavioural problems in young adolescent girls”, Journal of Adolescence, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 175-9. Collins, W.A. and Russell, G. (1991), “Mother-child and father-child relationships in middle childhood and adolescence: a developmental analysis”, Developmental Review, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 99-136. Conger, R.D., Ge, X., Elder, G.H., Lorenzo, F.O. and Simons, R.L. (1994), “Economic stress, coercive family process, and developmental problems of adolescence”, Child Development, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 541-61. Currie, C., Levin, K. and Todd, J. (2008a), HBSC Scotland National Report, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh. Currie, C., Molcho, M., Boyce, W., Holstein, B., Torsheim, T. and Richter, M. (2008b), “Researching health inequalities in adolescents: the development of the health behaviour in school-aged children (HBSC) Family Affluence Scale”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 66 No. 6, pp. 1429-36. Currie, C., Nic Gabhainn, S., Godeau, E., Roberts, C., Smith, R., Currie, D., Picket, W., Richter, M., Morgan, A. and Barnekow, V. (2008c), Inequalities in Young People’s Health: Health Behaviour in School-aged Children International Report from the 2005/2006 Survey, World Health Organization Europe, Copenhagen. Demuth, S. and Brown, S.L. (2004), “Family structure, family processes and adolescent delinquency: the significance of parental absence versus parental gender”, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 58-81. Dierker, L.C., Vesel, F., Sledjeski, E.M., Costello, D. and Perinne, N. (2007), “Testing the dual pathway hypothesis to substance use in adolescence and young adulthood”, Drug and Alcohol Dependence, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 83-9. Eamon, M.K. (2002), “Influences and mediators of the effect of poverty on young adolescent depressive symptoms”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 231-42. Edwards, L.M. and Lopez, S.J. (2006), “Perceived family support, acculturation, and life satisfaction in Mexican American youth: a mixed-methods exploration”, Journal of Counselling Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 279-87.


165

HE 110,3

166

Erel, O. and Burman, B. (1995), “Interrelatedness of marital relations and parent-child relations: a meta-analytic review”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 118 No. 1, pp. 108-32. Falci, C. (2006), “Family structure, closeness to residential and non-residential parents and psychological distress in early and middle adolescence”, Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 123-46. Fiscella, K. and Franks, P. (1997), “Does psychological distress contribute to racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality?”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 45 No. 12, pp. 1805-9. Gilman, R. and Huebner, E.S. (2003), “A review of life satisfaction research with children and adolescents”, School Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 192-205. Helliwell, J.F. (2007), “Well-being and social capital: does suicide pose a puzzle?”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 81 No. 3, pp. 455-96. Herman, H., Saxena, S. and Moodie, R. (2005), Promoting Mental Health: Concepts, Emerging Evidence, Practice. A Report of the World Health Organization, Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse in Collaboration with the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation and University of Melbourne, World Health Organization, Geneva. Iacovou, M. (2004), “Patterns of family living”, in Berthoud, R. and Iacovou, M. (Eds), Social Europe: Living Standards and Welfare States, Edward Elgar Publishing, University of Essex. Juby, H. and Farrington, D.P. (2001), “Disentangling the link between disruptive families and delinquency”, British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 22-40. Keyes, C.L.M. (2006), “Mental health in adolescence: is America’s youth flourishing?”, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 395-402. Koivumaa-Honkanen, H., Honkanen, R., Koskenvuo, M., Viinamaki, H. and Kaprio, J. (2002), “Life dissatisfaction as a predictor of fatal injury in a 20-year follow-up”, Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, Vol. 105 No. 6, pp. 444-50. Koivumaa-Honkanen, H.T., Kaprio, J., Honkanen, R., Viinamaki, H. and Koskenvuo, M. (2004), “Life satisfaction and depression in a 15-year follow-up of healthy adults”, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, Vol. 39 No. 12, pp. 994-9. Kuntsche, E.N. and Gmel, G. (2004), “Emotional well-being and violence among social and solitary risky single occasion drinkers in adolescence”, Addiction, Vol. 99 No. 3, pp. 331-9. McMunn, A.M., Nazroo, J.Y., Marmot, M.G., Boreham, R. and Goodman, R. (2001), “Children’s emotional and behavioural well-being and the family environment: findings from the Health Survey for England”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 423-40. Meadows, S.O., Brown, J.S. and Elder, G.H. (2006), “Depressive symptoms, stress and support: gendered trajectories from adolescence to young adulthood”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 93-103. Molcho, M., Nic Gabhainn, S., Kelly, C., Friel, S. and Kelleher, C. (2007), “Food poverty among Irish adolescents”, Public Health Nutrition, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 364-70. Morrow, V. (2004), “Children’s social capital: implications for health and well-being”, Health Education, Vol. 104 No. 4, pp. 211-25. Muldoon, J., Levin, K., van der Sluijs, W. and Currie, C. (2009), Validating Mental Well-being Items of the Scottish Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) Survey, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh. Park, N. (2004), “The role of subjective well-being in positive youth development”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 591 No. 1, pp. 25-39.

Pavot, W.G. and Diener, E. (1993), “Review of the satisfaction with life scale”, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 164-72. Ram, B. and Hou, F. (2003), “Changes in family structure and child outcomes: roles of economic and familial resources”, Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 309-30. Rasbash, J., Steele, F., Browne, W. and Prosser, B. (2004), A User’s Guide to MLwiN: Version 2.0, University of London, London. Ruschena, E., Prior, M., Sanson, A. and Smart, D. (2005), “A longitudinal study of adolescent adjustment following family transitions”, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 353-63. Russell, A. and Saebel, J. (1997), “Mother-son, mother-daughter, father-son and father-daughter: are they distinct relationships?”, Developmental Review, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 111-47. Schraedley, P.K., Gotlib, I.H. and Hayward, C. (1999), “Gender differences in correlates of depressive symptoms in adolescents”, Journal of Adolescent Health, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 98-108. Scottish Executive (2003), National Programme for Improving Mental Health and Well-being: Action Plan 2003-2006, The Stationary Office, Edinburgh. Sheeber, L.B., Hops, H. and Davis, B. (2001), “Family processes in adolescent depression”, Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 19-35. Sheeber, L.B., Davis, B., Leve, C., Hops, H. and Tildesley, E. (2007), “Adolescents’ relationships with their mothers and fathers: associations with depressive disorder and subdiagnostic symptomatology”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 116 No. 1, pp. 144-54. Sousa, L. and Lyubomirsky, S. (2001), “Life satisfaction”, in Worell, J. (Ed.), Encylopedia of Women and Gender: Sex Similarities and Differences and the Impact of Society on Gender, Vol. 2, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 667-76. Spencer, N. (2005), “Does material disadvantage explain the increased risk of adverse health, educational and behavioural outcomes among children in lone parent households in Britain? A cross sectional study”, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 152-7. Stewart, S.D. (1999), “Nonresident mothers’ and fathers’ social contact with children”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 894-907. Waylen, A., Stallard, N. and Stewart-Brown, S. (2008), “Parenting and health in mid-childhood: a longitudinal study”, European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 300-5. Windle, M. (1992), “A longitudinal study of stress buffering for adolescent problem behaviours”, Developmental Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 522-30. About the authors Kate A. Levin is a Senior Research Fellow at the Child and Adolescent Health Research Unit (CAHRU). She graduated in 1994 with a BSc (Hons) in Mathematics and Statistics from the University of St Andrews. She obtained a MSc in Social Statistics in 2001 from the University of Southampton. She then spent three years as a research associate at the Medical Research Council Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, working within the “Monitoring Health, Variations in Health, and the Determinants of Health in Scotland” programme on a project titled “Urban/Rural Differences in Health in Scotland”. She then worked in the Dental Health Services Research Unit in Dundee as a research statistician, primarily involved in the National Dental Inspection Programme, which annually surveys five and 11-year-old children. She joined CAHRU in August 2006. Kate A. Levin is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Candace Currie is a Professor of Child and Adolescent Health and is the Director of the Child and Adolescent Health Research Unit (CAHRU). With a background in the biological and


167

HE 110,3

168

behavioural sciences (BSc Hons in Zoology, University of St Andrews; PhD Animal Behaviour, University of Edinburgh), she began working in the area of child and adolescent health when she joined Edinburgh University’s Research Unit in Health and Behavioural Change (RUHBC) in 1985. Building on the programme of research she developed over the following 15 years, she left RUHBC to take up a Readership in 2000 and establish the Child and Adolescent Health Research Unit (CAHRU) at the Moray House School of Education. In 2006 she was promoted to a Personal Chair in Child and Adolescent Health. Since 1988, she has been Principal Investigator for Scotland of the Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children: WHO Collaborative Cross-National Study (HBSC). In 1995 she was elected as International Coordinator of the HBSC Study in which more than 40 countries across Europe and North America are currently members. Since establishing CAHRU, she has been awarded more than £3 million in research funding for the unit’s work. While her research activities as Director of CAHRU are wide-ranging she is particularly interested in social inequalities, and in developing cross-national and interdisciplinary perspectives on adolescent health.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints