Strengthening Families: Parents' Voices on Discipline and Child Rearing

This qualitative study conducted semi-structured, multi-session focus groups and interviews with twenty-seven participants to explore in-depth, participant constructs of child discipline and punishment methods and reasons for the continuing support for corporal punishment of U.S. children. The research assumed that parents want to parent well and utilized the strengths perspective as the instrument to listen to participants' voices. Narratives revealed that participants were thoughtful about discipline and parenting strategies and viewed their parent role as a serious commitment. Non-violent discipline strategies, particularly communication, were often used. However, parents generally framed use of physical punishment as “when children need spanking” versus articulating the view that corporal punishment is a choice. Parents were unfamiliar with risks associated with physical punishment and only three parents, as a result of their foster parent training, had ever heard, “Do not spank.” Participants enumerated services and recommendations that would support and inform their own parenting, as well as, benefit children and the eighty percent of women and men in the United States who become mothers and fathers. Recommendations included: creation of a national campaign to build on parent strengths and the intentionality of effective parenting; child development education and increased public awareness of positive discipline methods; parenting supports, including respite and venues for dialogue and discourse about parenting. Recommendations are intended to inform child welfare practice and policy, particularly child abuse prevention. Creating, funding, and implementing a national campaign as described would challenge the dominant child welfare paradigm from one currently perceived as punitive and focused on parents' deficits to a strengths-based paradigm that provides supports and assistance to parents and children.

Commentary on "Strengthening Families: Parents' Voices on Discipline and Child Rearing"

There is a growing consensus among professionals working with parents and children, and advocates for child rights, that a ban on the use of corporal punishment (CP) in raising children is justified in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC, 1989). However, this is an issue which seems to polarize people and opponents of banning CP have attacked the scientific literature and made dire predictions of adverse consequences if parents are not allowed to use CP. The problem is that so much attention has been focused on the “to spank or not to spank” issue, the developmental benefits for children and parents stemming from positive parenting have been largely ignored. There is increasing evidence that public health approaches to increasing parenting support reduces coercive parenting practices. Breshears' study represents an effort to gain a clearer understanding of the reasons many parents continue to support CP and draws on innovative qualitative methods to argue that parents’ views about CP are important and must be taken into account in planning intervention programs.

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FEDERAL FAMILY PLANNING POLICY: AN ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING STATE EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEARS 1976-1981 (WOMEN, BUDGET, POPULATION)

The purpose of this study was to analyze the implementation of national family planning policy in the United States, which was embedded in four separate statutes during the period of study, Fiscal Years 1976-81. The design of the study utilized a modification of the Sabatier and Mazmanian framework for policy analysis, which defined implementation as the carrying out of statutory policy. The study was divided into two phases. The first part of the study compared the implementation of family planning policy by each of the pertinent statutes. The second part of the study identified factors that were associated with implementation of federal family planning policy within the context of block grants.^ Implemention was measured here by federal dollars spent for family planning, adjusted for the size of the respective state target populations. Expenditure data were collected from the Alan Guttmacher Institute and from each of the federal agencies having administrative authority for the four pertinent statutes, respectively. Data from the former were used for most of the analysis because they were more complete and more reliable.^ The first phase of the study tested the hypothesis that the coherence of a statute is directly related to effective implementation. Equity in the distribution of funds to the states was used to operationalize effective implementation. To a large extent, the results of the analysis supported the hypothesis. In addition to their theoretical significance, these findings were also significant for policymakers insofar they demonstrated the effectiveness of categorical legislation in implementing desired health policy.^ Given the current and historically intermittent emphasis on more state and less federal decision-making in health and human serives, the second phase of the study focused on state level factors that were associated with expenditures of social service block grant funds for family planning. Using the Sabatier-Mazmanian implementation model as a framework, many factors were tested. Those factors showing the strongest conceptual and statistical relationship to the dependent variable were used to construct a statistical model. Using multivariable regression analysis, this model was applied cross-sectionally to each of the years of the study. The most striking finding here was that the dominant determinants of the state spending varied for each year of the study (Fiscal Years 1976-1981). The significance of these results was that they provided empirical support of current implementation theory, showing that the dominant determinants of implementation vary greatly over time. ^