An Introduction to:
The Economic Status, Public Policy, and Child
Neglect Study
(aka, the In-Home Longitudinal Study of Pre-School Aged Children)
Lonnie Berger
Center for Health and Wellbeing
Princeton University
Prepared for the Fragile Families workshop
Columbia University
July 2004
Overview of the study:
• Consists of on an in-home module added to the Fragile
Families study at 36 and 60 months
• Observational and self-report data are collected in
participants’ homes over approximately one and a half
hours
• Originally designed to collect information on “child
neglect” and “poor” parenting behaviors and their effects
on children, but the data can be used to study parenting
and child wellbeing across a wide range of domains and
levels
Types of data collected:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Health and disability, health behaviors, and accidents
Child behavioral and cognitive development
Family routines
Parenting, parent-child interactions, and the quality of the caregiving
environment
Nutrition, food sufficiency, and food expenditures
Physical and social characteristics of the home, building, and
neighborhood
Parental physical and mental health and cognitive ability
(anthropometrics, stress, mastery, PPVT)
Discipline strategies
Involvement with child protective services (60-months)
Standardized measures:
• Conflict Tactics Scale
• Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment
• USDA Food Security Supplement
• PSID Food Expenditures Module
• Child Behavior Checklist
• Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
Research questions:
• How do factors such as economic status, family structure, and other
parental/family characteristics affect parenting and the environments
in which children live?
• What are the determinants of “poor” parenting/child deprivation?
• How do parental behaviors and the types of care children receive
affect their developmental outcomes?
• How do maternal employment and work patterns affect parenting
and child outcomes?
• What role do (resident and non-resident) fathers and mother’s
partners play in determining children’s care?
• How do public policies that affect family resources impact parenting,
children’s care, and child outcomes?
Parenting measures (1):
We have created 19 parenting measures. Many of these
are available in multiple coding schemes.
Measures based on the CTS:




Lack of non-violent discipline
Psychological aggression
Physical assault
Neglectful behavior
Measures based on the HOME:




Harshness
Lack of warmth
Lack of maternal verbal/social skills
Lack of materials for learning/cognitive stimulation
Parenting measures (2):
Physical measures:




Problems with the home interior
Home is unsafe for children
Food insecurity
Problems with the child’s clothing/hygiene
Medical measures:
 Any accident requiring medical care last year
 No medical checkup last year
 Problem’s with child’s oral health care
Exposure measures:
 Exposure to domestic violence
 Exposure to cigarette smoke
 Lack of seatbelt use
CTS measures and economic status
cts1C90
cts3C90
cts2C90
cts4C90
.3
.2
.1
0
-2
-1
0
lnmrypov
CTS1 = Lack of nonviolent discipline
CTS2 = Psychological aggression
CTS3 = Physical assault
CTS4 = Neglectful behaviors
1
2
HOME measures and economic status
nonpunC90
verbsocC95
emorespC90
langstimC90
.3
.2
.1
0
-2
-1
0
lnmrypov
1
2
nonpun = Harshness
emoresp = Lack of warmth
verbsoc = Lack of maternal verbal/social skills
langstim = Lack of materials for learning/cognitive stimulation
Physical measures and economic status
homeintC90
fs1C90
unsafe
appearC90
.3
.2
.1
0
-2
-1
0
lnmrypov
1
2
homeint = Problems with the home interior
unsafe = Home is unsafe for children
fs = Food insecurity
appear = Problems with the child’s hygiene/appearance
Medical measures and economic status
anyacc
oralprob
nocheckup
.2
.1
0
-2
-1
0
lnmrypov
1
anyacc = Any accident requiring medical care last year
nocheckup = No regular medical checkup last year
oralprob = Problems with child’s oral health care
2
Exposure measures and economic status
m3dvexpany
noseatbelt
smokeC90
.2
.1
0
-2
-1
0
lnmrypov
1
m3dvexpany = Exposure to domestic violence
smoke = Exposure to cigarette smoke
noseatbelt = Lack of seatbelt use
2
What are we finding so far?
• Lower income status is associated with poor outcomes on
several of the HOME, physical and exposure measures, but
less so with the CTS and medical measures.
• Poor outcomes on the most resource oriented measures (e.g.,
materials for learning, child appearance, food insecurity) are
most closely linked to poverty.
• We are currently investigating the extent to which family
characteristics affect child deprivation only through their
effects on income. Thus far, we have rejected this hypothesis
for 8 of the 19 outcomes (lack of nonviolent discipline, all 4
physical measures, accidents, and exposure to cigarette
smoke).