Adult and Community Influence on Sexual Experience Among First-,Second-,and Third-Generation Immigrant Youth

Abstract

Adult and community support may protect against sexual experience among immigrant youth, but it remains unknown whether this support confers protection equally across immigrant generations. Drawing on data from 852 race/ethnically diverse low-income youth recruited from Boys & Girls Clubs, we used mixed effect logistic regression models to examine associations between adult and community support and sexual experience and tested interactions to examine whether adult or community support influenced sexual experience differently across immigrant generations. As adult support increased, the odds of sexual experience decreased. However, adult support increased the odds of sexual experience for first-generation youth and decreased the odds in the second and third generations. Greater community support reduced the odds of sexual experience across all immigrant generations. Thus, adult support may not confer equal protection across all immigrant generations, suggesting youth of different immigrant generations have different needs.

Keywords

sexual behavior adolescents immigrant youth social capital adult and community support

In 2015, 41.2% of U.S. high school students had ever had sexual experience (Ethier, Kann, & McManus, 2018). Early sexual initiation increases risks for negative physical and psychosocial outcomes, including substance use and adjustment problems during adolescence, particularly in academic settings (Madkour, Farhat, Halpern, Godeau, & Gabhainn, 2010). Studies define early sexual initiation as vaginal sexual intercourse before age 16 years (Madkour et al., 2010), although U.S. youth initiate sex around age 17 years (Martinez & Abma, 2015). There are negative consequences to delaying sexual initiation into adulthood (Sandfort, Orr, Hirsch, & Santelli, 2008). However, longer exposure from early sexual activity confers greater risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unintended adolescent pregnancies (Epstein, Bailey, Manhart, Hill, & Hawkins, 2014). The proportion of adolescents who have sexual experience is higher among some race/ethnic minorities and lower socioeconomic status (SES) groups, such as Black and Latino/a adolescents (Ethier et al., 2018). Therefore, earlier sexual initiation of any type is a contributor to their higher rates of STIs and unintended adolescent pregnancies (Caminis, Henrich, Ruchkin, Schwab-Stone, & Martin, 2007; Epstein et al., 2014). With race/ethnic and SES disparities in sexual experience and consequences of earlier sex, it is important to evaluate risk and protective factors contributing to differences in sexual experience among vulnerable populations, such as immigrant youth.

First- (foreign-born) and second-generation (U.S.-born to a foreign-born parent) immigrant adolescents have grown 51% from 1994 to 2014 and now account for one quarter of all U.S. adolescents (Child Trends, 2014). Immigrant adolescents face challenges related to cultural and social adaptation, language proficiency, poverty, and poorer physical and mental health compared with native-born adolescents, all of which contribute to sexual health disparities (Morse, 2005). Factors that protect adolescent sexual health among immigrants are seldom considered (Coleman-Minahan, Chavez, & Bull, 2017; McPherson et al., 2013), such as social capital. Moreover, most studies examining immigrant generation and adolescent sexual health disparities focus on Latino/a youth and fail to include immigrant adolescents of multiple race/ethnic groups.

Adult and Community Support

Adult and community support are often considered key components of social capital among adolescents, although social capital is often inconsistently measured (Schaefer-McDaniel, 2004). Data suggest that adult support is a protective factor against sexual risk behaviors among youth, such as intent to have sex and early sexual initiation (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2017; McPherson et al., 2013). Adult support is typically measured with parent centric items, for example, high-quality parent–child relationships, good parent–child communication, and parental surveillance, and is consistently associated with reduced risky sexual behaviors (McPherson et al., 2013; Terzian, Andrews, & Moore, 2011), with some exceptions (Killoren & Deutsch, 2013; McPherson et al., 2013). We know little about nonparent adult influence on youth, which may be important among low-income youth or those in single-parent families who have support from extended family members or other adults (Fomby, Mollborn, & Sennott, 2010; McPherson et al., 2013).

The majority of studies examining the role of neighborhoods and communities on youth behavior focus on community risk factors, rather than community support. Low levels of community opportunity are associated with increased risk of adolescent birth (Driscoll, 2005) and neighborhood poverty has been associated with adolescent risky sexual behavior (Brooks-Gunn, Duncan, Klebanov, & Sealand, 1993; Cubbin, Brindis, Jain, Santelli, & Braveman, 2010). Limited studies on protective community factors have used administrative data, for example, the proportion of married couples (Cubbin, Santelli, Brindis, & Braveman, 2005) or adult collective efficacy (Browning, Leventhal, & Brooks-Gunn, 2004). There is a dearth of research on community support from adolescents’ perspectives and whether adult and community support influence sexual risk behavior similarly across immigrant generations.

Immigrant Generation

First-generation adolescents have a lower risk of sexual initiation than their second- and third-generation peers, despite lower family SES (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2017; Guarini, Marks, Patton, & Coll, 2011; McDonald, Manlove, & Ikramullah, 2009). Differences in both patterns of cultural and social adaption and health outcomes by immigrant generation suggest the importance of exploring immigrant generations separately when examining risk and protective factors. The theory of segmented assimilation may help explain differences in adult and community support across immigrant generations because it is formulated on experiences of second-generation youth and posits that adult and community support are reasons they may become upwardly mobile and avoid risk behaviors commonly seen in the third generation. The theory asserts second-generation youth can take three assimilation paths, including (a) downward mobility, when youth assimilate to an impoverished social class; (b) assimilation to “White” middle class America by shedding cultural and ethnic identity; and (c) upward mobility using “selective acculturation.” Through selective acculturation, second-generation youth benefit from adult and community support because of the preservation of their immigrant parents’ and community’s culture and values, accompanied by additional resources, including opportunities to learn a skill or trade (Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Portes & Zhou, 1993). The first generation may have similar adult and community support and more conservative sexual values but they face greater language and educational barriers than second- and third-generation peers. The third generation has fewer ties to immigrant adult and community support and opportunities and greater exposure to nonimmigrant youth of lower SES who engage in risky behaviors. Thus, adult and community support can protect second-generation adolescents against risky behaviors such as substance use, adolescent pregnancy, and high school incompletion (Portes, Fernández-Kelly, & Haller, 2005).

Immigrants account for 13.5% of the U.S. population (Migration Policy Institute, 2013), and remain vulnerable and marginalized underscoring the importance of assessment of both sexual health disparities and protective factors across generations of immigrant youth. Here, we (a) evaluate sociodemographic factors associated with social and community support among low-income immigrant youth, (b) examine how social and community support are associated with sexual experience, and (c) investigate whether social and community support influence sexual experience differently across immigrant generations.

Method

Study Design

We draw on a larger research project on sexual and reproductive health among low-income youth. Detailed information on the methods used to obtain the data for this research is available elsewhere (Bull et al., 2016). In brief, data are from a sample of 852 youth participating in a cluster randomized trial examining the impact of a text messaging intervention to reduce adolescent pregnancy delivered through Boys & Girls Clubs of Metro Denver. This is a local branch of a national organization serving 4.3 million primarily race/ethnic minority youth living in high poverty and economically depressed communities (Boys & Girls Clubs of America, 2018). The study was implemented in eight clubs over 4 years, beginning in 2011. All 3,652 active club members between the ages of 14 and 18 years were eligible to participate, and 854 agreed to participate. Two declined participation after viewing the informed consent, resulting in 852 enrolled participants. There were no significant differences in gender, age, and race/ethnicity between youth who participated in the study and those who did not. Participants received US$5 for completing an online, self-administered baseline survey, including demographic and sexual health information. The study was approved by the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board.

Measures

A dichotomous variable captured our outcome variable, previous sexual experience. Participants were asked, “Have you ever had sexual intercourse? By sexual intercourse, we mean having a penis enter into a vagina or butt; or having oral sex, which means having someone suck on a penis or vagina.”

Covariates included adult and community support. We used confirmatory factor analysis and created a six-item measure of adult support with questions asking about “adult” information, support, interest, communication, love, and expectations, as described elsewhere (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2017). The type of adult is not specified so the participant could be considering a parent, a counselor at the Club, or other adult in this question. The eigenvalue was 2.67, with a single factor loading of >0.5, except for adult expectations with a loading of 0.46, and a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.82 confirming internal consistency. For additional confirmatory testing, we created a normally distributed variable based on the mean score of all six adult support variables. This variable and the factor were correlated at 0.9989. Analyses include the factor to capture greater variation in responses. The greater the value of the factor, the greater adult support the participant reported.

We captured community support with a previously validated measure of social capital, ‘‘Do you feel like your neighborhood and community are supportive places?’’ (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2017; Fujiwara & Kawachi, 2008). The four-item Likert-type scale, from 0 = not at all to 4 = very supportive was analyzed as a continuous variable.

Control variables included sociodemographic variables. Participants reported if they and their parents were born in the United States, immigrant generation was coded as first generation, second generation, and third or higher generation (U.S.-born to U.S.-born parents). Participants reported if they were Hispanic or Latina/o and selected all races they identified (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). Participants self-identifying as Hispanic or Latina/o were coded as Latina/o, regardless of their race along with 170 participants who chose “Other” race and wrote in Hispanic, Latina/o, Mexican (or other Latin American countries), or Spanish as Latina/o. Participants self-identifying as non-Latina/o Black and no other race were coded as non-Latina/o Black. Participants were considered non-Latina/o White only if they chose no other race. The small numbers of Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Natives, and multiple races were added to “Other race/ethnicity.” Family structure was captured dichotomously with living with two biological parents versus all other structures. Parental SES was captured with parental education based on the highest level of education of either parent (missing, less than high school, high school, and greater than high school). Language spoken at home was classified as “English” versus “Other language.” We included a continuous variable for age and a dichotomous variable for gender (transgender options were provided but not selected). Finally, we included a dichotomous variable for the participant feeling it was “very important” to go to college.

Analysis

We calculated means and proportions of variables by immigrant generation and sexual experience. Significant associations were determined using bivariate logit, multinomial logit, or ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models. Because of our focus on variation in adult and community support by immigrant generation and SES, we examined bivariate associations between adult and community support and age, gender, race/ethnicity, family structure, parental education, language, and importance of going to college.

To account for 32 clusters in the sample (8 Clubs × 4 Years), we used mixed effects logistic regression models to predict sexual experience. We used Bernoulli for conditional random effects for clusters with covariate associations being fixed-effects. The baseline model included age, gender, race/ethnicity, and immigrant generation. Based on a likelihood ratio (LR) test <0.05, only parents’ education was included in the model. We created separate models examining the influence of adult and community support on sexual experience. Each set of models included (a) baseline model + adult or community support variable, and (b) an interaction between immigrant generation and the adult or community support variable to examine whether adult or community support was associated with sexual experience differently across immigrant generations. We conducted sensitivity analyses stratified by gender and by age (<17 years old). There were no substantial differences (i.e., no associations in the opposite direction).

Because 20% of participants did not know their parents’ level of education, we included “missing” as a category in parental education variable. Whether or not a parent was born in the United States was missing 7% of the time and all other variables less than 5%. To address missing data, we used 40 multiply imputed data sets by chained equations (Azur, Stuart, Frangakis, & Leaf, 2011).

Results

Participant Characteristics

One third of the sample are first-generation immigrants, 20% second, and 45% third (Table 1). The mean age is 15 years and 87% of participants are below age 17 years. Latino/a adolescents make up the largest proportion of the sample and within each immigrant generation. Both the first and third generation include about 20% Black adolescents. The second generation has the highest proportion of participants living with two biological parents but the lowest proportion with parents who completed high school or more education. Adult support did not vary significantly by immigrant generation.

Table 1.

Means (SE) and Proportions of Sociodemographic Variables by Immigrant Generation and Sexual Initiation.

	First generation	Second generation	Third generation	p value	Ever had sex	Never had sex	p value	Latino	Non-Latino	p value
N = 852	303	167	382		243	609		243	609
Age	15.07 (0.07)	15.03 (0.09)	14.91 (0.05)	.194	15.55 (0.07)	14.77 (0.04)	.000	15.02 (0.05)	14.94 (0.06)	.325
Female	0.57	0.46	0.51	.099	0.43	0.46	.000	0.54	0.49	.126
Race/ethnicity				.000			.357
Latino	0.68	0.87	0.48		0.60	0.64		NA	NA
Non-Latino Black	0.19	0.07	0.25		0.23	0.18
Non-Latino White	0.06	0.01	0.14		0.08	0.09
Other	0.07	0.05	0.13		0.08	0.10
Lives with two biological parents	0.55	0.64	0.39	.000	0.44	0.52	.029	0.55	0.40	.000
Parent’s education				.000			.008			.000
Unsure	0.20	0.26	0.18		0.16	0.22		0.20	0.20
Less than high school	0.19	0.28	0.12		0.23	0.15		0.24	0.05
Completed high school	0.22	0.25	0.21		0.18	0.24		0.23	0.20
More than high school	0.40	0.22	0.50		0.44	0.39		0.32	0.54
Speaks English at home	0.74	0.60	0.97	.000	0.86	0.80	.051	0.75	0.93	.000
Going to college is very important	0.87	0.85	0.82	.223	0.83	0.85	.342	0.84	0.87	.198
Adult support	−0.01 (0.05)	−0.14 (0.07)	0.06 (0.05)	.079	−0.09 (0.06)	0.03 (0.04)	.089	−0.051 (0.04)	0.073 (0.05)	.060
Community support	2.32 (0.06)	2.24 (0.08)	2.22 (0.06)	.485	2.02 (0.07)	2.36 (0.04)	.000	2.30 (0.04)	2.19 (0.07)	.151
Ever had sex	0.29	0.23	0.31	.249	NA	NA		0.27	0.31	.279

Approximately 29% of participants had sexual experience. Fewer females, younger participants, those living with two biological parents, and those with parents with higher education had sexual experience compared with males, older participants, those living in other family structures, and those with less educated parents. Adult social support and community support were higher for participants without sexual experience (M = 0.03, p < .010 and M = 2.36, p < .001, respectively).

Black adolescents reported greater adult support compared with Latino/as (0.37, p < .001; Table 2). Participants with higher educated parents reported higher adult support (0.29, p < .01). “Other” race/ethnic participants reported lower community support than Latino/a participants (–0.28, p < .05), those living with two biological parents reported greater community support than those in other family structures (0.20, p < .01), and participants who feel going to college is very important had higher adult and community support (coefficients = 0.40, p < .001, and 0.25, p < .05, respectively).

Table 2.

Bivariate Coefficients Between Adult and Community Support and Sociodemographic Characteristics.

	Adult support	Community support
Age	−0.02	−0.05
Female	−0.03	−0.06
Race/ethnicity
Latino	Ref.	Ref.
Non-Latino Black	0.37***	−0.03
Non-Latino White	−0.08	−0.11
Other	−0.22	−0.28*
Lives with two biological parents	0.06	0.20**
Parental education
Less than high school	Ref.	Ref.
Missing education	0.17	0.14
High school education	0.15	0.18
More than high school	0.29**	0.03
Speaks English at home	0.04	−0.14
Going to college is very important	0.40***	0.25*

Note. Ref. = reference.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Multivariate Models

The odds of ever having sex did not vary by cluster (Club × Year) in any models (Table 3). In the baseline model (Model 1) and all subsequent models, the older the participant, the greater the odds of sexual experience. Females had lower odds of sexual experience than males and having a parent whose level of education is missing or a parent with a high school education had lower odds of sexual experience than participants with parents with less than a high school education. After controlling for covariates, as adult support increased, the odds of ever having sex was reduced by 20% (Model 2). This association varied by immigrant generation. Although adult support remained protective for the third generation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.63, p < .01), adult support increased the odds of ever having sex for the first generation (0.63 × 1.67 = 1.05, p < .05; Model 3). The association between sexual experience and adult support among the second generation did not differ from the third generation. Thus, adult support was protective against sexual experience for the second and third generations but slightly increased risk for the first generation (Figure 1a). The odds of sexual experience were reduced with increased community support (Model 4) which did not differ or interact across immigrant generations (Model 5). In other words, community support is protective against sexual experience in all three immigrant generations (Figure 1b).

Table 3.

Mixed Effects Logistic Regression Models Predicting Ever Having Sex by Adult Support and Community Support.

	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3		Model 4		Model 5
Age	1.97***	(1.68-2.30)	1.97***	(1.68-2.30)	1.99***	(1.70-2.33)	1.97***	(1.68-2.32)	1.98***	(1.68-2.32)
Immigrant generation
First generation	0.85	(0.51-1.43)	0.84	(0.50-1.41)	0.86	(0.51-1.44)	0.88	(0.52-1.50)	0.73	(0.27-1.96)
Second generation	0.60	(0.34-1.04)	0.57*	(0.33-1.00)	0.57	(0.32-1.02)	0.60	(0.34-1.04)	0.31*	(0.10-0.99)
Third generation	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.
Race/ethnicity
Latino	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.
Non-Latino Black	1.11	(0.67-1.84)	1.17	(0.70-1.97)	1.19	(0.71-2.00)	1.12	(0.67-1.88)	1.12	(0.67-1.89)
Non-Latino White	0.93	(0.49-1.79)	0.90	(0.47-1.74)	0.90	(0.47-1.73)	0.88	(0.45-1.72)	0.90	(0.46-1.75)
Other race/ethnicity	0.89	(0.46-1.71)	0.83	(0.43-1.61)	0.83	(0.43-1.61)	0.81	(0.41-1.57)	0.80	(0.41-1.58)
Female	0.54**	(0.38-0.77)	0.54**	(0.37-0.76)	0.54**	(0.38-0.78)	0.52***	(0.36-0.75)	0.52***	(0.36-0.75)
Parental education
Less than high school	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.
Missing parent education	0.51*	(0.29-0.92)	0.52*	(0.29-0.94)	0.51*	(0.28-0.91)	0.52*	(0.29-0.94)	0.52*	(0.29-0.94)
High school education	0.53*	(0.31-0.93)	0.54*	(0.31-0.95)	0.52*	(0.30-0.92)	0.56*	(0.32-0.97)	0.56*	(0.32-0.98)
More than high school	0.72	(0.43-1.19)	0.74	(0.45-1.23)	0.73	(0.44-1.21)	0.71	(0.43-1.18)	0.71	(0.43-1.19)
Adult social support
Adult social support			0.80*	(0.65-0.97)	0.63**	(0.47-0.86)
First Generation × Adult Social Support					1.66*	(1.09-2.55)
Second Generation × Adult Support					1.19	(0.66-2.13)
Third Generation × Adult Support					Ref.
Community support
Community support							0.71***	(0.60-0.84)	0.65**	(0.51-0.83)
First Generation × Community Support									1.10	(0.74-1.62)
Second Generation × Community Support									1.35	(0.85-2.15)
Third Generation × Community Support									Ref.
N	852		852		852		852		852

Note. Ref. = reference.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 1.

Association between (a) adult and (b) community support and odds of sexual experience by immigrant generation.

Discussion

Our work advances the literature by considering the relationship between immigrant generation and sexual experience among a diverse race/ethnic group of adolescents with data that build on that shown for Latino/a populations. We provide new data using a diverse race/ethnic sample and show adult and community support are protective against sexual experience, but may not confer equal protection across immigrant generations.

As documented elsewhere, we find a protective effect of adult and community support on the odds of sexual experience (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2017). Importantly, our measure of adult support captures support from any adults, including nonparents. Supportive adults other than parents, such as grandparents, may also reduce adolescent risk behavior (Fomby et al., 2010; McPherson et al., 2013). Low-income youth who experience parental instability may have greater support from other adults than higher income youth (Fomby et al., 2010). Adult support may protect against sexual experience through high-quality relationships that may include open communication or love and affection (Coleman-Minahan & Samari, 2018; Samari & Seltzer, 2016), or through adult surveillance (Buhi & Goodson, 2007; Killoren & Deutsch, 2013). Higher parental education was associated with greater adult support in our sample. Perhaps higher educated parents provide greater supervision and support because of flexibility in work schedules than lower educated parents doing shift work (Enchautegui, 2013). Finally, it is possible that participants in this sample have greater adult support from other adults than low-income urban adolescents who are not Boys & Girls Club members, because of their access to Boys & Girls Club counselors and staff. What this suggests is that the type of access to adult support afforded by Boys & Girls Club is beneficial to youth.

Our work sheds light on what has been unclear about the perception that a neighborhood or community is supportive of youth and that this in turn may protect against risky sexual health behavior (McPherson et al., 2013). This is aligned with research showing community collective efficacy was associated with lower odds of sexual experience (Browning et al., 2004). Community support may help buffer the negative impact of neighborhood poverty that is associated with risky sexual behavior, particularly among immigrants (Brooks-Gunn et al., 1993; Browning et al., 2004; Cubbin et al., 2010). Participants living with two biological parents reported greater community support and we consider that these families may be wealthier and living in communities with more resources (Browning et al., 2004).

We know that sexual health outcomes vary by immigrant generation (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2017; Guarini et al., 2011; McDonald et al., 2009). Ours is a more nuanced consideration of the specific risks and protections across diverse immigrant groups. The modest increase in the odds of sexual experience with increased adult support among the first generation is puzzling, particularly because both first- and second-generation adolescents have immigrant parents. Greater adult support may reflect more permissive parenting in the first generation. Indeed, Driscoll, Russell, and Crockett (2008) found permissive parenting increased with each generation, with first-generation adolescents reporting more authoritarian and less permissive parenting. Authoritarian immigrant parents who espouse conservative sexual values, have limited experience with communication about sex, have more gender inequality, or are working long hours in low-paying labor, may provide less open communication and support of their children but convey their expectations of not having sex (Coleman-Minahan, 2017; Killoren, Updegraff, Christopher, & Umaña-Taylor, 2011; Samari & Coleman-Minahan, 2018). The processes through which parent–child relationships influence sexual risk behavior are highly nuanced. A recent study showed that although lower SES and economic exploitation of parents was associated with greater gender inequality, risk of sexual experience was higher among adolescents from these families than those with greater gender equality (Coleman-Minahan, 2017). Others (Killoren et al., 2011) found deviant peer relationships helped explain why negative aspects of parent–child relationships were associated with risky sexual behavior among U.S.-born Latino/a youth. The positive association between adult support and sexual experience among first-generation adolescents might be explained by factors such as parenting practices, peers, gender equality, or economic pressures. As Killoren and colleagues (2011) hypothesize that U.S.-born Latino/a adolescents with poorer parent–child relationships may turn to peer groups for support, perhaps first-generation adolescents turn to other adults, potentially nonimmigrants such as teachers.

Our results partially support segmented assimilation theory by showing adult and community support, both components of social capital, are protective against sexual experience. Similar to other aspects of social capital, such as peer support or attendance at a club, components of social capital may not be protective for all risky behaviors across all immigrant generations (McPherson et al., 2013). Therefore, aligned with segmented assimilation theory, our findings indicate that adult and community support may not be protective across all immigrant generations perhaps because they experience different types of cultural adaptation and have different barriers including language acquisition and peer groups (Portes et al., 2005; Portes & Zhou, 1993). We lack understanding of why greater adult support modestly increased the risk of sex for first-generation youth and our findings may be specific only to our sample. However, this work emphasizes that youth across generations have different needs requiring different supports. Although we are unable to disentangle parental support versus other nonparent adult support, given that our sample has consistent exposure to adult staff at Boys & Girls Club, our work offers suggestions that increasing access to nonparent adults such as teachers, coaches, and mentors can be protective. We need to better understand how to build and sustain supportive communities for youth and whether having places like Boys & Girls Clubs can enhance youth perception of support in their communities.

Finally, in addition to differences across immigrant generations, we found that although results mirrored prior research on sociodemographics among Latino/as, they also suggest Latino/a youth may have less adult support than non-Latino/a youth. Thus, it important to examine protective factors across immigrant generations among other race/ethnic groups.

Limitations

Our data are from a convenience sample in one metro area of a group of adolescents participating in Boys & Girls Clubs, which limits generalizability; however, Boys & Girls Clubs operate nationally. The survey did not capture which participants were living in the same households. Although we advance the literature by including all three immigrant generations, the survey question asked whether “parents,” rather than “a parent,” were born outside the United States and it is possible that participants with only one parent born in the United States were misclassified as third generation. Given the majority of second-generation youth have two immigrant parents (Landale, Thomas, & Van Hook, 2011) and not all participants with one immigrant parent would say “no” to this question, we do not anticipate this would significantly impact the results.

Participants’ “neighborhood and community” could have different meanings, for example, physical location of the home or the location where the participant spends time. However, the importance of support in reducing the risk of sexual experience could inform interventions to leverage community support regardless of definition. Capturing “adult” support rather than parental support alone is a strength. Future studies can provide insight into what types of adults are supportive under varying circumstances. Finally, social desirability bias and/or fear of being found out may bias participants’ reports of sexual experience. Using a self-administered survey reduces but does not eliminate this bias. Defining “sexual activity” as including oral or anal-genital sex is important because these forms of sex are still associated with STIs and there are similar race/ethnic and SES disparities as vaginal sex alone (Haydon, Herring, Prinstein, & Halpern, 2012). Future studies using this broader definition can corroborate our findings or examine types of sexual behavior separately.

Our study underscores the protective influence of adult and community support on sexual experience among low-income and race/ethnic diverse adolescents and advances research by including multiple race/ethnicities. We confirm prior work showing adolescent substance and sexual risk behaviors differ across immigrant generation and reinforce the need to examine protective factors across immigrant generations. Future research on the meaning of community support and how it confers protection for immigrant adolescents could inform interventions aimed at improving adolescent health.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge the work and contributions of the TOP® Facilitators in the Boys & Girls Clubs, data collectors from the University of Colorado, and members of our management team, including Amber Leytem, Marissa Vasquez, Charlene Barrientos Ortiz, and Stefanie Winfield.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Office of Adolescent Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Grant No. TP2AH000016.

Author Biographies

Kate Coleman-Minahan, PhD, RN, FNP-BC, is an assistant professor at the University of Colorado College of Nursing. She is a social scientist and nurse practitioner whose work focuses on reproductive health outcomes and access to contraception and abortion among marginalized young women.

Yurico Gutierrez, MPH, is a DrPH student at the Colorado School of Public Health. She studies sexual and reproductive health among adolescents in the US and Latina America.

Sheana Bull, PhD, MPH, is assistant vice chancellor for Digital Education at the University of Colorado Denver and Anschutz Medical Campus and professor in Department of Community and Behavioral Health at the Colorado School of Public Health. Her research includes a focus on sexual and reproductive health among adolescents, including minority, immigrant and low income youth.

References

Azur

M. J.

Stuart

E. A.

Frangakis

Leaf

P. J.

(2011). Multiple imputation by chained equations: What is it and how does it work? International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 20, 40-49. doi:10.1002/mpr.329

Boys & Girls Clubs of America. (2018). At a glance. Atlanta, GA: Boys & Girls Club of America. Retrieved from https://www.bgca.org/about-us/annual-report

Brooks-Gunn

Duncan

G. J.

Klebanov

P. K.

Sealand

(1993). Do neighborhoods influence child and adolescent development? The American Journal of Sociology, 99, 353-395.

Browning

C. R.

Leventhal

Brooks-Gunn

(2004). Neighborhood context and racial differences in early adolescent sexual activity. Demography, 41, 697-720.

Buhi

E. R.

Goodson

(2007). Predictors of adolescent sexual behavior and intention: A theory-guided systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 4-21. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.09.027

Bull

Devine

Schmiege

S. J.

Pickard

Campbell

Shlay

J. C.

(2016). Text messaging, teen outreach program, and sexual health behavior: A cluster randomized trial. American Journal of Public Health, 106(S1), S117-S124.

Caminis

Henrich

Ruchkin

Schwab-Stone

Martin

(2007). Psychosocial predictors of sexual initiation and high-risk sexual behaviors in early adolescence. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 1, Article 14. doi:10.1186/1753-2000-1-14

Child Trends. (2014). Immigrant children. Bethesda, MD: Author. Retrieved from https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/immigrant-children/

Coleman-Minahan

(2017). The socio-political context of migration and reproductive health disparities: The case of early sexual initiation among Mexican-origin immigrant young women. Social Science & Medicine, 180, 85-93. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.011

10.

Coleman-Minahan

Chavez

Bull

(2017). Immigrant generation and sexual initiation among a diverse racial/ethnic group of urban youth. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 19, 1412-1419. doi:10.1007/s10903-016-0420-4

11.

Coleman-Minahan

Samari

(2018). “He supported me 100%”: Mexican-immigrant fathers, daughters, and adolescent sexual health. Ethnicity & Health, 25(4), 560-579. doi:10.1080/13557858.2018.1439897

12.

Cubbin

Brindis

C. D.

Jain

Santelli

Braveman

(2010). Neighborhood poverty, aspirations and expectations, and initiation of sex. Journal of Adolescent Health, 47, 399-406. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.02.010

13.

Cubbin

Santelli

Brindis

C. D.

Braveman

(2005). Neighborhood context and sexual behaviors among adolescents: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 37, 125-134.

14.

Driscoll

A. K.

(2005). Community opportunity, perceptions of opportunity, and the odds of an adolescent birth. Youth & Society, 37, 33-61. doi:10.1177/0044118X04267493

15.

Driscoll

A. K.

Russell

S. T.

Crockett

L. J.

(2008). Parenting styles and youth well-being across immigrant generations. Journal of Family Issues, 29, 185-209. doi:10.1177/0192513X07307843

16.

Enchautegui

M. E.

(2013). Nonstandard work schedules and the well-being of low-income families (Paper No. 26). Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/research/publication/nonstandard-work-schedules-and-well-being-low-income-families

17.

Epstein

Bailey

J. A.

Manhart

L. E.

Hill

K. G.

Hawkins

J. D.

(2014). Sexual risk behavior in young adulthood: Broadening the scope beyond early sexual initiation. The Journal of Sex Research, 51, 721-730. doi:10.1080/00224499.2013.849652

18.

Ethier

K. A.

Kann

McManus

(2018). Sexual intercourse among high school students—29 states and United States overall, 2005–2015. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 66, 1393-1397. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm665152a1

19.

Fomby

Mollborn

Sennott

C. A.

(2010). Race/ethnic differences in effects of family instability on adolescents’ risk behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 234-253. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00696.x

20.

Fujiwara

Kawachi

(2008). A prospective study of individual-level social capital and major depression in the United States. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 62, 627-633. doi:10.1136/jech.2007.064261

21.

Guarini

T. E.

Marks

A. K.

Patton

Coll

C. G.

(2011). The immigrant paradox in sexual risk behavior among Latino adolescents: Impact of immigrant generation and gender. Applied Developmental Science, 15, 201-209. doi:10.1080/10888691.2011.618100

22.

Haydon

A. A.

Herring

A. H.

Prinstein

M. J.

Halpern

C. T.

(2012). Beyond age at first sex: Patterns of emerging sexual behavior in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50, 456-463. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.09.006

23.

Killoren

S. E.

Deutsch

A. R.

(2013). A longitudinal examination of parenting processes and Latino youth’s risky sexual behaviors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1982-1993. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-0053-z

24.

Killoren

S. E.

Updegraff

K. A.

Christopher

F. S.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

(2011). Mothers, fathers, peers, and Mexican-origin adolescents’ sexual intentions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 209-220. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00799.x

25.

Landale

N. S.

Thomas

K. J. A.

Van Hook

(2011). The living arrangements of children of immigrants. The Future of Children, 21(1), 43-70.

26.

Madkour

A. S.

Farhat

Halpern

C. T.

Godeau

Gabhainn

S. N.

(2010). Early adolescent sexual initiation and physical/psychological symptoms: A comparative analysis of five nations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1211-1225. doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9521-x

27.

Martinez

G. M.

Abma

J. C.

(2015). Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing of teenagers aged 15–19 in the United States (NCHS Data Brief No. 209, p. 8). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

28.

McDonald

J. A.

Manlove

Ikramullah

E. N.

(2009). Immigration measures and reproductive health among Hispanic youth: Findings from the national longitudinal survey of youth, 1997–2003. Journal of Adolescent Health, 44, 14-24.

29.

McPherson

K. E.

Kerr

Morgan

McGee

Cheater

F. M.

McLean

Egan

(2013). The association between family and community social capital and health risk behaviours in young people: An integrative review. BMC Public Health, 13(1), Article 971. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-971

30.

Migration Policy Institute. (2013, August 14). U.S. immigrant population and share over time, 1850-present. Retrieved from https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/immigrant-population-over-time

31.

Morse

(2005). A look at immigrant youth: Prospects and promising practices. National Conference of State Legislatures. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/documents/immig/CPIimmigrantyouth.pdf

32.

Portes

Fernández-Kelly

Haller

(2005). Segmented assimilation on the ground: The new second generation in early adulthood. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28, 1000-1040. doi:10.1080/01419870500224117

33.

Portes

Rumbaut

R. G.

(2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. Berkeley: University of California Press.

34.

Portes

Zhou

(1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 530, 74-96. doi:10.1177/0002716293530001006

35.

Samari

Coleman-Minahan

(2018). Parental gender expectations by socioeconomic status and nativity: Implications for contraceptive use. Sex Roles, 78, 669-684. doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0820-5

36.

Samari

Seltzer

J. A.

(2016). Risky sexual behavior of foreign and native-born women in emerging adulthood: The long reach of mother-daughter relationships in adolescence. Social Science Research, 60, 222-235. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.06.003

37.

Sandfort

T. G. M.

Orr

Hirsch

J. S.

Santelli

(2008). Long-term health correlates of timing of sexual debut: Results from a national US study. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 155-172.

38.

Schaefer-McDaniel

N. J.

(2004). Conceptualizing social capital among young people: Toward a new theory. Children, Youth and Environments, 14, 140-150.

39.

Terzian

M. A.

Andrews

K. M.

Moore

K. A.

(2011). Preventing multiple risky behaviors among adolescents: Seven strategies (Research-to-Results Brief No. #2011-24). Washington, DC: Child Trends.

40.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2013, July 8). Race. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/topics/population/race/about.html