Longitudinal Effects of Positive Father Involvement on Child Behavioral Health Among Families at-Risk for Neglect

Background:

Parenting behaviors and the home environment are among the strongest predictors of adverse child outcomes and neglected children are at a higher risk of developing internalizing and externalizing behaviors (e.g., depression, anxiety, disruptive behaviors). Despite the growing evidence highlighting the relationship between father behaviors and child development, fathers still receive less research attention than mothers. As a result, there is a lack of empirical evidence on the direct effects of positive father involvement on child behavioral health. Even less is known about the role fathers play in neglect risk.                                                                 

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between father involvement, home environment, and child behavioral health among children at-risk for child neglect. The research questions are as follows:

RQ1: Does father involvement (financial support, physical care, emotional support, and

companionship) influence child behavioral health (internalizing and externalizing behaviors) over time?

RQ2: Does household environment (family cohesion and expressiveness) mediate the relationship between father involvement and child behavioral health over time?        

Methods:

This study used multi-wave data from the Longitudinal Studies of Child Abuse and Neglect (LONGSCAN) to test the relationship between father involvement, home environment, and child behavioral health at child ages 6, 8, and 12. This study used a subset of the total sample, and included children who had at least one father or father-figure at age 6 (n=767). The following standardized measures were used: Father Involvement with Child, Family Support Inventory, and Child Behavior Checklist.

Cross-lagged panel models were conducted, in MPlus 7.31, to analyze the data. Maximum likelihood robust estimation was used to account for missing data and address violations of normality. Several goodness-of- fit indices were assessed to determine model fit (e.g., CFI, TLI, RMSEA). The Sobel Test was used to determine the total indirect effect of household environment on the relationship between father involvement and child behavioral health.

Findings:

All cross-lagged models fit the data adequately. No significant direct effects from father involvement at Wave 1 on child behavioral health at Wave 3(b= -0.001, p = .98) were found. Analysis of the indirect effects model indicated that positive father involvement at Wave 1 predicted a decrease in home environment issues at Wave 2, which predicted a decrease in child behavioral health problems at Wave 3. Results from the Sobel test indicated a fully mediated model, in which home environment mediates the relationship between father involvement and child behavioral health (b= -0.009, p = .05) over time.

Conclusions & Implications:

This study advances our understanding on the role of father involvement in family and child outcomes. Findings from this study support the benefits of positive father involvement in reducing neglect risk (i.e., home environment) and child internalizing and externalizing behaviors over time. These findings also highlight the need for a better understanding of how to best utilize fathers to improve the lives of children and families. Thus, teasing apart which aspects of father involvement impact the home environment and child development can inform prevention efforts targeting at-risk families and youth.