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 "Household Hardships, Public Programs, and Their Associations with the Health and Development of Very Young Children: Insights from Children's HealthWatch"

This commentary, written in response to the article "Household Hardships, Public Programs, and Their Associations with the Health and Development of Very Young Children: Insights from Children's HealthWatch", highlights the importance of the research done by Children's HealthWatch in relation to childhood food insecurity. Childhood food insecurity has been linked with various adverse health effects, including undernutrition, poor or delayed child development, and social and psychological consequences. Children's HealthWatch provides important data that can be used to monitor threats to our children's well-being and address problems with effective interventions.

A health disparities perspective on developing emerging infectious disease preparedness

A systematic review of the literature yielded 10 articles that explored the interaction between race/ethnicity, citizenship, socioeconomic status, and health literacy domains with respect to preparedness agenda development. Current emerging infectious disease (EID) preparedness plans do not adequately address the needs of vulnerable populations for the events before, during, and after an epidemic. Central to the disadvantage of most vulnerable populations are various health disparity domains that persist as barriers for individuals and communities alike to engage in preparedness efforts. Seven out of the ten articles discussed the importance of including health disparity domains in preparedness policy. Two proposed frameworks for an emerging infectious disease framework that considers health disparities are presented in this study. ^ Framework 1 is beneficial for the evaluation phase after a disaster has struck and preparedness efforts have been initiated. It considers several existing disparities and remediation strategies at the individual, community, and system levels to reach adequate restructuring of preparedness aims. Framework 2 serves as a "how to" carry out preparedness during a disaster event. It is a revision of a framework proposed by Blumenshine et al. (2008) and explores those characteristics central to pandemic preparedness plan development/deployment. Although two frameworks were devised, no one framework will adequately address the needs of vulnerable populations during an epidemic. However, the two frameworks propose to demonstrate the inclusion of important health disparity domains in preparedness plan development. ^ The National Consensus Panel for Emergency Preparedness and Cultural Diversity has released guidelines that are considered the leading strategies necessary to reorient preparedness infrastructure. In order for vulnerable populations to benefit from ample protection during a disaster, inclusion of health disparity domains in the development phases of preparedness must occur prior to full deployment in communities. Although "promising practices" and other methods at the frontier of exploring these multidimensional constraints has entered the research arena, new studies on adequate preparedness merit further investigation and support.^