Counting and Serving Never-Married Families

Counting and Serving Never-Married

Families

Fall 2007

Presenters:

Minnesota Fathers & Families Network

University of Minnesota ExtensionFamily Relations

Hosted with support from

the regional Minn.

Initiative Foundations

University of Minnesota Extension

The major outreach arm of the University of Minnesota

The Family Relations Team offers: Professional Development Resources for parents of teens Parent Education resources Education for family transition: Parents Forever,

We Agree: Creating a Parenting Plan, Padres para siempre

www.parenting.umn.edu

www.extension.umn.edu

www.mnfathers.org

• training events

• news

• educational resources

• public policy

PromotingHealthy

Fatherhood

ChildWell-being

CommunityDevelopment

GenderEquity

Men’sDevelopment

Why Fathers Matter

The Best Part of Being a Dad

“cuddling up at nightafter reading a bedtimestory and getting a bighug and ‘I love you,Daddy’ just makes theday worthwhile”

Diane and Kevin

Read Part I of the case study In groups of three or four discuss the

questions at the end Be prepared to talk about your small

group discussion

Your discussion

What strengths do Diane and Kevin have?

What challenges? What work would you do with Diane

and Kevin? How would you help Kevin as a

father?

Two Different Views of Fatherhood:

The Involved Father Fathers in the Shadows

Setting the Context:Do We Count Fathers

The Involved Father

Changes in the Value of Different Fatherhood Roles

Fathers rated as very important

Show love & affection 90%Provide safety & protection 88%Provide financial care 73%

The Involved Father

Involvement Activities 0-4 year olds Daily to 1-2 times a week

Holds & comforts child 98%

Plays interactive games 96%

Sets & enforces rules 95%

Helps with dressing, toileting,

makes meals & puts to bed 90%

Fathers in the Shadows

Paucity of data about numerous groups of men including:


Fathers of children born to teen mothers: 27% did not establish paternity

Incarcerated fathers: 4,600 estimated in Minnesota

Education level of fathers is related to fertility rate

Fathers w/college degree = 0.9 childrenFathers without HS diploma = 1.8

children


Multiple Partner Fertility = 15% of men by age 40. This is likely to increase with the current rate of non-marital births increasing.

Young fathers with low education status and two or more households are not able to financially support children in these family structures.


Among custodial parents in U.S., 2001 31.2% of mothers, never married 20.3% of fathers, never married

Families with children, percent married Highest percentage: UT 82.9% Minnesota 77.4% National average 72.9% Lowest percentage: MS 65.5%

Are never-married families visible?

Diane and Kevin, part II

What do you think about Diane and Kevin’s situation after learning this information?

Have your thoughts about their strengths and challenges changed?

How would you change how you would work with Diane and Kevin?

What does research tell us about fathers like Kevin and his family?

New research findings from the Fragile Family and Child Well-Being (FFCW) study.

www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/

Fragile Families

Non-married parents raising a child together

Complex families in which one or both parents: Has responsibility for children with whom they

do not live

AND/OR Shares residence with non-biological children

What do you think of the term “fragile”?

Why the FFCW Study?

Researchers looked at the 1997 National Survey of America’s Families Analyzed longitudinal data Found that as children with non-married

parents grew older, father involvement declined sharply

Headed by well-known and reputable social science researchers

Targets both mothers and fathers Takes culture into account Has a high response rate Answers

What are the conditions and capabilities of unmarried parents, especially fathers?

What is the nature of the relationships between unmarried parents?

Study Design

Started in 1998 Followed a group of newborns in 20 U.S.

cities for five years. Used mixed methods:

Quantitative: Various questionnaires completed by parents and by trained observers of the child

Qualitative: Interviews with parents with open ended questions on a list of topics

For the Quantitative Study

Sample: 4,898 births 3,712 to unmarried parents 1,186 to married parents

Selected randomly from 75 hospitals in 20 cities across the United States

Data Collection

Occurred at four points

1. New mothers initially interviewed in the hospital and fathers in the hospital or at another location

2. Mothers and fathers interview by telephone again at the child’s first, third and fifth birthdays

Data from first three points are currently available

Unit of analysis was “focal child.”

Parent interviews focused on: Mother & father relationship New partner relationships Parenting behavior Marriage attitudes Child well-being and characteristics Social support and family relationships Demographic characteristics, health (mental

and physical) Economic and employment status Incarceration Neighborhood characteristics Program participation

Response Rates

For non-marital births

At baseline: 87% of mothers and 75% of eligible fathers (mother had to be interviewed to be eligible)

By year three: 88% of mothersand 65% of eligible fathers continued to participate

For the Qualitative Studies

Baseline in-depth interviews in seven cities with a subset of FFCW participants Oakland, Austin, Baltimore, Detroit, Newark,

Philadelphia, and Richmond A random sample of 250 non-marital and 75

marital births within three racial groups (Black, Latino & Non-Hispanic White)

Response rates of mothers exceeded 90%, of married or cohabiting fathers exceeded 90%; and of unmarried fathers 75%.

Study Limitations

Births were in urban areas. Did a much better job of including fathers,

but still only reached 76% of unmarried fathers.

Restricted access to adolescent parents by the hospital. Teen mothers and fathers were under-represented.

What can we learn about non-married parents like Diane and Kevin from the FFCW study?

At the time of birth, the vast majority of new unmarried parents are committed to one another and have high hopes of raising their child together: 82% were romantically involved About 4 out of 5 fathers contributed financially

during pregnancy 3 out of 4 fathers visited the mother in the

hospital

McLanahan, Garfinkel, Reichman, & Teitler, 2004

Relationship Status of Fragile Families

Cohabiting Dating

Friends Little or no contact

McLanahan et al, 2004.

51%

31%

8%10%

More encouraging findings at or near the baby’s birth

Stated positive future intentions: 80% of babies had father’s last name 80% of fathers planned to contribute

financially 91% of babies had father’s name on the

birth certificate 94% of mothers wanted the father involved


More baseline information Almost 80% of cohabiting mothers and

82% of fathers intended to marry their partner

More likely to have children with more than one partner 43% of unmarried mothers have children

with at least 2 men while only 15% of married mothers have children with different fathers.


Poverty and Fragile Families

Average incomes: Mothers $21,500 Fathers $18,000

Unmarried parents 2 Xs as likely to live in poverty when compared to married parents 40% of unmarried parents 20% of married parents

17%

13%

29%

26%

Capabilities of non-married parents at baseline

Over 40% of mothers and 35% of fathers lacked a high school degree or GED

Risk factors: 6% of mothers and 12% of father had drug

or alcohol problems 6% of mothers reported some violent or

abusive behavior on the part of the father towards her (likely under-reported)


What happens to father involvement in Fragile Families over time?

Fathers’ risk factors in Fragile Families

Study by Waller and Swisher, 2006 Examined how these 3 risk factors

related to relationship status and father involvement over time

Physical abuse Alcohol and substance use Incarceration

Prevalence of Father Risk Factors

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Physicalabuse

Drug oralcohol useinterference

Recentincarceration(since child's

birth)

Pastincarceration

(beforechild's birth)

30%

12%

18%

11%

Physical abuse

Mothers’ reports of ever being cut, bruised or seriously hurt in a fight with the father in the one year follow-up. 11% reported violence Does not capture emotional and sexual

abuse Most often-cited reason for ending the

couple relationship.

Drug and alcohol use Reports of both mother and father of fathers’

drug or alcohol use interference with daily life – 17.6% of fathers

Use was not always considered problematic. Mothers were often involved in drug use as

well. Parents often decided to stay together and

work the problems out.

Incarceration Most common risk factor in the study.

Drug-related offenses Eroded the mother’s trust in the father and strained

the couple relationship. Most parents believed that seeing the parent

incarcerated was not a good thing.

Relationship status 3 years after the birth of the child Research suggests that romantic relationships

mediate father involvement. Relationship Status was connected to risk

factors.

Ending the relationship Father’s risk factors made couple relationships

particularly unstable. Mother’s reasons for ending relationships

1st: physical abuse 2nd: substance use.

Decision often resulted after reaching a “threshold” of negative interactions.

Father involvement was contingent on the quality of the couple’s relationships.

Strategies used in couple relationships

Couples decided to stay together and looked for ways to respond to risk behaviors.

Parallel parenting: parents maintained separate relationships with their children.

Fathers withdrew from the mother and children; for some it helped maintain a sense of control.

Mother used protective gate-keeping.

Parenting Apart

The continuum of parenting relationships

Parallel Parenting

Conflictual

Unengaged

Cooperative co-parenting

Findings Fathers with risk factors were less likely to have

a romantic relationship with their children’s mothers.

As a result of this poor relationship quality, fathers were less likely to be involved with their children.

Physical abuse was consistently and significantly associated with parents’ relationship status and father involvement.

More findings Mothers selected out of relationships that they

deemed “unhealthy” and monitor ed father’s access to children. Especially in cases of physical abuse When fathers tried to stay involved, their efforts often

failed. Drug and alcohol abuse were more common

than physical abuse. Fathers attempts to change behavior were often

unsuccessful.

More

Incarceration was the most common risk factor and played an important role in family life: Not viewed as harmful as physical abuse Did create problems in terms of losing

contact and passive withdrawal


“watching my daughtergrow and develop intoa fine young lady who

has morals, values andrespect for others”

What about younger parents?

Study by Gee, McNerney, Reiter and Leaman (2007)

Looked at the predictors of father involvement and in-kind support 3 years after a child’s birth among fathers of children born to adolescent and young adult mothers

Sample Subset of FFCW dataset

2,850 mothers under age 25 and 2,215 fathers at baseline

87% of mothers and 81% of fathers were interviewed at the 3-year follow-up

Relationships status: saw the same pattern as shown in the earlier slide Fewer were romantically involved and slightly

higher percentage were married

Measures

Relationship quality Father involvement In-Kind support

Mothers not cohabiting reported on father responsibility

Results for father involvement African American fathers were less

involved overall. Fathers with lower incomes at baseline

were more involved at 3 years. Both baseline and 3-year relationship

quality variables were significantly associated with father involvement.

The strongest predictor of father-involvement at the 3-year follow-up was father-child cohabitation.

Results of father’s in-kind support

Race was significantly associated with fathers’ in-kind support at three years. African American and Latino fathers provided less in-

kind supports. In-kind support of the father was more likely if the

mother reported a romantic relationship with the child’s father

In-kind support was less likely, if mother was involved with a new partner.

Multiple partner fertility

Either or both members has a child(ren) from a prior relationship

Significant barrier to forming a enduring couple relationship Less likely to marry Greater apprehension about marriage

Often results in lack of trust and problems with commitment

Let’s think about Diane and Kevin

What risk factors does Kevin have that could reduce father involvement?

What about Diane? What services might be useful?

What do Fragile Families say about their couple relationships?

Based on Kathryn Edin’s work Research Brief #17 (2003): The Retreat

from Marriage among Low-Income Families Used data from the Time, Love, Cash, Care

and Children Study (TLC3) of FFCW project

In-depth interviews with 75 couples found they:

Hold positive view of marriage

Are postponing marriage Reasons

Have financial concerns Have relationship problems Have timing issues

Financial Concerns

Being responsible, holding a job

Acquiring assets Saving enough for a proper

wedding

Relationship Problems

High standards – men are viewed as not being mature

Worries about sexual fidelity – very low trust

Perception that the relationship was not strong enough to last

Timing Issues

Not enough time to get married right now

Need a stretch of uninterrupted time to plan the wedding

Did not discuss the obstacles to marriage – children’s needs, public assistance and ideological objections

Implications for practitioners Work on strengthening couple relationships and trust,

including emphasis on the importance of sexual fidelity.

Identify ways to increase financial stability and asset accumulation to help couples meet their “high hopes”.

When staying together or marriage is dangerous or inappropriate, educational programs can help parents work together in raising their children.

Highest father involvement exists when children are young.

Reaching fathers at or near children’s births helps both mothers and fathers form and sustain a healthy family.

Let’s look at one more part to Diane and Kevin’s story

What would you do as a practitioner working with Diane and Kevin?

Discuss the two questions at the end of part III.

Your thoughts

Based on the information that Sally received in the referral (parts 1 and 2 of the case study), what services and plan would you develop with Diane and Kevin?

What steps could Sally take to learn more about the issues in Diane and Kevin’s relationship that might pose risks for Diane, her daughter and Kevin?

When working with Fragile Families, there are several principles to follow:

Take a comprehensive approach Protect against domestic abuse Focus on family process not family form Address attitudes and behaviors that can be

changed Build co-parenting skills Be culturally competent Meet the needs of fathers

Build in protection against domestic abuse

Promote healthy, non-abusive relationships Do no harm – do not do anything to

exacerbate the risks Go through a process of creating a protocol

for domestic violence Implement the protocol

In cases of domestic violence

Avoid giving sole or joint custody to

batterers Do not mandate mediation Allow mothers and children to relocate to

insure safety Mothers should not be labeled

uncooperative if they don’t want to co-parent

Take a comprehensive approach

Relationship education alone is too simple of a solution for many unmarried parents

Offer a helpful package of soft and hard services:Soft: relationship skill workshops, financial

literacy classes and peer support groupsHard: job placement and training, housing,

medical coverage and substance abuse treatment, if needed

Must get beyond establishing paternity and instituting child support orders

Some other thoughts on couples/relationship education About 1/3 to 1/2 of Fragile Families pose

no risk for marriage Be cautious of using traditional, marital

education programs Need to get beyond skill building to

building self efficacy Offer parenting education and co-

parenting education in conjunction with couples education

Minnesota’s Fatherhood Programs

Minnesota has over100 programs thatwork to meet theneeds of men infamilies.

Men comprise less than 1/3 of all professional staff working in fatherhood programs.

Resources used by Fathers

0 10 20 30 40 50

Family*

Wife / partner

Friends

Dad's groups / ECFE

Books / reading materials

Internet

Health care providers

Teachers / helping professionals

Religion / Bible

Find out on own

Co-workers

Age 5-12

Age 0-4

Percent of respondents

Minnesota’s Fatherhood Programs

20

37

21

1615

16

34

28

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Fam

ily L

aw

Par

ent E

duca

tion

Hea

lthca

re /

Hea

lthE

duca

tion

Em

ploy

men

t Ser

vice

s

Men

tal H

ealth

Sup

ervi

sed

Vis

itatio

n

Act

iviti

es

Sup

port

Gro

ups

Services provided by 58 of Minnesota’s social service

and educational programs for

fathers.

Paternity Establishment

When a child is born to an unmarried mother in Minnesota, paternity can be decided in one of two ways:

(1) Both parents sign a Recognition of Parentage (ROP) and have it filed with the State Dept. of Health.

(2) A paternity action is made through court

(Paternity Order).

Why is paternity establishment important?

Parental Access to Records

Unless otherwise provided by the court:

A. Each party has the right of access to, and to receive copies of, school, medical, dental, religious training and other important records and information about the minor children…

B. Each party has the right to be informed by school officials about the children’s welfare, educational progress and status…

(Statute Section 518.17, Sub.3)

Various Statewide Resources

“Unmarried Parents’ Guide…” Supervised Visitation Network Minn. Father’s Adoption Registry The Men’s Line: 866-379-6367

Find more resources at www.mnfathers.org

Education from Extension

Parents Forever We Agree: Creating a Parenting Plan Padres Para Siempre

www.parenting.umn.edu

Actions Promote image of fathers as

nurturers Include fathers in discourse

around early childhood development and narrowing the achievement gap

Support & fund parenting education and services for fathers of young children

Count on mothers and women as allies for fathers

What can you do locally?


“being capable of inciting raucous belly laughs in my child at will”

Documents

Counting and Serving Never-Married Families