• Cultural shifts change what adults try to foster in children. In locations that are moving from collectivistic to more individualistic values (e.g., many urban areas in China), parents are increasingly balancing two goals: encouraging independence (autonomy) and continuing to encourage connection and caring (relatedness).
• Kindness and parental goals show two-way links over time.​ In our study, Chinese parents’ greater focus on autonomy predicted later increases in their preschooler-aged children’s kind actions (e.g., sharing toys), and children’s frequent kind actions predicted later increases in parents’ focus on autonomy. Parents’ relatedness goals also predicted children’s later kindness.
• These findings matter beyond China: Teaching both autonomy and relatedness helps children adapt as their cultural settings shift.

This blog is based on research originally published in Song, Y., & Yuan, Q. (2025), Exploring the autonomous-relatedness model: Parental goals and preschoolers’ prosocial development during cultural shifts. Advance online publication. International Journal of Behavioral Development.

A common playground moment

Picture this: Your four-year-old is playing happily on the only swing at the park. Another child is waiting politely and quietly. Do you step in or wait to see if your child offers a turn? How long do you wait before saying something, and what do you say?

This scenario reflects opportunities parents often navigate. In these moments, parents may grapple with questions about emphasizing the importance of children’s autonomy and personal choice versus the importance of connecting with other people.

Autonomous and relatedness goals: Two complementary paths to navigating one’s place in society

Autonomous goals focus on supporting children’s self-directed independence, including their confidence, assertiveness, and strong sense of self. Relatedness goals involve promoting children’s social connectedness, including their concern for others, helping, and obedience to authority.

Traditionally, parents in individualistic cultures (e.g., the United States, Canada, Australia, Western Europe) prioritize autonomous goals, which align with their cultural emphasis on independence, achievement, and decision making at the individual level.

In contrast, in traditionally collectivistic cultures (e.g., China, Japan, India, Mexico), parents emphasize relatedness goals, which align with their cultural values of group harmony, shared responsibility, consideration of others’ needs, and social cohesion.

Different experiences can lie beneath children’s behaviors

The child in the opening scenario might offer the swing to the waiting child because they feel capable of helping that child and actively choose to do so (autonomy) or because they feel it is their duty to share with another child (relatedness). The reasons parents give children for helping others can affect how children see themselves as they navigate social situations.

Photo by Vincent Tan pn Pexels

Parents pursue both goals: Changes in dynamic, shifting cultures

Autonomy and relatedness are both important. Some cultures have historically focused on one set of goals more than the other, but many parents today try to support both. Children may need both sets of skills to find their place in different situations.

Starting in the 1990s, scholars promoted the need to capture parents’ support for both sets of goals. This shift from purely autonomous or relatedness models came amid ​rapid socioeconomic change in many traditionally collectivistic cultures.

For example, in research in the early 2000s, urban parents from traditional collectivistic cultures (e.g., India, China) valued autonomy just as much as did parents in individualistic cultures. Meanwhile, these parents’ focus on relatedness was retained but at an intermediate level – lower than the levels indicated by parents still immersed in more purely collectivistic cultures but higher than the levels reported by parents in individualistic cultures.

In our recent research, my colleague and I asked two main questions: When parents value both sets of goals, do they support them equally or favor one over the other? Are there common patterns in how important the goals are to parents?

Children shape parental priorities

Parenting is not a solo, independent act performed by the parent with children passively absorbing parental values and goals.

For instance, a compliant but shy child may be afraid to initiate helping others (e.g., hesitating to offer their swing to a waiting child). That child’s parents may shift their goals to cultivate the child’s feelings of autonomy, satisfied that the child has already internalized a sense of responsibility to share.

In our research, we also asked: Is there a two-way, cyclical relation in which parents’ autonomous and relatedness goals predict their preschoolers’ later prosocial (e.g., kind) behaviors and the children’s prosocial behaviors also predict parents’ later goals?

Parental goals and preschoolers’ prosocial behavior in Chinese families

To address these three questions, we conducted an online study with ​336 Chinese families​ of preschool-aged children (ages three to six). One parent from each family participated in the study; just over half were mothers and the average parental age was about 30 years old. More than 80% of the parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher, indicating a highly educated sample, and families tended to be in the middle or upper class economically. Most of the families lived in cities.

Parents completed online questionnaires three times over ​eight months​ (November 2022 to July 2023), with four months between the two adjacent time points. At each time, they rated the importance of various autonomous and relatedness goals in their parenting and the frequency of their child’s prosocial behaviors (e.g., sharing, comforting).

Collecting families’ responses repeatedly allowed us to examine possible two-way links between parental goals and children’s prosocial behaviors. Our study revealed three main findings:

1. Parents prioritized autonomy but still valued relatedness

Chinese parents consistently rated autonomous goals as more important than relatedness goals. This result reflects China’s cultural shift: As society becomes more individualistic, parents adapt by promoting independence.

Chinese parents tended to emphasize both types of goals more than parents in individualistic countries typically do.

But these parents have not abandoned traditional values. Relatedness goals – teaching children to care for others and respect authority – remained important. In fact, Chinese parents tended to emphasize both types of goals more than parents in individualistic countries typically do.

2. Two distinct patterns emerged in parenting goals, with links to children’s prosocial behavior

While Chinese parents valued both sets of goals and prioritized autonomy, not all parents rated the importance of the goals similarly. Two groups of parents emerged, with most parents fitting one or the other profile throughout the study:

• Profile 1 (10% to 20% of parents): These parents rated relatedness goals as somewhat important and autonomous goals as moderately important.
• Profile 2 (80% to 90% of parents): These parents rated relatedness goals as moderately important and autonomous goals as very important.

In other words, while all parents rated relative importance the same (i.e., autonomous goals were more important than relatedness goals), Profile 2 parents rated both sets of goals as more important than did Profile 1 parents.

Children whose parents fit Profile 2 showed significantly more prosocial behavior (i.e., kindness) across time than did children whose parents fit Profile 1. Profile 2 parents’ greater emphasis on both relatedness and autonomous parenting goals was linked to more frequent displays of kindness by their preschoolers.

3. There was a “kindness loop” between parents’ goals and children’s prosocial behaviors

We found a “kindness loop” – a dynamic, two-way relationship – between parents’ goals and children’s behavior over time:

• Autonomous goals predicted kindness: Parents who emphasized independence had children who became more prosocial four months later.
• Kindness predicted stronger autonomous goals: When children acted kindly, parents became even more committed to fostering independence.
• Relatedness goals also predicted kindness – but unlike autonomous goals, they did not shift after increases in children’s prosocial behavior.
• Short-term adjustments mattered: Even small, temporary increases in a parent’s emphasis on autonomy predicted more prosocial behaviors by their child four months later – and vice versa. (Our study did not address whether these increases simply tended to predict each other or whether parents’ changes in goals caused changes in prosocial behaviors and vice versa.)

Photo by Kevin Malik on Pexels

Practical implications for children’s prosocial development

While results might differ in other communities, our findings point to four implications for parents and caregivers of preschool-aged children to consider.

Parents can support both autonomous and relatedness goals while respecting their cultural contexts

Without abandoning cultural heritage, parents in traditionally collectivistic communities can integrate autonomy in ways that honor traditional relational values while also adapting to societal shifts (e.g., globalization, urbanization).

For example, instead of insisting that their children help others simply because it is expected, parents can encourage children to decide how and when to help, making kindness a personal commitment, not just a duty.

In the opening scenario, the parent could remind their child that someone is waiting for a turn on the swing or encourage their child to imagine what the waiting child might feel or think. The child might then come up with a plan for when to get off the swing and move to another part of the playground.

Parents can highlight opportunities for their young children to choose how and when to be kind ​

Parents should view autonomy and relatedness not as opposing forces, but as complementary tools. Fostering both kinds of behavior allows children to become independent individuals who can assert themselves while also connecting meaningfully with others through kindness. For example, a parent might say, “Would you like to help set the table now or after you finish your puzzle?” and “You chose to share – that was kind.”

​By promoting both autonomous and relatedness goals, parents offer children tools to understand and act on different motivations for prosocial behavior

In today’s globalized world, many children grow up navigating multiple cultural norms. They may encounter different expectations at school, at home, and in the media about how to relate to others and how to assert themselves. This makes flexibility – not rigid conformity – an essential life skill.

Photo by Norma Mortenson on Pexels

A child raised with both goals can recognize that sometimes people help others because they care about group harmony, and sometimes people help because it reflects who they are as independent moral agents. This dual understanding may foster empathy across cultural contexts and prepare children to thrive in diverse social settings.

Both parents and children contribute to children’s socialization

The results of our study suggest that changes in parents’ goals might lead to changes in children’s behaviors. That said, parenting is not a one-way transmission of values. In their everyday behavior, children can profoundly influence the way their parents think and act.

Parents should pay close attention to their children’s behavior – not only to correct or guide it, but to reflect on what it reveals about children’s emerging values in relation to themselves and the world.

In our study, increases in children’s prosocial behaviors predicted changes in parents’ goals over time. Although we did not address causality, parents may have changed because of their children’s actions.

Parents should pay close attention to their children’s behavior – not only to correct or guide it, but to reflect on what it reveals about children’s emerging values in relation to themselves and the world. These insights can inform future parenting decisions.

The post Balancing children’s autonomy and relatedness in a shifting culture: How prosocial development and parental goals are linked appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Children learn a lot about themselves through daily conversations with caregivers.
• When caregivers talk to toddlers about their own bodies, thoughts, and feelings, they give them opportunities to attend to themselves.
• Mothers from Canada and Vanuatu differ in how they talk to their toddlers about these matters.
• These cultural differences may affect how early in life young children think of themselves as separate individuals.

Humans are cultural beings. Everyday interactions with other people gradually shape the way they experience the world and engage with others. Societies have their own ways of guiding children into these ways of being – we call this socialization. Language is one of the most important tools of socialization.

Babies are not born with a sense of self that allows them to reflect on their experiences. Children take two to three years to develop a rudimentary sense of self – that is, to demonstrate an awareness that they are separate from others and that others see them as separate beings.

Children take two to three years to develop a rudimentary sense of self.

Even this early sense of self develops at different rates in different cultures (e.g., we see evidence for it earlier in urban and Western societies and later in rural, small, closely knit communities), highlighting the importance of socialization. In this article, we show that the way parents and caregivers talk to toddlers in everyday conversations is important in shaping their development.

This article covers:

1. Socialization with toddlers through language
2. Cross-cultural differences in adult-toddler conversations
3. A cross-cultural study with toddlers
4. Potential effects of conversation on a toddler’s development
5. Joint attention to children’s selves
6. What caregivers talk about with toddlers matters

1. Socialization with toddlers through language

In studies with children who are talking, caregivers from English-speaking, urban, middle-class backgrounds encouraged children’s personal narratives during conversations. They did this by:

• asking questions about a particular experience the child had;
• commenting on the child’s emotions, thoughts, and preferences, and
• helping the child build a personal story that is culturally suitable – perhaps one that reflects self-confidence, curiosity, and creativity.

Imagine a mother and her five-year-old in an urban or Western setting reminiscing about an experience at the playground. The mother says, “You have always been adventurous. Remember how you ran off to explore the giant slides when you were only three?” In this example, the mother is not only inviting the child to remember this past event but also setting the stage for interpreting it as an illustration of positive fearlessness.

2. Cross-cultural differences in adult-toddler conversations

The encouraging style adopted by the mother in the above example is a culturally unique one. In studies, caregivers in some cultures (e.g., China, India, Korea, Turkey) were less likely to focus the conversation on their child and instead tended to use a more instructive style, such as telling the child to do something.

Photo by Barbara Olsen

These differences can affect children’s social and emotional development. For example, the ways in which children remember events about themselves are shaped by parent-child conversations. Preschool-aged children whose parents encouraged detailed conversations about their child’s experiences provided longer and more elaborate memories about their past than did children whose parents did not encourage these conversations.

3. A cross-cultural study with toddlers

Most studies of parent-child conversations have been conducted with children of preschool age and older. It is difficult to study this topic with younger children, but doing so could help researchers understand what drives the faster-paced self-development of children in urban and Western societies. In our study, we examined how mothers living in an urban Canadian city and a rural island village in Vanuatu conversed with their toddlers, who were old enough to understand language but too young to speak.

Why choose families from Canada and Vanuatu?

Our Canadian participants were from an urban center with a population that is well-educated, affluent, and ethnically diverse. As is the case in most North American countries, the culture is primarily individualistic – that is, the culture values individuals’ independence and people strive to express their uniqueness through both lifestyle and achievements.

In contrast, Vanuatu is a small-scale society in the South Pacific made up of several small islands. People live in small villages surrounded by relatives and practice horticulture. Western-style formal schooling exists on the island and is optional, with most youth attending part-time and until middle school.

Many families in Vanuatu opt for informal education instead of formalized learning. Caregivers care deeply about teaching their children traditional subsistence skills and local customs. Vanuatu is a classless society without occupational specialization where individuals shy away from standing out and value interpersonal harmony.

Unsurprisingly, these two contexts are associated with very different socialization goals. Whereas residents in urban Canada prioritize emotional independence, residents in Vanuatu (especially in rural Vanuatu) support emotional union among family members. Therefore, studying mothers and children from Canada and Vanuatu offers the opportunity to understand how socialization priorities are reflected in language use. This is the first step in figuring out how language may guide children’s early self-development.

How do Canadian and ni-Vanuatu mothers talk with their toddlers?

We met with 35 families either in the lab or in their homes (16 in Canada, 19 in Vanuatu; all families included mothers and approximately half of the children were girls). We asked mothers to play with their 21-month-olds in typical ways for 10 minutes. Next, we analyzed the content of what the mothers said to their children during play. The differences were remarkable.

Canadian mothers were much more talkative than ni-Vanuatu mothers. In proportion to their talkativeness, Canadian mothers referred significantly more to toddlers’ body parts (e.g., “Is that your tummy?”) and internal states than ni-Vanuatu mothers did.

When we divided internal states further – into mental states (e.g., thoughts, emotions, abilities, desires) and bodily states (e.g., perceptions, sensations) – we identified additional cultural patterns.

When referring to internal states, Canadian mothers referred significantly more frequently to mental states (e.g., “Do you remember that song?”). The few references ni-Vanuatu mothers made to internal states involved bodily states (e.g., “Are you thirsty?”) rather than mental states. Instead, ni-Vanuatu mothers referred much more frequently to actions (“Get up and dance!”) than did Canadian mothers.

Canadian mothers referred significantly more frequently to mental states (e.g., “Do you remember that song?”). Ni-Vanuatu mothers referred much more frequently to actions (“Get up and dance!”).

4. Potential effects of conversation on a toddler’s development

Our results highlighted substantial differences in the ways Canadian and ni-Vanuatu mothers talked to their preverbal toddlers. Specifically, Canadian mothers referred significantly more to their toddlers’ body parts and mental states, whereas ni-Vanuatu mothers focused more on their children’s actions.

What difference does this make? Our study did not investigate the effects of these differences on the children. But we expect that what caregivers say to their toddlers might affect the pace of the children’s development. Our reasoning revolves mostly around the concept of joint attention, specifically, the opportunities that arise during joint attention to the self.

5. Joint attention to children’s selves

What are caregivers doing when they talk to their toddlers about their own bodies, thoughts, feelings, and preferences? Interacting through language involves participating in a joint attention triangle: The words refer to whatever the conversation partners are jointly attending to.

For example, imagine a mother talking to her toddler about a puppy. “She’s so tiny,” the mother might say. Or: “Look at that cute wet nose.” In this example, both the mother and the child are attending to the puppy. Now, instead, imagine this mother asking her child, “Is this your tummy?” and the toddler nodding with a smile. Here, the duo is attending to the toddler’s stomach.

Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko

We refer to these interactions as joint attention to the self and argue that they give children opportunities to attend to themselves. Such opportunities may benefit children in understanding if a stomach is his or hers, as well as what it is to be himself or herself, and eventually, support an early development of self in toddlerhood.

This emphasis on the self is consistent with Canadian parents’ socialization goals – to prepare their children to survive and thrive in a context in which individuality is key to economic, social, and emotional well-being.

6. What caregivers talk about with toddlers matters

In different parts of the world, how early a child learns a variety of skills, such as walking and talking, varies. Similarly, how early a child learns that they are a separate person who has a body, thoughts, and feelings of their own also varies.

When studying cross-cultural differences, it is important to keep in mind that differences do not mean deficits. We are not arguing that using language that focuses on the child is inherently better for their development. The value of different approaches and outcomes depends on the culture.

Photo by Polina Tankilevitch

Therefore, we cannot make the universal recommendation that caregivers talk to their children in a certain way. But we do suggest that what they talk about matters. When parents ask their children to talk about their day, they create an opportunity for children to develop a sense of self, identity, and world view. That is the power of language, discourse, and dialogue. Therefore, we suggest that caregivers use language to support the skills and values that are important in the context of each child’s community.

The post The Power of Words: Benefits of Conversations with Toddlers for Self-Development appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Children tend to have better health and well-being when they have a strong ethnic identity (affinity and adoption of ethnicity-based self-concept).
• A traditional Latine cultural value (familismo) that emphasizes family bonds is also associated with better developmental outcomes.
• Caregivers can support the development of U.S. Latine children (and possibly other children of immigrant/cultural/racial/ethnic groups) by using ethnic socialization practices that foster ethnic identity and cultural values such as familismo.
• Communities can further support these children and their caregivers by developing policies and interventions that support ethnic socialization practices and that build inclusive community infrastructures.

Introduction

America Ferrera is a television and film star (Ugly Betty, Barbie) and a political activist. In her book, Ferrera describes her family and cultural identity experiences as a U.S.-born Latina whose parents of Honduran heritage immigrated to the United States:

Speaking Spanish at home, my mom’s Saturday-morning-salsa-dance party in the kitchen, and eating tamales alongside apple pie at Christmas do not in any way seem at odds with my American identity. In fact, having parents with deep ties to another country and culture feels part and parcel of being an American. (Ferrera, 2018, p. 15)

Living with multiple social identities

As this quote illustrates, many immigrant and ethnic minorities often experience a juxtaposition between powerful influences: the immediate influence of their own parents and other family members, and the broader influence of U.S. cultural norms and expectations.

Indeed, we can immediately sense the multiple social identities that manifest at the intersectionality of her Honduran heritage and U.S. identity, brown-colored skin, and gender.

Ferrera’s story is the story of many other Latinas who live in the United States. Her story is one among countless others of adaptation to successfully integrate into the large, complex social structure of the United States.

Some have described the United States as a historic social experiment unlike any other in human history because of the mix of Indigenous and immigrant groups from virtually every other country in the world.

In this article, we highlight one small narrative of culture-related stories and processes that reflects the experiences of many (but not all) Latine (we use the term Latine to include all people of Latin American heritage) people living in the United States.

We start with what is known about the central role of ethnic socialization practices, with a focus on U.S. Latine families.

Photo by Alena Darmel

Families can teach children about their cultural heritage

Among the few well-documented factors that enhance U.S. Latine children’s health and well-being is the notion of ethnic socialization practices, which families use to teach their ethnic-minority children about their cultural heritage.

Examples of ethnic socialization include exposure to native ethnic heritage language books, music, film, and stories. It also refers to celebrating traditional Latine holidays, eating Latine foods, and teaching Spanish to their children.

Ferrera’s (2018) memories of eating traditional Latine foods, dancing and listening to Latine music, and speaking Spanish at home as a child strengthen her affinity to her ethnic heritage.

For many U.S. Latine children, these ethnic heritage memories are juxtaposed with the learning and exposure to experiences (e.g., listening to English-language music and stories, watching films) in the United States that embody U.S. majority cultural values and norms.

Examples of ethnic socialization include exposure to native ethnic heritage language books, music, film, and stories. It also refers to celebrating traditional Latine holidays, eating Latine foods, and teaching Spanish to their children.

How do ethnic socialization practices enhance U.S. Latine children’s development? Part of the answer lies in evidence that these practices foster strong ethnic identity (i.e., affinity and adoption of ethnicity-based self-concept) and promote traditional Latine cultural values, such as familismo (familism; identification with, support from, and obligation to the family).

Photo by RDNE Stock project

Supporting Ethnic Identity

Ethnic identity refers to an individual’s identity that is acquired from belonging to and being associated with a specific ethnic group. Ethnic identity is also related to ethnic pride, affinity, knowledge, and engagement in behaviors that connect individuals to their cultural heritage.

Children who are frequently exposed to ethnic socialization practices are likely to exhibit a stronger ethnic identity, which is linked to positive developmental outcomes (e.g., academic achievement, moral development, positive mental health outcomes).

Strong ethnic identity is also positively associated with higher levels of self-worth and self confidence in Latine adolescents, which motivates them to perform better academically and leads them to have better well-being.

Developing bicultural identities

Many Latine children living in the United States develop bicultural or multicultural identities (e.g., Mexican American, queer Latine, Puerto Rican/Dominican). Furthermore, although somewhat less studied, Latine heritage children who develop bicultural or multicultural identities also have positive developmental outcomes.

In contrast, when Latine children report a weak Latine identity, they are prone to negative developmental outcomes (e.g., mental health problems, delinquency).

Parents can protect their ethnic-minority children from culture-related adversity and stressors (e.g., discrimination, prejudice, external pressures) by fostering their ethnic identity and by giving their Latine children the resources and skills they need to face discrimination and the challenges of navigating a new cultural setting.

Supporting family bonds and familismo

Familismo represents one of the most important traditional cultural values taught and engrained early in childhood in many Latine families. This value is derived from a general collectivist and communal orientation (i.e., an emphasis on the importance of connection and cooperation within the broader community) that is prioritized in most Latin American societies.

Encouraging responsiveness to the family’s needs and fostering interdependence with the family can teach Latine children to care for others and be a reliable source of social support.

These benefits are reflected in research, which demonstrates that high levels of familismo are associated with better health and well-being (e.g., more successful academic outcomes, better mental health). As is the case with ethnic socialization practices and ethnic identity, familismo protects Latine children from adversity and enhances positive adjustment.

Familismo has its limits

However, the protective and enhancing effects of familismo have limits. Extremely high levels of familismo might mitigate Latine children’s positive development, as occurs when Latine children are expected to take on adult-like responsibilities and to engage in behaviors that can undermine their personal development (e.g., translating for their parents, taking care of younger siblings).

Encouraging responsiveness to the family’s needs and fostering interdependence with the family can teach Latine children to care for others and be a reliable source of social support.

Conclusion

Given the current wave of hostility toward ethnic minorities and immigrants in the United States, caregivers need to help their Latine children successfully navigate these difficult and challenging societal times.

The good news is that scholars have documented ethnic socialization practices, ethnic identity, and familismo as culture-related mechanisms that can enhance positive outcomes and protect Latine children from adverse and trauma-related experiences.

Ferrera’s (2018) description of her positive early life experiences and her well-documented accomplishments align with research showing the benefits of ethnic socialization practices and ethnic identity in Latines. When U.S. Latine families teach and foster these mechanisms to their children, they can become strengths and assets for children to thrive and succeed.

Photo by Vidal Balielo Jr.

We hope communities embrace and respect the expression of traditional Latine cultural practices and values. Families and schools can take steps to support children’s ethnic identity and familial values by, for example:

1. Encouraging Latine children to speak their native language at home, at school, and in other social settings,
2. Supporting Latine children in creating school projects that embrace their ethnic heritage, and
3. Providing Latine children access to resources (e.g., books, music) that promote learning about their ethnic heritage.

Although we highlighted the positive consequences of ethnic socialization for U.S. Latines, when all people invest in these practices, their efforts will result in increased social harmony and culturally enriched, healthy communities.

The post A Strong Latine Identity Supports U.S. Latine Children’s Well-Being appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• A strong sense of identity can help children and youth build resilience and self-esteem to cope with challenges.
• Cultural identity is particularly impactful for young people who face adversities, such as Australian Aboriginal youth.
• Obstacles to building a strong cultural identity include repercussions of the history of colonization and racism, as well as distance from cultural learning in modern urban life.
• Cultural identity and being Aboriginal should be seen as assets, and schools are one context where these can be cultivated.

Article contents:

1. Australia’s Aboriginal youth face significant cultural challenges
2. Building cultural identity strengthens Aboriginal children
3. It is important to maintain cultural identity when children are young
4. Cultural identity combats adversity
5. The many barriers to transferring identity
6. Obstacles to learning within families
7. Difficulties of maintaining cultural identity at school

1. Australia’s Aboriginal youth face significant cultural challenges

How do we help children thrive when they face a hostile environment – racism at school, in daily interactions, and in almost every aspect of their public lives?

This is a crucial question, particularly if a key protective factor – connection to their own culture – is weakened by public institutions that fail, however inadvertently, to value such connections, and when past experiences have left families fragmented and adults also struggle to cope.

These questions are acute for Australia’s Aboriginal children. Many of their parents and grandparents were traumatized. Not until 1977 did the Australian government end the practice of forcibly removing Aboriginal children – the Stolen Generation – from their families, placing them in missions to assimilate with non-Aboriginal people.

Indeed, it was only in 1968, following a referendum, that Aboriginal people were classified as human beings and counted in the Census.

How do we ensure that children today develop well when the chronic symptoms of colonization – and its subsequent fracturing of Aboriginal existence – endure: alcoholism, drug dependency, poverty, self-harm, suicide, mental illness, and incarceration of family members?

On top of that, Aboriginal children continue to experience high levels of racism. For example, in a study in a Western Australian town, 75% of Aboriginal children and youth aged 11-17 years experienced racism that they wanted to stop, and 74% were too scared to walk around the town (Kickett-Tucker et al, 2018).

2. Building cultural identity strengthens Aboriginal children

Very young (aged 6-12) Aboriginal children still encounter racism. Some have reported scrubbing their bodies to remove their dark skin.

One vital response to these challenges is to build a young person’s identity.

Research shows that the identity of Aboriginal children usually equates with being recognized as the first people of Australia, with identity defined as connection to country (place), family, kinship, language, culture, and importantly, traditional rights to heritage, history and lands.

Research also indicates that building such an identity is an all-encompassing, holistic way to support any child to grow and thrive. But it is a particularly effective and culturally safe way to address the daily costs of historic injustices and the realities of modern-day racism. It can enable young Aboriginal people to take a steady and sturdy journey to adulthood and support other key points in their life transitions. 

3. It is important across cultures to maintain cultural identity during youth 

The prescription to maintain a strong, positive identity is important during youth across all cultures, according to developmental psychology. It helps create functioning, well-rounded individuals, and boosts positive social and emotional well-being.

A robust identity empowers individuals to acknowledge, respect, and define their purpose and role in life, helping them understand who they are and how they relate to others. Research suggests that the transition from childhood to adolescence and into early adulthood is a vital time for interaction with – and formation of – identity, though identity continues to develop across the lifespan. 

4. Cultural identity combats adversity

A strong identity is particularly important for children who face adversity. It helps them develop resilience, which promotes the skills, knowledge, and confidence needed to overcome and cope with life’s challenges.

Individuals gain control over their own well-being which has a positive impact on their self-esteem. In a study of First Nations’ youth in Canada, a strong racial identity was a protective factor against self-harm and suicide.

Having a strong Aboriginal identity and self-esteem is like the hub of a wheel. Without the hub, the wheel can go nowhere. Like a hub, racial identity is at the center of an Aboriginal child’s well-being. It is their spirit and without it, they can be steered by outside forces that determine how fast to go and in which direction to travel.

5. The many barriers to transferring identity

But transferring and bolstering Aboriginal identity is fraught with difficulty. The experiences of the Stolen Generation painfully disturbed identity in older groups, undermining their connection with land, kin, spirituality, and culture.

Chris Jackamarra, one of those affected, explained: “The mission taught us that we were white, but they never taught us to be prepared for what was out in the world. That there was racial prejudice, stereotype casting and things like that. We were robbed of our identity and culture and that bothered me. It is something I was never taught and I am still just learning it now.”

In my research, I have identified very young (aged 6-12) Aboriginal children who still encounter racism. Some have reported scrubbing their bodies to remove their dark skin.

Schools should be culturally audited for how well they respect, understand, maintain, and teach about Aboriginal identities.

6. Obstacles to learning within families

Many modern-day obstacles stand in the way of transferring Aboriginal identity.

Understanding what it is to be Aboriginal involves observational learning by a child, including sitting and waiting with elders. In this situation, an elder carries out an activity, a child models it, and the elder continues the activity until the child has done it in culturally appropriate ways.

The activity might be burning fur off a kangaroo tail and cooking it under the ashes. It might be collecting berries and fruit products. Out in the bush, Aboriginal people look for bush medicine.

Food is vital and many activities take place around a campfire. But today, Aboriginal people, who typically live in urban centers, are not allowed to make fires because of the risk of bush fires. They lack money for gas and few have cars to travel to the bush, leaving many stuck in the city.

Moreover, many Aboriginal people are very poor. If they live in state-provided housing, there are rules about how many people can be together under one roof, and neighbors can report anyone who violates the rules.

7. Difficulties of maintaining cultural identity at school

Schools have a long way to go before they are truly focused on Aboriginal children. Government funding is provided for Aboriginal education, but there is disparity between what is awarded to schools and the sums that are actually spent by schools on Aboriginal pupils’ education. Even less is spent to support the cultural identity of Aboriginal children and youth.

School leaders and teachers have some understanding that they should do something beyond just acknowledging the importance of Aboriginal culture, but ambivalence about teaching Indigenous languages persists. Aboriginal parents are rarely invited to help co-create curricula or inform teaching practices in ways that are culturally relevant.

Simple school practices could make a difference, signalling a shift in perceptions so that being Aboriginal is recognized as an asset, rather than a challenge. For example, when the Aboriginal flag is raised at school, an Aboriginal child should lead the flag raise alongside another student.

Each school assembly should begin with a welcome in an Indigenous language. Traditional authorities – local elders – should be invited regularly to attend assemblies. Schools should be culturally audited for how well they respect, understand, maintain, and teach about Aboriginal identities.

These recommendations are just the beginning of big changes that need to occur to develop and support Aboriginal identity in children. Aboriginal children and youth need these actions to protect them in a world that is often hostile and damaging.

The post Maintaining cultural identity: Key to children’s development, particularly for Australia’s Aboriginal children appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Both the availability of grandparents and the need for grandparents to support parents in caring for grandchildren are rising globally, with increasing elderly populations and growing demands for high-quality child care.
• Grandparents can be an important source of caregiving and emotional support for their children and grandchildren.
• Grandparents in China are often co-parents, living with their adult children and being actively involved in daily caregiving for grandchildren.
• When grandmothers support mothers by avoiding conflict and letting mothers take the lead in parenting, it can promote healthy mother-child attachment and children’s behavior.

The number of and need for grandparents are increasing globally

In most societies worldwide, the number of grandparents has risen, the result of a half century of extraordinary growth in global life expectancy. At the same time, birth rates have fallen in many countries. As a result, increasing numbers of grandparents are available to help look after fewer children.

Families may need grandparents’ time, experience, and skills. Child care can be expensive or unavailable, especially in infancy. Without grandparents’ support, how can parents ensure that their young children receive the care they require, especially if both parents are in paid employment?

Grandmothers remained careful not to rock the boat and to leave mothers in the lead.

Grandparents offer much-needed support to parents in China

China highlights many of these issues. The legacy of the now rescinded one-child policy makes the predominance of grandparents especially notable: Urban Chinese families typically have a 4-2-1 characteristic — four grandparents, two parents, and one child. Confucian values, still embedded in Chinese family relationships, support clear roles and duties for parents and children, even when the latter become adults. They are meant to care for each other.

Career opportunities and their impact on family harmony

In large Chinese cities like Beijing, well-educated and highly skilled individuals are encouraged to pursue better career opportunities. But fierce competition and economic pressures take their toll on overworked parents. Moreover, kindergartens usually do not accept children under age three, meaning that families are expected to care for their young children.

As a result, grandparents often move to the city, live with their adult children, and provide child care. This happens not only because of cultural expectations, but also so grandparents can provide instrumental and potentially emotional support to their offspring.

Mothers and grandmothers as co-parents

As in many Asian countries, mother-grandmother co-parenting is common in China. Chinese grandmothers, especially when they live with their children and grandchildren, typically engage in many children’s activities, including playing with children; bathing and feeding children; and putting children to bed. They also do household activities such as cleaning and preparing food.

The parenting differences between East and West

Traditional Chinese families differ from the West’s matrilineal caregiving cultures, where intergenerational co-parenting is frequently done by mothers sharing the task with their own mothers. China’s patrilineal system identifies the care of grandchildren as the responsibility of the paternal grandparents, many of whom live with the family or nearby. This can lead to a complication: A mother may be co-parenting with her mother-in-law.

How should grandmothers interact with mothers?

This context of global changes in caregiving needs and the availability of grandparents has implications for the dynamics among generations, particularly in Asian societies. It remains important to understand the well-documented and positive impact on children’s development that a good grandparent can have through the direct care they provide.

How grandparents can support mothers and fathers

We must also answer the more subtle question of how grandparents can best support mothers and fathers. Grandparents in these societies are usually part of a caring team that includes a child’s mother and father. What can grandparents do to strengthen these members of the team and avoid diminishing or undermining their contributions?

To address this question, in our research, we have studied families in Beijing with a total of 60 children. In this culture, grandmothers tend to have a more hands-on role than grandfathers, who may be doing tasks such as shopping. Therefore, in our work, we have focused on grandmothers, using methods of behavioral observation to explore the dynamics of family relationships and the impact of these intergenerational relationships on children’s development.

Important aspects of healthy children’s development are related to a harmonious relationship between grandmothers and mothers.

Grandmothers tend to avoid conflict so mothers take the lead

According to an old Chinese saying, “Everything will flourish if the family is in harmony.” Our study found this to be true. In some families, grandmothers co-parented with their daughters, while in others, they co-parented with a daughter-in-law. Regardless of the relationship, grandmothers tried to maintain family harmony by avoiding confrontations.

Mothers behaved similarly out of filial piety (i.e., respect for one’s elders), particularly in the first six months of their children’s lives. Subsequently, mothers tended to take a more commanding role as principal caregiver in the co-parenting team. But even then, grandmothers remained careful not to rock the boat and to leave mothers in the lead. They seemed to prefer harmony and abstained from confrontation, even when mothers became more assertive.

Positive impacts on children’s development and family harmony

This diplomacy was good for two key indicators of children’s development. First, in families with mothers present and parenting, when a grandmother (whether maternal or paternal) stepped back and watched more, the attachment between infants and their mothers was more secure than when grandmothers were less diplomatic. One might speculate that a grandmother leaving more room for a mother in the co-parenting relationship, and not actively interfering in mother-child interactions, made it easier for mother and child to bond.

Second, when children were two years old, they were less likely to be aggressive and disruptive in their behavior when grandparents were diplomatic than when they were not. These findings are consistent with research on co-parenting between mothers and fathers, which has found that children do better when co-parents are supportive of each other and avoid conflict.

The message to grandmothers

These findings suggest that important aspects of healthy children’s development are related to a harmonious relationship between grandmothers and mothers. Based on our study, these outcomes might occur when grandmothers are patient companions to mothers rather than dominating figures.

The message to grandmothers? Being diplomatic, taking a back seat, and not being overbearing with new mothers are not only good for family peace, but might also be beneficial to young children. In this setting, children might feel closer to their mothers and less prone to conflictual behavior as they develop.

The post Flourishing amid family harmony: Grandmothers in China can support children’s development best when they support the mothers appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Determining which children are in vulnerable situations and need assistance requires identifying the risk factors that they face.
• Helping street children involves bolstering protective factors that can reduce the impacts of the risks.
• Effective interventions to help at-risk children must be practical and flexible to their different needs, and should involve people, institutions, and systems that care about and support them.

Research on Brazil’s street children needs to meet the children where they are

What is one simple thing street children would like to improve their lives? When we asked street children in Brazil, we wondered if they would talk about iPhones, new clothes, or sneakers. But the children did not focus on material things. Many asked for “somewhere I can put my stuff.” Others requested “a place that’s my own, hidden from the world.” They were searching for privacy, because when you live on the streets, everything is public.

Sometime later, my friend, the director of a Brazilian children’s shelter, sought my advice. “We can’t keep the children off the street. They come and they are gone. We can’t keep them safe when they don’t come back every night. What can I do?” My suggestion was to give each child a locker and a key. “You can keep spare keys in the office, but promise me you will not search inside those lockers,” I advised.

We know from developmental psychology that every child needs someone who really cares about them.

A month later I returned. “Are you a magician?” my friend laughed. The children were coming back at night to stay at the shelter. Later, we learned what they were storing on those shelves. Just simple things: Some shampoo, pieces of paper, a document. Having a little privacy, in the form of a tiny locker, made all the difference to where the children spent the night.

This example highlights why, for more than 30 years, our teams of researchers studying Brazil’s street children have focused on leaving our ivory towers. We must understand the lives of street children to identify interventions that genuinely support their development. In the vast academic learning about child development, we must find what is relevant to their lives and translate this combined, well-evidenced understanding into effective, practical interventions.

Defining street children

We studied children of all ages in Brazilian urban areas. In our work, we have learned a lot – about terminology, children’s needs, and impactful interventions – thanks to our research teams, many collaborators, and mentors. First, we realized that conventional definitions of street children were at best inadequate and often wrong. They tended to focus on key activities, such as begging or wiping windshields, where children slept, or their family ties. But these definitions did not fit well and they did not inform effective interventions.

We seldom found children who had completely lost contact with family. Sleeping locations also blurred the picture: Some lived at home and worked on the streets, occasionally sleeping there. Others periodically slept on the streets for weeks but then returned home.

Photo provided by the author.

Instead, we categorize children around the risks they face (e.g., contact with gangs, use of drugs, sexual exploitation) and the programs and people available to protect them (e.g., school attendance, supportive social networks, contact with caring adults). Through this approach, we draw on what is known about the impacts of exposing vulnerable children to developmental risks.

We also shine a light on factors that already exist to protect them. This helps us identify actions tailored to each child, based on well-evidenced knowledge. It means that in our work, we combine the insights of rigorous developmental science with in-depth understanding of street children’s lives.

Find one person who really cares about the child

We know from developmental psychology that every child needs someone who really cares about them. But what does that mean for street children? Most do have relationships with family members. But many of those relationships have big problems, including abusive behavior. These children know that their home is not a place to be all the time.

School attachment is a very important protective factor, particularly for youth in their early teens, for both girls and boys.

They are also smart. They understand how to find people who can take care of them. We have found many people in institutions and shelters who recognize this central childhood need and will play a protective, constant role in children’s lives. It is important to build on these opportunities for children.

School is vital in this respect. In our research, school attachment is a very important protective factor, particularly for youth in their early teens, for both girls and boys. This finding highlights the crucial role that schools can play, but they must be ready to embrace these children.

Street children want to go to school

Some people say street children do not want to go to school or learn. That is not true. It is not easy for them. They do not have someone who wakes them every morning to go to school. They lack paper, notebooks, and pencils, as well as a place to keep school supplies for the next day.

In addition, street children can face prejudice from other students and teachers. Surviving on the street requires constant vigilance to potential dangers, so maintaining self-discipline and concentration at school can be difficult. But given the chance, most street children we have met love school. They want to go. But they need an open school, not a place where they have to arrive at exactly 8 a.m. The school has to be flexible and welcoming: Maybe they get there at 9. There should be some breakfast for them.

We have also learned about psychological interventions that support children who have experienced trauma. For example, we know that group therapy can be highly effective, especially for girls who have experienced sexual exploitation, but it is less helpful for boys, who may be less able to confide in groups and may need more one-to-one approaches.

In conclusion – doing good, but accidentally doing harm

Finally, we have found that services and institutions that strive to bring children off the street sometimes unintentionally achieve the opposite. Some children told us that, to access care institutions and services, they had to “pretend” they were street children, giving that identity a high status. Instead of slowing the migration of children to the street, these institutions were actually propelling children to street life. We had to go to the directors of these institutions and advise them to change their approach.

And they did. They introduced more rules and expectations around what the children should be doing, such as attending certain programs and bringing a responsible adult with them, so they did not just come in for new clothes and disappear again. They were genuinely off the streets.

Perhaps one of the most important lessons we have learned from our innovative approach is that traditional research techniques, which usually have academics observing and then walking away with their findings, are not ethical in this environment. We are always asking: “How can we learn from and inform practitioners? How can we contribute to the well-being of these children, right here, now, in front of us?” We must be wary never to exploit the misery of the many for our own personal academic advancement.

The post Brazil and its street children – understanding the needs of street children appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Start with acknowledging and celebrating the diversity of Latinx families and communities

The past 20 years have seen dramatic shifts in the location of Latinx communities, stretching beyond traditional jurisdictions in California, Texas, and New York into areas that are much less familiar with their needs and cultures. Indeed, the label “Latinx” does not capture the diversity of Latinx-identifying families and individuals born and raised in the United States versus recent and earlier arrivals who hail from different countries of origin and heritages, and who are fluent in different Spanish dialects and indigenous languages. (Latinx is a gender-neutral term used in the United States to refer to Latino/Hispanic individuals of Latin American or Caribbean heritage.)

This diversity can sometimes overwhelm rigid and unfamiliar systems, which can contribute to frustration, confusion, and tensions in receiving communities. Correspondingly, fear and distrust among Latinx populations and between Latinx populations and other groups can escalate. What may actually be misinformation or confusion among Latinx parents can be internalized as failure. In reality, Latinx parents bring with them hope, optimism, a sense of family cohesion, and a strong work ethic, which are key strengths that support children’s success.

Three key strengths: Optimism, work ethic, and family cohesion

It is hard to overstate the optimism that Latinx immigrants have today and have always had when they arrive in the United States. They feel they have had to risk everything, leaving behind family and the life they knew to move to a better life, one filled with hope of economic opportunity and promise for their children’s futures. This optimism carries them through difficult times. Such positivity protects their well-being and mental health and drives success.

Service and public infrastructure such as transportation, internet access, and schools can be extended in ways that capitalize on co-location of community organizations and neighborhoods that parents trust.

Optimism is just one of many strengths Latinx families bring with them, whether they are born in the United States or are recent immigrants. Their capacities include a strong work ethic, with many Latinx parents working long hours and producing high-quality output, rarely missing work or calling in sick, often at the risk of losing earned income and with no mechanism for recourse in case of injury or emergency.

This strong work ethic goes hand in hand with an equally strong commitment to their children, ensuring that they receive proper nutrition and feel safe, and attending to their children’s learning and education. As in all families, Latinx parents balance the competing demands of being a worker and a parent, and ensure that their children get not only resources but also their time.

Family cohesion is the hallmark of adapting and thriving in the United States. Latinx families provide love and support for each other in the form of social and financial capital. The strong family bond can protect them from adversity and provides a personal safety net that helps the family not only survive, but in many cases, thrive. An integral part of the family is the belief that children thrive when raised by two parents—mothers and fathers.

Photo: David Beoulve. Creative Commons.

Fathers’ role is not only to provide financially for their children, but also to be there for them and be involved in day-to-day parenting. Latinx fathers have a strong commitment to their family and their children, and their involvement in their lives matters for the development of children’s basic language and social skills. Fathers and mothers also co-parent and combine resources to ensure that their children have more opportunities than they had. 

Celebrating learning and education

The value placed on education and learning is infused throughout stages of child development, as demonstrated during children’s earliest years. Both Latinx mothers and fathers engage in active storytelling which is sustained through support of formal schooling.

Investments in early education in the United States have yielded high enrollment in programs serving preschool-age Latinx children, and the benefits to Latinx children, including dual language learners, sometimes outpace those of other groups of  children. Families also benefit from the role early education and care play in supporting parenting, access to other resources in the community, and connections to social networks.

The strong Latino parent work ethic goes hand in hand with an equally strong commitment to their children. As in all families, Latinx parents balance the competing demands of being a worker and a parent, and ensure that their children get not only resources but also their time.

Indeed, Latinx fourth and fifth graders’ math and reading achievement has increased over time, as have Latinx high school graduation rates and subsequent enrolment in post-secondary education programs. When researchers visit Latinx homes, parents ask about where and how they can purchase the educational toys used to observe children’s play. It is not unusual for young children to ask their teachers for more books to bring home from school, declaring: “One is for me, and one is for Mom.” Modelling good behavior is a tool parents use to inculcate in their children a love of learning, with many parents “doing homework” with their children. Family members, and sometimes entire communities, come together to participate in and witness schooling milestones, such as graduations.

Educational preparedness for many Latinx children includes fluency in two languages, mastering English and Spanish. Schools that embrace equity-oriented practices – including strategies to facilitate family engagement and family-school partnerships, and extended learning opportunities – have reduced disparities in Latinx students’ school progress compared to peers.

A foundation of good health

Across many metrics of children’s health, Latinx children fare well, notably in low rates of infant mortality. Latinx parents care deeply about the health of their children and the foundation that good health provides for their children’s educational attainment and economic opportunities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Latinx families, like many other families, expressed concern about the social isolation and mental health of their children. They also experienced high rates of economic, food, and housing insecurities, which threatened the well-being of their children.

Yet their abilities to meet the physical and mental health needs of their children are often hindered by structural barriers to medical care, public services, and other resources needed to support children’s well-being. As one example, 12 states, many in the U.S. South, have chosen not to expand Medicaid, a health insurance program for low-income persons. Even with insurance, Latinx families can face a variety of barriers to care, including limited time off from work to obtain medical care, limited access to transportation, and a lack of culturally and linguistically appropriate services in the communities in which they live.

Pandemic challenges

Optimism can wear thin when families are faced with health risks and economic uncertainty over a prolonged period. During the first few months of the pandemic, the mental health of Latinx parents was initially buoyed by their optimism and strong co-parenting support, but high rates of unemployment, especially among Latina parents, reduced household income. Not all eligible Latinx families received pandemic-related government assistance.

Although most Latinx families did their best to keep children engaged in learning activities at home, Latinx children’s learning suffered because they did not receive the support they needed for education transmitted remotely or online. Latinx children did not have consistent access to technology or equipment, such as extra iPads or laptops. In some cases, children missed online testing because digitally accessible equipment, including a smart phone, was shared by an entire household. 

As Latinx parents struggled to cope with extra demands, Latinx teens and young adults were expected to help their younger siblings with learning.

Photo: Jhon David. Unsplash.

Opportunity for policy investment and the price of policy failure

These and other stories speak to Latinx family strengths. How can these strengths of optimism, work ethic, and family cohesion be harnessed – and not undermined – by investments in education, health care, and child care policy?

Latinx children arrive at formal schooling curious and eager to learn. Although Latinx children quickly catch up to their peers in some academic domains, lack of support for their home language and cultural barriers contribute to dashed hopes and disillusionment with educational opportunities. As economic pressures on the family, youth are forced to disengage from the educational system as they face competing demands, including working to financially support their family or sharing in the responsibility of raising younger siblings. This path can lead to lost years of formal education.

Child care providers have difficulty accommodating the complexities of work schedules among some Latinx parents, and early education and care arrangements are not always culturally responsive, lacking support for Spanish-speaking or dual-language parents and children and failing to adequately accommodate children with special needs. The supply of child care slots is low, resulting in fewer options to reconcile work and parenting commitments.

Many Latinx families with children are left out of health insurance because of discrimination against individuals whose immigration status is not regularized. Latina adolescents have some of the highest rates of depression and suicide attempts in the United States. Longer-term consequences are documented in poor cardiovascular health, diabetes, and suboptimal functioning in adulthood.

When family cohesion faces such stressors, how far can the safety net it provides its members be stretched before it snaps? It is hard to know precisely. Low-wage work is deeply problematic, setting tight limits on what parents can do for their children. When a mother works two or three jobs, who cares for her children? When can a mother or father engage with the school if they are both working long hours? When is there time to navigate the health care system?

How can parents ensure that child care is good? If work is unreliable and unstable, with no benefits and few hours required on short notice, children may have to be placed in three or four different child care arrangements. Typically, there is no formal child care on weekends, so low-paid Latinx families are forced into an informal network of supports, some of which are not of very high quality.

How do parents square the circle of wanting to spend loving time with their children and earning enough money to feed their family? One father we know works three jobs, getting home at 11 pm every night. His two-year-old naps until 10:30 pm, then is wakened so she can play with her father for half an hour – but she is tired the next day.

A manifesto for change

It is time for public programs and services to re-envision their engagement with Latinx families and support Latinx children’s paths to success. They must also respect the rights of Latinx individuals: Most young children of immigrants are U.S.-born, thus have rights and privileges equal to all other U.S. citizens such that their parents’ immigration status is not a barrier.

Service and public infrastructure more generally—including transportation, internet access and schools—can also be extended in ways that capitalize on co-location of community organizations and neighborhoods that parents trust. Community schools have proven their worth in, for example, improving access to children’s health care and reducing the administrative burden on hard-pressed parents of accessing other services.

Latinx families bring such strengths – so much energy, skill, and commitment – to raising their children well. A public commitment to policies and practices that harness and align with these strengths can go a long way to recouping returns to investments.

The post Investing in the strengths of Latinx families and children appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

In 1972, Mike published Maternal Deprivation Reassessed. It was a slim volume, written in dry academic style, but it was a tour de force. In the book, he scrutinised John Bowlby’s attachment theory, especially the impact on children of separation from their mothers, with his characteristic precision, and he concluded that some aspects of the theory, such as the claim that only mothers could be attachment figures for young children, did not stand up. His interest in the topic may well have been grounded in his own separation from his parents when he was evacuated from England to the United States at the beginning of the second world war. What was remarkable about Mike’s book was his incisiveness in analysing the evidence for and against Bowlby’s views. This was emblematic of all of Mike’s work; a forensic examination of the empirical evidence was at the root of everything he did. Bowlby, of course, remained the leading figure in the field of attachment, but he did come to the same conclusions as Mike on some specific issues. Maternal Deprivation Reassessed, and the slightly later Helping Troubled Children, were the books that inspired me as a young undergraduate to become a developmental psychologist. Not only did they present the study of children’s development as a worthwhile pursuit, but they also provided insight into how greater understanding of children’s difficulties could lead to better solutions for their psychological problems. For many budding psychologists back then, these books felt like a call to arms.

I first met Mike in the autumn of 1976. Recently enrolled on a Master’s course in child development at the Institute of Education in London, I had just begun a study of children in lesbian mother families. It is hard to describe just how much animosity there was against lesbian mothers in these days. Divorced heterosexual mothers were subject to considerable prejudice and discrimination; lesbian mothers were beyond the pale. It was in this social climate that Mike was called to act as an expert witness in child custody cases involving lesbian mothers. With his ever-present eye on the evidence, or in this case, the lack of it, Mike argued that there was no good scientific reason to deny lesbian women custody of their children on the grounds of their sexual orientation. He also believed that there was a need for sound empirical data on what actually happened to children with lesbian mothers, so when he heard about my fledgling study of children in lesbian mother families, I was summoned to meet him. There began a body of research that changed the way in which lesbian mothers were treated and perceived. Most child psychiatrists in these days wouldn’t have touched this controversial topic with a barge pole. For Mike, the issue was an empirical one. He did all he could to support research on whether the outcomes for children with lesbian mothers were, as he put it, ‘good, bad, or indifferent’, and to ensure that this research was carried out to the highest possible standards. Mike was an iconoclast through and through.

I can’t pretend it was always easy working with Mike. He was an exacting supervisor, and we had disagreements based on generational differences, such as whether the word gay should, or should not, have inverted commas. Mike supported the former. This was one of the few arguments that I won! But I learned more from him than anyone else I have ever met in academic life. He was extremely generous with his time, sending 10-page memos that will be familiar to those who have ever worked with him. Their arrival used to incur in me a sense of dread, but I also knew that the contents would make the research very much better. The last of such memos was waiting for me when I returned to my office following the third Covid lockdown; it was a handwritten note with his thoughts on my most recent book.

I came to realise that Mike relished a good argument. When I learned to stand up for myself, there would be a twinkle in his eye, and our conversations became much more fun. Mike’s interest in lesbian mothers is a little-known part of his vast array of accomplishments, but this work would not have been taken nearly so seriously without his weight behind it. Mike has always been committed to social justice and to the proper use of research, not only in improving people’s lives, but also in changing social attitudes. He was a man before his time in supporting lesbian mothers in courts of law in the mid-1970s. More than 40 years later, in 2019, we were both tickled to see that our early, and somewhat obscure, article on children in lesbian mother families was included among the selection of his papers republished to celebrate the 60^th anniversary edition of the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry.

Others are better qualified than I am to honour Mike’s intellectual accomplishments and unparalleled contribution to research in the fields of child development, child psychiatry, and developmental psychopathology, for which he has been awarded many honours. His work on the aetiology of child psychiatric disorder, the intergenerational transmission of psychiatric disorder, autism, risk and resilience in childhood, social influences on child adjustment, and the interplay between genes and the environment – to name just some of areas that he influenced – was transformative, and it had a pivotal influence on policy and practice worldwide. He had a capacity to identify the most important questions, and to be unrelenting in his search for the answers. For Mike, identifying the mechanisms was always key.

At a time when mental health problems in childhood and adolescence are on the rise, Mike’s work is more important than ever. His contribution has been profound, not least for its rigour and integrity, and will continue inform solutions to children’s problems for decades to come.

The post Obituary: Professor Sir Michael (Mike) Rutter appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Graeme pioneered research on fathering, starting in the late 1970s, and his 1982 book, The changing role of fathers, remains the point of reference for research on primary caretaking fathers because it sought to place the fathers’ behavior in the context of intrafamilial and broader societal beliefs, practices, and constraints. Graeme continued to publish articles and book chapters on primary caregiving fathers, father-child relationships in childhood and adolescence, shared parenting, grandfathering, Australian fatherhood, and family policy over the succeeding decades. Because of his scholarship, researchers now recognize that men can be active parents in the move toward greater gender equality and that social attitudes and institutional policies play an essential role in constraining and facilitating parental behavior. Graeme was actively involved in organizing and disseminating outcomes from the first International Fatherhood Summit at Oxford in 2003 and was a key figure in helping the Australian government design policies to promote gender equality and work-family integration, for example, by engaging in several projects for the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, established in 2012. In 2017, he co-authored a book entitled Men make a difference – engaging men on gender equality.

For nearly four decades, Graeme was avidly involved in supporting working fathers, consulting with companies interested in promoting gender equality and work-family integration in many countries, including Australia, China, Japan and Korea. He established workshops for fathers in the workplace to help them integrate work and family demands and published several articles on the impact of workplace practices on father involvement. His keen interest in workplace flexibility and its promise for gender equality led him to design team-based approaches for work redesign, making it possible for companies to implement flexible work arrangements, assuring benefits for individuals and companies. At the time of his death, he was focused on ensuring that human resource professionals were aware of these important possibilities.

Graeme’s success as a consultant and colleague was facilitated by his genuine warmth, friendliness, and accessibility, which allowed him to get along with everyone regardless of their personal characteristics or ideology.  His personal strengths were especially evident in his skillful engagement with diverse groups, including senior managers, employees, unions, politicians, academics and social activists. While Graeme’s professional and personal lives were mutually enriching, his first priority in life was always his family, comprising his wife Susan, his children (Kirsten, Emily, and Benjamin) and his eight grandchildren. He especially adored his grandchildren and played an important role in their daily lives, spending as much time as possible with them. He was a loving husband, father, and grandfather.

Graeme’s legacy as a pioneer of gender equality in Australia will be long-lasting and his influence on students, collaborators, scholars, human resource practitioners, and policy makers has been profound.

The post Obituary: Dr. Graeme Russell appeared first on Child and Family Blog.