{"id":2170,"date":"2016-04-13T21:54:07","date_gmt":"2016-04-13T20:54:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/?post_type=snippet&p=2170"},"modified":"2024-12-22T17:11:33","modified_gmt":"2024-12-22T17:11:33","slug":"coparenting-support","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/coparenting-support\/","title":{"rendered":"The Future of Parent Support: Teach Coparenting?"},"content":{"rendered":"

A randomised controlled trial has compared two very different ways of supporting parents: one a programme focusing on couples\u2019 communication and stress management called Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET)<\/em> and the other a programme focusing on parenting skills called Triple P<\/em>. Both involved group sessions for couples \u2013 an 8-hour session all in one weekend in the case of CCET, and 4 separate 2-hour sessions in the case of Triple P.<\/p>\n

The researchers, lead by Martina Zemp<\/a> of the Department of Psychology at the University of Zurich, measured parents\u2019 perceptions of relationship quality, parenting quality and child behaviour in 150 couples \u2013 50 who participated in CCET, 50 who participated in Triple P and 50 who did neither (untreated control group).<\/p>\n

The researchers found that each programme yielded positive effects for child behaviours for participating mothers. In the case of CCET, this came about through improvement in the mother-father relationship, and in the case of Triple P through improvement in the quality of parenting. The authors suggest some mechanisms why improvement in the mother-father relationship might reduce child behaviour problems in the mothers\u2019 perspective, although the answers will have to wait for further research. Could the influence be direct \u2013 the child flourishes in a more harmonious atmosphere? Or could it be that when the relationship is good, parents are more consistent with each other in how they rear the child?<\/p>\n

The pattern for fathers was different from that for mothers. In the fathers\u2019 case, improved parenting rather than an improved relationship explained the CCET programme\u2019s benefits for children\u2019s behaviour.<\/p>\n

The authors discuss why this difference might exist. Prior research has found that fathers\u2019 parenting is more susceptible to couple conflict than the parenting of mothers. This could explain why the couple-focused program reduced child behaviour problems via improved paternal parenting.<\/p>\n

Much research shows that couple conflict has adverse effects on children, and it is perhaps surprising that parenting programmes take so little account of this (as we have reported earlier<\/a> on the Child and Family Blog). Earlier research has shown that introducing a couple focus into parenting may enhance the programmes\u2019 efficacy and that couple relationship programmes often improve children\u2019s behaviour, too.<\/p>\n

The authors conclude that all this provides further evidence that the most effective method of supporting mothers and fathers together may be to focus on parenting and<\/em> relationship skills. Growing evidence suggests that \u201ccoparenting\u201d\u2014that is, how parents cooperate in parenting, support each other in their parenting efforts, and manage conflict regarding child-rearing\u2014is a big factor in family functioning and children\u2019s well-being. They quote a number of other studies that suggest that a focus on coparenting in prevention and intervention programmes is an effective way forward.<\/p>\n

\n

References<\/h4>\n

Zemp M, Milek A, Cummings EM, Cina A &Bodenmann G (2016), How couple- and parenting-focused programs affect child behavioural problems: a randomized controlled trial<\/a>, Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Researchers conclude that the most effective method of supporting mothers and fathers may be to focus on coparenting.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":16,"featured_media":2171,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5773,438],"tags":[463,311,1283,306,479],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2170"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/16"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2170"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2170\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21456,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2170\/revisions\/21456"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2171"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2170"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2170"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/childandfamilyblog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2170"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}