Quality of Grandmother-Mother Relationships: Links to Children’s Behaviors, Mothers’ Parenting and Psychological Functioning

Laura D. PittmanPsychology DepartmentNorthern Illinois University

Grandparents’ role in the family Growing number of studies

considering influence of grandparents Custodial parents Multigenerational households Grandparents providing childcare

Often the focus is on the burden placed on the grandparents, and not the impact of mother or child

Aspects to consider Direct vs. indirect influences

Direct interactions with children – either informally or if providing childcare

Indirect influences through interactions with mother

Contextual factors Minority vs. European American families Married vs. divorced families

Questions for this study

How does the quality of the grandmother-mother (GM-M) relationship influence mothers’ mental health, her parenting, and her children’s functioning?

Do these associations vary by context? Single versus two-parent households African American vs. Hispanic American

families

Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study

2402 families completed Time 1 interview (1999) Over 40,000 household screened for eligible families Children age 0-4 years or 10-14 years 74% overall response rate Boston, Chicago, San Antonio

88% of families completed Time 2 interview (2001) For each time point a 2-hour interview of the

maternal caregiver in family’s home using a computerized interview format was completed

Obtained information on family background, mental health, economic condition, and parenting

Embedded Developmental Study (EDS)

At each time point, mothers of 2-4 year old children asked to completed a second interview focused on grandmother & father relationships and childcare Time 1: 85% response rate Time 2: 88% response rate

This analysis focuses on the 370 families with EDS interviews at both time points who identified a biological grandmother in their lives

Quality of Grandmother-Mother relationship

Global relationship quality 12 items from Inventory of Parent and Peer

Attachment (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987) Two factors: Trust & Communication and

Anger & Alienation Specific scale about parenting

6 items asking about how much GM helps or interferes with parenting

Two scales: Parenting Cooperation & Parenting Conflict

Mothers’ Mental Health

10-item Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1986)

Brief Symptom Inventory–18 (Derogatis, 2000) Includes symptoms of anxiety, depression, &

somatization Parenting Stress & Satisfaction

12 items derived from similar measures in the New Hope Study & Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID)

Mothers’ Parenting

Parenting Practices - Raising Children Checklist (Shumow, et al., 1998) 20 items which collapsed to 4 Subscales: Authoritative,

Harsh, Permissive & Disengaged Parenting Cognitive Stimulation subscale from the HOME

(Caldwell & Bradley, 1984) Family Routines

6-items from Family Routines Inventory (Jensen et al., 1983)

Child outcomes

Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach, 1992; 1992) Externalizing & Internalizing Problem Behaviors Because two versions used age-standardized

scores and collapsed across version Positive Behavior Scale (Quint, Bos, & Polit,

1997) 6 items about children’s social competence

Background Characteristics at Time 1(N = 370)

Mothers’ Age: 26.97 years (SD = 5.57)

Children’s Age: 3.32 years (SD = 0.92)

42% African American; 51% Hispanic American;

7% Caucasian or Other

46% earned High School degree

55% Single; 37% Married; 8% Cohabiting

Household Income-to-Needs Ratio: 0.84 (SD = .48)

Longitudinal regressions Longitudinal regressions run predicting Time 2

variables by the four GM-M relations variables GM-M Trust & Communication GM-M Anger & Alienation GM-M Parenting Cooperation GM-M Parenting Conflict

Controlling for: Corresponding Time 1 variables Other key demographic variables

child’s age & gender mother’s age, education, marital status &

race/ethnicity household income-to-needs ratio

Main effects of GM-M relationship Maternal mental health

More GM-M Parenting Cooperation Increasing self-esteem (β = .19*)

More GM-M Anger & Alienation Increasing Internalizing Symptoms (β = .20**) Increasing Parenting Stress (β = .26**) Decreasing Parenting Satisfaction (β = -.29**)

Parenting More GM-M Trust & Communication

Increasing Family Routines (β = .30**) Child outcomes

Higher GM-M Trust & Communication Increasing Positive Behaviors (β = .21*)

Considering context

Added interaction terms with the four GM-M relationship variables and 1 vs. 2-parent household Ethnicity of the family

Limited analysis to 330 families who were either African American or Hispanic American

Interactions with Household Type

5 interactions were significant GM-M Parenting Cooperation interaction on

Parenting Stress GM-M Trust & Communication on Mothers’

Self–esteem GM-M Anger & Alienation on Parenting

Satisfaction GM-M Trust & Communication on Cognitive

Stimulation Gm-M Parenting Conflict on Children’s

Internalizing Symptoms

Interaction between Household Status and GM-M Parenting Cooperation predicting Parenting Stress

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

- 1 SD +1 SD

Mother-Grandmother Cooperation on Parenting Issues

Pa

ren

tin

g S

tre

ss

Married or Cohabiting Single

Interaction between Mother-Grandmother Trust and Communication and Single Parent Household predicting Mothers' Self Esteem

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

- 1 SD +1 SD

Mother-Grandmother Trust and Communication

Mo

the

rs' S

elf

es

tee

m

Married or Cohabiting Single

Interactions with Ethnicity 11 interactions were significant Predicting Mothers’ Mental Health

GM-M Parenting Conflict interaction on Mothers’ Self-Esteem

GM-M Parenting Conflict on Parenting Satisfaction GM-M Parenting Cooperation on Parenting Satisfaction Gm-M Anger & Alienation on Parenting Satisfaction

Mothers’ Parenting GM-M Parenting Conflict on Cognitive Stimulation GM-M Parenting Cooperation on Authoritative Parenting GM-M Parenting Cooperation on Disengaged Parenting GM-M Trust & Communication on Disengaged Parenting GM-M Trust & Communication on Permissive Parenting

Children’s Outcomes GM-M Parenting Conflict on Child’s Positive Behaviors GM-M Parenting Cooperation on Child’s Positive Behaviors

Interaction between Mother-Grandmother Parenting Conflict and Ethnicity predicting Mothers' Self-esteem

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

- 1 SD +1 SD

Mother-Grandmother Parenting Conflict

Mo

the

rs' S

elf

es

tee

m

Hispanic American African American

Interaction between Mother-Grandmother Parenting Cooperation and Ethnicity predicting Parenting Satisfaction

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

3

3.1

3.2

- 1 SD +1 SD

Mother-Grandmother Parenting Cooperation

Pa

ren

tin

g S

ati

sfa

cti

on

Hispanic American African American

Interaction between Mother-Grandmother Parenting Cooperation and Ethnicity predicting Mothers' Authoritative Parenting

2.1

2.15

2.2

2.25

2.3

2.35

2.4

2.45

2.5

- 1 SD +1 SD

Mother-Grandmother Parenting Cooperation

Mo

the

rs' A

uth

ori

tati

ve

Pa

ren

tin

g

Hispanic American African American

Interaction between Mother-Grandmother Parenting Conflict and Ethnicity predicting Child's Positive Behaviors

2.4

2.45

2.5

2.55

2.6

2.65

2.7

2.75

2.8

2.85

2.9

- 1 SD +1 SD

Mother-Grandmother Parenting Conflict

Ch

ild's

Po

sit

ive

Be

ha

vio

rs

Hispanic American African American

Summary-Main Effects GM-M relationship was important

Several main effects related to linked to maternal mental health & parenting stress

Fewer related to parenting and children’s mental health

Aspects of the global GM-M relationship seemed more relevant

Summary: Contextual influences Family context seemed to influence how

important the GM-M relationship was Less clear for single vs. two-parent

household These relationships seem more influential

among African American, as compared to Hispanic American, families The specific aspects of the GM-M relationship

related to parenting seem most likely to find differences

It may be that these aspects are more variable or more important among African American families

Limitations & Future Directions

Analyses are exploratory in nature More studies designed to look at these

questions are needed However, the analyses used are

conservative in nature and, thus, suggest that grandmothers can be important in family life

Future studies need to consider Other populations Grandfathers as well as grandmothers, and Other contexts

THANKS….

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation

Administration on Developmental Disabilities,

Administration for Children and Families

Social Security Administration National Institute of Mental

Health The Boston Foundation The Annie E. Casey Foundation The Edna McConnell Clark

Foundation The Lloyd A. Fry Foundation The Hogg Foundation for Mental

Health

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

The Joyce Foundation The Henry J. Kaiser Family

Foundation The W.K. Kellogg Foundation The Kronkosky Charitable

Foundation The John D. and Catherine T.

MacArthur Foundation The Charles Stewart Mott

Foundation The David and Lucile Packard

Foundation The Searle Fund for Policy

Research The Woods Fund of Chicago

To the families who participated in this study; To the PI’s of this study: Andrew Cherlin, P. Lindsay-

Chase-Lansdale, Robert Moffitt, Ronald Angel, Linda Burton, and William Julius Wilson; and

To the funders of this project: