Deprivation and intra‐family conflict: Children as agents in the Family Stress Model

• Published in: Journal of marriage and family 2022-02, Vol.84 (1), p.121-140
• Main Authors: Chzhen, Yekaterina, Howarth, Chester, Main, Gill
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adults; Child Development; Child poverty; child well‐being; Childhood; Children; Deprivation; Economic factors; Economic hardship; Emotional abuse; Families & family life; Family conflict; Family income; Family relations; Family resources; family stress; Households; Language Skills; Low income groups; Money; Parent-child relations; Parents & parenting; Polls & surveys; poverty; Psychological distress; Social studies; Stress; Structural equation modeling; Structural models
• ISSN: 0022-2445; 1741-3737
• DOI: 10.1111/jomf.12791

Objective The study applies an adapted Family Stress Model (FSM) to analyze the relationship between child material deprivation and intra‐family conflict about money using a nationally representative survey of children in England in 2018. Background The standard FSM holds that poverty is experienced by parents who, in turn, impact children. Drawing on new social studies of childhood, the authors posit that the model does not recognize children as social actors—with direct experiences of poverty—nor as social agents who co‐construct parent–child relationships in a context of poverty. Method The authors use secondary survey data from Fair Shares and Families, which investigated children's and parents' experiences of, and involvement in, the sharing of family resources. The authors estimate linear structural equation models to test an adapted FSM, which includes separate pathways (for parents and children) from economic hardship to intra‐family conflict. Results Both parent‐ and child‐reported economic pressure and psychological distress have significant direct and indirect associations with intra‐family conflict. The adapted model works the same way in lower and higher income households, as well as in lone parent and couple‐headed families. Conclusion Children's experiences as social actors and influence as social agents are important in shaping parent–child relationships. This suggests that the standard FSM is limited in its insights about how economic hardship affects children and families and its policy applications for interventions to mitigate the impacts of child poverty. Research applying the FSM should seek to conceptualize children as active “child‐beings,” rather than as passive “adult‐becomings.”