was
2 moments? Es

7‘31“};- ATE UNIVERSITY

J ,7 7 C 6 for 9 EAST LANSING, MICH 48824-1048

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

INDIVIDUAL LEVEL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH
DECREASED DEPRESSION AMONG RURAL LOW-INCOME
WOMEN: A FAMILY RESILIENCE PERSPECTIVE

presented by
LAURIE A. BULOCK

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Master of degree in Department of Family and Child
Arts Ecology

%%M {v A9

Major Professor’s Signature

/¢;,g-0¢

 

 

 

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c-JCIRC/DanDuo.p65-p.15

INDIVIDUAL LEVEL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH DECREASED
DEPRESSION AMONG RURAL LOW-INCOME WOMEN: A FAMILY
RESILIENCE PERSPECTIVE
By

Laurie A. Bulock

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Family and Child Ecology

2004

ABSTRACT
TOWARD A FAMILY RESILIENCE MODEL:
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH MATERNAL
DEPRESSION
By

Laurie A. Bulock

This study examined factors associated with decreased depression levels among
rural low-income women over a one-year time period. Bivariate correlation and multiple
regression analyses were conducted to identify individual level perceptual and objective
factors associated with depression levels at Waves one and two. and which factors were
associated with depression score changes. Further regression analyses were run on the
portion of the women whose depression levels had decreased from Wave one to Wave
two to below the CES-D cut-off of 16 in order to identify which factors were associated
with participants’ improved mental well-being. The results Show that wave one
depression scores along with life satisfaction, parental confidence, and parental support
predict lower depression levels at Wave two. and serve to mediate economic variables.
Changes in depression scores were predicted by changes in perceived life satisfaction.
perceived parental confidence. and annual income. and indirectly by changes in perceived
parental support. Decreased depression to below the C ES-D cut-off was predicted by

changes in annual income. perceived life satisfaction. and perceived parental confidence.

DEDICATION
To my loving husband Bryan
And to my wonderful children Corey, Sydney and Max

This iS dedicated to you with lots of love.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge and express Sincere appreciation to Dr. Barbara
Ames, my advisor and chairperson of my committee, for her warmth, encouragement.
and patience. and for keeping me on track. Your push for excellence has helped me to
become a better writer. I want to thank Dr. David Imig for the opportunity to work on
this exciting and rewarding project, and for the providing support and exchanging ideas.
Your questions have contributed to my growth as a student and scholar. I would also like
to thank Dr. Joanne Keith for serving as a committee member, and for providing
encouragement throughout my program.

I thank God for leading me where I am today, and for getting me through the
tough times. I would like to thank my family for your patience, and understanding.
Bryan, my loving husband, I could not have done this without your support and belief in
me. This is our accomplishment together. To my children Corey, Sydney, and Max,
your love and patience helped pull me through when I really needed it. You’re the best.

To my parents, Kathy and Ron Holcom, and Mel and Jan Hansens, your lives
have been an inspiration to me. Your love and belief in me sparked the desire to follow
through. Mom, I don’t know what I would have done over the years without your help
and support. You have done more for me and my family than you could ever know.

Thank you.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 2
Significance of the Study ......................................................................................... 3
Conceptual Model .................................................................................................... 4
Research Questions & Hypotheses .......................................................................... 6
Conceptual and Operational Definitions .................................................................. 7
Research Assumptions ............................................................................................. 9
CHAPTER 11
REVIEW OF LITERTURE ................................................................................... 10
Low income and rural family challenges ................................................... 10
Family risk and resilience framework ........................................................ 12
The role of perceptions and maternal depression ...................................... 13
The role of depression ................................................................................ 15
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 21
Research Design ..................................................................................................... 21
Research Sample .................................................................................................... 21
Research Instruments ............................................................................................. 23
The CES-D Scale ....................................................................................... 24
Life Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 24
Income Adequacy ...................................................................................... 24
Parental Confidence ................................................................................... 25
Parental Support ......................................................................................... 25
Data Collection Procedure ..................................................................................... 26
Analyses ................................................................................................................. 26
Hypotheses ............................................................................................................. 27
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 29
Demographic characteristics of the sample ............................................... 29
Research Question 1 .................................................................................. 33
Research Question 2 .................................................................................. 38
Research Question 3 .................................................................................. 42
Regression model I ........................................................................ 43
Regression model 2 ........................................................................ 44

Regression model 3 ........................................................................ 47

Regression model 4 ........................................................................ 50
Summary of Results ............................................................................................... 53
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................. 56
Key Findings .......................................................................................................... 56
Limitations of the Research ................................................................................... 63
Implications of the Study ....................................................................................... 67
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Additional Tables ............................................................................ 75
Appendix B: Wave One Survey Protocol ........................................................... ..78
Appendix C: Wave Two Survey Protocol .......................................................... 103
REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 139

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Participants’ Demographic Characteristics ............................................. 32
Table 2: Descriptive Data for Study Variables ..................................................... 34

Table 3: Descriptive Data for New Change Variables and One-Sample
T-Test for Differences Between Waves One and Two .......................................... 35

Table 4: Percentages of Participants Who Improved, Stayed the Same
Or Worsened Along the Study Variables ............................................................... 36

Table 5: C rosstabulations of Depression Categories for Wave 1 and Wave 2 ..... 38

Table 6: Bivariate Correlations Among Wave 1 Variables .................................. 39
Table 7: Bivariate Correlations Among Wave 2 Variables .................................. 40
Table 8: Bivariate Correlations among Change Variables ................................... 41
Table 9: Regression of Depressive Symptoms on Wave 1 Variables .................... 44
Table 10: Depressive Symptoms Regressed on Wave 2 Variables ...................... 46
Table l 1: Regression of Changed Depression Symptoms on Change

Variables ................................................................................................................ 48
Table I2: Regression of Decrease in Depressive Symptoms on Demographic and

Change Variables ................................................................................................... 52
Table 13: Descriptives omeall Dropped Sample ............................................... 75
Table 14: Descriptives Of Large Dropped Sample ................................................ 76

vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Factors that may be associated with changes maternal depression
at two points in time using an ecological framework .............................................. 5

Figure 2: Path model of individual level factors associated with changes in
maternal depression ............................................................................................... 49

Figure 3: Path model of individual level factors associated with decreased
maternal depression ............................................................................................... 53

viii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Working poor families in rural areas face many challenges and risks, including
isolation. limited employment and educational opportunities, and poverty extended over
long periods of time. Transportation can become a problem for rural families when
home, workplaces and childcare locations are separated by long distances. Of the
employment options available. many do not provide basic benefit packages that would
include health insurance or vacation or sick time. Changes in welfare legislation, while
intended to help families by moving them off the welfare rolls and into the workforce,
may actually make it harder for poor families to make ends meet. Some families struggle
and are not able to cope with the demands posed by the realities of rural life, while others
overcome adverse situations and emerge stronger.

The purpose of this study was to explore individual level factors associated with
risk and resilience among rural working poor families. Specifically. this study explored
relationships between depression and indicators of mental well-being among women
from low income families living in rural areas. Understanding the nature of these
relationships across time at the individual level provides a foundation for further
investigations that link individual level risk and resilience processes with family level
risk and resilience processes among rural working poor families.

According to family stress and coping theory, families‘ perceptions oftheir

challenges and capabilities are key to their success in coping. or adaptive functioning. in

the face of prolonged adversity (McCubbin, McCubbin & Thompson, 1993; McCubbin &
Patterson, 1983; Patterson, 2002a, 2002b). Similarly, stress and coping processes among
individuals are influenced by a person’s perceptions of the hardships created by stressor
events, and by his or her capabilities and concepts of self, such as mastery and self-
esteem (Pearlin, Menaghan, Lieberman & Mullan, 1981). Poverty and economic
hardship are commonly operationalized as stressors and strains in models developed to
investigate factors and processes associated with depression. Recent research has
suggested that low income alone does not significantly predict parental depression or
child adjustment among Hispanic families working in rural areas (Hovey & Magafia,
2002; Dennis, Parke, Coltrane, Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy, 2003). Rather, Similar to
stress and coping, and risk and resilience theories, the subjective appraisals associated
with the strains of not having enough money and unstable employment were more
indicative of parental and family stress (Dennis, Parke, Coltrane, Blacher, & Borthwick-
Duffy, 2003). Within the context of rural poverty and welfare reform, it was important
that this study examine factors influencing maternal depression in order to understand
factors which may act as risks for depression, and which may act as buffers against
depression. This study examines such factors within a broader family risk and resilience

framework.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The purpose of this study was to identify individual level factors within a sample
of rural working poor families in the United States that were associated with family risk

and resilience processes. Specifically. this study explored individual level factors

identified from data collected at two points in time that were be associated with maternal
depression. Changes in the data and patterns of associations with depression between
waves of data were explored. Within an ecological framework, the individual level risk
and protective factors examined included participants“ reported depressive symptoms and
perceptual indicators of mental well-being. Finally, the study examined which factors

were predictive of depression among rural working poor women.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Research on the concept of family risk and resilience is relatively new, and
researchers continue to debate the conceptualization and operationalization of family
resilience (Patterson, 2002; McCubbin, McCubbin, Thompson, Han & Allen, 1997;
Walsh, 2003; Cowan, Cowan & Schulz, 2003). While it is well documented that
exposure to maternal depression and other parental mental illnesses are associated with
risk and resilience among children and adolescents (Seifer, 2003; Hammen, 2003; and
Luthar, D’Avanzo & Hites. 2003), less is known about the role of maternal depression
within family risk and resilience processes. This study provided an opportunity to explore
individual level factors and processes associated with maternal depression and set the
stage for further exploration of links between maternal depression and family risk and

resilience processes within this population.

CONCEPTUAL MODEL
The familyrisk and resilience framework.

Similar to research on risk and resilience among individuals, family risk and
resilience has its roots in the stress and coping literature (Patterson. 2002). Several
models have emerged in the family risk and resilience literature that are useful for
examining different aspects of family adaptation to stress or crises. According to
Patterson’s Family Adjustment and Adaptation Response (FAAR) Model (2002).
competent family functioning emerges as a product of family relational processes. The
FAAR Model “emphasizes the active processes families engage in to balance family
demands with family capabilities as these interact withfimzily meanings to arrive at a
level Of family adjustment or adaptation” (Patterson, 2002b, p. 236). The family's
appraisal, or perception of the Situation. is a crucial link in developing competence
(resilience) or vulnerability (risk). In turn, a family‘s appraisals are influenced by the
unique perspectives and collective experiences of its individual members. Thus it was
important in this study to understand participants” perceptions of their situations and of
their well-being. and how those perceptions along with objective indicators were related

to changes in their mental well-being.

The human ecological model.

 

The human ecological approach provides a framework with which to View family
members as they interact within family subsystems. and as they interact with
macrosystem institutions including work and societal expectations. Individuals and

families are viewed as dynamic as they adapt to changes within and between systems

with which they are interdependent. The ecological model provides a lens with which to
examine microsystem and macrosystem influences on individual and family functions
over time (Bubolz & Sontag, 1993). For instance, within the context of welfare reform,
stricter policies regarding employment and access to public assistance can affect the
extent to which workers are able to provide for the economic needs of their families. This
in turn can contribute to parental stress and mental well-being, affecting relationships and
caregiving abilities. This study focused on changes among individual level perceptual
factors (presented in Figure l) and objective indicators that were associated with changes

in maternal depression across two waves of data collection.

Figure 1. Factors associated with changes in maternal depression among women in
rural working poor families at two points in time using an ecological framework.

 

 

Time 1 Time 2
Individual Level Individual Level
Factors: Factors:
0 Life satisfaction - - - - - - - —> 0 Life satisfaction
0 Parental confidence 0 Parental confidence
0 Parental support 0 Parental support
0 Income adequacy 0 Income adequacy

 

 

 

 

 

 

l i
l .
V T

Maternal Depression 9 Maternal Depression

_————*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
For this study the following research questions and hypotheses were posed in
order to understand risk and resilience among rural working poor families within the
context of welfare reform. This study integrated family risk and resilience theory within

an ecological framework. as focused on individual level factors:

I. Do perceived levels ofdepression and individual level factors change significantly
between waves one and two for the study sample?
HI: Participants” perceptions of their depression levels will increase from wave
one to wave two.
H2: Participants’ perceptions of life satisfaction will decrease between waves one
and two.
H3: Participants” perceptions of family income adequacy will decrease between
waves one and two.
H4: Participants‘ perceptions of parental confidence will decrease between waves
one and two.
H5: Participants” perceptions of parental support will decrease between waves
one and two.
2. Which of the changed individual level factors are associated with changes in maternal
depression levels?
H6: Changes in levels of maternal depression will be negatively correlated with
changes in life satisfaction. family income adequacy. parental confidence, and

parental support.

3. Which of the changed individual level factors predict changes in maternal depression
levels?
H7: Changes in participants‘ perceptions oflife satisfaction, family income
adequacy, parental confidence. and parental support will negatively predict

changes in levels of maternal depression.

CONCEPTUAL AND OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

Individual level factors

 

C onceptually, individual level factors refer to subjective or objective factors
which contribute to individual and family well-being. given the context of rural poverty
and welfare reform and framed within an integrated family risk and resilience and
ecological theory. Subjective factors included respondents’ subjective thoughts, feelings,
and opinions. Objective factors included respondents’ age. education level, ethnicity. and
employment status. Operationally. individual level factors were measured using the
following items from the interview protocol: maternal depressive symptoms, perceived
life satisfaction, perceived parental confidence. perceived parental support, and perceived

income adequacy. These measures are further defined in Chapter Three.

Maternal Depression

 

Maternal depression was conceptualized in the study as the perceived level of
depressed mood or affect as indicated by participant‘s responses on the self-report scale
utilized in the study. Depression is defined in Taber's C yclopedic Medical Dictionary

(Thomas, 1993) as presence of altered or depressed mood nearly everyday, and is

characterized by diminished interest in things or activities that are usually pleasurable.
Operationally, maternal depression was measured with a 20-item scale, as described in

Chapter Three.

Life Satisfaction

 

Conceptually, life satisfaction refers to whether the respondent felt content or
satisfied with her life at the time of the interviews. It was considered a perceptual
variable in this study because it involved participants’ subjective perceptions or
appraisals of their life circumstances. Perceptions and appraisals are important to
meaning making in the resilience literature. Theoretically, one’s appraisal of life
satisfaction will influence how one perceives and balances life demands and capabilities
in order to adjust or adapt. Operationally, life satisfaction was measured in this study

with a one-item measure, as described in Chapter Three.

Parental Confidence

C onceptually, parental confidence refers to the participant’s subjective feelings
about her abilities. or role fulfillment, as a parent. In the resilience literature, subjective
appraisals of capabilities are important for balancing life demands. In the depression
literature, successful role fulfillment positively affects emotional well-being (Ross &
Huber, 1985). Conversely, role strain contributes to depression levels (Pearlin.
Menaghan, Lieberman, & Mullan, 1981). While mastery has been widely used in the
literature as a self-concept or psychological resource for coping. (Ennis. Hobfall &

Schroder. 2000; Pearlin, Menaghan. Liebemian & Mullen. I981: Pearlin & Schooler.

1978; Siefert, Heflin, Corcoran. & Williams. D. 2004; Turner & Lloyd, 1999a. b), other
variables can as used as well, such as mothers’ optimism (Taylor, Rodriguez, Seaton, &
Dominguez, 2004). In this study. parental confidence was conceptualized as a self-
concept, or psychological resource. That is, the well-being of the self is protected via the
perception of successful fulfillment of the parenting role. Operationally, parental

confidence was measured in this study with a 7 item scale. as described in Chapter Three.

Parental Support

 

Parental support refers to participants’ perceived access to parenting support, such
as family, friends, or professionals. Compared to definitions of general social support, in
this study, social support pertained to the social relations the participant perceives She can
draw from for support in fulfilling the parenting role. Operationally. parental support

was measured with a Six item scale. as described in Chapter Three.

RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS
I. All respondents answered questions honestly during the semi-structured
interview.
2. All individuals strive to function competently and provide for family members.
3. All families work to contribute to their family well—being. and to contribute to

society as a whole.

CHAPTER 11

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Low income and rural family challenges in the context of welfare reform

There has been debate since the passage of Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) about how to measure the success of welfare
changes both nationally and within states. Early reports used caseload reduction and
increased employment rates as measures of the success Of welfare reform (Bauer, Braun
& Olson, 2000; Lichter and Jayakody, 2002). However these instances co-occurred in
the late 1990’s, during a time of economic growth when jobs were available. In addition,
these reports of early successes did not consider that families that left welfare may not
have left poverty (Bauer. Braun & Olson, 2000; Cheng, 2002; Lichter and Jayakody.
2002). Researchers from many fields have championed the need for research that
considers other measures of individual and family well-being among the poor that are
more current and reflect the economic realities of the early 21St century. Data collection
for the current study began in 2000 for wave one, and 2001 in wave two.

In analyses of multiple national quantitative datasets. and using qualitative data,
Heymann (2000, 2002) documented several risks working poor families face. Many
families are in what She calls “multiplejeopardy”: low income, health problems. child
problems with school, child behavior problems, child disabilities. problems with
transportation, and the time crunch. Within the context of a global, 24-hour economy,
low-income parents often must work irregular shifts to accommodate employers’ needs,

but lose time with their families and struggle to find adequate child care for off-peak

IO

hours. In addition, most low-income workers receive few basic benefits from their
employers, such as health insurance coverage, vacation and sick time, and over time pay.
Thus many low-income workers are working long hours with little pay. They struggle to
make ends meet, and to meet the social and emotional needs of their families. Yet they
are not provided with the security afforded by basic employee benefits.

Given this context, the concept of risk and resilience among rural working poor
families is a timely research topic. Lichter and Jayakody (2002) report that most welfare
to work programs were developed from an urban-based political and cultural context. Yet
rural economies have challenges that are uniquely different than urban challenges.
Working adults in rural populations are challenged by limited employment and education
opportunities, long commutes between work and home, childcare concerns, and the need
to work multiple jobs to make ends meet (Ames, Brosi, & Damiano-Teixeira, 2003).
Research conducted by the Rural Policy Research Institute’s Rural Poverty Research
Center (2004) found that welfare reform was accompanied by reduced welfare caseloads
and poverty rates and increased employment rates. but not in rural areas. In addition,
child poverty and food insecurity rates were higher in rural areas than metro areas
(USDA, 2002).

The link between poverty and depression is well documented in the literature. as
is the link between depression in mothers and child and family well-being. Both are
discussed further in the following sections. However. given the continued lag in poverty
rates in rural areas, and the link with depression. it was expected that depression levels in
the present study sample would increase from wave one to wave two, and that annual

income and perceptual indicators of well-being would decrease.

ll

Family Risk and Resilience Framework

The family resilience literature is closely identified with the literature on
individual resilience and uses many of the same concepts and definitions. For instance.
both sets of literature agree that deeming an individual or a family resilient requires two
fundamental judgments: 1) that the person or family under study functions well on some
measure, and 2) that the person or family under study experienced significant adversity,
whether chronic or acute, and overcame it (Masten & Powell. 2003; Patterson. 2002). In
addition. both sets of literature emphasize resilience as a dynamic process through which
competent functioning is the outcome despite adverse situations (Luthar, C icchetti &
Becker, 2000; Patterson. 2002; McCubbin, McCubbin, Thompson, Han & Allen. 1997).

Resilience is multidimensional and heterogeneous in nature. Individuals and
families face varying risks, possess varying personal or family-level attributes, and have
access to a variety of support resources. In addition, resilience processes occur over time
and within a developmental context. Thus, within the context of adversity, individual and
family functioning varies across developmental and family function domains (Luthar,
Cicchetti & Becker, 2003; Patterson, 2002). For instance. an individual who has
experienced prolonged poverty may function competently within cognitive and language
domains, but struggle with emotional and social domains during adolescence. The same
person may overcome the emotional and social struggles related to adolescence and
function differently in adulthood. Similarly, families who have experienced poverty may
function well within the nurturing and protection domains of family functions. but

struggle with membership and economic support functions when their children are young.

However, when their children have grown past the age when childcare is needed, the
family may develop competence in other areas.

Evidence and patterns of competent functioning among young people who have
grown up in poverty have been well documented. along with the individual and family
factors that are often associated with poverty (Cauce, Stewart, Rodriquez, Cochran, &
Ginzler, 2003; Owens & Shaw. 2003; Reynolds & Ou, 2003', Seidman & Pedersen, 2003;
and Wyman, 2003). Parental depression is another factor that has been identified in the
resilience literature as associated with individual risk or resilience among children and
youth (Brown, Brody & Stoneman. 2000; Hammen. 2003; Hammen & Brennan, 2003:
Jackson, 1998; Luthar. D’Avanzo & HiteS. 2003). It is important that this study examine
factors associated with maternal depression among this sample of rural working poor
families within a family resilience framework, given the potential ramifications of
maternal depression on the development and well-being of the mother and other family

members.

The role of perceptions and maternal depression

 

Individual and family level perceptions and capabilities are important to
resilience. Several models have been developed that incorporate family perceptions. or
appraisals, of stressors, crises, and capabilities for adjusting to them. The Circumplex
Model of Marital and Family Systems presents a map which can be used to characterize
family types (patterns of interactions) along three dimensions: cohesion, adaptability, and
communication (Olson. 1993). According to this model. the processes families use to

handle stress and crisis. as well as normative family demands. are influenced by their

13

family type (varying levels of family cohesion and adaptability). The family’s perception
of the situation and use of family resources (capabilities) interact with family type to
influence adaptation of the family system (Lavee & Olson, 1991).

The Double ABCX Model of Adjustment and Adaptation (McCubbin &
Patterson, 1983) focuses on the ways in which stressor events interact with family
perceptions of the stressor, along with family resources, to produce a level of adjustment
or crisis. What may follow over time is a pile up of stressors and demands which interact
with new family perceptions and new and existing resources to produce maladaptation or
bonadaptation.

Similarly. the Family Adjustment and Adaptation Response (F AAR) Model
emphasizes families’ meaning making processes (perceptions) to balance family demands
with family capabilities to achieve a level of adjustment. If adjustment is not achieved,
or if there is a pile up of demands, a crisis may occur which would necessitate new
meanings of the situation in order to balance new demands with new and existing
capabilities. Families must make changes in the family’s structure and relational
processes in order to facilitate bonadaptation.

These models have been used to study the importance of perceptions and
capabilities among families who have faced significant risk and emerged resilient, such
as families affected by war (McCubbin, McCubbin & Thompson, 1983), families raising
children with serious illness or disabilities (Patterson, 2000), as well as families
experiencing normative stresses and strains (Lavee & Olson, 1991). Canary, Stafford,
and Semic (2002) examined resilience in marital relation processes and found that

perception of maintenance strategies plays an important role in understanding relational

14

characteristics. DeJong. C hamratrithirong, & Tran (2002) found that the perception of
life satisfaction among migrant families in Thailand is influenced by the migrant lifestyle.

Other recent research has Shown that self-reported perceptions of maternal
depressive symptoms are associated with reduced or loss of welfare benefits and food
stamps, food insecurity. and child health problems (Casey, Goolsby, Berkowitz, Frank.
Cook, Cutts, et.al, 2004). Among samples of rural Hispanic migrant workers, parental
depression was predicted by subjective perceptions of not having enough money and
unstable employment. rather than low income per se (Hovey & Magafia. 2002; Dennis,
Parke. Coltrane, Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy. 2003).

It is clear that perceptions play a key role in the ability to “bounce back” from
crisis. This study focuses on several perceptual variables in order to understand the role
they play in predicting changes in matemal depression. Such variables will include life

satisfaction, income adequacy, parental confidence. and parental support.

The role of depression

In the context of rural poverty and welfare reform. matemal depression can be
viewed as an outcome or response to stress processes brought on by economic hardships
and strains (Mirowsky & Ross, 1990; Pearlin. Menaghan. Lieberman, & Mullan, 1981;
Pearlin & Schooler. 1978; Ross & Mirowsky. 1989: Turner & Lloyd, I999a, 1999b), or
it can be Viewed as a contributor to child adjustment problems (Brown. Brody &
Stoneman. 2000; Casey, Goolsby, Berkowitz, Frank. Cook. C utts. et. al., 2004: Dennis.
Parke, Coltrane, Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy. 2003', Hammen. 2003; Hammen &

Brennan. 2003; Jackson. 1998: Luthar. D’Avanzo & Hites. 2003). and family

15

functioning, such as problems associated with food insecurity (C asey, Goolsby,
Berkowitz, Frank, Cook, C utts. et. al., 2004; Olson, Anderson. Kiss. Lawrence, &
Seiling, 2004; Siefert, Heflin, Corcoran & Williams, 2004). For the scope and purposes
of this study, it is important to understand the role of depression as a response to the
economic hardships and strains brought on by the challenges of rural life and welfare
reform.

Depression is often used in the resilience literature as an outcome variable or
manifestation of stress in order to examine the protective factors and processes that may
lead to positive adaptation. Like resilience, depression is heterogeneous and
multidimensional in nature. Depression combines with differing types of stressors to
affect different segments of the population in different ways.

Pearlin and associates helped pave the way for understanding depression as a
response to stress. In the stress process model (Pearlin, Menaghan, Lieberman & Mullan,
1981), depression was viewed as an outcome or manifestation of stress in which discrete
life events (acute or chronic) trigger associated life strains or role strains and decreases in
self concepts (mastery and self-esteem). In their model, individuals may employ coping 1
responses or utilize social supports in order to avoid or minimize the distress brought
about by the life event. The coping responses discussed involved individuals’ use of
comparative, or positive, framing. and valuation or devaluation of economic
achievements. The first type of response involves the reframing of resources or
circumstances such that one sees the present condition as an improvement over the past,

or better compared to someone else.

16

Similarly, the structure of coping model (Pearlin & Schooler. 1978), describes
coping resources and coping responses. Coping resources refer to what a person has
available to them for developing a coping repertoire. Such resources include social
resources and support networks, and psychological resources (self-esteem, self-
denigration, mastery, denial). Coping responses refer to the behaviors and cognitions a
person engages to deal with life situations. The three types of coping responses include
responses that change the situation, responses that control the meaning of the situation,
and responses that control the stress. The concepts and processes presented in the stress
and coping models can be viewed similarly to the perceptions or meaning making
concepts discussed in the resilience literature.

Within the broader society, the distribution of depression and the array of
available coping behaviors and resources are partly explained by social status (Turner &
Lloyd, 1999b). Perceived control and active problem solving have been found to be more
prevalent among peOple with higher incomes and education levels (Ross & Mirowsky.
1989). The availability of positive selfconcepts, such as mastery and self—esteem, as
buffers to depression are distributed by socioeconomic status. That is, people with higher
socioeconomic status are more likely to have mastery and self-esteem available to them
as buffers, and are thus less likely to suffer depression. Conversely, low socioeconomic
status iS associated with lower sense of mastery and self-esteem and higher depression
(Turner & Lloyd, 199%). Having a sense of control over outcomes (good and bad) is
also associated with depression. and is also found to distribute according to

socioeconomic status (Mirowsky & Ross. 1990).

17

Within families, the precursors to depression are different for husbands and
wives. Economic hardship influences how well husbands and wives are able to fulfill
their role obligations (Ross & Huber, 1985), which influences depression levels. For
husbands, depression levels and successful role fulfillment is associated with his
earnings. Wives’ depression levels and successful role fulfillment is associated with her
education level and the number of children in the home. The authors suggest that
education is a more important component of socioeconomic status for women than
income because it helps women successfully meet role obligations in the home. The
authors found that childrens’ presence increases both parents’ depression levels by
increasing economic hardship. However. childrens’ presence also decreases mothers’
depression levels. possibly indicating successful role fulfillment.

Various individual level, family level. and societal level factors have been
identified in the literature as important to maternal depression. These factors can be
conceptualized within the stress and coping models discussed previously in this section.
Poverty and associated economic hardships are discussed in much of the literature on
maternal depression as life events which trigger strains and coping responses (Brown.
Brody & Stoneman. 2000; Casey. et.al.. 2004; C oiro, 2001; Dennis, Parke, C oltrane,
Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy. 2003: Ennis, Hobfall & Schroder. 2000; Jackson, 1998.
1999; Jackson & Huang, 1998: Ross, 2000; Siefert, Heflin, C orcoran, & Williams, D.
2004; Taylor, Rodriguez, Seaton, & Dominguez. 2004). The present study also discusses
poverty, within the context of rural life and welfare reform. as a life event which triggers

coping responses.

18

While mastery has been widely used in the literature as a self-concept or
psychological resource for coping. as discussed previously (see also Ennis, Hobfall &
Schroder. 2000; Siefert, Heflin. C orcoran. & Williams. D. 2004), other variables such as
mothers’ optimism (Taylor, Rodriguez. Seaton, & Dominguez, 2004) can be
conceptualized as self concepts or psychological resources. In this study. parental
confidence is conceptualized as a self-concept. or psychological resource. The well-
being of the self is protected via the perception of successful fulfillment of the parenting
role.

Coping resources and coping responses are employed in the stress and coping
models to mitigate distress triggered by life events. Social support has been
operationalized as a coping resource in research studies to determine its effects on
depression, and has received mixed results (Ross & Mirowsky, 1989). In terms of
maternal depression. perceived access to social support has been found in some studies to
buffer the relationship between life events and levels of depressive symptoms (C oiro,
2001; Dennis. Parke. Coltrane, Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy. 2003; Ennis. Hobfall &
Schroder. 2000). Jackson (1998. 1999) found that instrumental support received by
mothers is associated with higher levels of depression. Other studies found that support
received from a spouse. non-resident father, or significant other is associated with lower
depression levels (Jackson. 1998, I999; O’Brien. Heron Asay & McCluskey-Fawcett.
1999; Ross & Mirowsky. 1989), especially under circumstances of high risk (Brown,
Brody & Stoneman. 2000). Parental support is operationalized in this study as a coping
resource because it is a form of social support that is particular to fulfilling the parenting

role. Coping responses. as discussed earlier in this section. refer to behaviors and

I9

cognitions for dealing with life Situations, and often involve positive framing such that
one sees life conditions in a positive light, or as an improvement. In this study, life
satisfaction is considered a coping resource because it serves to frame participants’ life
conditions in a positive light.

The studies discussed in this section were classic for identifying factors and
processes associated with depression, but were conducted by national random sampling,
and by interviews with metropolitan samples. Within the context of welfare reform, it

would be useful to identify factors and processes that may be unique to rural populations.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study used data from a multi—state research project titled NC 223, “Low
Income Rural Families: Tracking their Well-Being and Functioning in the Context of
Welfare Reform.” The project adopted a multidisciplinary approach to develop an
understanding of the challenges and complexities faced by rural low-income families
within the context of their communities. The project collected three waves of
quantitative and qualitative data over a five year time period from 24 counties in 14
states. This study focused on the sample of rural families who participated in the first
two waves of data collection.

The multi-state NC223 study was designed to assess the well-being of rural
working poor families within the context of welfare refomi. In order to carry out the
objectives of the research study, a longitudinal non-experimental survey research design
was used, which included purposive samples from one county in each of the participating
states. This particular study used quantitative data from the multi-state dataset and was
designed to examine associations between maternal depression and individual level

indicators of family well-being among low income families living in rural areas.

Research Sample
The NC223 sample consisted of rural families in 24 counties across 14 states. To
be included in the multi-state study, it was required that each family have at least one

child 12 years old or younger living in the home. Families also had to be eligible for.

21

although not necessarily receiving, Food Stamps or the Supplemental Nutritional
Program for Women Infants and Children (WIC) at the time of the interviews, or have a
poverty ratio less than 200% of the poverty level limit. Preference was given to families
with at least one preschool child so that child care arrangements could be studied.

The sample included participants from all geographical regions of the United
States: four states in the Western region, five in the Central, two in the Southern, and four
in the Eastern region. Compared to rural working families nationwide, the larger NC223
sample (Bauer, 2003) and the current study sample had a higher proportion of rural
Latino(a) families (21% for NC223 and 17.1% for the current study, versus 12%
nationwide), a lower proportion of White families (68% for NC223, 68.1% for the current
study, versus 75% nationwide ), and a lower proportion of rural Black families (8% for
NC223, 8.4% for the current study, versus 18% nationwide). Native American families
(n=5, 1% for NC 223 and current study) were not targeted for recruitment due to
complicated circumstances regarding tribal benefits and services.

A purposive sample was selected due to the difficulty in obtaining a consistent
across state random sample of rural low-income, highly mobile families. Most states
recruited participants through food programs or other educational programs for low-
income families within the identified counties. Interviews were conducted face-to-face
with the woman in the family for about two hours using a semi-structured protocol.
Interviews took place in family homes. places of work, or community centers.

Three waves of interviews were conducted and included 433 participants for wave
one and 315 participants for wave two. Data for wave three are still being collected in

some states. Attrition among those in the sample occurred for several reasons. One state

I\)
h)

dropped from the study before wave two data were collected. Some participants from
wave one did not meet the sampling criteria to be interviewed for wave two (they were no
longer eligible to receive assistance, their incomes rose above the 200 percent poverty
limit, or their youngest child matured over the 12 year old age limit). Last, many
participants could not be contacted for the second wave of interviews, because they had
moved. The sample for the present study included families who participated in both
waves one and two (254) and whose income level at wave one was below 200 percent of
the poverty limit. Families whose income levels were below 200 percent of the poverty
line in wave one, but rose above it in wave two, were still included in this study.

Though the family was defined as the unit of analysis for the larger national
study, the women in the families were interviewed. Thus respondents were all females.
Ethnic representation in this sample is Similar to the larger study, with a higher
proportion of Latino(a) families. The average age of participants when they entered the

study was 29 years old.

Research Instruments

The larger NC223 study collected a comprehensive and broad range of measures
to begin to understand the effect of welfare reform on rural populations. This study
focused on measures that could be used to understand individual level family risk and
resilience processes among rural working poor families in the United States. Measures

for this study included the following:

Dependent variable

0 Maternal depression (II = 254), was measured using the Center for Epidemiologic
Studies’ Depression Scale (C ES-D), which was designed to measure symptoms of
depression in the general public. It was found to have high internal consistency and
adequate test-retest repeatability, and evidence of construct validity. By clinical and
self-report criteria, the scale was found to have concurrent validity. The properties
hold across Black and White English-Speaking American subpopulations, across
both sexes. a wide age range. and SES. Participants were asked to rate how often
they experienced certain feelings within the last week. Responses ranged from
“rarely or none of the time” (coded as 0) to “most or all of the time” (coded as 3).
Sample items included: "I could not shake the blues,” "I had crying spells,” and “I
felt depressed.” The 20-item inventory has a reported Cronbach’s alpha of .82
(Radloff, 1977). Cronbach’s alpha for this study was .89 for wave 1 and .90 for
wave 2. Scores are totaled for all items, resulting in a continuous score ranging
from 0 to 36. Radloff indicates an arbitrary cutoff score of 16, which is the cutoff
score commonly used in other large studies such as the National Longitudinal Study
of Youth (NLSY).

Independent variables

0 Life satisfaction (n = 254), a one-item nominal measure that asked participants how
satisfied they were with their lives. Responses were coded on a one-to-five Likert-
type scale, ranging from "very dissatisfied” (low) to “very satisfied” (high).

0 Income adequacy (n = 254), a one-item nominal measure to determine participants’

perceptions of the adequacy of the families’ income. The item was consistent with a

 

Likert-type scale with responses coded from one-to-five. The participants were
asked the extent to which they thought their income was enough for their families to
live on. Responses ranged from “not at all adequate” (coded as I) to “can afford
about everything we want and still save money” (coded as 5).

Parental confidence (n = 254), the first of two components of “The Parenting
Ladder,” a measure constructed by the Oregon State University Family Policy
Program (Richards, 1998). Each item of the parenting ladder is scored on a seven
point scale in terms of where the participant would put herself on the ladder. A
score of 0 means the person places herself at the lowest point on the ladder. A
higher score means the participant places herself higher on the ladder, with 6 as the
highest point. Parental confidence was conceptualized in this study as self-concept,
or psychological resource indicating a perceived level of success in fulfilling the
parenting role. Items for the seven-item parental confidence portion asked
participants where they perceived themselves on the ladder in terms of, for example:
a) knowledge of how children grow and develop: b) confidence that you know what
is right for your child: and c) your success in teaching your child how to behave.
Scores are totaled for all items. resulting in a continuous score ranging from 0 to 42.
Parental support (11 = 254), is the second part of"The Parenting Ladder,” as
described above. Parental support was conceptualized in this study as participants’
perceived access to social relations that could be drawn from for support in fulfilling
the parenting role. The Six-item parental support portion asks participants about
support they perceive that they get from Others. Items for the parental support

portion ask participants where they would put themselves on the ladder in terms of:

25

a) other parents to talk to: b) someone to help in an emergency; and c) someone to
offer helpful advice or moral support. Scores are totaled for all items, resulting in a

continuous score ranging from 0 to 36.

DATA COLLECTION
Two hour interviews were conducted face-to-face with the woman in the family
using a semi-structured protocol. Interviews took place in family homes, places of work.

or community centers. Twenty-four of the interviews were conducted in Spanish.

Analyses
There were four steps to analyzing the data collected from the measures listed in

the previous section. The steps are listed below and organized by the research questions:

Research Question #1: Do scores for individual level factors change Significantly

between waves one and two for the study sample?
Analysis Step #1: Descriptive procedures were conducted for the dependent
variable and each of the independent variables for waves one and two.
Analysis Step #2: New change score variables were created for the dependent
variable and each of the independent variables by subtracting wave one scores
from wave two scores. One sample t-tests were then computed to determine
whether there were significant changes from wave one to wave two. The new

change variables were treated as continuous variables for all other analyses.

26

Research Question #2: Which of the changed individual level factors are associated
with changes in maternal depression?
Analysis Step #3: Bivariate correlation procedures were conducted to determine
associations among the change scores for maternal depression and change scores
for each of the independent variables, and for all pairs of the change scores of the

independent variables. A correlation matrix was produced.

Research Question #3: Which of the changed individual level factors predict changes in
maternal depression?
Analysis Step #4: Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to
determine which of the change scores for the independent variables were
predictive of changes in maternal depression scores.
Analysis Step #5: Path analyses were conducted for each of the regression
models from Step 4 to illustrate the predictive contributions of the independent

variables.

HYPOTHESES
The following hypotheses are presented. framed within the context of welfare reform, and

directed by human ecological theory:

H1: Participants’ perceptions of their depression levels will increase from wave one to
wave two.
H2: Participants’ perceptions of life satisfaction will decrease between waves one and

two.

27

H3: Participants’ perceptions of family income adequacy will decrease between waves
one and two.

H4: Participants’ perceptions of parental confidence will decrease between waves one
and two.

H5: Participants’ perceptions of parental support will decrease between waves one and
two.

H6: Changes in matemal depression levels will be negatively correlated with changes in
life satisfaction. family income adequacy, parental confidence, and parental support.

H7: Changes in participants’ perceptions of life satisfaction, family income adequacy.
parental confidence, and parental support will predict changes in maternal depression

levels.

28

 

 

CHAPTERIV

RESULTS

Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Demographic characteristics of the participants were obtained during the first
wave of interviews and were updated during the second wave. A summary of sample
characteristics is presented in Table l. Frequencies were run for each demographic
variable, which gave percentages. the mean. and the standard deviation. Data collected
during interviews provided information about participants’ age. household income.
ethnicity, level of education, marital status, and employment status.

The number of participants in the first wave included 433 women, and the second
consisted of315 women. Attrition among those in the sample occurred for several
reasons. One state dropped from the study before wave two data were collected.
Participants from another state participated in wave one, but did not complete all of the
measures. Those participants also dropped from the study before wave two data were
collected. Some participants from wave one did not meet the sampling criteria to be
interviewed for wave two (they were no longer eligible to receive assistance, or their
youngest child matured over the 12 year old age limit). Last, many participants could not
be contacted forlthe second wave of interviews. because they had moved.

Tables 13 & 14 (located in Appendix A) provide descriptive analyses of the
portion of participants who dropped from the study. Table 13 describes a smaller portion
of women who dropped from the study, and did not complete all of the study measures (n
= 18). Fifteen of those women were from the same state, and were a sample of

grandmothers who were raising their grandchildren. Therefore the mean age of the

smaller sample was much older (51 years old) than the study sample and the other
women who dropped. Only two women from the smaller dropped sample were under 40
years old. Most of the women from the smaller dropped sample were White (83.3%) or
African American (1 1.2%). Most were married (67%). and half were employed. Over
half of the smaller sample did not graduate from high school (61%). This smaller portion
of women had a higher average income ($20,090) compared to the larger dropped sample
($14,395) and the study sample ($14,348). There was no depression data for the smaller
dropped sample. However. three of the women completed the other study variables. All
three were either satisfied or very satisfied with their lives. One perceived her family
income was only adequate to meet necessities. Another perceived her family income as
adequate to afford some things: and the other perceived her income as adequate to afford
about everything the family wanted. The average parental confidence score for the three
women was 30.3. which was slightly lower than the larger dropped sample (31.8) and the
study sample (31.0). Perceived parental support for the three women was also lower
(23.3) than the larger dropped sample (26.4) and the study sample (27.1).

Table 14 describes the larger sample of women who dropped from the study after
wave one, and completed the study measures (n = 1 12). Compared to the present study
sample, there were a higher percentage of women who dropped from the Study who were
of Hispanic or African American origin (21.6% and 1 1.7% respectively). The larger
sample of women who dropped from the study had a lower level of education: almost
half (45.0%) had not earned a GED or high school diploma. There was a higher
percentage of mothers who were either single parents or married (31.3% and 46.4%

respectively). and fewer who were divorced (1.8 versus 12.6). Table 14 reports a mean

30

age of 27, which is comparable to the study sample (29 years old). The incomes of this
larger sample of women who dropped from the study had comparable annual household
incomes to the study sample (814.395 versus $14,348). Compared to the study sample,
the women who dropped from the Study reported fewer depressive symptoms, with a
wave one mean depression score of 16.1 compared to 18.1 for the study sample.
However, this should be interpreted with caution since 16.6 is still within the established
cutoff score of 16 (Radloff. 1977). Analyses also Show that the larger dropped sample
reported similar life satisfaction (3.8). income adequacy (2.5). parental confidence (31.8).
and parental support (26.4), compared to the study sample.

The total number of participants for the present study consisted of254 women
who participated in both waves of data collection. and who did not have missing data for
the study variables for both waves. The age of participants ranged from 17 years to 52
years, with a mean age of 29. Compared to rural poor families nationwide, as described in
Chapter 111, this sample had a higher proportion of rural Latina women (17.1%), a lower
proportion of White women (68.1%). and a lower proportion of rural Black women
(8.4%). The sample also included a small proportion of Native American women (1.2%),
and those who consider themselves multi-racial (4.8%).

In this study. 5.5% of the participants attended school up to the eighth grade,
while 19.8% attended high school, and 28.2% of the participants earned a high school
diploma or GED. Approximately 27% obtained some college education. while 2%

completed a college degree or obtained graduate level education.

31

Table 1. Participants’ Demographic Characteristics (N = 254)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percent Mean SD
Participant’s age 29 7.2
Participant’s household income
Year 1 $14,348 $8,905
Year 2 $22,127 $14,721
Participant’s ethnicity
Non-Hispanic White 68.1
Hispanic/Latino 17.1
African American 8.4
Native American 1.2
Multi-racial 4.8
Other 0.4
Participant’s education
8th grade or less 5.5
Some high school 19.8
High school or GED 28.2
Specialized training 15.4
Some college, no degree 27.3
College graduate 2.0
Some post graduate/Graduate degree 0.8
ParticpIant’s marital status Wave 1 Wave 2
Single 24.0 22.1
Married 40.6 43.1
Living with partner 15.4 18.2
Divorced 12.6 10.7
Separated 7.5 5.9
Enylpyment status
Employed 52.8 60.6
Unemployed 47.2 39.4

 

Since this study considered participants’ well-being over a period of time within
the context of welfare reform, it was important to consider marital status, employment
status, and household income at both waves of data collection. At the time of the first

wave of interviews. 24% of the women were Single. 40.6% were married, 15.4% were

living with a partner, and 20% were separated or divorced. By wave two there was an
increase in the amount of participants who were married (43.1%) or living with a partner
(18.2%), while 22.1% were Single. Sixteen percent were divorced or separated.

Among those who participated in both waves, employment status rose, from
52.8% of participants employed at wave one, to 60.6% employed at wave two. Average
annual household income levels also rose over the one year period for this sample; from a
mean of $14,348 at wave one to a mean of $22,127 at wave two. The income increase
may be related to the increase in employment status, as reflected in the bivariate analysis
(Table 4), or may be related to more participants being married or with a partner in wave
two. However, there may be other factors related to increased income that are beyond the

scope of this study.

Researcmuestion 1: Do scores for individual level factors change sigpificantlLbetween

waves one and two for the study sample?

 

Descriptive procedures were run for the dependent variable (maternal depression)
and the independent variables (life satisfaction, income adequacy. parental confidence,
and parental support) for both waves, including means and standard deviations.
Descriptive statistics are presented as percentages in Table 2. Results of one-sample t-
tests comparing the two waves are presented in Table 3.

On the average. participants reported fewer depressive symptoms from wave one
(18.1%) to wave two (15.1%, t = -4.60. p < 05). Life satisfaction among participants
increased slightly from 3.6% to 3.9%. but statistically significant (1 = 5.05. p < .05). as

did income adequacy from 2.4% to 2.8% (t = 6.54, p < .05). In addition. participants

33

Table 2. Descriptive Data for Study Variables (N = 254)

 

 

 

Measure Wave 1 Wave 2
Mean SD Mean SD
Maternal depression 18.1 1 1.4 15.1 1 1.1
Life satisfaction 3.6 .96 3.9 .83
Income adequacy 2.4 h .88 2.8 .95
Parental confidence 3] .0 4.7 30.9 5.0
Parental support 27.1 7.6 28.0 6.4

 

perceived more parental support at the second wave (28.0%) than the first wave (27.1%).
This increase did not achieve statistical significance (1 = 1.81, p = .07). There was a
slight decrease in parental confidence from the first interview (31.0%) to the second
interview (30.9%), however the decrease did not achieve statistical significance (t = -
.27, p = .79). These findings failed to support hypotheses one, two, three, and five,
which proposed that. given the context of rural poverty, depression levels would increase
and life satisfaction, perceptions of income adequacy, and perceived parental support
would decrease. Hypothesis four, which proposed that perceived parental confidence
would decrease, was supported at this point for the study sample of 254 women, but will
be discussed further under Research Question 3.

Because this study was concerned with examining associations between changes
in individual level factors of family risk and resilience over time, change scores were
created for maternal depression and each independent variable. Change scores also were

created for three demographic variables (marital status. employment status. and annual

34

household income) which are included in multivariate analyses described later in this
chapter. Change scores were created by subtracting wave one mean scores from wave
two mean scores. Table 3 presents a summary of one-sample t-tests for the change
scores.

Table 3. Descriptive Data for New Change Variables and One-Sample T-Test for
Differences Between Waves One and Two

 

 

Change variable (w2 score —- wl score) Mean t-value df P value
Change in depression -3.03 -4.60 253 .000
Change in life satisfaction .30 5.05 253 .000
Change in income adequacy .41 6.54 253 .000
Change in parental confidence —.08 —.27 253 .785
Change in parental support .81 1.81 253 .071
Change in marital status -.03 -.55 252 .582
Change in employment status .08 2.61 253 .010
Change in annual income 7779.31 8.66 253 .000

 

Based on the scores for the change variables. categorical variables were created to
examine participants’ changes in depression and among the independent variables more
closely. Depression change scores of negative one or lower indicated improvement in
depressive symptoms (wave two depression levels were lower than wave one levels),
scores of zero indicated that the number of depressive symptoms did not change between
waves, and scores of one or higher indicated more depressive symptoms at wave two.
Conversely, for the independent variables, change scores of one or higher indicated
improvement (wave two scores were higher than wave one), zero reflected no change.

and change scores of negative one or lower reflected a worsening of well-being. Table 4

displays the frequencies and percentages of the participants who improved between
waves one and two on the study variables, those who stayed the same between waves,
and those who reported a worsening of mental well-being from wave one to wave two.
While many women experienced worsening depressive symptoms (35%), over half
experienced improvement or reported the same number of depressive symptoms.
Approximately half of the women reported the same level of life satisfaction for both
waves, while 37% reported an improved sense of life satisfaction, and 15% reported a
lower sense of life satisfaction. Perceptions of income adequacy remained unchanged or
improved for most of the participants. Changes in parental confidence and parental
support were similar in nature. A small percentage of participants felt the same at wave
two as they did at wave one, while almost half either improved or worsened. Last, most
participants’ annual incomes increased from wave one to wave two (72%). These
categorical change variables are not used in further analysis for this study, but were used
to examine the changes between waves more closely.

Table 4. Percentages of participants who improved, stayed the same, or worsened along
the study variables

 

 

Variable # Improved (%) # Same (%) # Worse Q/o)
Depression 156 (61.4%) 9 (3.5%) 89 (35.0%)
Life Satisfaction 94 (37.0%) 122 (48.0%) 38 (15.0%)
Income Adequacy 107 (42.1%) 115 (45.3%) 32 (12.6%)
Parental Confidence 126 (49.6%) 22 (8.7%) 106 (41.7%)
Parental Support 128 (48.4%) 18 (7.1%) 113 (44.5%)
Annual Income 182 (71.7%) 1 (4%) 71 (28%)

 

36

Because mean depression scores improved by only 3 symptoms between waves.
and wave two mean depression scores were so close to the clinical cutoff of 16, Table 5
was created to examine more closely participants’ movement along the depression
continuum between waves. Total depression scores for each wave were converted to
categorical variables where total scores of zero to nine indicated the participants were not
depressed, scores of 10 to 15 indicated mild depression. 16 to 24 reflected moderate
depression. and scores 25 and above indicated severe depression (as discussed in
Seligman, 1998). Table 5 reveals that, of the 62 women who were not depressed in wave
one, 17 experienced increased depressive symptoms by wave two, 5 of them increasing to
above the cutoff of 16. Ofthe 57 women who were mildly depressed in wave one. 24
improved to the nondepressed category. 19 remained mildly depressed and 14
experienced increased depressive symptoms by wave two. Of the 57 women who were
moderately depressed in wave one. 35 improved to below the 16 cutoff, 24 remained
moderately depressed. and 12 worsened to the severely depressed category. Last, of the
63 women in the severely depressed category in wave one, 20 improved to below the
cutoff, 17 improved to the moderately depressed category, and 26 remained severely
depressed. When looking at the total number for each category. one can see that the
numbers of women in each category was fairly evenly distributed, with more in the
moderately depressed range. and then by wave two the pattern became more skewed

toward the nondepressed and mildly depressed end of the continuum.

37

Table 5. Crosstabulation of Depression Categories for W1 and W2 (N = 253)

 

Wave 2 Depression Categories & Frequencies

 

 

W1 Depression Nondepressed Mildly Moderately Severely

Categories & depressed depressed depressed

Frequencies n = 93 n = 63 n = 58 n = 40

Nondepressed 45 1 2 4 1

n = 62 48.9% 19.0% 6.9% 2.5%

Mildly depressed 24 19 13 1

n = 57 26.1% 30.2% 22.4% 2.5%

Moderately l6 1 9 24 1 2

depressed 17.4% 30.2% 41.4% 30.0%

n=71

Severely depressed 7 13 17 26

n = 63 7.6% 20.6% 29.3% 65.0%

Total 92 63 58 40
100% 100% 100% 100%

 

Note: Pearson Chi-Square = 92.98; p < .05

Research Question 2: Which of the changed individual level factors are associated with

changes in maternal depression?

 

Three separate bivariate correlation procedures were performed. The first two
were to test for associations among the study variables at wave one and at wave two, as
displayed in tables 6 and 7. The third correlation was performed to test for associations
among the changes in the dependent and independent variables.

As reflected in Table 6, wave one depression scores were negatively and
significantly correlated with life satisfaction (r = -.48. p < .01 )_, income adequacy (r = -
.31, p < .01), parental confidence (r = -.41, p < .01, parental support (I = -.38. p < .01),
employment status (r = -. l 7, p < .01), and annual income (r = -.19, p < .01). According to

these results. larger scores for life satisfaction and parental confidence showed the

38

strongest association with lower wave one depression scores. Interestingly, marital status
was not significantly correlated with depression. There were other interesting
relationships among the study variables. For example, life satisfaction was not
significantly correlated with marital satisfaction or income, however it was Significantly
associated with perceived income adequacy. Perceived income adequacy was
significantly correlated with all of the study variables, including marital status. However,
marital status was not correlated with income. A surprising finding iS that parental

support is not significantly correlated with marital status. but parental confidence was.

Table 6. Bivariate Correlations among Wave 1 Variables (N = 254)

 

 

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Wave ldepression -.48** -.3l** -.4l** -.38** .10 -.l7** -.l9**
2. Life Satisfaction -- .28** .29** .34** -.07 .21 ** .10
3. Income adequacy -- .16* .14* -.20** .l9** .23**
4' Parent“ -- .40** -.14* .07 —.09
confidence

5. Parental support -- -.03 .12 .03
6. Marital status -- .01 -.02
7. Employment __ '19,...

status

8. Annual income -_

Note: *p<.05 (2-tailed). **p<.01 (2-tailed)

 

Wave one depression scores were included in the correlation matrix for wave two.
Similar to Table 6, Table 7 reflects Similar associations between wave two depression and

wave two study variables, with a stronger association with life satisfaction (r = -.55. p <

39

.01). In addition, wave two depression is significantly and directly correlated with wave
one depression. That is, women who were depressed in wave one were likely to be
depressed in wave two, and women with lower wave one depression scores were likely to
report lower wave two depression scores. An interesting finding in wave two was the
Significant correlation between parental support and employment status (r = .15, p < .05).
This relationship was not significant in wave one. Also in wave two, life satisfaction
was significantly correlated with income (I = .19, p < .01). but wasn’t in wave one.

Table 7. Bivariate Correlations among Wave 2 Variables, and Including Wave 1
Depression Score (N = 254)

 

 

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1' WW.“ .57** -.55** -.36** -.42** -.35** .09 -.27** -.20**
depressron

ii IvaY?‘ -— a37** a23** =28** A29** .09 426** 406
depressron

3. Life Satisfaction -- .46** .38** .22** -.12 .27** .l9**
4'I"C°"“’ -- 24** 18** -l4* 28** 39**
adequacy ’ ' ° ' ’
:8J:::::: -- .38** Liz .l9** .02
6. Parental support -- -.05 .15* .02
7. Marital status -- -.08 -.01

8. Employment

-— . 7**
status 2

9. Annual income --

 

Note: *p<.05 (2-tailed). **p<.01 (2-tailed)

Finally, bivariate correlation procedures were performed to test for associations

among changes in the dependent and independent variables. Results presented in Table 8

40

 

Show that decreases in maternal depression were Significantly correlated with increased
life satisfaction (r = -.34. p < .01). income adequacy (r = -.15. p < .05). parental
confidence (r = -.34. p < .01). and parental support (r = -.l7. p < .01). These findings
support the fourth hypothesis. which proposed that changes in maternal depression would
be negatively correlated with changes in the independent variables.

Fewer maternal depressive symptoms also were significantly correlated with
higher income levels (r = -. l 7. p < .01). a control variable to be used in multivariate
analysis. However, changes in maternal depression were not significantly correlated with
the changes in the other two control variables, marital status (r = -.01) and employment
status (r = -.04).

There were several other interesting correlations among change variables in the
study and control variables worth noting. For instance. Similar to wave one associations.
increased life satisfaction was significantly associated with increases in perceived income
adequacy (r = .14, p < .05). but was not Significantly associated with higher actual
income level. However, increased life satisfaction was significantly correlated with
changes in employment status (r = .17. p < .01). Changes in life satisfaction were not
significantly correlated with changes in marital status; however. the changes in marital
status between waves of data collection were not statistically significant. As expected,
changed parental confidence was significantly associated with increased parental support

(r = .30. p < .05).

41

Table 8. Bivariate Correlations among Change Variables (N = 254).

 

 

2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Change in depression -.34** -.15* -.34** -.17** -.01 -.04 -.17**
2. Change in life satisfaction -- .14* .30** .25** -.10 .l7** .10
3' Change ‘" ‘ncome -- .10 .03 -.10 .27** .34**
adequacy
4. Change In parental -- .30,” -.Ol -.01 .05

confidence

5. Change in parental
support

6. Change in marital status -- .08 -.l 1

7. Change in employment __ 30H
status '
8. Change in income level --

Note: *p<.05 (2-tailed). **p<.01 (2-tailed).

Research Question 3: Which of the changed individual level factors are predictive of
c_11_anges in maternal depression?

Results from the analyses thus far do not support hypotheses one, two, three, and
five. Given the context of welfare reform, it was expected that maternal depression
would increase, and the independent variables would decrease from wave one to wave
two. From a risk and resilience perspective, these unexpected findings provided an
opportunity to take a closer look at which factors predicted decreased depression scores.
Therefore, four separate hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed in
order to critically examine the factors that contribute to maternal depression in wave one,

in wave two. the factors which predicted changes in maternal depression levels between

42

 

waves one and two, and finally, factors which predicted decreased depression scores.

The four separate regression models are presented in this section.

Regression model 1

Prior to employing the change variables, the first regression analysis was
conducted using wave one demographic and independent variables to predict their
contribution to wave one depression levels. The multiple regression analysis was
performed using the enter method in three steps with the demographic variables entered
in the first step.

The first step in Table 9 demonstrates that older participants were more likely to
have higher depression levels (standardized beta = .13. t = 2.0. p = .05). However.
employment status (beta = -. 14, t = -2.3. p = .02). and income (beta = -.18, t = -2.9. p =
.004) predicted lower wave one depression levels. In the next step, wave one scores for
perceived income adequacy and parental support were added to the regression model.
Results indicate participants’ perceptions that their incomes are adequate (beta = -.22. t =
-2.0, p = .05), and that they received needed parental support (beta = -.33, t = -5.6, p =
.000) significantly contributed to lower wave one depression levels. However, the
contribution of participants’ age and employment status was no longer significant.

In the last step, wave one life satisfaction and parental confidence were added to
the model. Both variables were significant contributors to lower depression scores (life
satisfaction: beta = -.31, t = -5.4. p = .000; parental confidence: beta = —.27. t = -4.6, p =
.000). Also in this step, participants’ education became a significant contributor to lower

depression scores (beta = -.14, t = -2.7. p = .01). Table 9 demonstrates that the third step

43

in the model accounted for 40% of the variation in wave one depression scores that was

explained by the independent variables (R2 = .40, F = 15.8, p = .00).

Table 9. Regression of Depressive Symptoms on Wave 1 Variables (N = 254)

 

 

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3
Participant’s age .13* .03 .09
Participant’s education -.1 l -.10 -.14*
Participant’s ethnicity -.Ol -.01 -.01
Marital status .09 .05 .01
Employment status -. 14* -.06 -.02
Annual income -.l8* -.12* -.16*
Income adequacy -.22* -.l2*
Parental support -.3 3 * -. 12*
Life satisfaction -.31*
Parental confidence . -.27*
R2 09* .25* .40*
F-Ratio 4.2* 9.8* 15.8*

 

Notes: Depression is regressed on wave 1 demographic variables (Step 1); income
adequacy and parental support (Step 2); and life satisfaction and parental confidence
(Step 3). Standardized regression coefficients are shown.

* p<.05

Regression model 2
The second regression analysis was conducted using wave two demographic and

independent variables. and wave one depression levels to predict their contribution to

44

 

wave two depression levels. The multiple regression analysis was performed using the
enter method in four steps with the demographic variables entered in the first step.

The first step in Table 10 demonstrates that employment significantly predicted
lower depression scores in wave two (standardized beta = -.22. t = -3.5. p = .001 ), as did
higher income levels (beta = -.13, t = -2.1. p = .04). In the next step, perceived income
adequacy and perceived parental support were added to the regression model. Results
indicate that the respondents’ perceptions that their incomes were adequate (beta = -.25. t
= -4.0. p = .000), and their perceptions of parental support (beta = -.29, t = -5.0, p = .000)
contributed to lower wave two depression scores. However, the effects of employment
status and annual income changed in the second step. Employment Status was still a
Significant predictor, but the magnitude of its effect decreased (beta = -. I 3. t = -2.1. p =
.03), and the effect of annual income on depression was no longer significant (beta = -.06.
I: -.90. p = .37).

In the third step, wave two scores for life satisfaction and parental confidence
were added to the model. Both variables significantly predicted wave two depression
scores (life satisfaction: beta = -.37. t = -6.1. p = .00: parental confidence: beta = -.18, t =
-3.2, p = .002). The effects of employment status and perceived income adequacy were
no longer statistically significant in predicting wave two depression scores, and the
contribution of annual income to the model remained statistically non—Significant.
Perceived parental support remained a statistically significant contributor to the model.
but its magnitude decreased, suggesting a mediating effect with the addition of the last
two variables. Also of interest. the contribution of participants’ education levels

approached significance in this step (beta = -.10. t = -l .9. p = .054).

45

Table 10. Depressive Symptoms regressed on Wave 2 Study Variables (N = 254)

 

 

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Participant’s age .05 .03 .07 .03
Participant’s education -.09 -.10 -.10 -.06
Participant’s ethnicity -.10 -.09 -.05 -.05
Marital status .06 .03 -.01 -.01
Employment status -.22* -.13* -.06 -.01
Annual income -.13* -.06 -.08 -.09
Income adequacy -.25* -.07 -.06
Parental support -.29* -.17* -.12*
Life satisfaction -.37* -.28*
Parental confidence -.18* -.15 *
Wave 1 depression score .35*
R’- .113 .262 .417 .511
F -Ratio 5.1 * 10.6* 16.9* 22.4*

 

Notes: Depression is regressed on wave 2 control variables (Step 1); income adequacy
and parental support (Step 2); life satisfaction and parental confidence (Step 3); and wave
1 depression (Step 4). Standardized regression coefficients are shown. * p<.05

In the last step, wave one depression scores were added to the model and were
found to significantly predict wave two depression (beta = .35, t = 6.7, p = .000). In this
step, parental support, parental confidence, and life satisfaction remained significant
contributors to the model. Interestingly, income and perceived income adequacy were
not significant contributors in the third and fourth step. The magnitude of education’s

effect decreased with this step and did not contribute to the model. Table 10

demonstrates that the fourth step in the model accounted for 51% of the variation in

46

 

wave two depression scores that was explained by the independent variables (R2 = .511. F

= 22.4, p = .000).

Regression model 3

The third regression analysis employed the change variables that were presented
in Tables 3 and 8. This was done in order to determine which of the independent
variables (changes in life satisfaction. income adequacy, parental confidence, and
parental support) were predictive of changes in maternal depression, regardless of the
direction of change. In addition, demographic variables such as participants’ ages,
education levels, ethnicity. and changes in marital status, employment status, and annual
income were included in the regression model as control variables.

This regression analysis was performed using the enter method in three steps with
the demographic variables entered in the first step. Table l 1 demonstrates that changes
in annual income predicted changes in maternal depression. When annual income
increased, maternal depressive symptoms decreased, and the relationship was statistically
significantly (standardized beta = -.l8. t = -2.65. p = .009).

In the next step. changes in income adequacy and parental support were added to
the regression model. Results show that increases in perceived parental support are
predictive of decreased maternal depression symptoms (beta = -.16. t = -2.5, p = .015).
Increased annual income remains a statistically significant predictor; however its
magnitude and significance level decreased with this step. For the third step. changes in
life satisfaction and parental confidence were added to the model. As Table l 1

illustrates. increases in perceived life satisfaction and perceived parental

47

Table 11. Regression of Changed Depressive Symptoms on Change Variables
(N = 254)

 

 

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3
Participant’s age -.07 -.03 -.02
Participant’s education .01 .00 -.03
Participant’s ethnicity -.O9 -.09 —.05
Change in marital status -.04 -.04 -.06
Change in employment status .00 .03 .05
Change in annual income -.18* -.14* -. 14*
Change in income adequacy -.ll -.07
Change in parental support -.16* -.02
Change in life satisfaction -.24*
Change in parental confidence -.25*
Wave 1 depression score
R2 .040 .086 .21
F-Ratio 1.8 2.4* 6.3*

 

Notes: Depression is regressed on changes in control variable (Step 1); changes in
income adequacy and parental support (Step 2); and changes in life satisfaction and
parental confidence (Step 3). Standardized regression coefficients are shown. * p<.05
confidence are statistically significant predictors of decreases in reported maternal
depressive symptoms (change in life satisfaction: beta = -.24. t = -3.8, p = .000; change in

parental confidence: beta = -.25, t = -4.0, p = .000). Increased annual income remains a

significant predictor in this step as well. However, increased

perception of parental support is no longer a statistically significant contributor to the
changes in maternal depression in this step, suggesting a mediating relationship between

changes in parental support and the last two variables entered. According to Table 11,

48

the third step accounts for 21% of the variation in the dependent variable (changes in
maternal depression) that is explained by the independent variables (R2 = .21, F = 6.3, p =
.000). These findings provide partial support for hypothesis seven, which proposed that
changes in life satisfaction, income adequacy, perceived parental confidence, and
perceived parental support would negatively predict changes in maternal depression
levels.

Path analysis (presented in Figure 2) was conducted to isolate the predictive
contributions of interrelated independent change variables toward changes in depression
scores. The results demonstrate that changes in parental confidence, life satisfaction, and

annual income had direct effects on changes in matemal depression. Effects of changes

Figure 2. Path model of individual level factors associated with changes in maternal
depression

 

Changes in Life
Satisfaction ‘24::

 

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in -.25* Changes in Changes in
Parental ———> Parental —’—————§ Maternal
Support Confidence Depression

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in
Annual
Income

-.l4*

 

 

 

Standardized beta coefficients are presented in the path model.
:1:
p < .05

49

in parental support on changed depression scores were mediated by changes in parental
confidence. Participants’ education levels and changes in employment status and
perceived income adequacy were not statistically significant contributors to changes in
depression.

Regression model 4

Within the context of welfare reform it was hypothesized that depression levels
would increase, income levels would decrease, and that individual level perceptual
factors would decrease (hypotheses one. two, three, and five). The data presented in this
study did not support these hypotheses. Instead, the first two analyses indicated the
opposite. Depression levels decreased, and annual income increased, as did the
individual level perceptual factors of life satisfaction, income adequacy, and parental
support.

However, the study of risk and resilience is concerned with identifying factors
and processes that contribute to improved or competent functioning in families and
individuals despite having faced significant adversity, such as the challenges presented by
rural poverty. Therefore, it was important in this study to take a closer look at the portion
of mothers in the study sample whose mental well-being improved such that their
reported depression scores by wave two fell below the C ES-D cut-off of 16 (Radloff,
1977). and which change variables predicted the improved depression scores. This
regression analysis employs the same change variables. and the same steps as in
Regression model 2, but with the smaller proportion of participants reporting decreased

depression scores to below the cut-off (N = 1 19).

50

The first step employs the demographic variables (participant’s age, education,
and ethnicity, and changes in marital status, employment status. and annual income).
Table 12 shows that increased annual income was the only demographic variable which
significantly predicted decreased depression scores (beta = -.22. t = -2.07. p = .04).
Changes in perceived income adequacy and parental support were added in step two.

The results indicate that neither were predictive of decreased depression, however, the
effect of annual income changed so that its magnitude was slightly smaller, and it was not
significant (beta = -.21, t = -1 .85. p = .06).

Earlier, table 3 showed a decrease in perceived parental confidence between
waves that was not Si gnificant (supporting hypothesis four for the larger study sample of
254 women); however, perceived parental confidence was associated with depression in
the correlation tables, and has been a significant contributor in each regression model.
This warrants further investigation. Therefore another one sample t-test was conducted on
change in parental confidence from wave one to wave two to determine whether its
change was significant for this smaller sample of participants whose depression levels
decreased to below the cut-off. Results do confirm statistically significant improvement
in perceived parental confidence for those participants whose depression scores decreased
to below 16 (t = 2.7. p < .008). Thus, changes in parental confidence was added with
changes in life satisfaction to the final step. As Table 12 indicates. both are significant
predictors of decreased depression (change in life satisfaction: beta = -.25, t = -2.48. p =
.02; change in parental confidence: beta = -.21. t = -2.2. p = .03). In this last step.
increased annual income again became a significant contributor to the model (beta = -.23,

= -2.2, p = .03). The third step in the model accounts for 16% of the variation in the

51

decreased maternal depression that is explained by the independent change variables

(R2 = .16. F = 2.0, p = .05).

Table 12. Regression of Decrease in Depressive Symptoms on Demographic and Change
Variables (n = 119)

 

 

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3
Participant’s age -.05 -.04 -.04
Participant’s education .03 .02 .10
Participant’s ethnicity -.03 -.03 -.04
Change in marital status .06 .06 -.01
Change in employment status .04 .05 .09
Change in annual income -.22* -.21 -.23*
Change in income adequacy -.03 -.01
Change in parental support -.02 -.08
Change in life satisfaction -.25*
Change in parental confidence -.21*
R2 .05 .056 .16
F-Ratio 1.0 .76 2.0*

 

Notes: Depression is regressed on demographic variables (Step 1); changes in income
adequacy and parental support (Step 2); and changes in life satisfaction and parental
confidence (Step 3). Standardized regression coefficients are shown.
* p<.05

Path analysis (presented in Figure 3) was conducted to isolate the predictive

contributions of the change variables toward decreased depression scores. The results

demonstrate that increases in perceived parental confidence, life satisfaction, and actual

52

annual income contributed significantly to reducing depression symptoms to below the

CES-D cut-off.

Figure 3. Path model of individual level factors associated with decreased maternal
depression

 

Changes in Life
Satisfaction -.25*

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in 21* Decreases in
Parental " Maternal
Confidence _’ Depression

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in
Annual Income -.23 *

 

 

 

Standardized beta coefficients are presented in the path model.

*p < .05
Summary of Results

This study was designed to understand the nature of family risk and resilience at

the individual level, and within the context of welfare reform, by examining factors
related to changes in maternal depression among women from rural working poor
families across two waves of data collection. The study examined the following change
variables: perceptions in life satisfaction, income adequacy, parental confidence, and
parental support. In addition, demographic variables (participants’ ages, education levels,
and ethnicity), and changes in three demographic variables were included in the analyses:
marital status. employment status. and annual income. Three research questionsrelated
to maternal depression were addressed. Descriptive analyses, crosstabulations, and one-

sample t-tests were conducted to examine changes in the study variables between waves

53

 

one and two. Change variables were created and used in three of the analyses. Pearson
Product Moment Correlations were run to determine relationships between and among
the outcome and predictor variables. Last, four separate multiple regression analyses
were conducted to determine the predictive nature of the independent variables and
control variables on wave one depression scores, wave two depression scores, changes in
maternal depression (regardless of direction of change), and decreases in maternal
depression (scores that improved to below 16). The significance level chosen was .05.
The results are summarized as follows:
1. Contrary to the first five hypotheses, the overall mental well-being of many of the
participants improved from wave one to wave two. That is, average maternal depression
levels decreased Significantly while employment status, annual income, and the
perceptions of life satisfaction and income adequacy increased significantly.
2. Pearson Product Moment correlations supported hypothesis six. There were
statistically significant correlations between decreases in maternal depressive symptoms
and increases in annual income. perceived life satisfaction. income adequacy. parental
confidence, and parental support.
3. Several indicators were significantly related to wave one depression levels, including
participants’ education, income, perceived income adequacy. parental support, life
satisfaction, and parental confidence.
4. Perceived life satisfaction, parental confidence, parental support, and wave one
depression scores contributed directly to wave two depression scores. Many other
variables contributed indirectly. There was a complex relationship among the economic

variables. The effects of employment status and actual annual income were mediated by

54

 

participants’ perceived income adequacy. The effect of perceived income adequacy was
mediated when life satisfaction and parental confidence were entered into the model. In
addition, participants’ education levels combined with parental support and parental
confidence to predict wave two depression scores in the third step of the regression
model. but not in the fourth step when wave one depression scores were added to the
model.

5. Hypothesis seven was partially supported by regression models 3 and 4. A greater
sense of life satisfaction and parental confidence Significantly predicted changes in
depressive symptoms among study participants. Perceived income adequacy was not a
statistically Significant predictor of changed or decreased depression. however, increased
actual annual income was.

6. Changed parental confidence mediated the relationship between changes in parental
support and changes in depression.

7. Among participants whose depression scores fell below 16 by wave two, the important
contributing factors were an increased sense of life satisfaction, increased perception of

parental confidence. and a higher actual annual income.

55

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study integrated family risk and resilience theory within an ecological
framework, as focused on individual level factors. Based on Patterson’s FAAR Model of
Family Resilience and Adaptation, the results of this study suggested that participants
engaged in the active processes of balancing the demands of rural family life with their
capabilities (such as their educational levels and perceived parental confidence in
fulfilling the parenting role) and effective utilization of resources (higher incomes and
sources of parental social support). along with the interaction of meanings (perceived life
satisfaction and income adequacy), which predicted improved parental well-being and
may influence how well individuals and families adapt to adversity (Canary, Stafford &
Semic, 2002; DeJong. C hamratrithirong & Tran, 2002; Lavee & Olson, 1991; McCubbin,
McCubbin & Thompson, 1993; McCubbin & Patterson. 1983; Patterson, 2002).

The discussion of the results is presented in three parts. The first part examines
key findings from the research. with discussions of factors that were important to the
changes and decreases in depression. The second and third parts discuss the limitations

and implications of the study.

Key Findings
Economic Factors: Annual Income, Perceived Income A dequac): and Employment
This study yielded interesting findings on the relationship between the economic

factors and depression. Objective economic factors for this study included annual

56

income and employment status. Participants’ perceptions that their incomes were
adequate to live on (income adequacy) was the subjective economic factor.

Participants’ annual incomes directly influenced their depression levels when the
first wave of interviews were conducted, but did not directly contribute to depression
levels during the second wave. However the increase in annual incomes between waves
was significant in the change regression models. At first glance, these findings appear to
be contradictory. Further examination of the descriptive data helps clarify the
contradiction.

Analysis of the changes in annual income between waves shows that incomes
increased for 71% of the participants. However, depression levels improved for 61% of
the participants. This suggests that increased income alone does not lower depression
levels. Rather, other factors may act to mediate the effect of higher incomes on wave two
depression levels, or they may act independently to directly influence depression. This
would be consistent with many studies of depression in which the contribution of income
was mediated by other perceptual or resource variables (Dennis, Parke, Coltrane,
Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy. 2003; Ennis, Hobfall & Schroder. 2000; Hovey & Magafia.
2002; Piescher & Bauer, 2004; Ross & Huber, 1985). For instance. participants’
perceptions of income adequacy appeared to mediate the effects of participants’ annual
incomes. That is, in each regression model. when perceived income adequacy was
added, the magnitude of the effects of participants’ incomes on depression decreased. A
Similar pattern emerged with participants’ employment status. When perceived income
adequacy was added to the first two regression models. the contribution of employment

status was decreased. This suggests that being employed and having a higher income is

57

important for buffering against depression when they influences one’s perceptions that
one’s income is adequate to support a family. Further examination suggests that
participants’ sense of life satisfaction also plays a mediating role with the economic
factors. That is, to the extent that participants reported a higher sense of life satisfaction
and felt their incomes were adequate. higher incomes and employment predicted
depression levels at wave two.

On the other hand. examination of the contributions of the other study variables
finds that perceived income adequacy, parental support, life satisfaction, and parental
confidence directly influenced depression levels at both waves in the first two regression
models, but only changes in life satisfaction and parental confidence were directly
influential with increased incomes in the change regression models. In addition, the
change models only accounted for 21% and 16% of the variability in depression. Further
examination of the change variables reveals that, although statistically significant, the
magnitudes of the changes were not substantial. These findings suggest that the change
models were not useful for predicting changes in depression levels among the
participants. Instead, as Regression Models 1 and 2 illustrate, participants’ mental well-
being (including depression levels and perceptions of life satisfaction, income adequacy,
parental confidence and parental support) at wave one more directly predicted depression
levels at follow up (wave two), and that small but significant increases in perceived life
satisfaction and parental confidence were important when combined with increased
annual income to lower depression levels in many of the participants. This is consistent
with other longitudinal studies of depression and mental well-being Dearing. Taylor &

McCartney, 2004: Moen, Robison & Dempster-McClain. 19950.

58

History of Depression

Analyses of the wave two correlation matrix and regression model reveal that
participants’ depression levels at wave one were most Strongly associated and predictive
of depression levels at wave one. Comparisons of depression levels between waves one
and two reveal that, although mental health improved for many participants, there
remained a substantial portion of women (39%) who were still moderately or severely
depressed during wave two interviews. The finding that depression levels at wave two
were influenced by depression levels at wave one is consistent with other longitudinal
studies (Dearing, Taylor & McCartney. 2004; Moen, Robison & Dempster-McClain,

1995).

Sense of Life Satisfaction and Parental Confidence

Two of the perceptual variables, sense of life satisfaction and perceived parental
confidence, were important in all four regression models for determining depression
levels at waves one and two, and for predicting changes in depression levels, and reduced
depression levels. The finding that these two perceptual variables, along with increased
annual income, contributed to improving mental well-being among participants suggests
that, although objective economic factors are important to parental mental well-being.
they are not more important than a person’s perceptions or appraisals. As discussed
previously, this is consistent with the literature on depression that indicates low income
alone does not predict parental depression (Hovey & Magafia, 2002; Dennis. Parke.

Coltrane, Blacher, & Borthwick-Duffy, 2003).

59

Parental confidence was conceptualized as a self-concept, or a psychological
resource indicating participants’ subjective feelings about their ability to successfully
fulfill the parenting role. The findings from this study support the importance of feeling
successful as a parent for buffering against and decreasing depression, and are consistent
with other research on depression (ROSS & Huber, 1985; Pearlin, Menaghan, Liebemtan
& Mullan, 1981). These findings also are consistent with Oltman (2003), who conducted
a phenomenological study using the qualitative data set from the larger Rural Families
study. She found that participants’ relationships, especially relationships with their

children, were important for developing a sense of meaning in their lives.

Perceived parental support

The effect of perceived parental support on depression was mediated by parental
confidence. Participants who reported higher parental support in wave two were more
likely to report higher parental confidence in their parenting roles, and thus reported
lower levels of depressive symptoms. Parental support is a form of social support that
specifically supports the parenting role. Other studies on depression have found mixed
results regarding the effects of social support on depression. Islam (2004), in her thesis
using the same multi-state rural data set as this study, found that mothers with
perceptions of high social support reported fewer depressive symptoms. In addition,
social support acted as a moderator for participants who had maintained their marital
status over time. Conversely, Richards and associates (2004). using wave one qualitative
data. found that participants with the lowest levels of depression perceived high levels of

social support which had no strings attached (that is. no expectations of reciprocity).

60

However, those with the highest levels ofdepression felt that social support came with
strings attached. Similarly, Brown, Brody and Stoneman (2000) reported in their study of
rural black mothers that support from one’s spouse was an important buffer for
depression under conditions of significant socioeconomic risk. These studies are
consistent with the classic research study on the stress process (Pearlin, Menaghan,
Lieberman, &Mullan, 1981) which suggests that social supports act to buffer depression
indirectly by reinforcing self-concepts and are most beneficial to those who need it most.
It may be that the benefits of social support for buffering depression depend upon
who is the giver of social support. and how the receiver uses it. For example, Ross and
Mirowsky (1989) demonstrated that compared to men, women have higher levels of
depression, but also have higher levels of social support and are more likely to talk to
others about their problems. Talking to others, in their study, was related to increases in
depression. However, their findings also indicate that married people have lower levels
of depression and higher levels of perceived support than unmarried persons. Similarly,
in a study of low-income, Single, African American mothers. Jackson (1998) found that
instrumental support received from participants’ mothers, especially those whose mothers
lived with them, was associated with increased maternal depression and parental distress.
However, mothers in that sample reported lower levels of depression when they were
satisfied with the non-resident father’s involvement with their children (Jackson, 1998,
1999). The author defines non-resident fathers’ involvement with the children (love,
nurturing, and time) as social support received from the non-resident father. The
findings from Islam (2004), Ross and Mirowsky (1989), and Jackson (1998, 1999)

suggest that support received from a spouse, or other non-resident parent. is more

61

effective for buffering depression than support received from social networks. Thus the
role that social support plays in mitigating depression warrants further investigation to
determine the types of social support that are most effective (spousal, family. social
networks), and how these types of support are utilized by the receiver to cope with stress

and reduce depression.

Participants ' education

Among the Objective demographic factors included in this study, age. ethnicity,
and marital status were not associated as buffers against depression in any of the
regression models. Participants’ education levels. on the other hand, was significant at
wave one when parental support and parental confidence were added to Regression model
1, and approached significance as a buffer against depression at wave two when parental
support and parental confidence were added to Regression model 2. This suggests that
parental support and parental confidence have a moderating effect on the relationship
between participants’ education levels and their levels of depression at wave two. That
is, higher education levels may be associated with lower depression levels for women
who feel they receive support as a parent, and are confident in their parenting abilities.
This is consistent with Ross and Huber’s (1985) suggestion that women’s education is
associated with successful role fulfillment. Education levels did not, however.
significantly contribute to changes or improvements in maternal well—being for this
sample. A possible explanation may be that women with higher education levels are able

to employ more coping mechanisms. and that those coping mechanisms contributed more

directly to improvements in depression than education. This explanation is consistent

with Pearlin and Schooler’s finding (1978).

Limitations of the Research

Family resilience theory was integrated within an ecological framework. Within
the scope of this study, the conceptual model provided a good framework for addressing
factors related to maternal depression; however the model was incomplete in focusing on
the individual level. To complete an ecological model of risk and resilience among rural
working poor families within the context of welfare reform, it would be important to
consider the family level and environmental level factors the NC223 multi-state database
has to offer. The health statIIs of family members, especially of children, is an example
of a family level variable that may be associated with maternal depression. Other
examples of family level variables from the larger NC 223 study that might improve the
model include satisfaction with child care arrangements, thenumber of people living in
the home, and the ability to make ends meet. Examples of environmental level variables
that could be included in a more comprehensive conceptual model include neighborhood
safety, access to community services, access to affordable health care, work environment.
and presence, or lack of, basic employment benefits such as health insurance. paid sick
leave, and paid vacation.

Another limitation of the study model was the use of the one-item measure, life
satisfaction. This one-item measure did not provide a depth of understanding of the
construct it represents. For instance. it did not clearly reflect the level of satisfaction

participants may have felt across multiple roles such as marital satisfaction, relationship

63

satisfaction, satisfaction with the mother role, satisfaction with social networks, and
satisfaction with one’s job. Life satisfaction was an important variable associated with
maternal depression levels. Thus learning the various possible dimensions and qualities
of life satisfaction would have provided a better understanding of the relationship
between life satisfaction and maternal depression.

The resilience literature suggests that shared meanings of challenges and
capabilities among family members are central to the concept of family resilience.
Information obtained from other household members may have provided a better means
for observing the processes by which the sample families created shared meanings and
situational appraisals. Also, the current study model would be better served within a
research design using mixed quantitative and qualitative methods in order to glean a
better understanding of family meaning making in the sample. and to add richness to the
model. The multi-state project has available the quantitative data needed to complete an
ecological model, and qualitative data to explore meaning making.

Sense of mastery is a concept that is central to understanding resilience.
According to past research, a sense of belief in abilities to develop solutions to manage
challenges may be an important component for building protective mechanisms in
families (Conger and Conger, 2002; McCubbin, McCubbin & Thompson, 1993:
McCubbin & Patterson, 1983; Patterson, 2002). Recent research on families moving
from welfare to work has found that a sense of mastery Significantly predicted higher
earnings and likelihood of working more hours (Danziger, Ananat & Browning, 2004).
In addition, research on depression and stress processes emphasize such concepts as

optimism, mastery, self-esteem. effective problem solving. sense of control. and ability to

64

claim responsibility for good outcomes as factors that protect against depression, or help
shorten the duration of depressive episodes (Mirowsky & Ross, 1990; Pearlin, Menaghan,
Lieberman, & Mullan, 1981; Pearlin & Schooler, 1978; Ross & Mirowsky, 1989;
Seligman, 1998; Turner & Lloyd. 1999a, 1999b). The present study conceptualized
parental confidence as a protective self-concept, but it may not be sufficient by itself to
represent a complete construct of the self-concept. Being a parent is just one part of a
person’s identity. Use of instruments like the Mastery Scale. may provide a more
comprehensive construct for self-concept. Similarly, life satisfaction (a one-item
measure) was operationalized as a coping response in the study. This too, appears
insufficient as a comprehensive coping response measure, as it does not explain
cognitions one might engage to deal with life situations. Future data collection efforts of
the larger project should employ more qualitative probing of the parenting confidence
and life satisfaction constructs to determine why they are so important for mitigating
depression, and to determine how they may be related to other self-concepts and coping
responses.

In regard to family processes, little quantitative information was available on the
quality Of relationships within the family, such as Spousal relationships, parent-child
relationships, and sibling relationship. A qualitative investigation of attachment and
social adjustment would be useful for determining positive family adjustment.

Further, other than child health indicators, there was no information available in
the data set about the developmental and educational progress of families’ school-age
children. For instance, there were no data available indicating whether younger children

qualified for or participated in pre-primary or zero-to-five programs. Also, there were no

65

indicators of whether school-age children participated in special education, emotionally-
impaired, or gifted and talented programs in school, or whether there were problems with
delinquency, or whether there were Special recognitions for achievements. Such
information would contribute to a better understanding of individual and family risk and
resilience indicators and processes in the local and national sample.

Comparisons of depression levels between waves one and two reveal that,
although mental health improved for many participants, there remained a substantial
portion of women (3 9%) who were still moderately or severely depressed during wave
two interviews. Therefore, one should not conclude that the general well-being of rural
working poor women is on a positive trend. The study sample was purposive in nature
and focused on a smaller subset of the population. Therefore, the findings do not
generalize across populations. The purpose of this study was to begin examining the
changes in depression over time, specifically, those changes that were associated with an
improvement in the number of reported depressive symptoms in order to employ a family
risk and resilience model. Results from this study indicate that the biggest individual
level determinants of changes in mental well-being involve participants’ educational
levels, increased incomes. baseline depression levels at wave one, and perceptual
indicators of successful parental role fulfillment, social support received for the parental
role, life satisfaction, and a sense that one’s income is adequate to support a family.

In addition, a substantial portion of the wave one sample dropped from the study
before wave two data collection. Analyses of descriptives statistics revealed that the
women who dropped from the study were less educated. but were comparable to those

who didn’t drop in terms of age, household income. life satisfaction. parental confidence.

66

and parental support. On the other hand. the women who dropped from the study
reported fewer depressive symptoms. A small portion Of the women who dropped from
the study did not complete all of the wave one study measures that were used in this
current study. For example. one state’s sample consisted of grandmothers raising
grandchildren, in which the measures for depression, life satisfaction, parental
confidence, and parental support were excluded during wave one interviews. Therefore,
this smaller sub-sample of women could not be compared to the Study sample in terms of
the study variables.

Last, this study focused on data collected at two points at one year intervals, with
the second wave of data collected between 2000 and 2001. Major events have occurred
within families. communities. and our country since then. The downward trend of the
economy in 2001 is an example of and event that likely affected the sample families by

creating more economic hardship and anxiety.

Implications of the Research

The mental well-being of parents is important when determining how to provide
services and assistance to families. and how to best implement policy. especially in the
context of welfare reform. Imposing mandates and time limits may not be effective for
helping families into the workforce and out of poverty if parents are experiencing
depressive symptoms and struggling in their parental roles. Many parents who
experience depressive symptoms do not receive mental health services. They are less
likely to leave the welfare rolls. although not less likely to work or attend school (C oiro.

2001). Social service agencies might best serve families currently or newly receiving

67

benefits by assessing the their needs and working with them to determine how they might
improve or maintain mental health While helping them find employment or educational
opportunities that are meaningful and substantial to families’ financial health.

Communities also have a role to play in better meeting the needs of families in
rural areas. The importance of increased income and mothers’ perceptions of life
satisfaction, parental confidence, and parental support to their improved mental well-
being points to the importance of local policy and practice for providing the resources
and services necessary for fostering these perceptions among individuals and families at
risk. Based on wave one data, education is an important factor, and one which can be
enhanced by more educational opportunities in rural communities. Policies and programs
that stimulate economic growth and educational opportunities in rural areas may help
raise income levels and promote a sense of hope and satisfaction.

In addition, results of this study reveal that, even though income levels increased
for many participants, their perceptions that their incomes were adequate to support their
family did not increase substantially. This suggests that money management may be an
issue. Obtaining loans and credit cards has become easier in the American culture.
Programs aimed at helping families in rural areas manage and make decisions about
money may help them reduce debt loads and improve their sense of income adequacy.
This suggests another area of future study for this sample.

Services that aim to promote strengths within individuals and families affected by
depression and adversity should consider the role of parental confidence for improving
well-being and parental competence. Improving access to affordable, safe and reliable

childcare in rural areas seems important for promoting parental confidence. In some

68

areas of the country, promoting the strengths and viability of informal kinship and social
support networks as providers of childcare might help alleviate some of the financial and
emotional burdens experienced by low-income parents. Support for such networks
Should involve access to affordable education and training on child development and
child learning, enabling these informal networks to provide a more structured
environment that promotes early learning.

The purpose of this study was to examine factors influencing maternal depression
in order to explore individual level factors associated with risk and resilience among
women in rural working poor families. The frameworks supporting the research design
were human ecological theory and family risk and resilience theory, which emphasize
processes between individuals, systems and their environments for supporting growth and
development, establishing equilibrium. and promoting adaptation to changes. This study
examined only a small portion of the whole picture possible for studying family
resilience. Further investigation is necessary for connecting the individual level findings
from this study with family and societal level risk and resilience factors and processes. In
addition, as indicated in the previous section. investigation of the qualitative data
available from the multi-state dataset would add richness and understanding to the ways
in which risk and resilience factors and processes play out within the lives of the sample
families.

From a risk and resilience approach, further study is needed comparing the
families of mothers whose depression levels improved to below the cut-off with families
of mothers whose depression levels worsened. It would be important to understand some

of the differences in the well-being of individual family members. and differences in

69

relational processes and family functioning in order to inform policy and practice about
the most effective ways to assist rural working poor families.

Considering other outcome variables also may be important for further family risk
and resilience investigations. Depression was used in this Study because of the rich
literature base that supports its use as an indicator of individual well-being, and because
parental depression is implicated as a factor contributing to child adjustment problems
(Brown, Brody & Stoneman, 2000; Hammen, 2003; Hammen & Brennan, 2003; Jackson,
1998, 1999; Luthar, D’Avanzo & Hites, 2003). From a resilience perspective, and given
their importance to this study, perceived life satisfaction and parental confidence are
worth studying as outcome variables. Research connecting possible links between these
two perceptual factors and other constructs such as satisfaction with child care
arrangements, feeling safe in the community, work and family issues, employer benefits,
and family health would have implications for partnerships and programming at the
community level. Local law enforcement could use such information for community
policing programs to enhance safety in the community. Local governments could work
with local employers to negotiate a better balance between work demands and family life,
and to discuss developing basic benefits packages for low-income workers.

Learning about what contributes to enhanced sense of life satisfaction and
parental confidence also has implications for parenting education and other community
based agencies for developing programs which would focus on fulfillment of parental
roles. Other variables from the database that may be important as outcomes for studying

family resilience could include child health. family health. and making ends meet.

70

Education is another variable that warrants investigation. Results from this study
and some of the depression literature suggest that education is indirectly related to lower
depression scores, and may contribute to perceived maternal role fulfillment. Research is
needed to explore the mechanisms by which education can enhance the lives of low-
income parents and their families. Such findings could contribute to policy and
programming discussions at local, state and federal levels for developing support systems
to make educational opportunities more available to low-income families in rural and
urban areas.

Last, efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of welfare reform must consider more
relevant factors to family well-being than caseload reduction (Bauer, Braun & Olson,
2000; Cheng, 2002; Lichter and Jayakody, 2002). Researchers from many fields have
championed the need for research that considers other measures of individual and family
well-being among the poor that are more current and reflect the economic realities of the
early 21St century. It is also important to consider the contextual differences between
rural and urban poverty when setting economic policy priorities.

Conclusions

This study identified factors related to depression, and to improving mental well-
being among a sample of rural working poor mothers within a family risk and resilience
framework. The scope of the study was limited to a certain level of analysis in order to
establish a connection between maternal mental well-being at the individual level and
relational functioning at the family level. The findings discussed indicate that previous
annual income. and perceptions of life satisfaction and parental confidence are important

contributors for decreasing depressive symptoms to below the established cut-off. More

71

complex analyses using mixed quantitative and qualitative methods are needed to
develop a deeper understanding of the family and societal level risk and resilience factors

and processes in the sample population.

72

APPENDICES

73

APPENDIX A

Additional Tables

74

Table 13. Descriptives of Small Dropped Sample (n = 18).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean SD
Participant’s age 51 1 1.4
Household income $20,090 $12,526
Maternal depression missing
Parental confidence (n = 3) 30.3 1.2
Parental support (n = 3) 23.3 13.9
Percent Percent
Participant’s ethnicity Participant’s marital status
Non-Hispanic White 83.3 Single 22.0
Hispanic/Latino 5.6 Married 66.7
African American 1 1.2 Living with partner
Native American Divorced 11.1
Asian Separated
Multi-racial n = 18
Other
11 = 18
Particphant’s education Employment status
8th grade or less 38.9 Employed 50.0
Some high school 22.2 Unemployed 50.0
High school or GED 11.1 n = 18
Specialized training
Some college, no degree 22.2
College graduate
Some post graduate/Graduate 5 6
degree '
n = 18
Life satisfaction Income adequgy
Very dissatisfied Not at all adequate
Dissatisfied Can meet necessities only 33.3
Mixed feelings Can afford some things 33.3
Satisfied 333 Can afford about everythlng 333
we want
Very satisfied 6 6.7 Can afford everything and
811” save money
n=3 M=4.7 n=3 M=3.0

 

75

Table 14. Descriptives of Large Dropped Sample (11 = 1 12).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean SD

Participant’s age 27.7 8.0
Household income $14,395 $10,740
Maternal depression 16.1 10.8
Parental confidence 3 1.8 5.0
Parental support 26.4 8.0

Percent Percent
Participant’s ethnicity Participant’s marital status
Non-Hispanic White 62.2 Single 31.3
Hispanic/ Latino 21 .6 Married 46.4
African American 1 1.7 Living with partner 12.5
Native American 1.8 Divorced 1.8
Asian .9 Separated 8.0
Multi-racial .9 n = 1 12
Other .9

n = 1 11
Particpgant’s education Employment status
8’h grade or less 14.4 Employed 57.0
Some high school 30.6 Unemployed 43.0
High school or GED 27.0 = 112
Specialized training 12.6
Some college, no degree 12.6
College graduate 2.7
Some post graduate/Graduate
degree

n = 1 11
Life satisfaction Income adequacy
Very dissatisfied 1.8 Not at all adequate 12.5
Dissatisfied 3.6 Can meet necessities only 38.4
Mixed feelings 33.9 Can afford some things 42.0
Satisfied 3 8. 4 Can afford about everythrng 4.5

we want
Very satisfied 22.3 Can afford everythmg and 2.7
stIIl save money

n=112 M=3.8 n=112 M=2.5

 

APPENDIX B

Wave One Survey Protocol

77

Interviewer: ID:

 

 

Date:

 

PARENT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
YEAR 1

Thank you for agreeing to participate in this important research on family life. As you
probably know, we are part of a big study that is looking at how families living in rural
parts of the country are managing on a limited income. We are talking to families living
in small towns and rural areas all over the United States. Not all of the families we will
talk to are currently receiving welfare. In fact, we will talk to some families who have
never received cash assistance from the government, but nevertheless have trouble
making ends meet each month. There are no “right” answers to any of our questions; we
just want to hear what life is like for you and your family. Remember, this interview is
voluntary. If you don’t want to answer a question, you don’t have to. All information you

give us will be kept confidential. (Do not proceed unless you have a completed informed
consent document.)

Let’s begin by talking about who lives in your household. Besides you, who lives in your
house?

 

 

CURRENT HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A. Mother’s lst Name DOB
Marital StatuS* Ethnicity**

B. Partner’s lst Name DOB Ethnicity**

Child Sex DOB Relation Relation Contact Receives

1St (name) to A*** to B*** w/bio child
parent support
(Y. N) (Y, N)

1. _

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

 

78

 

 

j * Key to codes ** Key to codes *** Key to codes ‘
‘ S = Single W = Non-Hispanic White A = Adopted

M = Married H = Hispanic/Latino SC = Stepchild I
I LWP = Living with partner AA = African American B = Biological I
I child
I D = Divorced N = Native American F = Foster child I
j SEP = Separated A = Asian NR = Not related I
j M = Multi-racial O = Other ‘

O = Other

 

___~ ____;

Do you have any children not currently living with you? (If yes) Who are they, and
where are they living?

OTHER HOUSHOLD MEMBERS

Relationship to A Length of Time in Household Permanent or Temporary
Arrangement

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interviewer Notes:

 

LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY

1. Tell me about how this neighborhood/area is as a place to live. Does this
neighborhood/area have everything that you and your family need? If not, what sorts
of things are missing? (Probe if necessary: Do you have easy access to a grocery
store; a mini-mart or convenience store; other household shopping; medical care; a
gas station; church; school; child care; a library?)

2. Families may need to know how to find many different services available in the
community. The services needed are different for each family. I have a list of
resources that are often available in communities. I’d like to know about the kinds of
community services you know about. Shall I read the list to you, or would you like to
fill this out yourself? (Administer: Knowledge of Community Resources Measure)

NOTE: IF THE INTERVIEWEE ASKS YOU TO READ THE MEASURE, ASSUME

THAT ALL FURTHER SURVEY MEASURES SHOULD BE READ ALOUD.
3. What’s the best thing about living where you do? The worst?

79

4. Is your housing adequate for you and your family’s needs? Why or why not? (Probe:
size, quality, price, landlord.)

5. Have you moved in the past two years? If so, why? How does this place compare
with where you lived before? (If not addressed) How has your family responded to
these changes? How do you feel about this?

6. (Optional, ask if not addressed in #5) Have you ever had a time in the last two years
when you and your family were homeless? For how long were you homeless? What
did you do? How did you get housing again?

 

1. Let’s talk about your employment Situation. Are you currently working? (If not
employed, skip to Question #2) What do you do? How much are you paid? When
did you start working there? How many hours do you generally work each week?
How many weeks do you work during the year? Have you ever had a raise? When?
How much? (List only current employment; space provided for up to three jobs.)

Participant’s Current Employment

Wage/salary Date started Hours/week Weeks/year Amount
raise
Jobl
Job 2
Job 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. (Ask only if Q currently employed) Are you looking for a job now? (If yes) How
are you going about it? Have you ever worked for pay? (If answer is no, ask the
appropriate questions in this section, but skip work history section)

3. What about your partner? What does your partner do? How much is your partner
paid? When did your partner start working there? How many hours does your
partner generally work each week? How many weeks does your partner work during
the year? Has your partner ever had a raise? When? How much?

Partner’s Current Employment
Wage/salary Date started Hours/week Weeks/year Amount
raise
Job 1
Job 2
Job 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Is there anyone else in the household who has a job? (If yes) Tell me about that.

80

5. (Ask if currently employed) What problems, if any, do you currently face at work?

6. (Ask if currently employed) Do you get any benefits from your job(s)? How about
your partner? What about health insurance...

Benefit Provided by Mother’s Job(s) Provided by Partner’s
Job(s)

Health insurance for self CI Yes CI No C] Yes C] No
Health insurance for CI Yes D No D Yes D No
children

Sick leave D Yes CI No D Yes Cl No
Vacation pay D Yes D No CI Yes D No
Overtime C1 Yes CI No CI Yes C] No
Retirement plan [3 Yes CI No D Yes D No

7. What would be your ideal job for supporting your family? What would help you to
get that kind of job?

8. In the last several years welfare regulations have changed. There is now more of an
emphasis on getting a job, and there are now time limits (talk about specific state
programs, if appropriate). What do you think about these changes? Has your family
been affected by them?

 

 

WORK HISTORY

1. We also want to know about the kinds of work that peOple have done in the past. Tell
me about your work history. How old were you when you got your first job?

2. About how many jobs do you think you’ve had Since then? Have you been more
likely to work full-time or part-time? Why?

3. What kinds of jobs did you have? What were some of the reasons you left these jobs?
4. Tell me about the job that you held the longest, not counting your current job. When

did you have this job? What did you do? What did you like about it? Why did you
leave?

81

 

 

TRANSPORTATION AND CHILDCARE

1.

What about transportation? How do you usually get around? (If not addressed: Do
you own a car or have one you can borrow? How do you and your partner get to and
from work?)

a. (If the family has no car) How do you get your groceries. take your children to the
doctors, run errands?

b. (If the family has a car) How reliable is your car? When was the last time your car
broke down? What happened?

What do you do when you really need transportation and it’s not available to you?

When you are working (or participating in a job training program or the state’s
welfare-to-work activities) who takes care of your children? Tell me how you get
them there, and about how long they stay every day. Is it different if you have to
work evenings or weekends?

(If appropriate) What about your older children? What do they do after school?
What about school holidays and summers?

How many childcare arrangements do you have each week/month? Overall, how
much do you pay for childcare each month?

How do you like your childcare provider? Why do you feel this way? Have you ever
changed providers? Why?

Is there ever a time when you need someone to take care of your children outside
your time at work? Who does that? How does it go?

Tell me about a situation when you needed emergency childcare. What did you do?
Have you ever had to miss work or a training program because of a childcare
problem? How did your supervisor react?

What do you do for childcare if your child gets sick? What happens if your provider
is sick?

 

 

Family Q/‘Origin Characteristics

1.

Tell me a little bit about your background. What was your family like when you were
growing up? Who was in your family? Where did you live? What do you remember
aboutyourchfldhood?

82

2.

3.

Did your parents work? What kind of work did they do?

How much education did your mother have? Your father?
1 = 8th grade less
2 = some high school
3 = high school or GED
4 = specialized technical, business or vocational training after high school
5 = some college, including AA
6 = college or university graduate
7: one or more years beyond college
8= graduate degree
9 = don’t know

4. Do you know if your family ever received welfare or other assistance?

CI Yes CI No CI Don’t Know
How often did your family move when you were a child? Why did you move?

(Optional) How much contact do you have with your family now? Who are you in
contact with? Where do they live? What is your relationship like now?

 

 

FAMILY WELL-BEING

I.

Tell me about a typical day (a working day, if appropriate). What time do you get
up? When do your children get up? Then, what happens next? And then. . .? (The
goal here is to get through atypical weekday for the family.)

What sorts of things do you do for fun with your family? How often do you get to do
them?

Overall, how would you say things are going for your family right now? (If not
addressed) How are things going for you personally? (If appropriate) How are things
going between you and your partner?

Here is a checklist that asks about how things have been in the last week.
(Administer: Feelings About How Things Are Going)

. Parents need lots of skills to help their families get by. Everyone has certain skills

and abilities, but it’s usually not possible for someone to have every single skill
needed. We’d like to know what sorts of skills you have. (Administer: Life Skills
Assessment)

83

6. Family members often have health problems. Sometimes these problems don’t have
much of an impact on day-to-day life, while at other times they can be a big problem.
We’d like to know about any health problems the members of your family might
have. (Administer: Adult Health Survey; Administer: Child Health Survey; use more
than one if needed to get info about all children)

7. (If there are other people living in the household) Do any of the other people in your
household have any health problems? (If yes) What kinds of health problems?

8. (If applicable) Do any of these health problems affect everyday life in your family?
If so, how?

9. What things about your family make you proud and happy right now? What are the
biggest challenges for your family as a whole?

 

 

EDUCATION AND INCOME

1. What is your current educational level? (use scale below)
1= 8th grade less
2 = some high school
3 = high school or GED
4 = specialized technical, business or vocational training after high school
5 = some college, including AA
6 = college or university graduate
7 = one or more years beyond college
8 = graduate degree
9 = don’t know

2. How much education did you have when you first became a parent? (use scale)
3. (If no high school diploma) Why did you leave high school before finishing?

4. (If appropriate) What about your spouse/partner-how much education does he
have? (scale)

5. In the last few years have you had the opportunity to get further education or develop
new job skills? What kind? How were you able to do this?

6. We’d like to know a bit about your family’s sources of income. Remember, all of
this information is completely confidential. From which of the following sources do
you receive income?

Source of Income Take Home Pay Weekly Bi-Weekly Monthly
Wages and salaries (self) C1 Cl C]
Wages and salaries (partner) C1 C1 C1

84

Tips, commissions, overtime
Social Security Disability
Social Security
Retirement/Pensions

SSI (Supplemental Security
Income)

TANF

Unemployment Compensation
Worker’s Disability
Compensation

Veterans’ Benefits

Child or spousal support
Children’s wages

Food Stamps

Regular gifts from
family/friends

Other:

UCICIDD DUO [3 DUB
DECIDE] DUE] I3 DUE]
CIDEIUU DUE] CI DEC]

13
13
CI

7. Housing is usually the largest expense for families. Tell me about how much you pay
per month and what utilities, if any, are included. Is this a rental or do you own? What
utilities do you pay each month? How much? What happens when you can’t pay for
utilities?

8. Families sometimes receive assistance from a variety of government or private
programs. Do you receive assistance from any of the following?

Cl WIC C] Transportation Assistance

CISchool Lunch Program CI Diversionary Assistance (only some states)
CI EIC (Earned Income Credit) CI Educational Grants or Loans

CIChild Care Assistance CI Medicaid/ MA

CI Housing Assistance CI Other

CI Energy/Fuel Assistance

9. Is there any other assistance you’re getting, such as help with healthcare, food, meals,
clothing, holiday gifts, furniture, baby goods, day care. or school supplies?

Type of help Amount Type of help Amount

 

 

 

 

 

85

10. Compared to two years ago, would you say your family’s economic situation has:

5 = Improved a lot

4 = Improved a little

3 = Remained the same
2 = Gone down a little
1 = Gone down a lot

11. (Optional)To what extent do you think your income is enough for you to live on?

1 = Not at all adequate

2 = Can meet necessities only

3 = Can afford some of the things we want but not all we want
4 = Can afford about everything we want

5 = Can afford about everything we want and still save money

12. In past year, has there been a time when you had a hard time making ends meet or
paying for necessities? What did you have trouble paying for? Food? Clothing?
Healthcare? Credit payments? Personal care or non-food items? (If appropriate)
Diapers? What did you do?

.<
33

Item

Food

Clothing
Medical Care
Dental Care
Medicines
Credit Payments
Personal Care Items
Diapers

School Fees or
Expenses

Past Bills:
Other:

DD DDDDDDDDU
DD 000000000?

13. Have you or members of your household ever gone hungry or been close to going
hungry? Please describe the situation as fully as you can. What led to it? How did
you deal with it?

14. What do you need most to prevent this situation from happening again? (Administer
Food Security Module)

15. When you’ve gone for help from an agency. how were you treated? (Probe for
specific agencies.)

86

16. In the past year, have you sold or pawned anything you owned?

 

 

PARENTING

1.

Let’s talk about being a parent. What do you enjoy most about being a parent? What
are your strengths as a parent? What is the hardest part of being a parent?

(If appropriate) How does your partner help you with parenting?

(Optional) Here’s another checklist that asks you to describe how you feel about
yourself as a parent. (Administer: Parent Ladder)

 

 

SOCIAL SUPPORT

1.

Who are the people who are most important to you and your family? By this, we
mean friends or relatives who are important to you for one reason or another. For
each person ask: Who is this person? Why are they important to you? (If appropriate)
How did you meet them? How often are you in contact with them? Is there anyone
else?

IS there anyone who makes things hard for your family? How so? Tell me about that.

Do you ever get to go outwith your friends? Have you been able to find the time for
any outside activities? What sorts of things do you do?

 

 

SUMMARY

1.

When you look back over the past few years, what do you think are the most
important things that have happened to you and your family?

Looking ahead into the future, what are you most looking forward to in the coming
year? What do you most worry about? What do you think things will be like for your
family in three years?

87

3. Overall, how satisfied are you with your life right now? (Use scale below) Why do
you feel that way?

1 = very dissatisfied
2 = dissatisfied

3 = mixed feelings
4 = satisfied

5 = very satisfied

4. Is there anything else that you think we should know about how your family is doing
right now? IS there anything we’ve missed?

CONTACT INFORMATION: TO BE REMOVED AND KEPT IN STATE FILES

As you know, we would like to visit with you again in a few months to see how your
family is doing. To make it easier to contact you in case you move and forget to tell us,
will you Share the name and phone numbers of three people who will always know where
you are? Please be sure to tell them that we may contact them.

Name Phone Number

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you so much for your time.

NOTE

88

KNOWLEDGE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES

There are many community services that families need to know how to access. The
services needed are different for each family. If you needed it, would you know Where
to go to:

 

Service Yes No
1. Get help on heating bills

 

 

2. Apply for subsidized housing

 

3. Find temporary housing

 

4. Apply for Medicaid

 

5. Find help for a drug or alcohol problem

 

Find help for a domestic violence problem

 

Get your child immunized

 

 

6
7
8. Find a family doctor
9

Find dental care

 

10 Find a mental health counselor

 

11. Find family planning services

 

12. Apply for welfare

 

13. Get legal assistance

 

14. Apply for food stamps

 

15. Apply for WIC

 

16. Locate job training

 

17. Find transportation choices

 

18. Find child care

 

19. Apply for a child care subsidy

 

20. Find help for a family member with disabilities

 

21. Find low-cost clothing for your family

 

22 Find Cooperative Extension Activities (EFNEP,

 

 

 

 

 

89

LIFE SKILLS ASSESSMENT

 

Do you have:

Yes

No

 

1.

A driver's license

 

Car insurance

 

Car registration

 

Heath insurance

 

A checking account

 

A good credit record

 

2
3
4.
5
6
7

A local library card

 

Do you know how to:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 Manage your bills

9 Write a personal check

10 Make a family budget

11. Stretch your groceries to the end of the month
12. Register to vote

13. Apply for a credit card

14. Prepare a well-balanced meal for your family
15. Get telephone service

16. Work with your landlord to improve housing

17. Register a consumer complaint

18. Talk to your child's teacher

19. Fill out forms to apply for services

20. Apply for a job

21. Write a resume

22. Dress for a job

23. Fill out your own income tax forms

24. Join a local club or organization

25. Create a personal support system

 

 

 

90

 

FEELINGS ABOUT HOW THINGS ARE GOING

For each of the following statements, check the box that best describes HOW OFTEN
YOU HAVE FELT THIS WAY DURING THE PAST WEEK.

Rarely or A little A Most or
none of of the moderate all Of
the time time amount of the time

time
1. I was bothered by things D C1 [:1 CI
that don’t usually bother me
2. I did not feel like eating; C1 Cl E] El
my appetite was poor
3. Ifelt that I could not shake C1 Cl E] El
the blues even with help from
my family and friends
4. I felt that I was just as C1 C1 [:1 D
good as other people
5. I had trouble keeping my C1 C1 C1 C1
mind on what I was doing
6. Ifelt depressed D
7. I felt that everything I did
was an effort
8. Ifelt hopeful about the C1 C1 C1 C1
future
9. I thought my life had been [:1 [:1 C1 C]
a failure
10. I felt fearful E] C1 C1 Cl
1 1. My sleep was restless C1 E] El CI
12. I was happy [:1 C1 C1 CI
13. I talked less than usual Cl Cl C1 CI
14. I felt lonely CI Cl Cl C]

91

15. People were unfriendly
16. I enjoyed life

17. I had crying spells

18. I felt sad

19. I felt that people disliked
me

20. I could not “get going”

Rarely or
none of
the time

[:1

DUDE]

A little
ofthe
time

USED

[3

A
moderate
amount of

time

C1

DUDE]

Most or
all of
the time

E]

DUDE

E]

THE PARENTING LADDER

6 High

--‘wa01

0 Low

 

Where would you put yourself on the Parenting Ladder in terms of:
Your knowledge of how children grow and develop?

Your confidence that you know what is right for your child?

Your ability to create a safe home for your child?

Your success in teaching your child how to behave?

Your Skill at finding fun activities that interest your child?

The amount of stress in your life right now?

Your ability to cope with the stress in your life?

Parenting is often smoother when others are there to help. Where would
you put yourself on the Parenting Ladder in terms of:

Other parents for you to talk to?

Someone to help you in an emergency?

Someone to offer helpful advice or moral support?
Someone for you to relax with?

Professional people to talk to when you have a question
about your child?

Your overall satisfaction with the amount of support
in your life?

93

Do you and/or your partner
have medical insurance?
You Yes No
Partner Yes No

If yes, what kind?

:1 Private/HMO

I] Medicaid/MA

1’ State Health Plan
ll Other (Explain)

 

Do you and/or your partner
have any type of dental
insurance?

You Yes No
Partner Yes No

If yes, what kind?

L7 Private

D Medicaid/MA
If; Other (explain)

ADULT HEALTH SURVEY

About how many times in
the past year have you
been to a doctor or

other health care
provider?

 

Your
partner?

 

If none. when was the last
time you visited a doctor
or health care provider?

 

Your
partner?

 

About how many times in
the past year have you
visited a

dentist?

 

Your
partner?

 

If none. when was the last
time you did visit a
dentist?

 

Your
partner?

 

94

Have you or your
partner had any
injuries or serious
illnesses in the past
year?

You Yes

No

Partner Yes

No

 

If yes, please explain

 

 

 

About how many
times in the past year
have you missed
work due to an
illness/injury?

 

Your
partner?

Have you been
pregnant in the past
three years
Yes No
If yes: How many
times

 

Are you and your
partner able to have
more children?

Yes No

If so, do you
currently use birth
control?

Yes No

In the past three years, have you or your partner experienced any of the following

health problems?

Heart Problems
High Blood Pressure
Diabetes

Cancer

Digestive

Problems

Liver Problems
Seizure Disorder
Depression/Anxiety

Anger Management
Hepatitis

Allergies

Asthma

Frequent colds/
flu/sinus

Thyroid Problems
Kidney Problems
Fatigue

Eye or vision
problems

Back Problems
Other (specify)

-<
O
C

CID UUUD DUDE] UDCICI CI DUE]

"U

artner

DD DUDE] DUDE GUIDE [3 DBL—.1

Joint Problems
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorder/
Obesity

Skin Problems

Permanent Disability

Sexually Transmitted

Disease
Reproductive
Problems

Bladder Infections
Drug Problem
Alcohol Problem
Tobacco Use

Anemia
Emotional, physical,
or sexual abuse

You

[3
C1
Cl
C]
C]

[3 [:1 0001313 U

Migraines/Headaches E]

Learning Disabilities CI

Arthritis

 

95

[:1

DD DC] U DDUDD D UDD DD;
:3
(D

First name of: Child 1:
Child 3:

Child 2:

 

 

 

CHILD HEALTH SURVEY

Does C1 have medical
insurance?

‘7 Private/HMO
Medicaid/MA
State Plan
Other (Explain):

L—

L] Fl if;

 

C2: Y Yes Y No If yes,
what kind?

i3. Private/HMO

Cl Medicaid/MA

j State Plan

[’1 Other (Explain):

 

C3: Y Yes Y No If yes.
what kind?

'3 Private/HMO

Lil Medicaid/MA

E State Plan

'_- Other (Explain):

41

 

About how many times
in the past year has your
child been to a doctor or
other health care
provider?

C1 C2

C3

 

If none, when was the
last time your child
visited a doctor or health
care provider?

C1 C2

C3

Does C 1 have any type of
dental insurance? Y Yes Y
NO If yes, what kind?

1] Private

3 Medicaid/MA

1? Other (Explain):

 

C2: Y Yes Y No If yes, what
kind?

LL Private

1: Medicaid/MA

; 7 Other (Explain):

 

 

C3: Y Yes Y No If yes, what
kind?

’3‘ Private

1 Medicaid/ MA

71 Other (Explain):

Has your child had
any injuries or
serious illnesses in
the past year?

C1: Y Yes YNo
C2: Y Yes YNo
C3: Y Yes YNo

If yes, please
explain

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About how many times in
the past year has your child
Visited a dentist?

C1 C2 C3

——

 

If none, when was the last
time your child did visit a
dentist?

C1 C2
C3

*—

96

About how many
times in the past year
has your child missed
school due to an
illness/injury?

C1:

C2:

C3:

In the past three years, has your child experienced any of the following health

problems?

Allergies

Anemia

Asthma

Cancer

Chronic Pain

Learning Disability

Depression/Anxiety

Anger Management

Diabetes

Digestive Problems

Drug Problem

Alcohol Problem

Ear Infections

Eating Disorder/

Obesity

Eye or Vision

Fatigue

Frequent colds/flu/
sinus

Hepatitis

Seizure Disorders

Skin Problems

Dggg DUE] UDDUDDDDDDDUDT

0

131300 DUE] UUUUDUUUDDDDDN

DUDE] ODD [30000000000008

97

Head Lice
Behavior Problems
Conjunctivitis
(pink eye)
ADD/ADHD
Fetal Alcohol Effects/
Syndrome
Fetal Drug Effects
Broken Bones
Sexually Transmitted
Disease
Skeletal Problems
Tobacco Use
Migraines/Headaches [:1
Permanent Disability CI
Other (specify)

ODD ODD DD DDS

CIDEICIU EDD CID DOS

0

GUESS DUO 00 1:11:w

 

FOOD SECURITY MODULE

These next questions ask about the food eaten in your household in the last 12 months,
since (current month) of last year, and Whether you were able to afford the food you
need.

1. Which of these statements bests describes the food eaten in your household in the
last 12 months:

[1] Enough of the kinds of food we want to eat (SKIP 1a and 1b)

[2] Enough but not always the kinds of foods we want (SKIP la)

[3] Sometimes not enough to eat (SKIP lb)

[4] Often not enough to eat (SKIP 1b)

[ ] DK or Refused (SKIP 1a and lb)

1a. [IF OPTION 3 OR 4 SELECTED, ASK] Here are some of the reasons why
people don’t always have enough to eat. For each one, please tell me if that is a
reason why YOU don’t always have enough to eat. [READ LIST. MARK ALL

THAT APPLY.]

YES NO DK

[:1 CI CI Not enough money for food

C1 C1 C1 Not enough time for shopping or cooking
CI CI CI Too hard to get to the store

Cl C! D On a diet

C1 C1 C1 No working stove available

C1 C1 Cl Not able to cook because of health

problems

1b. [IF OPTION 2 SELECTED, ASK] Here are some reasons why people don’t
always have the quality or variety of food they want. For each one, please tell

me if that is a reason why YOU don’t always have the kinds of food you want to
eat. [READ LIST. MARK ALL THAT APPLY]

YES NO DK

E] El CI Not enough money for food

C1 C1 [:1 Kinds of food we want not available

C1 C1 C1 Not enough time for shopping or cooking
CI Cl C] Too hard to get to the store

C1 C1 C1 On a special diet

98

. Now I’m going to read you several statements that people have made about their
food Situation. For these statements, please tell me whether the statement was often
true. sometimes true, or never true for your household in the last 12 months, that is,
since last (name of current month).

The first statement is “We worried whether our food would run out before we
got money to buy more.” Was that often true, sometimes true, or never true for
your household in the last 12 months?

CI Often True

CI Sometimes True

CI Never True

Cl DK or Refused

. “The food that we bought just didn’t last, and we didn’t have money to get more.”
Was that often, sometimes or never true for your household in the last 12 months?
CI Often True
CI Sometimes True
CI Never True
CI DK or Refused

“We couldn’t afford to eat balanced meals.” Was that often, sometimes or never
true for your household in the last 12 months?

CI Often True

[:1 Sometimes True

EJ Never True

CI DK or Refused

. “(I/We) relied on only a few kinds of low-cost food tofeed (my/our) child/ren
because (I was/we were) running out of money to buy food.” Was that often,
sometimes or never true for your household in the last 12 months?

D Often True

CI Sometimes True

CI Never True

CI DK or Refused

. “(I/We) couldn’t feed (my/our) child/ren a balanced meal, because I couldn’t afford
that.” Was that often, sometimes or never true for your household in the last 12
months?

CI Often True

CI Sometimes True

CI Never True

CI DK or Refused

If answer “often true” or “sometimes true” to any one of Questions 2-6, or response [3]
or [4] to Question 1, then ask questions 7-16, otherwise stop here.

99

7. “(My/Our child was/The children were) not eating enough because (I/we) just
couldn’t afford enough food.” Was that often, sometimes or never true for your
household in the last 12 months?

Cl Often True

CI Sometimes True
CI Never True

CI DK or Refused

8. In the last 12 months, since last (name of current month), did you (or other adults in
your household) ever cut the size of your meals or skip meals because there wasn’t
enough money for food?

CI Yes
CI No (Skip 8a)
C1 DK (Skip 8a)

8a. [IF YES ABOVE, ASK] How often did this happen—almost every month, some
months but not every month, or in only 1 or 2 months?

CI Almost every month

[:1 Some months, but not every month

Cl Only one or 2 months
CI DK

9. In the last 12 months, did you ever eat less than you felt you should because there
wasn’t enough money to buy food?
CI Yes
CI No
C] DK

10. In the last 12 months, were you ever hungry but didn’t eat because you couldn’t
afford enough food?
Cl Yes
[:1 No
D DK

11. In the last 12 months. did you lose weight because you didn’t have enough money
for food?

D Yes
CI No
D DK

If any answer to Question 7-11 is affirmative. continue, otherwise stop here.

100

12. In the last 12 months did (you/you or other adults in your household) ever not eat
for a whole day because there wasn’t enough money for food?
[:1 Yes
C] No (Skip 12a)
CI DK (Skip 12a)

12a. [IF YES TO 12, ASK] How often did this happen—almost every month, some
months, but not every month, or in only 1 or 2 months?

CI Almost every month

CI Some months, but not every month

Cl Only one or 2 months
CI DK

13. The next questions are about children living in the household who are under 18
years old. In the last 12 months, since (current month) of last year, did you ever cut
the Size of (your child’s/any of the children’s) meals because there wasn’t enough
money for food?

Cl Yes
CI No
CI DK

14. In the last 12 months, did (CHILD’S NAME/any of the children) ever skip meals
because there wasn’t enough money for food?
CI Yes
CI No (skip 14a)
CI DK (skip 14a)

14a. [IF YES ABOVE, ASK] How often did this happen—almost every month. some
months but not every month, or in only 1 or 2 months?

Cl Almost every month

CI Some months, but not every month

CI Only one or 2 months
CI DK

15. In the last 12 months, (was your child/were the children) ever hungry but you just
couldn’t afford more food?
CI Yes
C] No
[:1 DK

16. In the last 12 months, did (your child/any of the children) ever not eat for a whole
day because there wasn’t enough money for food?
D Yes
CI No
D DK

lOl

APPENDIX C

Wave Two Survey Protocol

102

Interviewer ID: Date:

 

 

 

PARENT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
YEAR II

I want to thank you for agreeing to be interviewed again this year. Just like last time,
there are no right or wrong answers to any of our questions. We are interested in hearing
what life is like for you and your family. I want to remind you that the interview is
voluntary. If you do not want to answer a question, you don’t have to. All information
that you give us will be kept confidential. [DO NOT PROCEED UNLESS
PARTICIPANT HAS SIGNED THE INFORMED CONSENT FORM]

{NOTE TO INTER VIER WER — A L WA rs ASK QUESTIONS IN OPEN-ENDED
MANNER FIRST, DON 'T JUST READ OFF A LIST OF YES/N0 QUESTIONS. USE
THEIR ANSWERS TO THE OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS TO FILL IN THE YES/N0
BOXES AND THEN PROBE WHEN NECESSAR Y TO GET INFORMA TION. PLEA SE
MAKE SURE THA T YOU FILL IN ALL BLANKS AND CHECK ALL BOXES ON THIS
FORM}

CURRENT HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION

Mother’s lst Name

 

We’d like to catch up on any changes in your life and in your family since the last time
we talked with you.

{PULL THE APPROPRIA TE INF ORMA TION FROM THE WA VE I INTER VIEW}

Last year, you said that

 

were living in your household.
Is this still true? Yes CI No CI
Is there any one new living in your household? Yes CI No Cl

Who? {FILL IN CHART F OR NEW CHILDREN, FILL IN SECTIONS BELOW FOR
PARTNERS AND NON-PAR T NERS}

[IF CHILD MOVED OUT]
When? Why? Where is child living now?

103

New Child Sex DOB Relation Relation Contact w/ Receives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(first name) Mother Partner/ bio parent child support
Spouse (Y, N) (Y, N)
l.
2.
3.
* Key to codes **Key to Codes *** Key to codes
S = Single W =Non-Hispanic White A = Adopted
M = Married H =Hispanic/Latino SC = Stepchild
LWP = Living with partner AA =African American B = Biological child
D = Divorced N =Native American F = Foster child
SEP = Separated A =Asian NR = Not related
M =Multi-racial O = Other
0 =Other

 

 

 

B. Last year you told us you were {married separated, divorced, single,
living with }.
Has that changed? Yes D No C] [IF NO. SKIP TO NEXT SECTION]

[IF YES] What is the change?

 

Did partner moved out? (PROMPT: When? Why?)

 

 

CI Yes CI No

Did a new partner moved in? (PROMPT: How long has partner lived here?)
CI Yes CI No

New Partner’s lst Name DOB

Ethnicity**

Did a non-partner move out (PROMPT: When? Why?)
CI Yes CI No

Did a non-partner move in (PROMPT: When? Why? Is it a permanent or
temporary arrangement?)

CI Yes D No

What is this person’s relationship to you?

 

104

LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY

1.

Are you living in the same place? Yes D No [3 [IF LIVING IN THE SAME
PLACE, SKIP TO Q2]

[IF NO] How many different places have you lived since we last
talked?

 

Tell me what has happened with the places where you lived?

(PROBE: Why did you move? How does this compare to where you used to live?
Why do you think that?)

Are there services close by? Yes CI No C]
How close?

Do you have easy access to:

Grocery store Yes CI No CI
Medical care Yes C] No C]
School Yes CI No CI
Other Yes C! No CI

If not, what is missing or far away?

Tell me about how your move affected your family.

PROBE: How is your family responding to the change? Is the place where you
are living now adequate for your needs?

PROMPT: Size, quality, price, landlord.

What’s the best thing about your new place (and/or community)? The worst
thing?

Were you without your own housing at any point in the last year? Yes D No Cl
[IF YES] What happened? How did you find housing again?
Did you live with a relative or a friend during that time?
Yes Cl No CI

There are many community services that families need to know how to access.

and what each family needs may be very different. I would like to know about

the kinds of community services you know about.

[ADMIN ISTER KNOWLEDGE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES MEASURE]
[GO TO Q3]

[IF THEY ARE LIVING IN THE SAME PLACE]

Has anything changed in your neighborhood this year? Can you tell me about
that?

105

What is the best thing about living where you do (community or neighborhood)?
What’s the worse?

Do you feel safe where you live? Yes Cl No CI
Why or why not? What makes it safe/not safe? (Physical safety or otherwise.)

DO you feel that your children are safe? (PROBE to fill in chart)

In your home Yes D No CI
The neighborhood Yes D No CI
At their school Yes Cl No Cl

Why do you feel your children are safe (or unsafe)? Who (relationship) or what is
it that makes you concerned for their safety? Is there anything you can do about
it?

3. Why do you choose to live in this area? In this particular unit/apartment/house?
In this town? In this neighborhood? (PROBE: Are family and friends in the area?
Yes CI No C]

4. Our house or apartment can sometimes have problems (such as plumbing
problems or a leaky roof) that can make things difficult for us and our families.

Can you tell me about any housing problems that you have experienced? (1F
NEEDED, PROBE WITH FOLLOWING)

Leaky plumbing Yes [:1 No CI
Faulty electrical system Yes [:1 No D
Exposed wires Yes CI No CI
Broken heating system Yes CI No C]
Pests (such as mice, rats, fleas, or cockroaches) Yes Cl No CI
Leaky roof or ceiling Yes D No CI
No hot water Yes C] No CI
Stove or refrigerator that would not work Yes C] No Cl
Environmental problems (such as asbestos,

lead paint, radon, or mold, Yes Cl No [:1

broken stairs. doors, etc.?)

[IF YES TO ANY] Were you able to fix it? Yes CI No CI
How did you pay for it? How long did the problem last? Did this
pose a difficulty for you and your family?

106

EMPLOYMENT/CURRENT WORK

{IN THIS SECTION, PICK THE SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT CAPT URES WHAT
THE RESPONDENT, AND PARTNER IF APPLICABLE, WAS/ WERE DOING AT THE
TIME OF THE WA VE I INTERVIEW. YOUMAY WANT TO ALWAYS LEA VE IN THE
QUESTIONS RELATED TO A NEW PARTNER JUST TO BE SAFE}

{IF RESPONDENT WAS WORKING LAST YEAR, ASK THE "A " QUESTIONS}
1.
A. Last time we talked you said you were working at
Are you still working there? Yes El No CI

 

[IF YES] How is your job/work going for you? Has anything changed about
your job? Such as....

Different responsibilities Yes C] No Cl

Different hours Yes CI No Cl

Have you had a raise or promotion? Yes CI No CI

When? How much?

 

Has the promotion changed your family life in any way (such as new hours or
longer hours)

Is this your onlyjob? Yes CI No Cl
[IF NO] Tell me about your other job(s).
Why did you need another job?

[IF NOT WORKING AT SAME JOB] Can you tell me about what happened
with your other job? (PROBE: Why did you leave the other job?

Are you currently working? Yes D No C]
[IF NOT WORKING] Have you looked for work? Yes D No C]
[IF LOOKED F OR WORK] How has that gone? [THEN SKIP TO Q2]

[IF NOT LOOKED FOR WORK] What’s kept you from looking? [THEN SKIP
TO Q2]

107

[IF YES, ARE WORKING] Tell me about the job(s) you have now. (PROBE to
fill in charts: Where are you working now? What is it that you do? Are you
working full-time or part-time?

Wage/Salary Started Hours/wk Weeks/yr Raise

 

 

 

 

Job 1
Job 2
(PROBE to fill in chart: Do you get any benefits with this new job(s)?)
Health insurance for yourself Yes CI No C]
Health insurance for children Yes CI No CI
Sick leave Yes CI No CI
Vacation Yes [:1 No CI
Overtime Yes Cl No C]
Retirement plan Yes Cl No D

How does this job compare to your old job? Why do you say that?
{IF RESPONDENT WAS NOT WORKING LAST YEAR. ASK THE “B " QUESTIONS}
B. Last time we talked, you said you were not working.
Has this changed over the year? Have you looked for work? Yes C] No CI
[IF YES] How has that gone?
[IF NO] What’s kept you from looking? [THEN SKIP TO Q2]
[IF WORKING] Tell me about your job(s). (PROBE: How did you find this job?
Did you know someone who already worked there? Where are you working now? What
is it that you do? Are you working full-time or part-time?) (PROBE to fill in charts)

Wage/Salary Started Hours/wk Weeks/yr Raise

Job 1

 

 

Job 2

 

 

 

108

(PROBE to fill in chart: Do you get any benefits with this new job(s)?)

Health insurance for yourself Yes CI No CI
Health insurance for children Yes CI No CI
Sick leave Yes D No [:1
Vacation Yes D NO [:1
Overtime Yes D No CI
Retirement plan Yes 1:] No C]

2. In the last year. have you had the opportunity to get further education or training?
Yes CI No C]

[IF YES] Tell me about that. What kind was it and where did you do it?
(PROBE: How did you pay for it?)
[IF EMPLOYER-SPONSORED] Who else was sent to the training?

{IF RESPONDENT HADA PARTNER WHO WAS WORKING AT WA VE I, ASK THE
“A ” QUESTIONS}

3. A. [IF SAME PARTNER AS WAVE 1] Last time we talked, you said
{name of person} was working.

 

Is he (She) still working there? Yes C] No CI

[IF YES] Has anything changed about his (her) job? (responsibilities,
hours, etc.)?

Has he (she) had a raise or promotion? Yes C] No CI
When?

 

HOW much?

 

Has the promotion changed your family life in any way (such as new
hours or longer hours)?

[IF NO] Can you share with me what happened and why he (she) is not
working at the same job? (PROBE: Why did he (She) leave the other job?)

Is he (she) currently working? Yes CI No CI
[IF NO] Has he (she) looked for work? Yes Cl No C]

[IF YES, LOOKED FOR WORK] How has that gone?
[THEN SKIP TO Q5]

[IF NOT LOOKED FOR WORK] What has kept him (her) from looking?
[THEN SKIP TO Q5]

109

[IF YES, CURRENTLY WORKING] Tell me about his (her) current
job(s). (PROBE to fill in chart:

Where is he (she) working now? What is it that he (She) does? Is he (she)
working full-time or part-time?

Wage/Salary Started Hours/wk Weeks/yr Raise

Job 1

 

 

 

Job 2

 

 

 

(PROMPT to fill in chart: Does he (she) get any benefits with this new job?)

Health insurance for him/herself Yes D No 0
Health insurance for children Yes CI No CI
Sick leave Yes D No 1:]
Vacation Yes Cl No CI
Overtime Yes CI No CI
Retirement plan Yes CI No C1

How does this job compare to his (her) old job? Why do you say that?

{IF RESPONDENT HAD A PARTNER WHO WAS NOT WORKING AT WAVE I, ASK
THE “B” QUESTIONS,I
B. [IF SAME PARTNER AS WAVE 1] Last time we talked. you said
{INSET NAME} was not working.
Has this changed over the year? Yes CI No C1
[IF NO] Has he (She) looked for work? Yes CI No CI
[IF YES, LOOKED FOR WORK] How has that gone? [THEN SKIP TO Q5]

[IF NOT LOOKED FOR WORK] What has kept him (her) from looking?
[THEN SKIP TO Q5]

110

[IF YES, CURRENTLY WORKING] Tell me about his (her) job(s). (PROBE:
How did he (she) find out about the job? Did he (She) know someone already
working there? Where is he (She) working now? What is it that he (she) does? IS
he (she) working full-time or part-time? (PROBE to fill in charts.)

Wage/Salary Started Hours/wk Weeks/yr Raise

Job 1

 

 

 

 

Job 2

 

 

(PROMPT to fill in chart: Does he (she) get any benefits with this new job?)

Health insurance for him/herself Yes CI No CI
Health insurance for children Yes D No D
Sick leave Yes Cl No CI
Vacation Yes CI No CI
Overtime Yes CI No CI
Retirement plan Yes D No C]

. [IF THERE IS A NEW PARTNER] IS your partner/boyfriend/spouse employed?
Yes C] No CI

[IF NO] Has he (she) looked for work? Yes C] No C]
[IF YES, LOOKED FOR WORK] How has that gone? [THEN SKIP TO Q5]

[IF NOT LOOKED FOR WORK] What has kept him (her) from looking?
[THEN SKIP TO Q5]

[IF YES, CURRENTLY WORKING] Tell me about his (her) job(s). (PROBE:
How did he (she) find out about the job? Did he (she) know someone already
working there? Where is he (she) working now? What is it that he (she) does? Is
he (she) working full-time or part-time? (PROBE to fill in charts.)

Has he (She) ever had a raise? Yes Cl No CI

When? How much?

 

 

Wage/Salary Started Hours/wk Weeks/yr Raise

Job 1

 

 

 

Job 2

 

 

 

111

(PROMPT to fill in chart: Does he (she) get any benefits with this new job?)

Health insurance for him/herself

Health insurance for children
Sick leave

Vacation

Overtime

Retirement plan

4. Does anyone else in the household have a job? Yes D No D

[IF YES] Tell me about that.

How about a child or children? Yes D No D

[IF YES] What is done with the child’s/children’s earnings?

5. [IF NOT CURRENTLY WORKING]

Since you are not currently working outside the home, is there anything in your
life that makes it more difficult for you to work at all or participate in a training

program? (PROBE to fill in the chart)

Childcare Yes D
Health issues Yes D

Family issues Yes D
Your partner Yes D

Can you tell me more about that?

NOD
NOD
NOD
NOD

YeS D
Yes D
Yes D
Yes D
Yes D
Yes D

NOD
NOD
NOD
NOD
NOD
NOD

7. What is your opinion of job opportunities in this area? {ALTERNATIVE

WORDING} From last year until now. what do you think of thejob situation in

this area? Have there been any changes?

8. Sometimes people express strong opinions about people who are receiving
welfare. What kinds of opinions have you heard?

What do you think of these opinions?

[IF EVER RECEIVED WELFARE] Were any of these things said to you? To
your children? What was the situation? Have you ever felt that you or your
children were treated differently or unfairly because you were on welfare?
(PROBE to fill in chart: Have you or your family ever been.

Refused service Yes D No D
Made to wait Yes D No D
Treated rudely Yes D No D

In the last several years, welfare regulations have changed. There is now more of
an emphasis on getting a job, and there are now time limits. For example,
families who have received assistance for five years in a row will not be able to
get cash assistance any longer. Five years will be over for some families at the
end of this year. In Michigan, single parents without children under 6 are
required to work at least 30 hours per week. These changes also apply to
immigrants from other countries. New legal aliens are not able to receive
government help for the first five years after they arrive.

Do you feel these rules have affected your family in any way? Yes D No D
DO you talk with anyone about these changes? Family? Friends?

{ALTERNA TIVE WORDING} Do you hear things on TV or radio about these
changes? Yes D No D [IF YES] What have you heard?

TRANSPORTATION AND CHILD CARE

{USE INFORMATION FROM WA VE I T O CONS TR UCT QUESTION 1.}
{IF HAD VEHICLE IN WAVE I, ASK 1A.}

1.

A. Last time we talked, you said that you had a (reliable car/ unreliable
car{1NDICA TE WHICH} ). Have you had a situation in the last year when you
had a problem with your car/truck{ OR WHA TE VER T RANSPOR TA TION SHE
HAS}? Yes D No D

Tell me about what happened. What did you do?

Has a friend or relative helped you out? Yes D No D

How do you get around if your car breaks down or is not available to you?

{IF NO VEHICLE IN WAVE I, ASK IB.}

1. B. Last time we talked, you said that you usually get around by

 

{USE INFORMATION FROM WAVE I} DO you still depend on {THIS PERSON/
THIS TYPE OF TRANSPORTATION}? Yes D NO D

113

(PROBE: How do you usually get around? How do you get to work? How do
you get groceries?) (PROBE IF NECESSARY:

Has a friend or relative helped you out? Yes D No D

2. This year the price of gas has gone up and down. Did this change anything in
how you get around? Yes D No D
(PROBE: Have the increases caused you any problems? Yes D No D
What have you done?)

{USE INFORMATION FROM WA VE 1 TO C ONST RUCT QUESTION 3.}
3. [IF APPROPRIATE] Last time we talked, you said that

 

provided care for your children. DO you still have the same arrangement(s)?
Yes D No D [IF YES, GO TO Q4]

[IF NO] What brought about the changes? Do you have a new child care
provider? (PROBE: How is this working out? How do you like your new child
care provider(s)? How does your child like the provider(s)? (IF MORE THAN
ONE PROVIDER, PROBE: How many? Why more than one?)

{IF RESPONDENT HAS OLDER CHILDREN, ASK QUESTION 4, OTHER WISE
OMIT}
4. [IF APPROPRIATE] What about your older children? What do they do after
school? What about school holidays and summers?

5. Tell me about a situation when you needed emergency childcare. What did you
do? (PROBE: Have you ever had to miss work or a training program because of a
childcare problem? Yes D No D [IF YES] How did your supervisor react?
(PROBE IF NECESSARY: Has a friend or relative helped you out? PROBE: Is
there a time when you needed someone to take care of your children outside your
time at work? Who does that? How does it go?

6. What do you do for childcare if your child gets Sick? What happens if your
childcare provider is Sick? (PROBE IF NECESSARY: Has a friend or relative
helped you out?) (PROBE IF APPROPRIATE: How did your supervisor react?

7. [IF RESPONDENT IS CURRENTLY WORKING] How is it combining work
responsibilities and family responsibilities? Do you have any problems at home
because of work? Or do you have any problems at work because of family?

114

8.

10.

[ONLY FOR MI RESPONDENTS] We have been talking about childcare,
transportation, and a lot of other issues. Can you think for a moment about a list
of all of the things that need to happen in order for you [and/or your partner] to be
able to work for pay. What would you need most to be able to work for pay?
What would come next? [Continue with the list as far as they can.] Is there
anything that you have not already told us about that you need to have or you
need to happen in order to be able to work? (PROBE: Moving for work,
commuting, carpooling, child care, housekeeping, new clothing or uniforms, odd
jobs to make enough money, education for a better job, help from friends or
family, ...)

[ONLY FOR MI RESPONDENTS] Last time, you told us about what your ideal
job would be, the sort of job you would most like to have. What would be an
ideal job for you right now? What would you need to happen for you to get that
job and be able to keep it? (PROBE: moving, commuting, carpooling, child care,
housekeeping, odd jobs, education, training, help from friends or family, ...)

[IF RESPONDENT IS CURRENTLY WORKING] IS there anything in your life
that makes it more difficult for you to hold down a job (or participate in a training
program)? (PROBE to fill in chart)

Childcare Yes D No D

Health issues Yes D No D

Family issues Yes D No D

Your partner Yes D No D
Can you tell me more about that?

FAMILY OF ORIGIN

1.

Last year we talked a bit about your family background. In the past year, have
there been any important changes in your relationships with your parents or your
brothers and sisters or other relatives?

Has your family experienced any important events in the last year, or is there any

family news that you think we should know about? (PROBE: births, deaths,
marriages, illnesses , etc.)

115

INCOME AND MAKING ENDS MEET

1. We would like to know about your family’s sources of income in the past year.
Remember, all this information is completely confidential. From which of the
following did you receive income this year? (PROBE for changes in TANF, child
and Spousal support, food stamps, wages: Has that been the same all year? Tell
me about the change.)

Amount Weekly Biweekly Monthly Other

Wages & Salaries (self) D D D D
Wages & Salaries (partner) D D D D
Tips, Commissions, Overtime D D D D
Social Security Disability D D D D
Social Security Retirement/

pensions D D D D
Supplementary Security

Income D D D D
TANF D D D D
Unemployment

Compensation D D D D
Worker’s Disability

Compensation D D D D
Veterans’ Benefits D D D D
Child or Spousal Support D D D D

When it doesn’t come, what do you do? How do you manage?

Children’s wages D D D D
Food Stamps D D D D
Regular gifts from family/

friends D D D D
Others D D D D

116

2. Did you receive assistance from any of the following sources over the past year?
[TRY TO RECORD THE CASH VALUE IF POSSIBLE]

Amount
WIC What do you get from WIC?
School Lunch/Breakfast Program Do your children eat the food?
Yes 1] No C.
Earned Income Tax Credit What did you do with the money?

Childcare Assistance
Housing Assistance
Energy/fuel Assistance
Transportation Assistance
Education Grants or Loans
Medicaid

Diversionary Assistance
{IF APPLICABLE}

Other [describe]

 

3. Housing is usually the largest expense for families. Tell me about how much you
pay per month and what utilities, if any, are included. About how much do you
pay each month for the utilities that are not included in your rent? (PROBE to
fill in chart)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Included in Rent P_ay_s Amount

Electricity D D how much per
month?

Gas/Oil/Wood/Coal D D how much per
month?

Cable TV D D how much per
month?

Water D D how much per
month?

Garbage D D how much per
month?

 

This year energy prices have gone up. Has anything happened to you over the
past few months that has changed your housing costs? (PROBE: Rent gone up?
Utilities shutoff?) What did you do?

(PROBE IF PAYS UTILITIES) In the last year, did you ever have a difficult
time paying for the utilities? Yes D No D

[IF YES] What did you do? Was anything disconnected? Yes D No D

[IF YES] What did you do to get it turned on again?

Who helped?

ll7

. Tell me about telephone service you have. About how much do you pay each
month?
What services does this include? (PROBE: Internet connection, long distance,

cell phone, pager?) Have you had a problem paying for phone service in the last
year? Yes D No D

 

. In the past year, have you had a problem paying for any of the following?

[FOR EACH YES] What have you done when this happened?

Food Yes D No D
Clothing Yes D No D
Medical care Yes D No D
Dental care Yes D No D
Medicines Yes D No D
Credit payments Yes D No D
Personal care items Yes D No D
Diapers Yes D No D
School fees or

expenses Yes D No D
Rent or house

payment Yes D No D
Anything else Yes D No D

[OPTIONAL] What other monthly bills do you have? (PROMPT: rent-to-own?)
How much do you normally spend on these? Have you ever had trouble paying
any of them? Yes D No D [IF YES] What did you do?

. Since we last talked, have you, or any members of your household, been close to
going hungry or ever gone hungry?

Yes D No D [IF YES] Tell me how this happened? What led to your being
hungry?

. Tell me about any strategies you have to help make the food last until the end of
the month. (PROMPT: Do you or your children ever eat at a family member’s or
fiiend’s house? Yes D No D [IF YES] Tell me about this.) (PROBE: How
often does that happen? Do you ever cook together with some other family to
make enough for both families? Yes D No D

(PROMPT: Have you gotten food from a food bank or soup kitchen during the
last year? Yes D No D [IF YES] Tell me about this. How useful was the kinds
of food you got?)

118

9.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

[ADMINISTER FOOD SECURITY MODULE]

When people are having a hard time making ends meet, sometimes they will work
for cash by doing different kinds of odd jobs. Have you ever done anything like
that?

Yes D No D

(PROBE: Cleaned homes? Collected bottles/cans? Mowed lawns? Shoveled
snow?) [IF APPROPRIATE] Has your partner ever worked for cash?

Yes D No D

[IF YES] What did you do? How long? Have you done this in the last year?
Yes D No D
HOW much did you earn? Did you like doing that work?

[IF NO] Do you know other people who do this? What do you think
about it?

Compared with last year. would you say that your family’s economic Situation
has...

[CIRCLE NUMBER OF RESPONSE]

Improved a lot

Improved a little

Remained the same

Gone down a little

Gone down a lot

~Nw-fi-Ut

To what extent to do you think your income is enough for you to live on?
[CIRCLE NUMBER OF RESPONSE]

1 Not at all adequate

2 Can meet necessities only

3 Can afford some of the things we want but not all we want

4 Can afford about everything we want

5 Can afford about everything we want and still save money

During the last year, did you ever borrow money from a relative or friend?

Yes D No D

[IF YES] Why did you borrow it? How much did you borrow?
Have you been able to pay it back? Yes D No D

 

[IF YES, PAID BACK] How were you able to do that?

[IF NOT PAID BACK] Has anything happened because you have not
been able to pay it back? Yes D No D

119

I4.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

If you got $20 tomorrow. what would you do with it?
If you got $200 tomorrow, what would you do with it?

What if your child needed a new pair of shoes. how would you get them for him
or her?

Birthdays are often times for celebration. Tell me about how you celebrate your
child’s / children’s birthday(s). (PROBE: How much would you usually Spend on
a gift?)

When you think about your bills and the things you need to buy, how do you
decide which comes first if you don’t have the money for them all?

What are your favorite money-stretching techniques?

How has the health of your family been this year? Has the health of any family
member changed? How? (PROBE: Has a health problem affected your family
life at all? How?)

ADMINISTER CHILD HEALTH SURVEY & ADULT HEALTH SURVEY]

 

PARENTING

 

1.

2.

[IF LIVING WITH PARTNER/SPOUSE] What sort of parenting tasks do you
typically do? And what parenting tasks does your partner/boyfriend/spouse
typically do?

Do you (and your partner/boyfriend/Spouse IF APPLICABLE) get help or advice
in parenting from anyone else? What sort of help do they provide? How do you
feel about this help?

120

3. [IF RESPONDENT IS NOT LIVING WITH FATHER OF CHILD/REN] During
the past 12 months, how often did your child(ren) see their father(s)? Why?
[MAKE SURE THAT QUESTION IS ANSWERED FOR EACH NON—
CUSTODIAL FATHER]

 

 

Overall, what is your relationship like with ’s {INSERT
NAME OF CHILD/CHILDREN} father?

Why do you say that?

Do you think that ’s {INSERT NAME OF CHILD/CHILDREN}

 

father wants a close relationship with his child?
What makes you say that? [ASK FOR EACH FATHER IF MORE THAN ONE.]

Do you ever have conflicts with ’s {INSERT NAME OF
CHILD/CHILDREN} father about the child? Yes I] NO 13‘

[IF YES] What are the conflicts about? (PROBE to fill in chart)

Custody Yes D No D
Child support Yes D No D
How child is being raised Yes D No D
Visits Yes D No D
Other Yes D No D

How do these conflicts get resolved?

4. [OPTIONAL] What is your number one wish for your child/ren? Why do you
feel this way? Has this changed over the last few months? Yes D NO D
[IF YES] Why?

5. [ADMINISTER PARENTING LADDER]

 

6. About how you responded to the last question on the Parenting Ladder, why do
you feel that way?

121

FAMILY WELL-BEING

 

{USE THE INFORMATION FROM WA VE I TO CONSTR UCT THE NEXT QUESTION}

1.

Last year, you said that the thing that you were looking forward to the most
was .

How is that going? {OR WHATEVER THE APPROPRIA TE F OLLOW— UP
QUESTION(S) MA Y BE}

 

{IF THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE FROM WA VE 1 THAT YOU WISH TO FOLLOW
UP ON WITH THE RESPONDENT, USE THE NEXT QUESTION AS A GUIDE.
OTHER WISE OMIT}

2.

Last year you mentioned (or you were ). Is the
situation still the same? Have things changed? Gotten better? Gotten worse?
{OR WHA T E VER THE APPROPRIA TE F OLLOW- UP QUEST ION(S) MA Y BE}

 

. A. [OPTIONAL] Would you describe yourself as a person with religious or

Spiritual beliefs? Yes D No D
[IF YES] Does this play a role in your everyday life? Yes D No D
How so?

B. {ALTERNATIVE WORDING} What do you rely on when times are difficult?
Religion? Family? Friends? How does this/do they help you?

Tell me about a typical day. (PROBE: What time do you get up? When do your
children get up? What happens next? And then? [THE GOAL HERE IS TO
GET A PICTURE OF A TYPICAL WEEKDAY FOR THE FAMILY]

What sorts of things do you do for fun? [PROBE2 Do you have any hobbies?]

What things about your family make you proud and happy right now?

What are the biggest challenges for your family as a whole?

How are things going for your family right now? Tell me about that. How are
things going for you personally?

122

9.

10.

11.

[IF HAS PARTNER] How are things between you and your partner? Tell
me about that.

Is there any one who is making things harder for your family right now? Tell me
about that.

Overall, how satisfied are you with your life right now?
[CIRCLE NUMBER OF RESPONSE]

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Mixed feelings

Safisfied

Very satisfied

LII-hbJN—‘I

Why do you feel that way?

. [ADMINISTER FEELINGS ABOUT HOW THINGS ARE GOING

MEASURE]

SOCIAL SUPPORT

I.

Have you made any new friends over the past year? What has made that
possible?

 

2. Are you able to get together with friends? What kinds of things do you do? How
ofien?

3. Are there any old friends that you have lost contact with over the last year? Tell
me a little about that.

SUMMARY

1. What is the most important thing that happened to your family in the past year?
Did something good happen to you or one of your children? Did something not
so good happen to you or one of your children?

2. Thinking ahead to the coming year, what are you looking forward to? What

worries you? What do you think things will be like for your family next year at
this time?

3. What do you think things will be like for your family in three years? Why do you
think this?

4. Is there anything else you think we should know about how your family is doing
right now? IS there anything we have missed?

[PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT THE CONTACT PERSON IS STILL THE SAME,
AND THAT PERSON’S INFORMATION IS STILL THE SAME.

5. The last time we talked, you said that would know how to find you
if we were unable to contact you. Has this changed?

 

Contact Information from Wave 1:

PLEASE MAKE ANY CHANGES OR WRITE NEW CONTACT INFORMATION
BELOW BEFORE ENDING THE INTERVIEW:

This is the end of the interview. Thank you so much.

124

KNOWLEDGE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES

There are many community services that families need to know how to access. The
services needed are different for each family. If you needed it, would you know where
to go to:

 

Service Yes No
1. Get help on heating bills

 

 

I"

Apply for subsidized housing

 

Find temporary housing

 

Apply for Medicaid

 

Find help for a drug or alcohol problem

 

Find help for a domestic Violence problem

 

Get your child immunized

 

Find a family doctor

 

PWNP‘P‘PS”

Find dental care

 

10 Find a mental health counselor

 

11. Find family planning services

 

12. Apply for welfare

 

13. Get legal assistance

 

14. Apply for food stamps

 

15. Apply for WIC

 

l6. Locate job training

 

17. Find transportation choices

 

18. Find child care

 

19. Apply for a child care subsidy

 

20. Find help for a family member with disabilities

 

21. Find low-cost clothing for your family

 

22 Find Cooperative Extension Activities (EFNEP,

 

 

 

 

 

125

LIFE SKILLS ASSESSMENT

 

Do you have:

Yes

No

 

l.

A driver's license

 

Car insurance

 

Car registration

 

Heath insurance

 

A checking account

 

A good credit record

 

2
3
4.
5
6
7

A local library card

 

Do you know how to:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 Manage your bills

9 Write a personal check

10 Make a family budget

11. Stretch your groceries to the end of the month
12. Register to vote

13. Apply for a credit card

14. Prepare a well-balanced meal for your family
15. Get telephone service

16. Work with your landlord to improve housing

17. Register a consumer complaint

18. Talk to your child‘s teacher

19. Fill out forms to apply for services

20. Apply for a job

21. Write a resume

22. Dress for a job

23. Fill out your own income tax forms

24. Join a local club or organization

25. Create a personal support system

 

 

 

 

FEELINGS ABOUT HOW THINGS ARE GOING

For each of the following statements. check the box that best describes HOW OFTEN
YOU HAVE FELT THIS WAY DURING THE PAST WEEK.

Rarely or A little A Most or
none of of the moderate all of
the time time amount of the time

time
1. I was bothered by things D D D D
that don’t usually bother me
2. I did not feel like eating; D D D D
my appetite was poor
3. I felt that I could not shake D D D D
the blues even with help from
my family and friends
4. I felt that I was just as D D D D
good as other people
5. I had trouble keeping my D D D D
mind on what I was doing
6. I felt depressed
7. I felt that everything I did
was an effort
8. I felt hopeful about the D D D D

future

D
D
D
D

9. I thought my life had been
a failure

10. I felt fearful
l 1. My sleep was restless
12. I was happy

13. I talked less than usual

DDDDD
DDDDD
DDDDD
DDDDD

14. I felt lonely

127

15. People were unfriendly
16. I enjoyed life

17. I had crying spells

18. I felt sad

19. I felt that people disliked
me

20. I could not “get going”

Rarely or
none of
the time

D

DDDD

128

A little
ofthe
time

D

DDDD

A
moderate
amount of

time

D

DDDD

D

Most or
all of
the time

D

DDDD

D

THE PARENTING LADDER

6 High
5
? 3
1
j
0 Low

Where would you put yourself on the Parenting Ladder in terms of}
Your knowledge of how children grow and develop?

Your confidence that you know what is right for your child?

Your ability to create a safe home for your child?

Your success in teaching your child how to behave?

Your skill at finding fun activities that interest your child?

The amount of stress in your life right now?

Your ability to cope with the stress in your life?

Parenting is often smoother when others are there to help. Where would
you put yourself on the Parenting Ladder in terms of:

Other parents for you to talk to?

Someone to help you in an emergency?

Someone to offer helpful advice or moral support?
Someone for you to relax with?

Professional people to talk to when you have a question
about your child?

Your overall satisfaction with the amount of support
in your life?

129

Do you and/or your partner
have medical insurance?

You Yes No
Partner Yes No

If yes, what kind?

. L Private/HMO

[- Medicaid/MA

1:- State Health Plan
1; Other (Explain)

 

Do you and/or your partner

have any type of dental
insurance?

You Yes No
Partner Yes No

If yes, what kind?

I—

._; Private
I Medicaid/MA

C Other (explain)

ADULT HEALTH SURVEY

About how many times in
the past year have you
been to a doctor or

other health care
provider?

 

Your
partner?

 

If none, when was the last
time you visited a doctor
or health care provider?

 

Your
partner?

 

About how many times in
the past year have you
visited a

dentist?

 

Your
partner?

 

If none, when was the last
time you did visit a
dentist?

 

Your
partner?

 

130

Have you or your
partner had any
injuries or serious
illnesses in the past
year?
You
No
Partner Yes

No

Yes

If yes, please explain

 

 

 

About how many
times in the past year
have you missed
work due to an
illness/injury?

 

Your
partner?

Have you been
pregnant in the past
three years
Yes No
If yes: How many
times

 

Are you and your
partner able to have
more children?

Yes No

If so, do you
currently use birth
control?

Yes No

In the past three years, have you or your partner experienced any of the following
health problems?

You Partner You Partner

Heart Problems D D Joint Problems D D
High Blood Pressure D D Chronic Pain D D
Diabetes D D Eating Disorder/

Obesity D D
Cancer D D Skin Problems D D
Digestive Permanent Disability D D
Problems D D
Liver Problems D D Sexually Transmitted
Seizure Disorder D D Disease D D
Depression/Anxiety D D Reproductive

Problems D D
Anger Management D D Bladder Infections D D
Hepatitis D D Drug Problem D D
Allergies D D Alcohol Problem D D
Asthma D D Tobacco Use D D
Frequent colds/
flu/sinus D D Anemia D D
Thyroid Problems D D Emotional, physical,
Kidney Problems D D or sexual abuse D D
Fatigue D D Migraines/Headaches D D
Eye or vision
problems D D Learning Disabilities D D
Back Problems D D Arthritis D D

Other (specify)

 

131

First name of: Child 1:

Child 2:

 

Child 3:

 

Does C] have medical
insurance?

3 Private/HMO

Lil Medicaid/MA

"1 State Plan

B Other (Explain):

 

C2: Y Yes Y No If yes,
what kind?

D Private/HMO

[J Medicaid/MA

1 State Plan

1 Other (Explain):

 

C3: Y Yes Y No If yes,
what kind?

:1 Private/HMO

I; Medicaid/MA

_’ State Plan
Other (Explain):

[J T

 

About how many times
in the past year has your
child been to a doctor or
other health care
provider?

C1 C2
C3

—

If none, when was the
last time your child
Visited a doctor or health
care provider?

C1 C2

C 3

 

CHILD HEALTH SURVEY

Does C1 have any type of
dental insurance? Y Yes Y
No If yes, What kind?

1,} Private

CI. Medicaid/MA

L Other (Explain):

 

C2: Y Yes Y No If yes, what
kind?

13 Private

T3 Medicaid/MA

2 Other (Explain):

 

C3: Y Yes Y No If yes, What
kind?

13 Private

[3 Medicaid/MA

1] Other (Explain):

 

About how many times in
the past year has your child
visited a dentist?

C1 C2 C3

——

 

If none, when was the last
time your child did visit a
dentist?

C1 C2
C3

—_

Has your child had
any injuries or
serious illnesses in
the past year?

C1: Y Yes YNo
C2: Y Yes YNo
C3: Y Yes YNo

If yes, please
explain

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About how many
times in the past year
has your child missed
school due to an
illness/inj ury?

C 1:

C2:

C3:

In the past three years, has your child experienced any of the following health

problems?

Allergies

Anemia

Asthma

Cancer

Chronic Pain

Learning Disability

Depression/Anxiety

Anger Management

Diabetes

Digestive Problems

Drug Problem

Alcohol Problem

Ear Infections

Eating Disorder/

Obesity

Eye or vision

Fatigue

Frequent colds/flu/
sinus

Hepatitis

Seizure Disorders

Skin Problems

DDDD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDT

(‘1

DDDD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDN

DDDD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDD8

133

Head Lice
Behavior Problems
Conjunctivitis
(pink eye)
ADD/ADHD
Fetal Alcohol Effects/
Syndrome
Fetal Drug Effects
Broken Bones
Sexually Transmitted
Disease
Skeletal Problems
Tobacco Use D
Migraines/Headaches D
Permanent Disability D
Other (specify)

D DDD DD 009

D

DDDDD DDD DD DD?)

0

00000 DUO 00 1:10w

 

FOOD SECURITY MODULE

These next questions ask about the food eaten in your household in the last 12 months.
Since (current month) of last year, and whether you were able to afford the food you
need.

1. Which of these statements bests describes the food eaten in your household in the
last 12 months:

[I] Enough of the kinds of food we want to eat (SKIP 1a and 1b)

[2] Enough but not always the kinds of foods we want (SKIP 1a)

[3] Sometimes not enough to eat (SKIP 1b)

[4] Often not enough to eat (SKIP 1b)

[ ] DK or Refused (SKIP la and 1b)

1a. [IF OPTION 3 OR 4 SELECTED, ASK] Here are some of the reasons why
people don’t always have enough to eat. For each one, please tell me if that is a
reason why YOU don’t always have enough to eat. [READ LIST. MARK ALL

THAT APPLY]

YES NO DK

D D D Not enough money for food

D D D Not enough time for shopping or cooking
D D D Too hard to get to the store

D D D On a diet

D D D No working stove available

D D D Not able to cook because of health

problems

1b. [IF OPTION 2 SELECTED, ASK] Here are some reasons why people don’t
always have the quality or variety of food they want. For each one, please tell

me if that is a reason Why YOU don’t always have the kinds of food you want to
eat. [READ LIST. MARK ALL THAT APPLY]

YES NO DK

D D D Not enough money for food

D D D Kinds of food we want not available

D D D Not enough time for Shopping or cooking
D D D Too hard to get to the store

D D D On a special diet

134

. Now I’m going to read you several statements that people have made about their
food situation. For these statements, please tell me whether the statement was often
true, sometimes true, or never true for your household in the last 12 months, that is,
since last (name of current month).

The first statement is “We wom’ed whether our food would run out before we
got money to buy more.” Was that often true, sometimes true, or never true for
your household in the last 12 months?

D Often True

D Sometimes True

D Never True

D DK or Refused

. “The food that we bought just didn’t last, and we didn’t have money to get more.”
Was that often, sometimes or never true for your household in the last 12 months?
D Often True
D Sometimes True
D Never True
D DK or Refused

“We couldn’t afford to eat balanced meals.” Was that often. sometimes or never
true for your household in the last 12 months?

D Often True

D Sometimes True

D Never True

D DK or Refused

. “(I/We) relied on only a few kinds of low-cost food to feed (my/our) child/ren
because (I was/we were) running out of money to buy food.” Was that often,
sometimes or never true for your household in the last 12 months?

D Often True

D Sometimes True

D Never True

D DK or Refused

. “(I/We) couldn’t feed (my/our) child/ren a balanced meal, because I couldn’t afford
that.” Was that often, sometimes or never true for your household in the last 12
months?

D Often True

D Sometimes True

D Never True

D DK or Refused

If answer “often true” or “sometimes true” to any one of Questions 2-6, or response [3]
or [4] to Question 1, then ask questions 7-16, otherwise stop here.

135

7. “(My/Our child was/The children were) not eating enough because (I/we) just
couldn’t afford enough food.” Was that often. sometimes or never true for your
household in the last 12 months?

D Often True

D Sometimes True
D Never True

D DK or Refused

8. In the last 12 months, since last (name of current month), did you (or other adults in
your household) ever cut the size of your meals or skip meals because there wasn’t
enough money for food?

D Yes
D No (Skip 8a)
D DK (Skip 8a)

8a. [IF YES ABOVE, ASK] How often did this happen—almost every month, some
months but not every month, or in only 1 or 2 months?

D Almost every month

D Some months, but not every month

D Only one or 2 months
D DK

9. In the last 12 months, did you ever eat less than you felt you Should because there
wasn’t enough money to buy food?
D Yes
D No
D DK

10. In the last 12 months. were you ever hungry but didn’t eat because you couldn’t
afford enough food?
D Yes
D No
D DK

1 1. In the last 12 months, did you lose weight because you didn’t have enough money
for food?

D Yes
D No
D DK

If any answer to Question 7-1 1 is affirmative, continue, otherwise stop here.

136

12. In the last 12 months did (you/you or other adults in your household) ever not eat
for a whole day because there wasn’t enough money for food?
D Yes
D No (Skip 12a)
D DK (Skip 12a)

12a. [IF YES TO 12, ASK] How often did this happen—almost every month, some
months, but not every month, or in only 1 or 2 months?

D Almost every month

D Some months, but not every month

D Only one or 2 months
D DK

13. The next questions are about children living in the household who are under 18
years old. In the last 12 months, since (current month) of last year, did you ever cut
the size of (your child’s/any of the children’s) meals because there wasn’t enough
money for food?

D Yes
D No
D DK

14. In the last 12 months, did (CHILD’S NAME/any of the children) ever skip meals
because there wasn’t enough money for food?
D Yes
D No (skip 14a)
D UK (Skip 14a)

14a. [IF YES ABOVE, ASK] How often did this happen—almost every month, some
months but not every month, or in only 1 or 2 months?

D Almost every month

D Some months, but not every month

D Only one or 2 months
D DK

15. In the last 12 months, (was your child/were the children) ever hungry but you just
couldn’t afford more food?
D Yes
D No
D DK

16. In the last 12 months, did (your child/any of the children) ever not eat for a whole
day because there wasn’t enough money for food?
D Yes
D No
D DK

REFERENCES

138

REFERENCES

Ames, B. D., Brosi, W., & Damiano-Teixeira, K. (2003, November). The ecology of a
rural community: Implications for wage-eaming women. Paper presented at the

65th National Council on Family Relations Annual Conference, Vancouver, BC ,
Canada.

Bauer, J. W. (2003). Rural F amilies Speak: Research Report. University of Minnesota.

Bauer, J. W., Braun, B., & Olson, P. D. (2000). Welfare to well-being framework for
research, education and outreach. The Journal of Consumer Affairs. 34(1), 62-81.

Brown. A. C., Brody, G. H., & Stoneman, Z. (2000). Rural black women and depression:
A contextual analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 187-198.

Bubolz. M. M. & Sontag, M. S. (1993). Human ecology theory. In P. G. Boss, W. J.
Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of
family theories and methods (pp. 419-448). New York: Plenum Press.

Canary, D. J., Stafford, L., & Semic, B. A. (2002). A panel study of the associations
between maintenance strategies and relational characteristics. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 64, 395-406.

Casey, P. Goolsby, S., Berkowitz, C., Frank, D., Cook, J ., Cutts, D., Black, M. M.,
Zaldivar, N., Levenson, S., Heeren, T., & Meyers, A. (2004). Maternal

depression, changing public assistance, food security, and child health status.
Pediatrics, 113, 298—304.

Cauce, A. M., Stewart, A., Rodriguez, M. D., Cochran, B., & Ginzler, J. (2003).
Overcoming the odds? Adolescent development in the context of urban poverty.

In Luthar (ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 343-363). New York: Cambridge
University Press.

C heng, T. (2002). Welfare recipients: How do they become independent? Social Work
Research, 26, 1 59-170.

Coiro, M. J. (2001). Depressive symptoms among women receiving welfare. Women &
Health, 32, 1-18.

C onger. R. D. & Conger, K. J. (2002). Resilience in Midwestern families: Selected
findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 64, 361-373.

Cowan. P. A., Cowan, C. P, & Schulz, M. S. (2003). Thinking about risk and resilience in
families. In F. Walsh (Ed.), Normal family process: Growing diversity and
complexity (pp. 1-36). New York: Guilford Press.

139

Danziger, S. K., Ananat, E. 0., Browning, K. G. (2004). Childcare subsidies and the
transition from welfare to work. Family Relations, 53, 219-228.

Dearing, E., Taylor, B. A., & McCartney, K. (2004). Implications of family income
dynamics for women’s depressive symptoms during the first 3 years after
childbirth. American Journal Of Public Health, 94, 1372-1377.

DeJong, G. F., Chamratrithirong, A., & Tran, Q. G. (2002). For better, for worse: Life
satisfaction consequences of migration. The International Migration Review, 3,
838-863.

Dennis, J. M., Parke, R. D., Coltrane, S., Blacher, J. & Borthwick-Duffy, S. A. (2003).
Economic pressure, maternal depression, and child adjustment in Latino families:
An exploratory study. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 24, 183-202.

Dyk, P. H. (2004). Complexity of family life among low-income and working poor:
Introduction to the special issue. Family Relations, 53, 122-126.

Ennis, N. E., Hobfall, S. E. & Schroder, K. E. E. (2000). Money doesn’t talk, it swears:
How economic stress and resistance resources impact inner-city women’s
depressive mood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 149-173.

Hammen, C. (2003). Risk and protective factors for children of depressed parents. In
Luthar (ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 50-75). New York: Cambridge
University Press.

Hammen, C. & Brennan, P. A. (2003). Severity, chronicity, and timing of maternal
depression and risk for adolescent offspring diagnosis in a community sample.
Archives of General Psychiatry, 60, 253-258.

Heymann, S. J. (2000). The widening gap: Why America’s working families are in
Jeopardy and what can be done about it. New York: Basic Books.

Heymann, S. J. (2002). Low-income parents and the time famine. In S. Hewlett & C.

West (Eds), Taking parenting public: The case for a new social movement (pp.
103-116). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Hovey, J. D. & Magar’ia, C. G. (2002). Exploring the mental health of Mexican migrant
farm workers in the Midwest: Psychosocial predictors of psychological distress

and suggestions for prevention and treatment. The Journal of Psychology, 136,
493-513.

Islam, J CS. (2004). Marital relationship status, social support and psychological well-
being among rural, low-income mothers. Unpublished master’s thesis, University
of Maryland.

140

Jackson, A. P. (1998). The role of social support in parenting for low-income, Single,
black mothers. The Social Service Review, 72, 365-3 78.

Jackson, A. P. (1999). The effects of nonresident father involvement on single black
mothers and their young children. Social Work, 44, 156-166.

Jackson, A. P., & Huang, C. C. (1998). Concerns about children’s development:
Implications for single, employed black mothers’ well-being. Social Work
Research, 22, 233-240.

Lavee, Y. & Olson, D. H. (1991). Family types and response to stress. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 53, 786-798

Lichter, D. T. & Jayakody, R. (2002). Welfare reform: How do we measure success?
Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 117-141.

Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical
evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 7], 543-562.

Luthar, S. S., D’Avanzo, K., & Hites, S. (2003). Maternal drug abuse versus other
psychological disturbances: Risks and resilience among children. In Luthar (ed.),
Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 104-129). New York: Cambridge University
Press.

Masten, A. S. & Powell, J. L. (2003). A resilience framework for research, policy, and
practice. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the
context of childhood adversities (pp. 1-25). New York: Cambridge University
Press.

McCubbin, H. 1., McCubbin, M. A., & Thompson, A. I. (1993). Resiliency in families:
The role of family schema and appraisal in family adaptation to crisis. In
Brubaker (ed.), Family relations: Challengesfor the future (pp. 153-177).
Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

McCubbin, H. I., McCubbin, M. A., & Thompson, A. 1., Han, S., Allen, C. T. (1997).
Families under stress: What makes them resilient. Journal of Family and
Consumer Sciences, 89, 2-11.

McCubbin, H. I. & Patterson, J. M. (1983). The family stress process: The double ABCX
model of adjustment and adaptation. In McCubbin, et al (ed.), Social stress and
the family (pp. 7-27). New York: Haworth Press.

Mirowsky, J. & Ross, C. E. (1990). Control or defense? Depression and the sense of
control over good and bad outcomes. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31,
70-86.

141

Moen, P., Robison, J. & Dempster-McClain, D. (1995). Caregiving and women’s well-
being: A life course approach. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 259-
273.

O’Brien, M., Heron Asay, J ., & McCluskey-Fawcett, K. (1999). Family functioning and

maternal depression following premature birth. Journal of Reproductive and
Infant Psychology, 1 7, 175-188.

Olson, D. H. (1993). Family continuity and change: A family life-cycle perspective. In
Brubaker (ed.), Family relations: Challenges for thefuture (pp. 17-40). Newbury
Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Olson, C. M., Anderson, K., Kiss, E., Lawrence, F. C., & Seiling, S. B. (2004). Factors
protecting against and contributing to food insecurity among rural families.
Family Economics and Nutrition Review, I 6, 12-20.

Oltman, P. J. (2003). Finding meaning: A phenomenological study oflow-income rural
women. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Owens, E. B. & Shaw, D. S. (2003). Poverty and early childhood development. In Luthar
(ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 267-292). New York: Cambridge
University Press.

Patterson, J. M. (2002). Integrating family resilience and family stress theory. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 64, 349-360.

Patterson, J. M. (2002). Understanding family resilience. Journal of'Clinical Psychology.
58. 233-246.

Pearlin, L. I., Menaghan, E. G., Lieberman, M. A., & Mullan, J. T. (1981). The stress
process. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 337-356.

Pearlin. L. I. & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 19, 2-21.

Piescher, K. N. & Bauer, J. W. (2004). Economic and social factors of depression for
rural low income mothers. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the
National Council on Family Relations, Orlando, FL.

Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the
general population. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1(3), 385-401.

Reynolds, A. J. & Ou, S. R. (2003). Promoting resilience through early childhood
intervention. In Luthar (ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 436-459). New
York: Cambridge University Press.

142

 

Richards, L. N. (1998). One step at a time: A report on the outcomes of Oregon’s
1996/1997 Even Start Programs. Prepared for Oregon Even Start Programs and
Department of Community College & Workforce Development. Corvallis, OR:
College of Home Economics and Education, Oregon State University.

Richards, L. N., Merrill, M., Corson, C., Sano, Y., Graham, N., & Weber, P. (2000).
After we say goodbye: A follow-up of Oregon’s Even Start families. Technical
report prepared for the Office of Community Colleges and Work Force
Development, Oregon Department of Education. Corvallis, OR: College of Home
Economics and Education, Oregon State University.

Richards, L. N., Coehlo. D., Guyer. A., Mammen, 8., Bauer, J. W., Berry, A., et. a1.
(2004). Health concerns of rural low-income families. Paper presented at the
Annual Conference of the National Council on Family Relations, Orlando, FL.

Ross, C. E. (2000). Neighborhood disadvantage and adult depression. Journal of Health
and Social Behavior, 41, 177-187.

Ross, C. E. & Huber, J. (1985). Hardship and depression. Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 26, 312-327.

Ross, C. E. & Mirowsky, J. (1989). Explaining the social patterns of depression: Control
and problem solving—or support and talking? Journal of Health and Social
Behavior. 30. 206-219.

Seidman, E. & Pedersen, S. (2003). Holistic contextual perspectives on risk, protection,
and competence among low-income urban adolescents. In Luthar (ed.), Resilience
and vulnerability (pp. 318-342). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Seifer, R. (2003). Young children with mentally ill parents: Resilient developmental
systems. In Luthar (ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 29-49). New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Siefert, K., Heflin, C. M., Corcoran, M. E., & Williams, D. R. (2004). Food insufficiency
and physical and mental health in a longitudinal survey of welfare recipients.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 45, 171-186.

Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life.
New York: Free Press.

Siefert, K., Heflin, C., Corcoran, M. E., & Williams, D. R. (2004). Food insufficiency

and physical and mental health in a longitudinal survey of welfare recipients.
Journal of Health and Behavior, 45, 171-186.

143

 

Taylor, R. D., Rodriguez, A. U., Seaton, E. K., & Dominguez, A. (2004). Association of
financial resources with parenting and adolescent adjustment in African American
families. Journal of Adolescent Research, I 9, 267-283.

Thomas, C. L. (Ed). (1993). Taber’s encyclopedic medical dictionary (17th ed.).
Philadelphia: F. A. Davis Company.

Turner, R. J. & Lloyd, D. A. (1999). The stress process and the social distribution of
depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 374-404.

Turner, R. J. & Lloyd, D. A. (1999). Personal resources and the social distribution of
depression. American Journal of Psychology, 27, 643-672.

United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. (2002). Rural
America at a glance. [Brochure]. Retrieved November 6, 2004 from United States
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service Web site:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/rdrr94-1/

Walsh, F. (2003). Family resilience: A framework for clinical practice. Family Process,
42, 1-18.

Wyman, P. A. (2003). Emerging perspectives on context specificity of children’s
adaptation and resilience: Evidence from a decade of research with urban children
in adversity. In Luthar (ed.), Resilience and vulnerability (pp. 293-317). New
York: Cambridge University Press.

144

Illlllilllillllll