Disrupting the Family Stress-Proximal Process: A Critical Review of Interventions for Children with Incarcerated Parents

• In Event: Poster Session 10
  In Poster Session: PS 10 Topic - Prevention and Interventions

Abstract

Background
The United States’ overreliance on incarceration has resulted in the imprisonment of millions of individuals, the majority of whom are parents of minor children (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2016). Parental incarceration has significant negative effects on children’s development and disproportionately impacts Black, Latinx, and economically marginalized families (Crenshaw, 2011; Miller, 2006). Developmental psychologists play an important role in both supporting activists working towards dismantling the discriminatory and overly punitive system of mass incarceration, and also in providing much needed support and intervention for children with incarcerated parents (CIP). However, no systematic review has examined the effects of interventions for CIP on youth outcomes, leaving clinicians without an understanding of best practices for supporting CIP and researchers without a guide for future research directions. The current systematic review used the Family Stress-Proximal Process (FSPP) model (Arditti, 2016; Figure 1) as a frame to critically examine the literature on interventions for CIP. This frame prioritized examination of chosen intervention targets and incorporation of developmental, sociodemographic, and contextual considerations.

Methods
A systematic search using PsycINFO identified 969 articles. After screening abstracts, 113 full texts were reviewed for eligibility (Figure 2). Twenty-two articles met inclusion criteria of 1) being based in the United States, 2) including CIP or parents/caregivers of CIP, 3) including an intervention, and 4) including child outcome measures. Three were doctoral dissertations and 19 were published articles.

Results
Targets of Intervention: Twelve interventions targeted parenting, contact, and visiting, including residential parenting, parent education, and extended visitation programs. Six targeted youth coping and social support, including mentoring programs and therapeutic group interventions, and four targeted multiple areas. Notably, zero papers targeted exclusively non-incarcerated caregiver parenting.

Developmental Considerations: Many studies used overly wide age ranges, controlled for age, or lacked age data entirely, which limited possible conclusions about how interventions impacted youth of different ages. Programs for infants and toddlers were most targeted to age, but developmental specificity declined as age of participants increased. Most notably, zero studies explicitly targeted teens, indicating a gap in specific services for adolescents who experience parental incarceration differently than younger children. Additionally, most studies relied on caregiver-reported outcomes and lacked youths’ perspectives.

Sociodemographic and Contextual Considerations: Despite the fact that structural racism and socioeconomic marginalization lead to and exacerbate the effects of parental incarceration, many studies perpetuated colorblind racism by conglomerating all non-White races, controlling for race, or lacking race data entirely. Only one study acknowledged how racist policies have led to the disproportionate incarceration of Black and Latinx parents. Similarly, half the studies included zero measures of socioeconomic status. Together, these findings suggest a need for intersectional research framing that acknowledges the roles of identities and systems of oppression and power.

Discussion
Results from this systematic review call for intersectional, developmental, ecological approaches to future research on interventions for CIP. Specifically, future research should 1) examine supports for non-incarcerated caregivers, 2) develop and evaluate developmentally-appropriate services, particularly for adolescents, and 3) explicitly acknowledge and incorporate identity variables and systems-level influences, like racism and socioeconomic marginalization.

Authors

• Elsia Obus, Tulane University
  Presenting Author

• Alexa Garfinkle, Tulane University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Celeste Pinto, Tulane University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Victoria Ross Parker, University of Toronto
  Non-Presenting Author

• Sarah A.O. Gray, Tulane University
  Non-Presenting Author