The Ties That Bind: Support and Strain in the Social Networks of Older Adolescents in Foster Care

Background and Purpose  In the past twenty years there has been growing interest in exploring the social networks of older adolescents in foster care (Hiles et al., 2013).  In addition to being a potential source of belongingness and identity, these ties may also supply important resources and support during the transition out of care.  Indeed, some scholars argue that interdependence (rather than solely independence) is a meaningful framework for guiding foster care services and outcomes (Mendes & Moslehuddin, 2006).  Recent research has examined various dimensions of support systems, such as youths’ perspectives, links between support and resilience, relational impermanence and adaptive strategies, and specific network ties (e.g., natural mentor arrangements) (Collins, Spencer, & Ward, 2010; Munson et al., 2010; Osterling & Hines, 2006; Samuels, 2009).  With some exceptions, most studies draw on convenient samples and do not use formal social network or support instruments.  Additionally, few studies consider negative features of relationships.  The present analysis draws on a stratified random sample of adolescents in California foster care, describing dimensions of social networks with particular attention given to support and strain.

Methods  A modified version of the Social Support Network Questionnaire (reference) was administered to participants in the CalYOUTH study (n = 727).  Data were collected on network size, availability of three types of support (emotional, tangible, and guidance), satisfaction with support, relationship strain (disappointment, intrusiveness, criticism, and conflict), frequency of contact, and relationship type (e.g., biological parent, caseworker).  Missing data was minimal (less than 2% for any item).    

Results  All youth nominated at least one individual they turn to for support, but variation existed among respondents (range=1-9, mean=3.7).  Friends (22.85%), siblings (14.04%), and extended family (15.60%) were the most commonly nominated relationship types, whereas formal relationships (e.g., caseworkers and mentors) were the least frequently nominated.  About half of all nominated individuals (49.8%) were in contact with respondents almost every day, and only 7.9% were in touch less than once per month.  An average of 2.27 individuals were nominated as emotional supports, compared to 2.01 and 1.97 individuals for tangible support and guidance, respectively.  Support was deemed “good” or “very good” for all three types (emotional=87.0%; tangible=91.5%; guidance=93.3%).  Strain was “never” or “rarely” present for the majority of relationships (disappointment=67.4%; intrusiveness; 57.4%; criticism=89.6%; conflict=75.5%).  There are significant gender differences (p<.01), with females nominating more individuals and being more satisfied, but also experiencing greater average strain.

Conclusions and Implications  Although adolescents were generally satisfied with the support they received and reported low levels of strain, some youth reported much less support than others.  Intrusiveness was the most commonly reported type of strain, which is probably normative for this age group.  Research is needed to determine how networks change over time and whether certain network dimensions predict better outcomes.  Although friends and extended family members were common sources of support, it may be that weak ties, which can link youth to valuable resources and opportunities outside of their close circles, become increasingly important as youth enter adulthood.