Moderating effects of race on internalizing and externalizing behaviors among children of criminal justice and child welfare involved mothers

Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth

Moderating effects of race on internalizing and externalizing behaviors among children of criminal justice and child welfare involved mothers Keva M. Miller a,⁎, Lewis Bank b, 1 a b

Portland State University School of Social Work, Academic Student Recreation Center Ste. 600, 1800 SW 6th Ave. Portland, OR 97201, United States Portland State University Regional Research Institute for Human Services Suite 900, 1600 SW 4th Avenue, Portland OR 97201, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 12 September 2012 Received in revised form 16 December 2012 Accepted 17 December 2012 Available online 5 January 2013 Keywords: Race Children Criminal justice Child welfare Internalizing behaviors Externalizing behaviors

a b s t r a c t This study examined whether the influences of multiple maternal criminal justice involvement (MCJI), community adversity, and violence exposure on children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors were moderated by race. The study included 409 children of criminal justice and child welfare involved mothers, ages 5–15 who participated in the National Survey on Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW). Results indicated that race, defined as Black vs. non-Black, moderated the associations between multiple MCJI and internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Decomposition of the regression effects indicated that non-Black children exposed to multiple MCJI, as compared to non-Black children who were not exposed to multiple MCJI, exhibited significant increases in both internalizing and externalizing behaviors, while Black children who experience multiple MCJI, on average, showed no increases. Similarly, race moderated the association between exposure to community adversity and externalizing behaviors. The decomposition of regression effects indicated that non-Black children who experienced higher levels of community adversity exhibited increases in externalizing behaviors, while Black children showed no increases. Criminal justice and child welfare practice and policy implications are discussed. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction For the past several decades, America's overall discontentment with penal policies, concerns with public safety, and the effects of crime on communities have surfaced as highly publicized national issues (Caplan, 1976; Gartner & Kruttschnitt, 2004). In response, state and federal laws of the 1970s and 1980s implemented stiffer penalties for drug related crimes, instituted mandatory minimum sentences, abolished federal parole, decreased “good time” credit, and imposed automatic life sentences for third felony convictions (Arditti, LambertShute, & Joest, 2003; Bloom, Owen, & Covington, 2004; Brownell, Miller, & Raimon, 2006; Smith & Young, 2003). The number of women involved with the criminal justice system has increased dramatically and as a collateral consequence their children have become one of the fastest growing at-risk populations (Glaze & Maruschak, 2008; Maruschak, Glaze, & Mumola, 2010; Mumola, 2000). 1.1. Contexts of race and criminal justice It is well documented that people of color are represented disproportionately in America's correctional systems, with Black men and women represented at more than triple their representation within the U.S. population (Beck, 2000; Harrison & Beck, 2006; Mumola, ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 503 725 5243. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.M. Miller), [email protected] (L. Bank). 1 Tel.: +1 503 725 9614. 0190-7409/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.12.022

2000; Sabol, West, & Cooper, 2009; Western & Wildeman, 2009). As a result, Black children are disproportionality represented among the children of criminal justice parents population and are affected disparately by criminal justice policies that are reflected in the historical sentencing disparities of state and federal drug laws (American Civil Liberties Union, 2006; Foster & Hagan, 2007; The Sentencing Project, 2010; Western & Wildeman, 2009). National data show that Black children account for 15% of the U.S. general population, yet represent 45% of the children with incarcerated parents and in contrast, White children represent 57% of the U.S. general population and 28% of the children with incarcerated parents population (Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 2008; Glaze & Maruschak, 2008). In terms of disparity, Black children are 7.5 times more likely than White children to have an incarcerated parent (Glaze & Maruschak, 2008). There are no reliable statistics to account for the number of children by race who experience parental arrest, probation, or parole. Criminal justice systems do not routinely track those data nor inquire about the impact that these types of involvements have on their children. It is reasonable, however, to believe that the parental incarceration statistics are similar to parental arrest, probation, and parole statistics; thus inferring that those types of involvement likely disproportionally and disparately affect Black children. 1.1.1. Intersections between child welfare, criminal justice, and race Maternal criminal justice involvement (MCJI) and the associated risks may be part of a more complicated dynamic for children of color,

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

particularly Black children—one with a higher prevalence of multilayered challenges in socio-ecological domains within and outside the criminal justice context (Miller, Gil-Kashiwabara, Briggs, & Hatcher, 2010). For example, children of criminal justice involved mothers are also at risk for exposure to the child welfare system (Hairston, 2008; Johnson & Waldfogel, 2002)—a system that child welfare scholars and stakeholders have increased concern about racial disproportionality and disparity. Studies have consistently shown that Black children are represented disproportionately and disparately in child welfare systems across the nation (Dettlaff & Rycraft, 2008; Dettlaff et al., 2011; Harris & Hackett, 2008; Marts, Lee, McRoy, & McCroskey, 2008; McRoy, 2004; Miller, Cahn, & Orellana, 2012; Sedlak & Broadhurst, 1996; Sedlak & Schultz, 2005; Sedlak et al., 2010; U.S. General Accounting Office, 2007). Black children are in fact overrepresented in all 50 states, American Indian children in 24 states, and Hispanic children in 10 states (Hill, Jackson, & Waheed, 2008). It is unclear whether there is a connection between the overrepresentation of Black children in the child welfare system and the overrepresentation of Black men and women in the criminal justice system as few scholars have examined these associations. However, these parallels and the vulnerabilities associated with dual system involvement merit further attention (Miller et al., 2010; Wells & Daniels, 2008). 1.2. Risk exposure and children's mental health Studies have consistently shown that children exposed to parental criminal justice involvement are at risk for numerous internalizing and externalizing behaviors (Bocknek, Sanderson, & Britner, 2009; Kampfner, 1995; Miller, Orellana, Johnson, Krase, & Anderson-Nathe, in press; Myers, Smarsh, Amlund-Hagen, & Kennon, 1999; Phillips, Burns, Wagner, & Barth, 2004; Poehlmann, 2005). In addition to child welfare exposure, children who experience MCJI are susceptible to risks that have the potential to increase mental health problems. Such vulnerabilities include recurrent parent–child separation due to their mother's repeat encounters with the correctional system, adverse community conditions, and violence within and outside the family (Johnston, 1995; Myers et al., 1999; Phillips, Erkanli, Keeler, Costello, & Angold, 2006; Swann & Sylvester, 2006). 1.2.1. Multiple maternal criminal justice involvement and children's mental health There are no precise statistics on women who experience multiple encounters with the criminal justice system as most data are gleaned only from incarceration statistics. It is estimated, however, that approximately 53–66% of incarcerated women have a history of multiple arrests prior to their current prison term (Glaze & Maruschak, 2008; Greenfeld & Snell, 1999; Johnston, 2006). The effects of multiple maternal arrests and incarcerations on children's mental health are unknown, as researchers have not focused on the issue. It is conceivable that multiple MCJI, even in situations where the repeated encounters with the criminal justice system are short-lived (i.e., arrested and released), would result in sustained enduring emotional stress for children. In addition, children's capacities to trust may become compromised, which may lead to internalizing behaviors such as depression, anxiety and/or reactive externalizing behaviors such as aggression and delinquency. More research is needed to understand how children respond to multiple MCJI and whether race influences the potential association between multiple MCJI and children's mental health. 1.2.2. Community adversity, violence exposure, and children's mental health Women involved with the criminal justice system often encounter risks within their social contexts that include residing in communities characterized by poverty, violence, and other adverse conditions (DeHart, 2008; Raj et al., 2008). The same vulnerabilities that further

473

complicate the lives of criminal justice involved women can also pose formidable challenges for their children. Predictive models have also found correlations between violence exposure, including community violence, and children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors (Aneshensel & Sucoff, 1996; Brooks-Gunn, Duncan, Klebanov, & Sealand, 1993; Cooley-Quille, Boyd, Frantz, & Walsh, 2001; DuRant, Cadenhead, Pendergrast, Slavens, & Linder, 1994; Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998; Johnson et al., 2002; Lambert, Boyd, Cammack, & Ialongo, 2012; Mrug & Windle, 2010). Other studies, however, suggests that not all children exposed to chronic violence, in particular community violence, exhibit internalizing behaviors (Cooley-Quille, Turner, & Beidel, 1995; Fitzpatrick & Bodizar, 1993). While not conclusive, a possible explanation for such findings is that children may become cognitively desensitized to habitual violence and react to such exposures through expression of externalizing behaviors (Farrell & Bruce, 1997; Fowler, Tompsett, Braciszewski, Jacques-Tiura, & Baltes, 2009; Ng-Mak, Salzinger, Feldman, & Stueve, 2004). Research conducted on children of incarcerated mothers has suggested that adverse community conditions and violence negatively affect the population's internalizing and externalizing functioning. For example, Mackintosh, Myers, and Kennon (2006) found that exposure to violence and other neighborhood risks were common among their study sample of children with incarcerated mothers. Thirty-six percent of the children had witnessed violence, 27% lived in neighborhoods that were too unsafe to play, and 25% had hidden to protect themselves from neighborhood dangers such as shootings. In another study, DeHart and Altshulter (2009) found that children of incarcerated mothers who had witnessed violence were more passive, cried more frequently, and were more verbally and physically aggressive as compared to children with other family histories. Despite these efforts to understand the associations between exposure to adverse community conditions and violence and children's mental health, no known study has focused on how race potentially moderates these associations among children exposed to MCJI. 1.2.3. Moderating effects of race on children's mental health The study of race is potentially confounded by complex historical, political, and social factors that can obscure the true effects of race (Murry, Smith, & Hill, 2001). Such complexities make it difficult to discern the extent that race and its cultural aspects affect children's development. There is literature that advances the notion that Black families possess qualities that are different from other cultures in that there is flexibility, family collectivism, and cohesion that historically has served to protect children from difficult life circumstances (Chipman, Wells, & Johnson, 2002; Derezotes & Poertner, 2005; Greene, 1995; McCullough-Chavis & Waites, 2004; Miller, 2007; Miller et al., 2010). Thus, it is plausible that the risks associated with MCJI may have less of an effect on Black children's mental health as compared to other children. However, it remains unclear whether race moderates the effects of MCJI, community adversity, and violence exposure on children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors. 1.3. Purpose of the current study While a number of studies have increased the knowledge base on children of criminal justice involved mothers, the extant research has primarily focused on descriptive analyses of race. Previous studies have not examined the extent that race interacts with risks associated with MCJI and how these potential interactions affect children's mental health. Given that Black children, as compared to other children, in America are far more likely to experience MCJI, the need and opportunity exist to examine a greater dynamic beyond simply reporting descriptive race statistics. Examining the associations between race, multiple MCJI, and environmental risks will help contextualize the phenomenon and increase our understanding of the role race has in shaping children's mental health outcomes.

474

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

Multiple Maternal Criminal Justice Involvement

Race

Internalizing & Externalizing Problems

Community Adversity

Violence Exposure Fig. 1. Analytic model for direct and indirect effects of predictors on outcomes.

The current study addresses this gap by examining the predictive validity of race, multiple MCJI, exposure to community adversity, and violence exposure on internalizing and externalizing behaviors among children with criminal justice and child welfare involved mothers. Moreover, the study examined whether there were differential outcomes for Black as compared to non-Black children who experienced MCJI by analyzing whether the influences of multiple MCJI, exposure to community adversity, and exposure to violence on children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors were moderated by race. Specifically, it was hypothesized that Black children, children who experienced multiple MCJI, children exposed to higher levels of community adversity and children with violence exposure would exhibit increased internalizing and externalizing behaviors. However, it was also hypothesized that race would serve as a moderating mechanism such that nonBlack children would be less resilient than Black children in the context of multiple MCJI, community adversity, and violence exposure (Fig. 1). 2. Methodology

CPS sample, 61.6% resided with their biological mother (n = 3387) and 52.6% (n = 1780) of those children had completed data on MCJI status. Twenty-three percent of the 1780 children experienced MCJI. The total sample for the current study is 409 children. 2.2. Measures 2.2.1. Multiple MCJI Multiple MCJI was a researcher-constructed variable gleaned from Audio Computer-Assisted Self Interview (ACASI) technology generated questions. The ACASI was administered to children's primary caregivers, in this sample the primary caregivers were biological mothers, to obtain information on criminal justice status. MCJI was considered only if the mother's involvement with the criminal justice system (arrest, sanctioned probation, incarceration) occurred after the child's birth. MCJI prior to the child's birth with no subsequent arrest, probation sanction, or incarceration were excluded from the current sample. The multiple MCJI variable was a dichotomous measure: 0 = a single reported occurrence and 1 = two or more reported occurrences.

2.1. Sample design and procedures This study used data from the National Survey on Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW) Child Protective Services (CPS), a national probability longitudinal study of 5501 youth and families assessed for child maltreatment. The NSCAW research design used a two-staged stratified cluster sample of children age 0 to 14 2 in the United States. In stage one, nine sampling strata (eight strata represented by the eight states with the largest child welfare caseloads and a ninth stratum corresponding to the District of Columbia and 36 states) were divided into 92 randomly selected Primary Sampling Units (PSU) utilizing a probability- proportionate-to-size procedure. In the second stage, 5501 children were selected from the 92 PSU and stratified by age, receipt of child welfare services, type of placement, and type of maltreatment. Cases were excluded in circumstances where: (1) the child was older than 14 years old; (2) a sibling was participating in the study; (3) the child was identified as the perpetrator of maltreatment; or (4) the CPS referral was deemed insufficient to investigate. Wave 1 of the NSCAW study began in October 1999, Waves 2–4 occurred at 12 months, 18 months, and 36-months after the initial investigation, and Wave 5 follow-up was completed 59–97 months (about 5–8 years) after the initial investigation. Additional details on the study design are available in Dowd et al., 2006. The current study sample consisted of children ages 5–15 with criminal justice involved mothers who resided with their biological mother in an in-home setting (i.e., non-foster home setting) at the time of initial data collection (Wave 1). Of the 5501 children in the 2 Several children in the NSCAW study turned 15 (n = 99) after data collection began; however, the official ages for recruitment were 0 to 14.

2.2.2. Community adversity This study used the abridged version of the Community Environment Scale (CES), items 1–5 from the NSCAW-CES nine-item questionnaire. The CES reports on parents' perceptions of the severity of hazardous conditions within their communities (e.g., assaults, muggings, the presence of delinquent gangs, drug activity). The NASW-CES used a 3-point Likert scale to assess parents' perceptions of community related behaviors. The response categories were: 0 = not a problem at all; 1 = somewhat of a problem; and 2 = a big problem with a theoretical total score range from 0 to 10. Higher NSCAW-CES total scores indicate a higher perceived level of adverse community conditions. The NSCAW-CES sample internal consistency is .86 Cronbach's alpha (Dowd et al., 2006). 2.2.3. Violence exposure The Violence Exposure Scale-Revised (VEX-R) was used to measure children's exposure to violence. The VEX-R is a 23-item child self-report scale that employs a 4-point Likert scale to assess whether a child was a recipient of and/or witness to violence in four domains: home, school, neighborhood, and television watching (Raviv et al., 2001). The VEX-R differentiates between mild violence (e.g., yelled at, beat up, pushed) and severe violence (e.g., witnessed an arrest, robbed, threatened with a gun or knife). The mild/severe total exposure to violence scores across all 23 items were used for analysis in this study. Children ages 5 to 10 years old were administered the VEX-R pictorial cartoon-based interview and children ages 11 and older were administered the VEX-R interview without the pictorial depiction of events. The response categories (0 = never; 1 = once; 2 = a few times; and 3 = a lot of times). The Cronbach's alpha for

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

the VEX-R has a range from .72 to .96 (Dowd et al., 2006; Raviv, Raviv, Shimoni, Fox, & Leavitt, 1999; Shahinfar, Fox, & Leavitt, 2000). 2.2.4. Children's internalizing and externalizing behavior The CBCL two broadband problem scales, internalizing (e.g., anxiety, depression, withdrawal) and externalizing (e.g., aggression, impulsivity, delinquency) were utilized in this study. The CBCL is an empirically supported 113-item measure with well-established reliability and validity, which was administered to children's identified parental caregivers to measure childhood mental health (Achenbach, 1991). Parents responded to items pertaining to the frequency of their child's behaviors, using a 3-point Likert scale: 1 = not true; 2 = somewhat or sometimes true; and 3 = very true or often true. Higher T scores on the two broadband problem scales indicate increased pathology. CBCL T scores between 60 and 63 are in the borderline clinical range and scores greater than 63 are in the clinical range. The Cronbach's alpha for the CBCL has ranged from .78 to .97 (Achenbach, 1991; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001). 2.2.5. Control variables Three of the control variables used in this study were demographic variables: sex, age, and race. Sex was coded as male = 0 and female = 1. The age variable ranged from 5 to 15 years old. Race was the moderating variable used in this study. Race was coded as a dichotomous dummy variable, where 0 = all other races (i.e., White, Hispanic, other) and 1 = Black. Substantiation of child maltreatment was the fourth control variable in the study. Substantiated child maltreatment was a dichotomous variable (0 = no substantiated maltreatment and 1 = substantiated maltreatment). 2.3. Data analysis Analyses were conducted with data weighted to adjust for the complex sampling design and to estimate population parameters that closely represent youth assessed for maltreatment in the U.S. child welfare system. Details of the NSCAW weighting construction are available in Dowd et al., 2006. Correlational analyses examined the associations between the predictor variables (i.e., demographics, child maltreatment, multiple MCJI, community adversity, violence exposure) and outcome variables (i.e., internalizing and externalizing behaviors). The research questions were tested using a series of hierarchical multiple regression analytic procedures. Sex, age, race, and substantiation of child maltreatment were entered in the first step. Multiple MCJI was entered in the second step. Community adversity and violence exposure both were entered in the third step. The analysis plan follows Baron and Kenny's (1986) model for establishing moderation. First, the predictor variables (i.e., multiple MCJI, community adversity, violence exposure) were analyzed to

475

determine whether they were significantly associated with the outcome variables (i.e., internalizing, externalizing). Second, the hypothesized moderator, race, was analyzed to test for a significant association with the outcome variables. To examine the moderating effects of race (0 = non-Black and 1 = Black), the three interaction terms 1) Black×multiple MCJI; 2) Black×community adversity; and 3) Black×violence exposure were entered in three separate analyses in the fourth step of each regression analysis. Note that each interaction term was calculated without the influence of the other two interaction terms in the fourth and final step. Decomposition of significant moderation effects was conducted consistent with the Aiken and West test and interpretation for moderation (Aiken & West, 1991). 3. Results 3.1. Sample characteristics The study sample consisted of 409 children who were assessed by child protective services, residing in in-home settings, and had mothers with criminal justice involvement. Males were 51.1% of the sample with a mean age of 9.9 (SD = 3.03). The sample was 43.1% White, 36.8% Black, 10.4% Hispanic, and 9.8% other. Slightly fewer than half (47.4%) of the children experienced multiple MCJI. Black and Hispanic children were represented disproportionately and Black children were represented disparately within the MCJI subsample (see Table 1a). Of the mothers with multiple criminal justice involvement, 37.7% had 2–3 encounters, 6.3% had 4–5 encounters, and 3.4% had 6 or more encounters. Additional data on multiple MCJI are reported in Table 1b. The CES community adversity mean was 2.33 (SD= 2.73) and VEX-R exposure to violence mean was 5.74 (SD= 4.03). The CBCL internalizing mean was 55 (SD = 11.15), with 10.7% of the sample scoring in the borderline clinical range and 25.2% scoring in the clinical range. The CBCL externalizing mean was 60.30 (SD = 11.44), with 10.1% of the sample scoring in the borderline clinical range and 43.9% scoring in the clinical range (see Table 1a). 3.2. Bivariate correlations Table 2 shows that children's internalizing behaviors were significantly associated with race (r=.159, p=b .01), multiple MCJI (r=.154, pb .01), community adversity (r=.191, pb .001), and violence exposure (r=.178, pb .001). Children's externalizing behaviors were significantly associated with age (r=.116, pb .05), race (r=.197, pb .001), multiple MCJI (r=.179, pb .001), and violence exposure (r=.149, pb .01). While internalizing and externalizing behaviors were highly correlated at r = .672, all bivariate correlations, with two exceptions, were b .2. These two exceptions were race with multiple MCJI (r = .311) and race with community adversity (r = .275). Thus, race (Black as

Table 1 a Race percentages, means, and standard deviations for Multiple maternal criminal justice involvement (MCJI), community adversity, violence exposure, and internalizing behaviors, and externalizing behaviors. Percentages

Study sample Multiple MCJIa Multiple MCJIb

Black

White

Hispanic

Other

Total

36.8% 24.9% 68.0%

43.1% 18.6% 43.2%

10.4% 2.7% 25.6%

9.8% 1.2% 12.5%

100% 47.4% –

Means and standard deviations Black Community adversity Violence exposure Internalizing behaviors Externalizing behaviors a b

3.31 5.56 57.32 63.25

Between racial/ethnic group comparisons. Within racial/ethnic group comparisons.

(3.07) (3.53) (10.42) (10.08)

White 1.48 6.09 54.21 61.29

(2.17) (3.88) (10.56) (10.33)

Hispanic 3.50 7.24 55.48 56.50

(2.80) (5.47) (11.44) (10.79)

Other

Sample M(SD)

1.11(1.54) 2.87 (3.56) 49.25 (13.71) 48.87 (13.79)

2.33 (2.73) 5.74 (4.03) 55.00 (11.15) 60.30 (11.44)

476

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

Table 1b Maternal criminal justice involvement (MCJI) experiences by race. Within race percentages

Single MCJI 2–3 MCJI 4–5 MCJI 6–10 MCJI

Table 3a Hierarchical regression model for internalizing behaviors (N = 409)†. Full sample

Black

White

Hispanic

Other

Total

32.0% 52.7% 10.7% 4.6%

56.8% 33.5% 5.7% 4.0%

74.4% 25.6% 0.0% 0.0%

87.5% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0%

52.6% 37.7% 6.3% 3.4%

Unstandardized coefficients

1

Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure

2

compared to other children) was significantly associated with multiple MCJI and community adversity.

3

3.3. Multiple regression analyses 3.3.1. Direct effects The two hierarchical regressions that test the hypothesized direct effects of race, multiple MCJI, community adversity, and violence exposure on internalizing and externalizing behaviors are shown in Tables 3a and 4a. The Adjusted R 2 indicates that the four predictor variables accounted for 6.9% of the variance in internalizing behaviors [F(7,367) = 4.941, p b .001]. Community adversity and violence exposure were positively associated with internalizing behaviors. Children exposed to higher levels of community adversity and violence exposure exhibited higher levels of internalizing behaviors as compared to children exposed to lower levels of community adversity and violence exposure (see Table 3a). The Adjusted R 2 indicates that the four predictor variables accounted for 6.6% of the variance in externalizing behaviors [F(7,367) = 4.781, p b .01]. Age and race were significant predictors of externalizing behaviors. Older children and Black children were more likely to exhibit externalizing behaviors as compared to younger and non-Black children. In addition, multiple MCJI and violence exposure predicted externalizing behaviors. Multiple MCJI, as compared to a single MCJI episode, and higher levels of community adversity predicted elevated externalizing behaviors (see Table 4a). 3.3.2. Moderating effects The hierarchical regressions for the three hypothesized interaction effects that test moderation by race on internalizing and externalizing behaviors are shown in Tables 3b and 4b. The Adjusted R 2 indicates that the addition of the race by MCJI interaction term at step four was statistically significant and accounted for 13.9% of the variance in internalizing [F(8,366) = 8.529, p b .001]. The moderator effects for community adversity and violence exposure on internalizing behaviors were not significant (see Table 3b). Fig. 2 illustrates that Black children's

B

SE

t

53.997 −1.639 .058 3.058 .758 53.418 −1.575 .035 2.429 .578 2.174 49.728 −1.361 .004 1.574 −.021 2.292 .628 .493

2.200 1.158 .191 1.199 1.290 2.216 1.155 .191 1.245 1.290 1.200 2.302 1.127 .188 1.255 1.264 1.172 .208 .140

24.545 ns ns 2.550⁎ ns 24.101 ns ns ns ns ns 21.602 ns ns ns ns ns 3.013⁎⁎ 3.511⁎⁎

Note: †Weighted N = 262,799, ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01, ⁎⁎⁎p b .001; Model 1: R = .155, R2 = .024, R^.2 = .013, F(4,370) = ns; Model 2: R = .181, R2 = .033, R^ 2 = .019, F(change)= ns; F(5,369) = 2.487⁎; Model 3: R = .293, R2 = .086, R^ 2 = .069, F(change) = 10.748⁎⁎⁎, F(7,367) = 4.941⁎⁎⁎.

internalizing behaviors were higher than non-Black children's internalizing behaviors when their mothers had a single encounter with the criminal justice system. However, the decomposition regression analyses showed that race moderated the association between multiple MCJI and internalizing behaviors such that non-Black children exposed to multiple MCJI had increased internalizing behaviors while Black children exposed to multiple MCJI showed a decrease in internalizing behaviors. The Adjusted R 2 indicates that with the addition of the significant race by MCJI interaction term at step four, the total variance accounted for in externalizing behaviors [F(8,366) = 5.587, p b .01] was 8.9%, and with the addition of the significant race by community adversity interaction term, the total variance accounted for in externalizing behaviors [F(8,366)= 5.386, p b .01] was 8.6%. The race by violence exposure interaction did not account for significant outcome variance in externalizing behaviors (see Table 4b). Figs. 3 and 4 illustrate that Black children's externalizing behaviors were higher than non-Black children's externalizing behaviors when their mothers had a single encounter with the criminal justice system and with lower community adversity. Consistent with the hypothesis and as shown in Fig. 3, the decomposition analysis revealed that race moderated the association between multiple MCJI and externalizing behaviors such that for non-Black children exposure to multiple MCJI predicted increased externalizing behaviors, while

Table 2 Study Variables Correlation Matrix (N = 409)†. Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Internalizing behaviors Externalizing behavior

–

.052 –

−.063 −.070 –

.086 .042 −.075 –

−.033 .052 .311⁎⁎⁎ .062 –

−.028 −.071 .275⁎⁎⁎ .048 .053 –

−.032 .107⁎ −.033 .072 .026 −.007 –

−.079 .011 .159⁎⁎ .016 .154⁎⁎ .191⁎⁎⁎ .178⁎⁎

.033 .116⁎ .197⁎⁎⁎ −.051 .179⁎⁎⁎

†

Weighted N = 262,799. ⁎ p ≤.05. ⁎⁎ p ≤.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p ≤.001.

.090 .149⁎⁎ .672⁎⁎⁎

– –

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481 Table 3b Hierarchical regression model for internalizing behaviors (N = 409)†.

Table 4b Hierarchical regression model for externalizing behaviors (N = 409)†.

Unstandardized coefficients

4a

4b

4c

Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Race × Multiple MCJI Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Race × Community adversity Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Race × Violence exposure

477

Unstandardized coefficients

B

SE

t

49.221 −2.549 −.055 8.719 −.924 7.276 .723 .481 −13.349 48.958 −1.586 .011 3.626 .378 2.475 1.040 .469 −.817 49.927 −1.285 .054 −1.044 −.083 2.319 .656 .356 .460

2.216 1.104 .181 1.764 1.226 1.441 .201 .135 2.404 2.328 1.128 .187 1.640 1.276 1.172 .297 .140 .423 2.302 1.126 .190 2.175 1.262 1.171 .209 .168 .312

22.216 −2.308⁎ ns 4.942⁎⁎⁎ ns 5.049⁎⁎⁎ 3.596⁎⁎⁎ 3.565⁎⁎⁎ −5.553⁎⁎⁎

4a

21.032 ns ns 2.211 ns 2.112⁎ 3.496⁎⁎⁎ 3.338⁎⁎⁎ ns 21.686 ns ns ns ns 1.981⁎ 3.140⁎⁎ 2.112⁎

4b

ns

4c

Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Race × Multiple MCJI Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Race × Community adversity Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure Race × Violence Exposure

B

SE

t

50.944 .093 .357 7.596 −2.272 5.681 .288 .407 −8.113 50.047 .463 .404 6.460 −1.100 2.938 .874 .376 −1.277 51.340 .849 .415 2.091 −1.751 2.664 .242 .353 .204

2.322 1.157 .189 1.849 1.285 1.510 .211 .142 2.519 2.359 1.144 .189 1.662 1.293 1.188 .301 .142 .428 2.355 1.152 .195 2.225 1.291 1.198 .214 .172 .320

21.943 ns ns 4.109⁎⁎⁎ ns 3.762⁎⁎⁎ ns 2.875⁎⁎ −3.221⁎⁎ 21.216 ns 2.136⁎ 3.888⁎⁎⁎ ns 2.474⁎ 2.901⁎⁎ 2.642⁎⁎ −2.984⁎⁎ 21.800 ns 2.130⁎ ns ns 2.225⁎ ns 2.049⁎ ns

Note: †Weighted N = 262,799, ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01, ⁎⁎⁎p b .001; Model 4a: R = .396, R2 = .157, R^ 2 = .139, F(change) = 30.839⁎⁎⁎, F(8,366) = 8.529⁎⁎⁎; Model 4b: R = .309, R2 = .095, R^ 2 = .076, F(change) = ns, F(8,366) = 4.823⁎⁎⁎; Model 4c: R = .302, R2 = .091, R^ 2 = .072, F(change) = ns, F(8,366)= 4.608⁎⁎⁎.

Note: †Weighted N = 262,799, ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01, ⁎⁎⁎p b .001; Model 4a: R = .330, R2 = .109, R^ 2 = .089, F(change) = 10.374**, F(8,366) = 5.587***; Model 4b: R = .325, R2 = .105, R^ 2 = .086, F(change) = 8.901**, F(8,366) = 5.386***; Model 4c: R = .291, R2 = .085, R^ 2 = .065, F(change) = ns, F(8,366) = 4.227***.

for Black children, exposure to multiple MCJI was associated with a non-significant decrease in externalizing behaviors. As shown in Fig. 4, the decomposition analysis revealed that race moderated the association between community adversity and externalizing behaviors such that non-Black children with higher levels of community adversity exhibited

increased externalizing behaviors in comparison to non-Black children with lower community adversity levels. Black children with higher levels of community adversity experienced non-significant declines in externalizing behavior as compared to Black children with lower levels of community adversity.

4. Discussion Table 4a Hierarchical regression model for externalizing behaviors (N = 409)†. Unstandardized coefficients

1

2

3

Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Intercept Sex Age Race Substantiated maltreatment Multiple MCJI Community adversity Violence exposure

B

SE

t

54.325 .585 .464 4.281 −1.142 53.618 .663 .435 3.514 −1.362 2.654 51.252 .815 .392 3.253 −1.724 2.652 .230 .414

2.215 1.166 .192 1.207 1.299 2.227 1.160 .192 1.250 1.296 1.206 2.349 1.150 .191 1.281 1.290 1.196 .213 .143

24.529 ns 2.410⁎ 3.546⁎⁎⁎ ns 24.080 ns 2.269⁎ 2.810⁎⁎ ns 2.201⁎ 21.818 ns 2.050⁎ 2.540⁎ ns 2.217⁎ ns 2.888⁎⁎

Note: †Weighted N = 262,799, ⁎p b .05, ⁎⁎p b .01, ⁎⁎⁎p b .001: Model 1: R = .218, R2 = .047; R^ 2 = .037, F(4,370) = 4.603⁎⁎; Model 2: R = .244, R2 = .060, R^ 2 = .047, F(change) = 4.843⁎, F(5,369)= 4.689⁎⁎⁎; Model 3: R = .289; R2 = .084, R^ 2 = .066, F(change) = 4.770⁎⁎, F(7,367) = 4.781⁎⁎⁎.

The study's findings contribute to the limited knowledge base concerning the influence of race on the mental health outcomes of children with criminal justice and child welfare involved mothers. The results underscore that Black children's experiences were different from non-Black children evidenced by a number of factors. The findings illustrated Black children's disproportionate representation within the study sample and their disproportionate and disparate representation among children who experienced multiple MCJI. In addition, Black children experienced higher levels of community adversity and elevated internalizing and externalizing behaviors relative to the study sample's mean. 3 Black children's disproportionate representation in this sample is consistent with national child welfare statistics (Sedlak & Broadhurst, 1996; Sedlak & Schultz, 2005; Sedlak et al., 2010; U.S. General Accounting Office, 2007) and criminal justice statistics (Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 2008; Glaze & Maruschak, 2008; Mumola, 2000). Moreover, the fact that Black children were represented disproportionately among the sub-sample of children who experienced multiple MCJI and disparately

3 Of note, Hispanic children and children categorized as other were also represented disproportionately among children with multiple MCJI. Hispanic children experienced higher levels of community adversity and violence exposure relative to the study sample's mean.

478

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

Fig. 2. Moderating effect of race on the association between multiple maternal criminal justice involvement and children's internalizing problems.

Fig. 4. Moderating effect of race on the association between community adversity and children's externalizing problems.

represented compared to their representation in the study sample is of additional importance. While not conclusive evidence, this finding suggests that Black children are not only at an increased risk for MCJI but are also at increased risk for the psychological and emotional toll of recurrent mother-child separation. These findings highlight critical aspects of the challenges Black children with child welfare and criminal justice involved mothers encounter in their daily lives. It is notable that non-Black children who encountered similar risks overall appeared to exhibit increases in internalizing and externalizing behaviors when the severity of their home and/or community context worsened, whereas Black children did not experience heightened dysfunction with multiple MCJI or more challenging community contexts. For example, while multiple MCJI was a significant predictor of children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors, as hypothesized race moderated the effects of multiple MCJI on internalizing and externalizing behaviors such that Black children did not exhibit elevations in internalizing and externalizing behaviors, whereas non-Black children consistently experienced these elevations. It is essential to note, however, that Black children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors were elevated above the study sample's mean with a single episode of MCJI and remained at or above the study sample's mean when exposed to multiple MCJI. Thus, Black children, regardless of whether their mothers had repeated encounters with the criminal justice system were still at risk for poor

outcomes. Children exposed to higher levels of adverse community conditions had increased internalizing behaviors but not externalizing behaviors. While race did not moderate the expected effect of community adversity on internalizing behaviors, race moderated the effects of community adversity on externalizing behaviors. Black children did not experience elevations in levels of externalizing behaviors in the context of higher levels of community adversity, whereas non-Black children did experience these elevations. Exposure to violence at home or within the environment increased children's risk for internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Race, however, did not have a moderating effect on violence exposure in predicting children's mental health outcomes. Several factors potentially mitigated the risks of multiple MCJI and community adversity for Black children in this study. Given the disproportionate and disparate rates of criminal justice involvement among Black men and women, their vulnerability to recidivism, and likelihood to reside in neighborhoods characterized by poor conditions, it is not uncommon for Black children to have extended family and friends with similar life circumstances. Therefore, one possible explanation for the moderating effects of race on children's mental health is that exposure to multiple MCJI and poor community conditions are common lived experiences for Black children. The representation of these circumstances may carry a different meaning (perhaps less stigma), thereby influencing Black children differently than children from cultures where similar experiences are not as common. These common lived experiences by no means should be interpreted as acceptance of these situations nor that there is desensitization as suggested in some of the existing literature, rather that these circumstances are unfortunate realities for many Black communities. Black communities, as have other communities of color, have a long history of enduring many adversities; yet have developed strategies within the extended family, church, and community to survive against incredible odds, across multiple generations to nurture its children (Greene, 1995; McCullough-Chavis & Waites, 2004; Murry, Brown, Brody, & Simons, 2001). Thus, another possible explanation for the differences found between Black and non-Black children in this study— one that may be interrelated with the previous explanation— is the notion that in the face of adversity, Black families restructure themselves during difficult life circumstance. One way Black families have found to restructure themselves is the valued tradition of preserving extended family relationships, kin and non-kin alike, and embracing a collective responsibility for the family's children (Miller, 2007; Miller et al., 2010; Murry, Brown, Brody, & Simons, 2001). It should also be noted that familial restructuring and cohesive coping strategies during distressing life events are experienced within the Hispanic culture

Fig. 3. Moderating effect of race on the association between multiple maternal criminal justice involvement and children's externalizing problems.

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

(Dettlaff, Earner, & Phillips, 2009; Holleran & Waller, 2003; Swisher & Waller, 2008). The social capital that extended family offers, however, does not nullify the effects of multiple MCJI and community adversity. As observed in this study sample, Black children who experienced risks still exhibited internalizing and externalizing behaviors and therefore these normative realities do not make them immune to poor outcomes. Rather the possible interpretation of the differences found between Black and non-Black children is the potential that the Black extended family provided greater levels of nurturance, acceptance, and support. This type of social capital may have served as a protective mechanism that fostered coping and adaptive abilities that helped modestly decrease the magnitude of multiple MCJI and exposure to high levels of community adversity on Black children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Furthermore, with multiple MCJI, in particular, the likelihood that mothers [would be out of the home during periods of incarceration and less available to their children, in general,] is greatly heightened. Thus, Black children in this circumstance are potentially more likely to be nurtured by familiar members of their extended families, whereas non-Black children may be less likely to be nurtured in this way. Such an explanation is consistent with the declines in internalizing and externalizing behaviors documented for Black children with more adverse home and community contexts observed in the current study. Non-Black children in more adverse community contexts consistently exhibited poorer mental health outcomes. Although this study did not have an a priori hypothesis regarding differences on mental health outcomes for males and females, there were noteworthy findings on sex differences that merit discussion. The zero order bivariate correlations for sex with internalizing and externalizing behaviors did not reach statistical significance, yet appeared to be enhanced for internalizing behaviors when the race by multiple MCJI interaction was entered into the regression analysis. Males tended to be at greater risk for internalizing behaviors when the race by multiple MCJI interaction effect was significant. While child's sex reached significance in the context of this interaction, the predictive power for sex remained small. In interpreting these data, the child's sex appears relatively unimportant such that males and females appear to be affected similarly. 4.1. Limitations The study's data are from the NSCAW CPS sampling frame, a national child welfare population and thus the findings are not generalizable to all children who experience MCJI. Most children who experience MCJI are not assessed by child welfare systems for maltreatment. Therefore, generalization of these findings is most applicable to those children assessed for maltreatment by child protective services, who reside in non-foster homes, and whose mothers have histories with the criminal justice system. Another study limitation is that it was not possible to determine the onset of the children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors relative to MCJI or experiences of community adversity and violence exposure. Thus, no interpretation of causal mechanisms can be made with these study findings. The onset of children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors may have occurred prior to MCJI, exposure to multiple MCJI, or exposure to adverse community conditions and violence. It is also difficult to discern mechanisms that result in poor mental health outcomes. A number of factors not measured in the current study could have played a key role in the influence of children's internalizing and externalizing behaviors. For example, conditions that led to MCJI, the child's experience with MCJI, and the proximal versus distal timing of MCJI, all should be considered. In addition, a number of mediating factors could have influenced the relationship between the predictor and outcome variables. Another consideration is the sole reliance on the mothers' assessments of children's mental health problems using the CBCL measure may have resulted in either over-reporting or under-reporting of

479

internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Parents' perceptions of children's behavior may be influenced by the perceptions of what behaviors are expected to be observed, concerns about the concepts being measured (Manders et al., 2009), or high levels of stress associated with child welfare involvement. Examining other CBCL and mental health reporting sources (e.g., teacher, child welfare caseworker), if consistent with the current findings, may strengthen the study conclusions. Of note, Sheppard and Watkins (2000) research on the validity of parents' assessments of child and family concerns found high levels of agreement with outside reporting sources. 4.2. Implications for practice, policy, and future research The findings in this study demonstrate important aspects of the lives for children who experience MCJI that should be considered by child welfare practitioners, social workers, and other professionals who interface with this population. While the population has been recognized as one of the fastest growing at risk populations in the U.S., neither the child welfare nor the criminal justice system has initiated national policy protocols for identifying these children. Moreover, neither system has effectively articulated initiatives to understand the effects of parental criminal justice involvement on children, consistently created policies that confront the challenges they encounter, nor routinely implemented practices that address their risk for poor outcomes (de Hann, 2010; From, 2008; Hairston, 1999, 2008; Porterfield, Dressel, & Barnhill, 2000). A collaborative cross-system policy initiative that collects and tracks cross system data is a first step in focusing on these issues. For children of color, particularly Black children, the parallels of racial disproportionality and disparity that exist within and between the two systems create an even greater need for practitioners and policy implementers to track the numbers in an effort to identify and address the unique risks that dual system involvement poses for children of color. In some states, child welfare agencies have implemented programs that focus on children of incarcerated parents who are in foster care. Unfortunately, these efforts do not reach the vast majority of children who are affected by parental criminal justice involvement. As found in the current study, none of the children were actively in foster care and none had incarcerated mothers at the time of data collection. Greater attention should be focused on programs that provide services to children of mothers with a history of any type of criminal justice involvement. Prevention and intervention practices could help reduce the recidivism rates among women of color (specifically Black and Hispanic women) and decrease the risk for their children's exposure to ongoing MCJI and heightened risks for internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Addressing issues related to exposure to adverse community conditions would also benefit children and their families. Examining the role of race, social capital, and mental health among children who experience MCJI was beyond the scope of this study and remains an important area for future research. This is particularly important as practitioners seek effective and culturally appropriate services for all children who experience MCJI and the associated risks. This study is one of the first to examine the direct and indirect effect of race on the mental health outcomes for children with criminal justice involved mothers. Future research should continue this area of inquiry and examine in greater depth the extent that historical, political, social, and environmental contexts of race differentially influence outcomes for children of criminal justice involved mothers. Research that is focused on these contexts could identify factors that contribute to racial disproportionality and disparity for children exposed to a mother's dual involvement with child welfare and criminal justice systems as well as where policy and practice initiatives would be most effective in preventing/reducing poor mental health outcomes. Finally, a unique implication of the study findings is that, in terms of mental health, Black children fare better than non-Black children in the context of extraordinary adversity. The flexibility and nurturance

480

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481

provided by extended family members in the Black community may serve as a model of adult protective behavior for children. Strategies to facilitate extended family flexibility and nurturance in non-Black communities that may not commonly possess similar behaviors are worthy of consideration.

Acknowledgments The National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect, funded by the Administration on Children, Youth, and Families and U.S. Department of Health and Humans Service, provided the National Survey on Child and Adolescent Well-Being data that are used in this study. The expressed views and opinions in this article are solely the positions of the authors.

References Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4-18 and 1991 Profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry. Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage. American Civil Liberties Union (2006). Testimony of Jesselyn McCurdy. Legislative counsel American Civil Liberties Union Washington National Office United States Sentencing Commission on Cocaine and Sentencing Policy November 14, 2006 (Washington, DC). Aneshensel, C. S., & Sucoff, C. A. (1996). The neighborhood context of adolescent mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 37(4), 293–310. Arditti, J. A., Lambert-Shute, J., & Joest, K. (2003). Saturday morning at the jail: Implications of incarceration for children and families. Family Relations, 52(3), 195–204. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. Beck, A. J. (2000). Prisoners in 1999. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, DC7 U.S. Department of Justice, Report No. 183476. Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2004). Women offenders and the gendered effects of public policy. Review of Policy Research, 21(1), 31–48. Bocknek, E. L., Sanderson, J., & Britner, P. A. (2009). Ambiguous loss and post-traumatic stress in school-age children of prisoners. Journal of Children and Family Studies, 18(3), 323–333. Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G. J., Klebanov, P. K., & Sealand, N. (1993). Do neighborhoods influence child and adolescent development? The American Journal of Sociology, 99(2), 353–395. Brownell, P., Miller, K. M., & Raimon, M. (2006). Female offenders and the criminal justice system. In A. R. Roberts, & D. W. Springer (Eds.), Social Work in Juvenile and Criminal Justice Setting (pp. 351–365) (3rd ed.). Springfield, IL:Charles C. Thomas. Caplan, G. M. (1976). Criminology, criminal justice, and the war on crime. Criminology, 14(1), 3–16. Chipman, R., Wells, S. J., & Johnson, M. A. (2002). The meaning of quality kinship care: Caregiver, child, and worker perspectives. Families in Society, 83(5/6), 508–520. Cooley-Quille, M., Boyd, R. C., Frantz, E., & Walsh, J. (2001). Emotional and behavioral impact of the exposure to community violence in inner-city adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30(1), 199–206. Cooley-Quille, M. R., Turner, S. M., & Beidel, D. C. (1995). Assessing community violence: The children's report to exposure to violence. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(2), 201–208. de Hann, B. (2010). The interface between corrections and child welfare for children of incarcerated parents. In J. M. Eddy, & J. Poehlmann (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents (pp. 265–286). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press. DeHart, D. D., & Altshulter, S. J. (2009). Violence exposure among children of incarcerated mothers. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 26(5), 467–479. Derezotes, D., & Poertner, J. (2005). Factors contributing to the overrepresentation of African American children in the child welfare system. In D. Derezotes, J. Poertner, & M. F. Testa (Eds.), Race matters in child welfare: The overrepresentation of African American children in the system (pp. 1–23). Washington, DC: CWLA Press. Dettlaff, A. J., Earner, I., & Phillips, S. D. (2009). Latino immigrants in the child welfare system: Prevalence, characteristics, and risks. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(7), 775–783. Dettlaff, A. J., Rivaux, S. L., Baumann, D. J., Fluke, J. D., Rycraft, J. R., & James, J. (2011). Disentangling substantiation: The influence of race, income, and risk on substantiation decision in child welfare. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(9), 1630–1637. Dettlaff, A. J., & Rycraft, J. R. (2008). Deconstructing disproportionality: Views from multiple stakeholders. Child Welfare, 87(2), 37–58. Dowd, K., Kinsey, S., Wheeless, S., Thissen, R., Richardson, J., Suresh, R., et al. (2006). National survey of child and adolescent well-being: Combined waves 1–4 data files user's manual general release version 4.5 (January Release). Ithaca, NY: National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect.

DuRant, R. H., Cadenhead, C., Pendergrast, R. A., Slavens, G., & Linder, C. W. (1994). Factors associated with the use of violence among urban black adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 84(4), 612–617. Farrell, A. D., & Bruce, S. E. (1997). Impact of exposure to community violence on violent behavior and emotional distress among urban adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26(1), 2–14. Federal Interagency Forum on Child (2008). America's children in brief: Key National indicators of well-being, 2008. Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing OfficeWashington, DC. Fitzpatrick, K. M., & Bodizar, J. P. (1993). The prevalence and consequences of exposure to violence among African American youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 32(2), 424–430. Foster, H., & Hagan, J. (2007). Incarceration and intergenerational social exclusion. Social Problems, 54(4), 399–433. Fowler, P. J., Tompsett, C. J., Braciszewski, J. M., Jacques-Tiura, A. J., & Baltes, B. B. (2009). Community violence: A meta-analysis on the effect of exposure and mental health outcomes of children and adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 21(1), 227–259. From, S. B. (2008). When mom is away: Supporting the families of incarcerated mothers. In T. LaLiberte, & E. Snyder (Eds.), CW360: A comprehensive look at a prevalent child welfare issue, children of incarcerated parents (pp. 18). Gartner, R., & Kruttschnitt, C. (2004). A brief history of doing time: The California institution for women in the 1960s and the 1990s. Law & Society Review, 38(2), 267–304. U.S. General Accounting Office (2007). African American children in foster care: Additional HHS assistance needed to help states reduce the proportion in care. GOA Publication No. GAO-07-816. Washington, DC: Author. Glaze, L. E., & Maruschak, L. M. (2008). Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Parents in prison and their minor children. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Gorman-Smith, D., & Tolan, P. H. (1998). The role of exposure to community violence and developmental problems among inner-city youth. Development and Psychopathology, 10(1), 101–116. Greene, B. (1995). African American families: A legacy of vulnerability and resilience. National Forum, 75, 29–32. Greenfeld, L. A., & Snell, T. L. (1999). Women offenders. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (NCJ 175688). Hairston, C. (1999). Kinship care when parents are incarcerated. In J. P. Glesson, & C. F. Hairston (Eds.), Kinship care: Improving practice through research. Washington, D.C.:CWLA Press. Hairston, C. F. (2008). Children with parents in prison: Child welfare matters. In T. LaLiberte, & E. Snyder (Eds.), CW 360: A comprehensive look at a prevalent child welfare issue, children of incarcerated parents (pp. 4). Harris, M. S., & Hackett, W. (2008). Decision points in child welfare: An action research model to address disproportionality. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(2), 199–215. Harrison, P. M., & Beck, A. J. (2006). Bureau of justice statistics bulletin: Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Hill, R. B., Jackson, S., & Waheed, K. (2008). Reducing racial and ethnic disproportionality and disparities in child welfare: Promoting racial equity. A presentation at the Joint Meeting on Adolescent Treatment Effectiveness, Washington, DC. Holleran, L. K., & Waller, M. A. (2003). Sources of resilience in Chicano/a youth: Forging identifies in the borderlands. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 20(5), 335–350. Johnson, R. M., Kotch, J. B., Catellier, D. J., Winsor, J. R., Dufort, V., Hunter, W., et al. (2002). Adverse behavioral and emotional outcomes from child abuse and witnessed violence. Child Maltreatment, 7(3), 179–186. Johnson, E. I., & Waldfogel, J. (2002). Children of incarcerated parents: Cumulative risk and children's living arrangements. Joint Center for Poverty Research Working Paper 306, Northwestern University/University of Chicago. Johnston, D. (1995). Effects of parental incarceration. In K. Gabel, & D. Johnston (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents (pp. 59–88). New York: Lexington Books. Johnston, D. (2006). Correctional social work with criminal offenders and their children. In A. R. Roberts, & D. W. Springer (Eds.), Social work in juvenile and criminal justice settings (pp. 376–393) (3rd ed.). Springfield, IL:Charles C. Thomas. Kampfner, D. (1995). Post-traumatic stress reactions in children of imprisoned mothers. In K. Gabel, & D. Johnston (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents (pp. 89–100). New York: Lexington Books. Lambert, S. F., Boyd, R. C., Cammack, N. L., & Ialongo, N. S. (2012). Relationship proximity to victims of witnessed community violence: Associations with adolescent internalizing and externalizing behaviors. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(1), 1–9. Mackintosh, V. H., Myers, B. J., & Kennon, S. S. (2006). Children of incarcerated mothers and their caregivers: Factors affecting the quality of their relationship. Journal of Child and Families Studies, 15(5), 581–596. Manders, W. L., Janssens, J. M. A., Cook, W. L., Oud, J. H. L., de Bruyn, E. E. J., & Scholte, R. H. J. (2009). Perceptions of problem behavior in adolescents' families: Perceiver, target, and family effects. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 10, 1328–1338. Marts, E. J., Lee, E. O., McRoy, R., & McCroskey, J. (2008). Point of engagement reducing disproportionality and improving child and family outcomes. Child Welfare, 87(2), 335–358. Maruschak, L. M., Glaze, L. E., & Mumola, C. J. (2010). Incarcerated parents and their children: Findings from the Bureau of Justice statistics. In J. M. Eddy, & J. Poehlmann (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents: A handbook for researchers and practitioners (pp. 33–51). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press. McCullough-Chavis, A., & Waites, C. (2004). Genograms with African American families: Considering cultural context. Journal of Family Social Work, 8(2), 1–19. McRoy, R. G. (2004). The color of child welfare policy. In K. Davis, & T. Bent-Goodley (Eds.), The color of social policy (pp. 37–64). Washington, D.C.: Council on Social Work Education.

K.M. Miller, L. Bank / Children and Youth Services Review 35 (2013) 472–481 Miller, K. M. (2007). Risk and resilience among African American children of incarcerated parents. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 15(2/3), 25–37. Miller, K. M., Cahn, K., & Orellana, E. R. (2012). Dynamics that contribute to racial disproportionality and disparity: Perspectives from child welfare professionals, community partners, and families. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(11), 2201–2207. Miller, K. M., Gil-Kashiwabara, E., Briggs, H. E., & Hatcher, S. (2010). Contexts of race, ethnicity, and culture for children of incarcerated parents. In J. M. Eddy, & J. Poehlmann (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents: A handbook for researchers and practitioners (pp. 141–157). Baltimore MD: The Urban Institute Press. Miller, K. M., Orellana, E. R., Johnson, A. B., Krase, K., & Anderson-Nathe, B. (in press). Maternal criminal justice and child welfare involvement: Associations between risk exposures and childhood mental health. Social Work Research. Mrug, S., & Windle, M. (2010). Prospective effects of violence exposure across multiple contexts on early adolescents' internalizing and externalizing problems. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(8), 953–961. Mumola, C. J. (2000). Bureau of justice statistics bulletin: Incarcerated parents and their children. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Murry, V. M., Brown, P. A., Brody, G. H., & Simons, R. L. (2001). Racial discrimination as a moderator of the links among stress, maternal psychological functioning, and family relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(4), 915–926. Murry, V. B., Smith, E. P., & Hill, N. E. (2001). Race, ethnicity, and culture in studies of families in context. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 911–914. Myers, B., Smarsh, T., Amlund-Hagen, K., & Kennon, S. (1999). Children of incarcerated mothers. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 8, 11–25. Ng-Mak, D. S., Salzinger, S., Feldman, R. S., & Stueve, C. A. (2004). Pathological adaptation to community violence among inner-city youth. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74(2), 196–208. Phillips, S. D., Burns, B. J., Wagner, H. R., & Barth, R. P. (2004). Parental arrest and children involved with child welfare services agencies. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74(2), 174–186. Phillips, S. D., Erkanli, A., Keeler, A., Costello, E. J., & Angold, A. (2006). Disentangling the risks: Parent criminal justice involvement and children's exposure to family risks. Criminology and Public Policy, 5(4), 677–702. Poehlmann, J. (2005). Representations of attachment relationships in children of incarcerated mothers. Child Development, 76(3), 679–696. Porterfield, J., Dressel, P., & Barnhill, S. (2000). Special situations of incarcerated parents. In C. B. Cox (Ed.), To grandmothers house we go and stay: Perspectives in custodial grandparents.. New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc. Raj, A., Rose, J., Decker, M. R., Rosengard, C., Herbert, M. R., Stein, M., et al. (2008). Prevalence and patterns of sexual assault across the life span among incarcerated women. Violence Against Women, 14(5), 528–541.

481

Raviv, A., Erel, O., Fox, N. A., Leavitt, L. A., Raviv, A., Dar, I., et al. (2001). Individual measurement of exposure to everyday violence among elementary schoolchildren across various settings. Journal of Community Psychology, 29(2), 117–140. Sabol, W. J., West, H. C., & Cooper, M. (2009). Bureau of Justice Statistics: Prisoners in 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Sedlak, A., & Broadhurst, D. (1996). Executive summary of the third national incidence study of child abuse and neglect. : U.S. Health and Human Services. Sedlak, A. J., Mettenburg, J., Basena, M., Petta, I., McPherson, K., Greene, A., et al. (2010). Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS–4): Report to Congress, Executive Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (Available from http://www. acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/abuse_neglect/natl_incid/reports/natl_incid/nis4_report_ congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf). Sedlak, A., & Schultz, D. (2005). Racial differences in child protective services investigation of abuse and neglected children. In D. Derezotes (Ed.), Race matters in child welfare. The overrepresentation of African American children in the system (pp. 97–118). Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America. Shahinfar, A., Fox, N. A., & Leavitt, L. (2000). Preschool children's exposure to violence: Relation of behavior problems to parent and child reports. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70(1), 115–125. Sheppard, M., & Watkins, M. (2000). The parent concerns questionnaire: Evaluation of a mothers' self report instrument for the identification of problems and needs in child and family social work. Children and Society, 14(3), 194–206. Smith, C. J., & Young, D. S. (2003). The multiple of TANF, ASFA, and mandatory drug sentencing for families affected by maternal incarceration. Children and Youth Services Review, 25(7), 535–552. Swann, C. A., & Sylvester, M. S. (2006). The foster care crisis: What caused caseloads to grow? Demography, 43(2), 309–335. Swisher, R. R., & Waller, M. R. (2008). Confining fatherhood: Incarceration and paternal involvement among unmarried White, African American, and Latino fathers. Journal of Family Issues, 29(8), 1067–1088. The Sentencing Project (2010). Federal crack cocaine sentencing. (Washington, DC). Wells, S., & Daniels, M. (2008). Racial disparities in child welfare. In T. LaLiberte, & E. Snyder (Eds.), CW360: A comprehensive look at a prevalent child welfare issue, children of incarcerated parents (pp. 13). Western, B., & Wildeman, C. (2009). The black family and mass incarceration. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 621(1), 221–242.