Coercive and Prosocial Fathering Degarmo

Coerci ve and Prosocial Fathe ring, Antisocia l Perso nalit y, and Growt h in Children’s Postdivorce Noncompliance David Scott DeGarmo Oregon Social Learning Center To bet ter und erstan d quant ity and quali ty of div orc ed fat her con tac t, a wei ght ed cou nty sample of 230 divorced fathers with a child aged 4–11 years was employed to test whether fathers’ antisocial personality (ASP) moderated effects of monthly contact with children in predicting children’s observed noncompliance. Eighteen-month latent growth models obtained significant individual differences in levels of noncompliance and gro wth rates. ASP sig nifi can tly modera ted ben eficial imp act of fat hers’ monthl y con tac t. Fathers’ observed parenting practices significantly predicted noncompliance levels but not growth. Parenting did not account for the effect of Contact · ASP, suggesting both environmental and potentially genetic influences on child adjustment. Findings were robust across boys and girls and age levels. Implications for preventive inter- vention are discussed. Rece nt repres enta tive find ings are showing that fath ers ’ involve ment is benefic ial for chi ldr en following divorce; however, this influence is not bene- ficial if father contact is influenced or moderated by fathers’ antisocial behaviors or antisocial personality (AS P; Col ey & Med eir os, 2007; Jaf fee, Moffitt , Cas pi, & Tay lor , 200 3; King & Sobole wski, 200 6). The existing re sear ch te st ing these ef fe cts ha s foc used mai nly on ado les cents and lit tle res ear ch has been carried out focusing on father’s actual parenting behaviors in addition to fathers’ amount of contact. The pre sent study tests whe ther fat hers ’ monthly contact fol lowi ng divorce is modera ted by antisociality for younger children and whether parenting pra cti ces acc ount for thi s rel ations hip. Mult ip le me thod s we re us ed incl uding di rect observation of fathering behaviors and child noncompliance to better address our understanding of the quantity and quality of divorced father contact. Father Involvement and Child Adjustment Following Divorce A generative fathering perspective focuses on a positive growth-promoting model seeking to tran- scend the deficit model of men in families (Brother- son, Doll ahit e, & Hawkins, 2005; Hawkins & Dollahite, 1997). Thi s per spe cti ve is par tic ula rly relevan t for di vorced fathe rs (Pas ley & Mi nto n, 1997) given that for some, the role of father may inc rea se in import ance and fat hers may bec ome more involved with their children, while for others, fac tors such as increased role strains, amb iguities ove r par ent ing, conflic t wit h the for mer spouse, and lack of institutional and personal supports can contribute to decreases in father contact and postdivorce par enti ng (Br aver et al. , 199 3; Step hens , 1996). Contributing to the pervasive dichotomy of the good fathe r or bad fa the r is research on father s’ influence on children following divorce or separa- tion. Studie s on res ide nt and nonresiden t fat hers (divor ce d and ne ver ma rr ie d) ha ve pr oduc ed mixed findings showing that fathers’ involvement can contri but e bot h positi vely and nega tive ly to child development. A generative perspective is sup- por ted from studie s showing that qua lity fat her involvement of nonresident fat hers has benefic ial impac ts childr en’s adjus tment (Simon s, Whitbec k, Beaman, & Conger, 1994). For example, in a meta- analysis of younger and older children, Amato and Gil bret h (19 99) fou nd tha t nonresi den tial fat her involve ment and author it ative paren ti ng (e. g., instructive, noncoercive parenting) were associated wit h higher levels of chi ldr en’s aca demic suc cess and lower levels of internalizing and externalizing. More recently, King and Sobolewski (2006) found Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David Sco tt DeGarmo, Ore gon Social Lea rni ng Center , 10 Shelt on McMu rphe y Boulevard, Eugen e, OR 97401. Electronic mail may be sent to [email protected]. Child Development , March/April 2010, Volume 81, Number 2, Pages 503–516 Ó 2010, Copyright the Author(s) Journal Compilation Ó2010 , Societ y forResearch in ChildDevelopmen t, Inc. All rights reserved. 0009-3920/2010/8102-0008

Documents

Coercive and Prosocial Fathering Degarmo