Previous Chapter

Back to Table of Contents

Next Chapter

Français

Chapter 3: The Family Environment and Its Impact on Child Well-Being ⁽⁶⁶⁾

Children are shaped by the world around them. For children under 6 years of age, nothing has greater influence on their development than their family. Families filter children’s experiences with others and provide nurture and care that strongly influences early child development. Families determine the quality of a young child’s world and shape the foundations for later development.

This chapter provides an overview of what is known about the relationship between the family environment and young children’s health and well-being. It examines key aspects of family functioning (including parenting and parental health), family income level, maternal education and family structure. Canadian research on the relationship between families and child well-being relies heavily on the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY)(68). As new releases of data from the NLSCY become available, researchers will be able to build on the existing knowledge base and provide additional insight into the complex relationship between families and child well-being.

The Importance of Family Dynamics on the Well-Being of Young Children

Research has shown that family dynamics is one of the most important elements affecting healthy child development. Positive family functioning can help mitigate the influence of other factors in child development, such as family income and family structure(69).

Family functioning refers to how well family members communicate with each other, work together, and treat each other. It also has to do with how well family members function as a unit. While the majority of children grow up in families that are functioning well, there is a small percentage who do not(70). Children living in dysfunctional families are about 35% more likely to display signs of problematic behaviour such as aggression or difficult temperament than their counterparts living in families that are functioning well(71). This relationship between family functioning and behaviour problems is particularly evident when examining the display of signs associated with aggressive behaviours, such as getting into fights, kicking, biting and/or destroying belongings.

Parenting Practices

How well a family functions is tied to the quality of the relationship between parents and their children. This relationship is a critical ingredient in shaping early child development and setting developmental pathways into adulthood(74). Research in Canada and the United States has consistently shown that parenting practices influence a range of childhood outcomes, such as aggressive behaviour, pro-social behaviour, academic achievement and high school completion(75).

Effective parenting puts sensitive child-rearing practices at the centre of parent-child interactions. These practices include carefully monitoring a child’s behaviour, providing a warm and caring environment, and encouraging independence. This combination of monitoring, responsiveness, and encouragement has been defined as an “authoritative style of parenting”(76). Specifically, “authoritative parents” monitor their children’s behaviour, respond to their needs, set reasonable boundaries and encourage increasing independence. While setting firm limits with their children, authoritative parents present options, discuss alternative ways of behaving and encourage independence. In contrast, “authoritarian parents” are generally controlling and sometimes harsh in their approach to discipline and can be seen as less flexible and lacking responsiveness and warmth in their interactions with their children. “Permissive parents” are characterized as overly indulgent and extremely tolerant of misbehaviour in their children.

Research indicates that children raised in an environment of authoritative parenting are the least likely to exhibit signs of vulnerability. This style is positively related to better behaviour and school performance. Positive parenting practices, as demonstrated by an authoritative style, also decrease the chances of developmental problems(78) in Canadian children by 25 to 52%, depending on the type of developmental problem. In contrast, researchers have found that inconsistent, non-positive parenting can lead to signs of vulnerability such as poorer school outcomes(79).

Work-Family Balance

Not only is the style of parenting important, but also parents’ level of involvement in their children’s daily lives. Research indicates that the amount of time in which parents are interacting directly with their children is positively related to child outcomes(81). However, the importance of time is not measured by the actual number of hours the parents spend with the child, but rather the “quality” of that time.

The participation in the workforce of mothers with young children is one of the most dramatic changes in family life over the past twenty years. Approximately 60% of women with children under 3 years of age were working in the paid labour force in 2001—up from approximately 40% in the early 1980s(82). Researchers have long been debating the impact that this increase has on child development outcomes.
Overall, research has found that children with mothers who work outside the home are not at any disadvantage in terms of developmental outcomes. Parents are increasingly aware of the importance of promoting the early development of their children. As a result, despite increased demands in the workplace, working Canadian parents significantly increased the amount of direct care (physical care, playing and travelling time) and their overall contact time with children aged 5 and younger between 1986 and 1998(83).

The increase in the number of mothers participating in the labour force means that more children are now in child care settings. A recent review concluded that quality child care can reduce the negative impact on child development of a stressed, disadvantaged home life, regardless of a family’s income level(84). This review concluded that the use or non-use of child care is not the issue. Rather, the key factor is the quality of the child care. Other studies have bolstered this conclusion, finding that child care does not negatively impact the mother-child relationship (except when very young children are extensively exposed to poor quality child care). Parents’ behaviour and beliefs are a substantially greater factor in child development than child care(85). Studies have also found that children in low- and moderate-income families who attend home-based and centre-based child care have improved vocabulary development at 4 and 5 years of age compared to children living in the same circumstances who do not attend out-of-home child care(86).

The amount of time that parents spend reading out loud to their children is another important aspect of parental engagement for young children. Research is demonstrating the significant influence that daily reading to a young child has on his or her development. Parents who read frequently with their children contribute to their healthy development, particularly their language and reading skills(87). Studies also show a link between early and frequent reading and social development. Daily reading seems to reduce the likelihood of behaviour problems.

Parental Well-Being

The well-being of a parent also plays a key role in how the family functions.

Researchers have found that maternal depression is a key determinant of childhood vulnerability, in particular, young children living with mothers who are depressed are more likely to have behaviour and learning problems(88). For example, infants of depressed mothers are less attentive, and more irritable and fussy. Children 5 years of age and younger were about one and one-half times as likely to have poor verbal skills if their mothers were depressed. In addition, children were about twice as likely to display behavioural problems if their mothers were depressed(89).

Researchers have also found that maternal heavy drinking is related to negative parenting practices and children’s behaviour and emotional problems. While only 3.5% of children had mothers who drank heavily (five or more drinks on more than 12 occasions during the past year) these children had more emotional problems, separation anxiety, hyperactivity and aggressiveness, as well as a higher likelihood to commit property crimes. Heavy drinking mothers reported fewer positive interactions with their children compared to non-drinking and moderate-drinking mothers, and they appear to be more hostile and ineffective in their parenting style(90).

The Importance of Income and Maternal Education on the Well-Being of Young Children

In general, growing up in a family that is functioning well with parents who exhibit positive parenting practices will reduce the effects of other factors such as income and maternal education. Despite these mitigating effects, however, income and maternal education have been shown to contribute significantly to child outcomes.

Family Income

The majority of children in low-income families do very well, having average or above average scores on their cognitive measures and not exhibiting major behavioural problems. Family income, however, is acknowledged as a consistent, significant contributor to child outcomes. While there is a demonstrated relationship between income and vocabulary development, it is important to note that other factors such as parental education, reading habits, and participation in early childhood activities are also important in influencing the vocabulary development of children. Children who live in low-income families at 4 and 5 years of age are more likely to have lower vocabulary skills than their counterparts living in middle- and upper-income families(91). Children living in families with lower incomes are also less likely than children in higher-income families to participate in recreational activities. Participation in these types of early childhood activities helps build the foundation for core skills and success in school(92).

Maternal Education

The education level of the mother also has a significant impact on child development. Recent research has demonstrated a strong link between maternal education and levels of vocabulary development.

Figure 2: Young Children’s Scores on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Revised by Maternal Education Level, 2000/01

D

Source: National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, Cycle 4 (2000–2001).

The more language a child hears, the more they are likely to use. Mothers with higher levels of education are more likely to talk with their children and use a broader range of vocabulary(93). As Figure 2 illustrates, in 2000–2001, children of mothers with college/university education were more likely to have average to advanced language skills. Studies loXing at preschool vocabulary in relation to reading and math skills four years later have suggested that the mother’s education level has both a short-term and a long-term impact on the child’s development(94).

The effects of maternal education are not confined solely to academic skills. They also have an impact on a child’s social skills. Data show that mothers who complete more than a secondary school education are less likely to have toddlers with problematic personal and social behaviours. Research demonstrates that this will have a longer term effect as children who get along with other children at 4 and 5 years of age are less likely to be aggressive with other children when they are older than children who are aggressive when they are 4 and 5 years of age(95). In addition, maternal education is correlated to family income. The more educated a mother, the more likely the family is to have a higher income.

The Importance of Family Structure on the Well-Being of Young Children

Numerous studies have examined the impact of single- and two-parent families on children’s developmental outcomes, including measures of academic achievement and social emotional well-being. They have demonstrated that children growing up in single-parent families are more likely to repeat grades, to possess poorer language skills, and to be less healthy than children living in two-parent families. These children are also less likely to get along well with friends and parents than children living in two-parent families(96).

Figure 3: Prevalence of Problematic Behaviour by Family Type, 2000/01

D

Source: National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, Cycle 4 (2000–2001).

As Figure 3 illustrates, children in single-parent families are slightly more likely to show signs of problematic behaviour such as emotional disorder/anxiety, hyperactivity/inattention and physical aggression/conduct disorder than children living in two-parent families(97).

Behavioural problems in young children are not solely an issue for single-parent families. It is important to note that 85% of young children continue to live in two-parent families and as a result, the majority of children experiencing behavioural problems live in two-parent families. As previously mentioned, the effects of family structure on child development are mitigated by such factors as family functioning and parenting. In addition, the outcomes for children from single-parent families vary with the distribution of other factors affecting the family such as the level of the mother’s education and family income.

Parental Separation

Many young children in Canada experience changes in family structure before they enter Grade 1 due to separation or divorce of their parents. In fact, approximately 25% of children now experience parental separation before the age of 6 compared to only 8% in the 1960s(98).

The impact of parental separation can have short-term and long-term effects on children’s outcomes. Data show that children living in post-divorce custodial arrangements have a higher prevalence of behavioural or emotional problems than children living in non-divorced families(99). Twenty-eight percent of children living with both parents have one or more behavioural problem as compared to 32.8% of children who are living in post-divorce custody arrangements(100).

Parental separation and divorce often result in lower family income and changes in a child’s residence—both of which are associated with negative impacts on child outcomes(101). Children seem to be most at risk for experiencing difficulties in the period immediately following their parents’ separation. Children benefit from maintaining contact and relationships with both biological parents after parental separation(102).

The overall conclusion from research studies is that positive parenting practices and continued contact with both parents seem to mitigate the negative developmental consequences of separation and divorce for young children(103).

Conclusion

The research indicates that the nature of children’s family environments has a very strong effect on children’s cognitive and behavioural development, and on the prevalence of childhood vulnerability. The factors within this environment that have been shown to have an impact on child development are parenting skills, the cohesiveness of the family unit, the educational level and mental health of the mother, and the extent to which parents are actively engaged with their children. However, there is still much that is unknown about this complex relationship. Ongoing research will help to further enhance our understanding of healthy child development.

66. Acknowledgement for the development of this chapter is extended to Kathleen Guy of Guy Associates and Jane Bertrand of the Atkinson Centre for Society and Child Development.
67. Federal/Provincial/Territorial Council of Ministers on Social Policy Renewal, A National Children’s Agenda – Developing A Shared Vision (Canada, 1999).
68. In the NLSCY, the Person Most Knowledgeable about the Child (PMK), which is typically the mother, provides information for all selected children in the household, as well as the sociodemographic information about herself and her spouse. The latter information is used to describe the socioeconomic situation of the child’s family. Only one PMK was selected per household.
69. H. R. Schaffer, Making Decisions About Children: Psychological Questions and Answers, 2nd edition (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998).
70. Human Resources Development Canada/Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, Cycle 4 (2000–2001).
71. Y. Racine and M. Boyle, “Family Functioning and Children’s Behavior Problems,” in Vulnerable Children – Findings from Canada’s National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, J. Doug Willms, ed. (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2002: 199–209).
72. E. M. Cummings, “Marital Conflict and Children’s Functioning,” in Social Development (3, 1994): 16–36.
73. N. Trocme et al., Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect – Final Report (Ottawa: Health Canada, 2001).
74. M. Bornstein, L. Davidson, C. Keyes, and K. Moore, Well-Being: Positive Development Across the Life Course, (Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum, 2003).
75. M. Bornstein and R. Bradley, Socioeconomic Status, Parenting and Child Development, (Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum, 2003); R. Tremblay, “When Children’s Social Development Fails.” Developmental Health and the Wealth of Nation, D. Keating and C. Hertzman eds. (New York: Guilford Press, 1999: 55–71).
76. D. Baumrind, “Child Care Practices Anteceding 3 Patterns of Preschool Behaviour,” in Genetic Psychology Monographs 75 (1967): 43–88.
77. J. Doug Willms, Vulnerable Children – Findings from Canada’s National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2002).
78. Ibid.
79. G. S. Ginsberg and M. Bornstein, “Family Factors Related to Children’s Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivational Orientation and Academic Performance,” in Child Development 64 (1993): 1461–1474; R. D. Conger et al., “A Family Process Model of Economic Hardship and Adjustment of Early Adolescent Boys,” in Child Development 63 (1992): 526–541.
80. NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, “Child Care and Mother-Child Interaction in the First Three Years of Life” in Developmental Psychology 35 96 (1999): 1399–1413; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network , “The Relation of Child Care to Cognitive and Language Development,” Child Development 71, 4, (2000): 960–980; NICHD Research Network, “Early Child Care and Children’s Development Prior to School Entry,” Research Symposium (Minneapolis: Society for Research in Child Development, April 19, 2001).
81. C. CoX and J. D. Willms, “Balancing Work and Family Life,” in Vulnerable Children – Findings from Canada’s National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, J. Doug Willms, ed. (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2002): 183–197.
82. Human Resources Development Canada/Government of Manitoba, A New Generation of Canadian Families: Raising Young Children – A New LoX at Data from National Surveys (Canada, 2003).
83. J. Zuzanek, “Parenting Time: Enough or Too Little,” in Isuma Canadian Journal of Policy Research (Canada: Government of Canada, Summer 2001): 125–133.
84. M. E. Lamb, “Nonparental Child Care: Context Quality, Correlated,” in HandboX of Child Psychology vol. 4: Child Psychology in Practice, 5th edition, W. Damon, I. E. Sigel, and K. A. Renniger, eds. (New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1998): 73–134.
85. J. Shonkoff and D. Phillips, eds., From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development (Washington: National Academy Press, 2000).
86. D. Kohen, C. Hertzman, and J. D. Willms, “The Importance of Quality Child Care,” in Vulnerable Children – Findings from Canada’s National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, J. Doug Willms, ed. (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2002): 261–276.
87. S. Neuman and D. Dickinson, eds., HandboX of Early Literacy Research (New York: Guilford Press, 2001).
88. A. G. Billings and R. H. Moos, “Comparisons of Children of Depressed and Nondepressed Parents: A Social-Environmental Perspective,” in Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 11, 4 (1983): 463–486.
89. M. A. Somers and J. D. Willms, “Maternal Depression and Childhood Vulnerability,” in Vulnerable Children – Findings from Canada’s National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, J. Doug Willms, ed. (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2002): 211–228.
90. R. O. Pihl et al., Alcohol and Parenting: The Effects of Maternal Heavy Drinking Working Paper: W-98-27E (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada, 1998).
91. Human Resources Development Canada/Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, Cycle 4 (2000–2001).
92. Human Resources Development Canada/Government of Manitoba, A New Generation of Canadian Families: Raising Young Children – A New LoX at Data from National Surveys (Canada, 2003).
93. B. Hart and T. Risley, Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children (Baltimore: Paul H. BroXes Publishing Co., 1995).
94. J. Hoddinott et al., Is History Destiny? Resources, Transitions and Child Education Attainments in Canada Working Paper: SP-551-12-02E (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada, 2002).
95. R. Tremblay, “When Children’s Social Development Fails,” in Development Health and the Wealth of Nations, D. Keating and C. Hertzman, eds. (New York: Guilford Press, 1999): 55–71.
96. L. J. Walker and K. H. Hennig, “Parent-Child Relationships in Single-Parent Families,” in Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 29 (1997): 63–75.
97. Human Resources Development Canada/Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, Cycle 4 (2000–2001).
98. N. Marcil-Gratton, Growing Up with Mom and Dad? Children and Family Instability (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada, 1998).
99. T. O’Connor and J. Jenkins, Marital Transitions and Children’s Adjustments Working Paper: W-01-1-3E (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada, August 2000).
100. Ibid.
101. E. M. Hetherington, Coping with Divorce, Single Parenting and Remarriage: A Risk and Resilience Perspective (New Jersey: Erlbaum, 1999).
102. T. Haddad, Custody Arrangements and the Development of Emotional or Behavioural Problems in Children Working Paper: W-98-9E (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada, 1998).
103. T. O’Connor and J. Jenkins, Marital Transitions and Children’s Adjustments Working Paper: W-01-1-3E (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada, August 2000); E. M. Hetherington, Coping with Divorce, Single Parenting and Remarriage: A Risk and Resilience Perspective (New Jersey: Erlbaum, 1999).