Howard J. Markman, Ph.D and Marcie Pregulman "The Effects of Relationship and Parenting Skill Training on Couples, Father Involvement, Parenting and Children"

The Effects of Relationship and Parenting Skill Training on Couples, Father

Involvement, Parenting and Children

Howard J. Markman, Ph.D & Marcie PregulmanUniversity of Denver

Center for Marital & Family ResearchUniversity of [email protected]

Oklahoma Statewide Survey (2002):If divorced, what were the contributors to your divorce?

• Religious differences 20.6%• Domestic Violence 30.1%• Economic Hardship 38.9%• Little or no marriage prep 41.4%• Married too young 42.9%• Infidelity 57.5%• Too much arguing 59.2%• Lack of commitment 84.9%

Johnson, C. A., Stanley, S. M., Glenn, N. D., Amato, P. A., Nock, S. L., Markman, H. J., & Dion, M. R. (2002). Marriage in Oklahoma: 2001 baseline statewide survey on marriage and divorce (S02096 OKDHS). Oklahoma City, OK: Oklahoma Department of Human Services.

Marital Conflict & Divorce: Effects on Children• Divorce associated with increased risk for child

behavioral problems, and school problems, later relationship problems

• Destructive parental conflict may underlie negative effects of divorce (children exposed to conflict for many years.

• Tolstoy – only few ways to have bad marriage/parenting

• Danger Signs

Data from Sweden

• Children growing up with two parents have fewer behavioral and emotional problems than growing up with single mother (Sarkadi, et. al, 2008 )

• Lower death and injury rates (Weitoft et. al, 2003, )

(reported in Popenoe, 2008, Rutgers Marriage Project)

For Children….

• Divorce is an emotional: “Searing Experience”

• American Association for Pediatrics (2004)

Marriage & Parenting Programs• Can these negative effects on children

be prevented or diminished?: The hope of marriage education and parenting programs

• The role of private and public sectors in promoting and funding these programs: Invest one Euro, save XXX Euro.

Children & Marriage: Key Findings• Children one of top three problem areas for

couples (money, communication others); especially in middle years, when fun, satisfaction fall to lowest point in marriage

• Marital satisfaction after childbirth falls for about 60% of couples, but most are still satisfied; unplanned children more negative effects

Children Benefit From Growing up in Intact and Healthy Relationships • Except in high danger sign relationships• Economic, social, education, emotional • Black poverty rate would be 25% vs. 47%• White 11% vs. 16%• After divorce, children experience 70% drop

in household income• More likely to finish high school and college• Avoid teen pregnancy

…do better at work,…earn more money,…feel happier in life.

Adults living within a healthy marriage tend to…

Copyright © PREP Educational Products, Inc. 2008. All rights reserved. 303.759.9931.

Children living with their married parents tend to do better…

…with friends,…in school,…emotionally.


Data based on U.S. nationwide random phone survey of 947 adults who were engaged, cohabitating, or married. (Stanley & Markman, PREP, Inc., 1996; 303-759-9931)


Marriage & Parenting: Key Findings• If you improve marriage you improve parenting

even if program does not directly target parenting

• If you improve parenting, may improve marriage, especially if program directly targets marriage

• If you improve marriage and parenting, you improve child and family functioning.

Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Marriage Initiative• 2010 1 year re-authorization• $150 million/year for marriage education

and responsible fatherhood promotion efforts for low income couples and individuals

• Child policy driven

Fatherhood & Healthy Marriage Initiative: History• 1996 Welfare reform under Clinton (TANF,

Temporary Aid for Needy Families) • Two of four goals involve marriage promotion,

since children growing up in one parent families in U.S. more at risk for a variety of behavioral and mental health problems, costing federal government billions of dollars in services

• Invest $150,000,000/year

Goal is to Promote Healthy Marriages

• Provide skills to help low income couples and parents who desire a healthy marriage the tools and knowledge to achieve this goal

Couples Relationship Education• Structured education to couples about

relationship skills, knowledge and attitudes

• Goal is to increase chances of couple having a healthy relationship and lifetime love and decrease chances of relationship distress and breakup

• Focus is on early intervention and on risk and protective factors

Effects of Marriage Education Programs (Hawkins Meta Analysis)• Effect size =.44 for communication pre-post• .44 one year later• 60% significantly improve • Experiments (random assignment) strongest • Impressive since most are PREVENTION

Fort Campbell– Home of the 101st AirborneDivision (Air Assault).

“The Screaming Eagles”

PREP AND CONTROL COUPLES DIVORCE OUTCOMES (1 YR)

GERMAN PREP AND CONTROL COUPLESDIVORCE OUTCOMES (11 YRS)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/German_flag_Reichstag_6376.JPG

Dissemination to Diverse Settings and Populations• Adoptive and foster parent couples • High Schools• Teen pregnancy • First offender youths and parents• Transition to parenthood • Work settings • Prisons

Getting Both Partners in Room• Despite the success of reaching out to

diverse groups of couples through institutions that serve them, one of the biggest issues heard from service providers is getting couples in the room.

“Spillover” Effects

• For example, a very important question in the family services field: Since mom’s receive most family oriented services (e.g., parenting programs; nurse visitor), how do these services impact dad, marriage, other romantic relationship partner, as well as children?

• Can effects be even stronger?

Fatherhood, Relationship, and

Marriage Education Project

Howard Markman, Martha Wadsworth, Lindsey Einhorn,

Shuana Reinks, Marcie Pregulman & Erica Moran

Thank You For Your Support

• Administration for Children Youth & Families (ACF), Office of Planning, Research & Evaluation (OPRE)

Qualifications for Entry into Study

• Low Income (200% of the poverty level)

• Raising at least one child together• Child 18 or under• Family of 3 - $34,000• Living together at least 6 months

Total Couples Recruited (n = 724)

Total Excluded (n = 423) Did not meet inclusion criteria n = 166 Qualified but declined participation n = 109 Other n = 148

Completed Pretest and

Randomized (n = 301)

Assigned to Male-Only

(n = 72)

Assigned to Couples (n = 77)

Assigned to Control (n = 72)

Assigned to Female-Only

(n = 80)

Completed Post (n = 67)

93.1% retention


90.9% retention


86.1% retention


90% retention

Completed FU1 (n = 63)

87.5% retention


81.8% retention


81.9% retention


82.5% retention

The Sample

• 301 couples• Random Assignmento77 Couples Intervention Groupo80 Female Intervention Group o72 Male Intervention Group o72 Control Group

Demographics

• Age M 33.9, F 31.0• Ethnicityo27% African Americano35% Whiteo23% Hispanico 5% American Indiano10% Bi-racial/Other

Demographics (2)

•Relationship Status: 63% Married•Relationship Length: 6.7 years•Children: 2.3 in home•Family Income: $22, 800

FRAME Intervention

• Marries Markman’s couple’s intervention (PREP) with Wadsworth’s stress and coping approach to parenting (consistent with Forgatch, Sanders)

• 14 hours delivered in two formats: 3 weekend days or 5 weekday evenings

• Community Service Providers, female/male teams

The Keys


Communication Danger Signs

• Escalation

• Invalidation

• Negative Interpretations

• Avoidance and Withdrawal

The Speaker Listener Technique

• A way to talk safely when you really need to do it well

• Not designed to be used all the time

• It neutralizes the Danger Signs

• Regular practice can help to “inoculate” your relationship against Danger Signs


The Goal• is for each partner to feel

understood by the other

• is NOT agreement

• is NOT to solve a problem (yet)




“The Speaker has The Floor.”


• So, what I hear you saying is…

• So, from your point of view…

• It sounds like you…

• So you…

• Let me see if I’ve got it. You feel…

How to Paraphrase


Events, Issues and Hidden Issues

Events: How

the discussion got started

Issues: WHAT

we’re talking about

Hidden Issues: WHY

it matters so much


How helpful was FRAME?

Response to Intervention

• Overall satisfaction with workshop o 5 point scale (5 = Very Satisfied)oCouples Group (mean = 4.32)o Female Group (mean = 4.46)oMale Group (mean = 4.2)

• Overall very high satisfaction with workshop leaders

• Participants most commonly reported finding the speaker listener technique most helpful

Divorce & Aggression

No overall breakup & divorce findings at FU 1 (not expected so soon)

However high aggressive couples have higher rates of breakup and divorce than low aggressive couples

Why? Couples may be learning about what a healthy relationship is and what it is not. Then deciding to breakup after seeing their relationship is unhealthy and bad for children

NEGATIVE COMMUNICATION FOR MEN

FEMALE GROUP RESULTS

FEMALE POSITIVE BONDING FOR

PREP AND CONTROL COUPLES (FRAME)

T1 T23

3.13.23.33.43.53.63.73.83.9

4

3.56 3.66

3.53

3.77

3.27

3.473.55

3.80 CONTROL

COUPLES

MALE GROUP

FEMALE GROUP

MALE POSITIVE BONDING FOR PREP AND CONTROL COUPLES (FRAME)

T1 T23.5

3.553.6

3.653.7

3.753.8

3.853.9

3.954

3.68

3.59

3.78

3.90

3.57

3.84

3.77

3.91 Control

Couples Group

Male Group

Female Group

NEGATIVE COMMUNICATION FOR WOMAN

MALE GRO

UP

RESULTS

FRAME Parenting Findings

• Increased parenting alliance• Increased parent-child warmth and decreased

parent-child negative interactions• When negative communication between

parents decrease and relationship happiness increased:

• There was decreased negative interactions between parents and child

FRAME Child Outcomes

• Decreased child symptoms of depression, anxiety & aggression (on Child Behavior Checklist)

Parenting Changes Linked to Child Functioning1. Pre-post increases in parental warmth and monitoring, and reduced stress predicted reductions in children’s internalizing and externalizing symptoms at 6-month follow-up

2. Decreased parental worry (50% 1-3 hours day) about finances, linked to lower levels of child symptoms

Parenting Changes and Child Functioning (2)3. Decreased parental worry (50% 1-3 hours day) about finances, linked to lower levels of child symptoms

4. Less negative communication and increased parenting alliance associated with decreased child externalizing and internalizing problems

Service Delivery Issues: Our Findings• Since mom’s receive most family

oriented services, can these services positively impact dad, marriage?

• Frame suggests yes, if services are dad and/or couple friendly

• So both people do not have to be in room.

• Its not so simple!• Need to have father, family perspective

How We Integrate Couple Perspective in FRAME• Letter to partner about couples

orientation• Talk about the other person in program• Orient skill use in program toward

partner• Home work is couple oriented

Integration of Couples Perspective (2)• Other person also gets home work assignment

sheet• Coed leaders give male and female

perspective• Bring home food for family • Food provided so other person does need to

deal with pre workshop dinner• Providing child care money so other partner

not burdened with taking care of kids

Building Strong Families Evaluation: Oklahoma• Family expectations delivered at Transition to

Parenthood; evaluated by RCT• Key significant findings 15 months later for

couple outcomes:• Higher stability• Relationship happiness• Support and affection• Avoidance of destructive conflict• Economic well being

Impact on Parenting (weaker findings)• Quality of co-parenting (not individual parenting

behaviors)• Higher father involvement• Living with child• Supporting child financially

Thank You For Listening