Do Multiple Dimensions of Social Support Moderate the Effects of Adversity on Parenting Practices ?

Background: Given the wide popularity of the adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) framework, it is surprising that a complementary field of research on adverse adult experiences (AAEs) has yet to gain traction. According to Mersky et al. (2021), AAEs are common, interrelated experiences such as partner violence, financial insecurity, homelessness, and discrimination. Emerging research indicates that, when measured in aggregate, the deleterious effects of adult adversities are comparable to the consequences of ACEs. Moreover, growing evidence suggests that exposure to adult adversity mediates the effects of childhood adversity.

To date, little is known about the extent to which positive adult experiences may protect against the effects of adult adversity. Various forms of social support, for example, are plausible moderators given prior evidence indicating that social support buffers the effects of childhood adversity. The current study examines whether multiple dimensions of social support moderate the association between AAEs and parenting practices.

Methods: The study uses data from the Families and Children Thriving (FACT) Study, a prospective, longitudinal investigation of 1,972 low-income households with children in Wisconsin who are at risk of contact with the child welfare system. At study wave 1, 10 AAEs were measured using the Adult Experiences Survey (Mersky et al., 2021) and coded as an aggregate count score. A global measure of social support was created based on wave 1 responses to the 4-item Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey. Social support from the child’s father was assessed at wave 1 using the 9-item Descriptive Assessment of Dads Scale. Neighborhood social support was measured at wave 1 using a 3-item neighborhood cohesion scale. Composite scales of positive and negative parenting practices were measured at wave 3 using the Multidimensional Assessment of Parenting Scale (MAPS).

Multiple regression analyses were performed to test the associated main effects of AAEs and social support on positive and negative parenting practices. A second set of regression models were fit after adding interaction terms between AAEs and each indicator of social support.

Results: The regression analysis revealed no significant association between AAEs and positive parenting practices but AAEs were found significantly associated with negative parenting practices (β = .026, p < .05). Global social support (β = .013, p < .001) and neighborhood social support (β = .013, p < .001) were associated with positive parenting practices, but no indicators of social support were associated with negative parenting practices. None of the social support variables moderated the link between AAEs and positive parenting practices, but global social support significantly moderated the association between AAEs and negative parenting practices (β = -.03, p < .05).

Conclusions and Implications: The findings suggest that social support may reduce the likelihood of negative parenting practices by buffering against the negative effects of proximal stressors. The findings have salient implications for developing and implementing prevention and early intervention strategies that reduce the risk of child welfare involvement by targeting alterable household and community protective factors.