Don’t Forget the Parents: Caregiver Coping Strategies for Daughter’s Juvenile Legal System Involvement

Abstract

Caregivers of adolescent daughters with juvenile legal system involvement face unique stressors that have been largely overlooked in research and practice. The current study recruited 183 Black and Native North American/Indigenous caregivers with daughters involved in the juvenile legal system via a Qualtrics survey distributed using MTurk with careful screening practices. Results indicated high levels of stress and worry related to daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. Female caregivers used prayer, talking with friends, going to therapy, and exercise significantly more than male caregivers as coping strategies. Problems associated with daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement and worry about daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement significantly impacted use of most coping strategies. Finally, nearly all caregivers were interested in trying new activities to strengthen their relationship with their daughter and in strategies to improve their own mental health. Potential intervention components highlighted by caregivers indicate future directions for family-focused programming targeting families with juvenile legal system involvement.

Keywords

girls juvenile justice system parenting prevention treatment

Parenting is both a pleasure and a challenge, contributing to feelings of joy and stress throughout the life course (Louie et al., 2017). In short, parenting can be emotional and is not easy. High levels of parental stress are significantly associated both with elevated parental mental health problems and with child behavioral and mental health problems (Burgdorf et al., 2019). Naturally, there are circumstances that can complicate or increase parental stress and associated problems. One understudied and stressful experience shared by caregivers of approximately 744,500 youth in the United States is having a child with juvenile legal system involvement, ranging from arrest to confinement (Hockenberry & Puzzanchera, 2020). The current study identified some of the experiences of caregivers with daughters in the juvenile legal system, how they cope with these experiences, and ways they envision improving their relationship with their daughter and their own mental health.

Adolescent girls comprise over 30% of arrested youth in the United States (Hockenberry & Puzzanchera, 2020; Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2021). Black and Native North American/Indigenous girls are dramatically overrepresented across multiple stages in the juvenile legal system, including arrests and court appearances (Hockenberry & Puzzanchera, 2020), as a result of disproportionate exposure to adversities due to systemic racism (Bailey et al., 2017; Williams & Cooper, 2019). Research has demonstrated Black girls are treated more punitively once they become enmeshed in the juvenile legal system (Lowery, 2019). Consequences of juvenile legal system involvement are far-reaching and impact not only the youth themselves, but the ecological systems with which they interact, including their families (Dragomir & Tadros, 2020; Sullivan Lavoie, 2021). Yet, we often overlook the experiences and difficulties faced by caregivers of youth in the legal system.

The caregiver–child relationship is instrumental to health and wellness outcomes for both the caregiver and child (Louie et al., 2017). Relatedly, negative effects of parental stress have been documented across diverse cultures and contexts (Burgdorf et al., 2019; Louie et al., 2017). Positive relationships between a caregiver and their child can protect against the child’s involvement in the juvenile legal system (Lippold et al., 2018), and thus should be prioritized as a prevention mechanism. Moreover, improved caregiver–child relationships can reduce adolescent delinquent behavior (Simons et al., 2017; Walker et al., 2015) and have a demonstrated capacity to reduce physical and mental health problems for both the caregiver and the child (Cryer-Coupet et al., 2020; Duque, 2020; Sentino et al., 2018; Whittle et al., 2020).

Literature focused on examining parental stress and coping strategies to address stress specific to parenting is limited. Much existing research centers on caregivers of children with disabilities or very young children (age 1–6) or only focuses on experiences of mothers (Miranda et al., 2019; Rajgariah et al., 2021; Vernhet et al., 2019). No empirical studies to our knowledge have assessed caregiver strategies to cope with the unique stressors associated with having a daughter who has been or is currently involved with the juvenile legal system. Data on this topic are critical for advancing prevention efforts for caregiver and child health problems, as well as adolescent delinquency.

Current Study

To optimize treatment and care for youth who are enmeshed in the juvenile legal system and expand prevention efforts, we must strengthen caregiver–child relationships. Thus, in the current study, we sought to better understand what types of experiences caregivers have and how caregivers of girls in the juvenile legal system cope with the stress of their daughter’s criminal legal involvement. Cross-sectional data were obtained using an online survey from Black and Native North American caregivers of girls with juvenile legal system involvement. This study addressed the following four research questions: (1) What experiences do caregivers of daughters with juvenile legal system involvement have specific to their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement? For this research question, we were interested in whether caregivers talked with their daughter about their own juvenile legal system involvement, experienced challenges with monitoring their daughters, and experienced worry and other problems specific to their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. (2) What strategies do caregivers use to cope with the stress of their daughters’ justice involvement? We were particularly interested in testing whether gender or family income level were significantly associated with use of specific coping strategies. (3) What family and contextual factors (e.g., family connectedness, problems from daughter’s justice involvement) and demographic characteristics (e.g., caregiver partner status, age) are associated with use of specific coping strategies? (4) What services and activities do caregivers desire or indicate they might use to strengthen their relationship with their daughter and to improve their own mental health? All questions were exploratory given the lack of relevant data.

Method

Procedures

We recruited caregivers of daughters with juvenile legal system involvement to complete a Qualtrics survey via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), an online labor market. MTurk includes a platform for online survey participation with compensation for participants’ time, which has demonstrated adequate reliability and validity for online data collection (Buhrmester et al., 2018; Paolacci & Chandler, 2014). Using MTurk, participants with predesignated characteristics can be targeted for recruitment. In the current study, we screened individuals for parent status using their account information and for race/ethnicity and daughters’ juvenile legal system involvement using skip logic as the first two survey questions so as to enroll only Black and Indigenous parents who had daughters currently or formerly involved in the juvenile legal system. Our Qualtrics survey further screened participants for these eligibility criteria as the first two questions of the survey; anyone who did not meet eligibility criteria had their survey discontinued and was not able to “retake” the survey. We provided a $10.00 incentive to all participants who completed the approximately 15-minute survey and passed validity checks. Validity checks included survey completion time (n = 6 removed due to completing the survey in under 5 minutes) and two validity check items (n = 5 removed). Our initial sample of 194 participants was reduced to 183 after applying validity check criteria.

Participants

Participants (N = 183) were caregivers of daughters with juvenile legal system involvement who predominantly identified their race as Black (81%); 14% of participants self-identified as Native North American, and 5% as biracial or multiracial including Black race. Sixty percent of participants identified their ethnicity as non-Latine. Their average age was 35.5 years (SD = 7.2); the average age of participants’ daughters was 14.7 years (SD = 1.8). Relationship status of participants was balanced between single caregivers (48%) and married caregivers (47%). Thirty-six percent of participants reported earning between $21,000-40,999, 29% earned $61,000-80,999, 20% $41,000-60-999, 11% earned less than $21,000, and 3% earned over $80,999 (see Table 1 and (Fix & Mendelson, 2022) for additional information about the study sample).

Table 1.

Descriptive Characteristics of Caregivers with Girls Who Have Juvenile Legal System Involvement (N = 183).

	M (SD)	Observed Range
Caregiver age	35.5 (7.2)	20–64
Daughter grade	9.4 (1.8)	6–12
Daughter age	14.7 (1.8)	12–19
Worry about daughter’s juvenile system involvement	33.3 (11.7)	7–60
Healthy coping behaviors	2.1 (1.4)	0–4
Problems from daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement	8.1 (2.3)	0–10
Total family connectedness	4.9 (2.1)	0–12
Parental monitoring problems	3.6 (1.0)	1–6

30 states represented across participants.

Measures

Demographics

Demographic information was collected from participants using a brief measure that assessed their age, gender, race, ethnicity, relationship status, income level, educational level, and employment status. Participants also reported their daughter’s age and the type(s) and severity of her/their juvenile legal system involvement.

Family Connectedness Scale

To measure the perceived strength of the caregiver–daughter relationship, we used a modified version of the Family Connectedness Scale (FCS), originally developed by Eisenberg and Resnick (2006). We used four of the five Likert-style items and modified wording so that each question asked about the caregiver’s daughter instead of asking about a parent(s). For example, the item originally worded, “How much do you feel your parents care about you?” was reworded to, “How much do you feel your daughter cares about you?” We excluded the question, “How much do you feel your family respects your privacy?” Response options ranged from 0 = not at all to 2 = very much. Internal reliability was (α = .68).

Problems Associated with Daughter’s Involvement in the Juvenile Legal System

The first author developed the Problems Associated with Daughter’s Involvement in the Juvenile Legal System (PADI) for this study. The PADI is a 10-item measure of caregiver problems associated with the stress of having a child who is involved in the juvenile legal system. Items inquired about how daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement impacted caregiver problems with mental health, economic stress, work stress, and relationships. Examples of items included, “I have felt shame due to my daughter’s justice involvement,” “I have been experiencing more financial strain due to my daughter’s justice involvement,” and “I have been feeling depressed due to my daughter’s justice involvement.” All questions on the PADI are true-false items; higher total scores on the PADI translate to a higher level of identified problems for caregivers. Internal reliability in this study was acceptable (α = .75).

Worry about Delinquency Scale

We evaluated level of caregiver worry about daughter’s delinquent behavior using the Worry about Delinquency Scale (WADS). The WADS includes 20 items, each of which are preceded by the question, “How much do you worry about your daughter doing the following things?” Items included content such as daughter’s substance use, illegal behavior, having peers that could negatively influence them, lying, and cheating. Response options were presented as a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Higher scores on the WADS indicate a higher level of caregiver worry. Internal reliability in this study was acceptable (α = .91).

Parental Monitoring

We used three items informed by existing measures to gauge problems with parental monitoring (Dishion et al., 2006). Each caregiver was asked, “How difficult is it to know where your daughter is and what she is doing?”, “How often do you think your daughter goes to places that you ask her not to go?”, and “When your daughter is at a friend’s house, how often do you think that a parent or other adult is there?” (reverse-scored). Caregivers responded to items using a three-point Likert scale (0 = not at all difficult or never to 2 = very difficult or always).

Communication About Caregiver Delinquency

To measure whether caregivers spoke with their daughters about their own delinquent behavior, caregivers were asked, “Have you told your daughter about any illegal or risky behavior you engaged in as a youth?” They were provided with five possible response options: “Yes—I wanted her to learn from my experience,” “Yes—it was normal adolescent behavior,” “Somewhat—I talked about some of it,” “No—I don’t want to talk to her about it,” and “No—I did not engage in much or any of this behavior.”

Coping Strategies

We asked caregivers, “How do you cope with stress associated with your daughter’s justice involvement?” to identify their coping strategies. Caregivers were asked to select all that apply from a list of seven types of coping strategies and an “other” option for which they could specify additional strategies. Coping strategies included alcohol use, marijuana use, prayer, talking with friends, going to therapy, exercising, and distraction. No “other” coping strategies were reported.

Desired Interventions or Activities for Caregivers

Caregivers were also provided a brief two-item measure to gauge the types of activities in which they would engage to strengthen their relationship with their daughter or to improve their own well-being. The first question read, “What do you think could help your relationship with your daughter?” Response options were: “Learning ways to communicate more effectively,” “Learning new activities you can do at home to bond,” “Learning about things you can do in the community (once COVID is less restrictive),” “Spending more time together,” “School mother-daughter activities,” “Spending more time with my daughter’s friends,” “Developing a new hobby together,” “Praying together,” and “Getting our hair done together.” Caregivers were asked to select all listed options that applied. The second question read, “What do you think could strengthen your current mental and physical health?” Response options included: “Individual therapy,” “Financial support,” “Spending more time with my friends,” “If my daughter stopped getting into trouble,” “Exercising,” and “Finding time for me.” Similar to the first question, caregivers were asked to select all applicable options.

Data Analysis

Data were examined for normality. We did not observe any problems with multicollinearity, skewness, or kurtosis in any continuous variables included in the current study. To test whether gender, income level, or severity of daughter’s criminal justice system involvement was significantly associated with specific coping strategies, a series of Chi-Square Tests of Independence were conducted. Logistic regression models were estimated to test for associations between multiple caregiver factors and use of each of seven coping strategies to address stress associated with having a daughter involved in the juvenile legal system. Each model included personal problems associated with their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement, family connectedness, worry about their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement, and severity of their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. They also included the following covariates: caregiver gender, marital/parenting status, income level, and age, and the age of their daughter with juvenile legal system involvement. All analyses were completed in SPSS 27 (IBM Corp., 2019).

Results

We first examined data on experiences of caregivers specific to their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. Participants reported a high average number of problems due to their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement (M = 8.1, range 0–10) and low average levels of family connectedness (M = 4.9, range 0–12). See Table 1 for more detail.

Table 2 displays findings regarding whether caregivers talked with daughters about their own juvenile legal system involvement, problems with parental monitoring specific to their daughter, and coping strategies used specifically to address stress from their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. Most caregivers had previous juvenile legal system involvement (91%), and many with such involvement talked about it with their daughters (95%). Between 67–100% of participating caregivers indicated having each of three different problems monitoring their daughter. The most commonly reported parental monitoring problem was having difficulty knowing where their daughter was going, which was endorsed by 97% of respondents. Only one caregiver reported having no problems monitoring their daughter.

Table 2.

Characteristics of the Criminal Legal System Involvement and Related Stress and Coping Strategies among Caregivers.

Caregiver’s Individual Reports	Total (n, %)
Daughter’s Criminal Legal System by Highest Level of Severity
Truancy petition	3 (1.6%)
Arrest	44 (24.0%)
Went to juvenile court	44 (24.0%)
Court ordered therapy	5 (2.8%)
Probation	36 (19.7%)
Pretrial detention	39 (21.3%)
Secure confinement	12 (6.6%)
Talked with Daughter about own Criminal Legal System Involvement
No—I did not have much justice involvement	16 (8.7%)
No—I don’t want to	9 (4.9%)
Yes—but only about some justice involvement	31 (16.9%)
Yes—I wanted her to learn from my experience	85 (46.4%)
Yes—it is normative behavior	41 (22.4%)
Parental Monitoring Problems
It is very difficult to know where my daughter is going	177 (97.3%)
My daughter regularly goes places I do not want her to go	168 (92.3%)
My daughter is consistently unsupervised at friend’s homes	136 (74.7%)
Coping Strategies for Daughter’s Juvenile Legal System Involvement
Drinking alcohol	35 (19.3%)
Smoking marijuana	43 (23.8%)
Praying	109 (60.2%)
Talking with friends	113 (62.4%)
Going to therapy	67 (37.0%
Exercising	86 (47.5%)
Distracting myself (e.g., watching television)	61 (33.7%)

Note. DJI = due to Daughter’s Justice Involvement.

Gender, Family Income, Severity of Daughter’s Involvement and Coping

All participants endorsed at least one coping strategy to deal with stress associated with their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement (see Table 2). The two most common forms of coping were talking with friends (62%) and prayer (60%). We further tested whether gender, family income level, or severity of daughter’s involvement in the juvenile legal system were significantly associated with use of coping strategies (see Table 3). Male gender was significantly associated with a greater likelihood of using marijuana as a coping strategy (p < .001). Prayer was used 3.1 times—and therapy used 3.2 times—more often among female caregivers compared with male caregivers (p < .001 and p = .001, respectively). Female caregivers were 2.3 times more likely than male caregivers to report talking with friends to cope with their daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement (p = .014). Exercise was used as a coping strategy significantly more for female caregivers (3.7 times; p < .001). Prayer was 1.9 times—and therapy 3.5 times—more likely to be used in higher (compared with lower) income households (p = .047 and p < .001, respectively).

Table 3.

Use of Coping Strategies among Caregivers Overall, by Gender, by Income Level, and by Severity of Justice Involvement.

Coping Strategy	Overall	Caregiver Gender		Chi-square	Income Level		Chi-square
	Overall	Female (n = 121)	Male (n = 60)	Male Gender	Low Income	Mod/High Income	Low Income
	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	χ ² (OR)	n (%)	n (%)	χ ² (OR)
Drinking alcohol	35 (19.4)	21 (17.4)	14 (23.7)	—	21 (25.0)	14 (14.7)	—
Smoking marijuana	43 (23.9)	19 (15.7)	24 (40.7)	13.6 (3.7)^***	19 (22.6)	24 (25.3)	—
Praying	109 (60.6)	84 (69.4)	25 (42.4)	12.2 (0.3)^***	64 (67.4)	44 (52.4)	4.2 (0.5)^*
Talking with friends	112 (62.2)	83 (68.6)	29 (49.2)	6.4 (0.4)^*	64 (67.4)	47 (56.0)	—
Going to therapy	67 (37.2)	55 (45.5)	12 (20.3)	10.7 (0.3)^**	48 (50.5)	19 (22.6)	14.8 (0.3)^***
Exercising	86 (47.8)	70 (57.9)	16 (27.1)	15.0 (0.3)^***	51 (53.7)	34 (40.5)	—
Distracting myself	61 (33.9)	46 (38.0)	15 (25.4)	—	29 (30.5)	31 (36.9)	—

Note. ^* = p < .05; ^** = p < .01; ^*** = p < .001; -- = Non-significant chi-square values. Mod/High = moderate or high.

Drinking alcohol was most frequently reported among caregivers of daughters who had been arrested (38.6%) and least frequently (or really not at all) reported by caregivers whose daughters had a truancy petition (0.0%) and court ordered therapy (4.2%; χ² (5) = 18.41, p = .002). Caregivers of daughters on probation (41.7%) were most likely to report using marijuana, whereas (similar to alcohol use) caregivers with daughters with a truancy petition (0.0%) or who had been ordered to therapy by the courts (8.3%) were least likely to cope by using marijuana (χ² (5) = 14.4, p = .012). Not surprisingly, those with daughters in court ordered therapy were most likely to indicate they were involved in therapy (66.7%); those with daughters on probation were the least likely (22.2%; χ² (5) = 26.6, p < .001). Caregivers were most likely to talk to friends if they had daughters in court ordered therapy (79.2%) or confined daughters (75.0%; χ² (5) = 17.5, p = .002); those with arrested daughters (43.2%) were the least likely. Caregivers who had a daughter in court ordered therapy exercised most (79.2%) and those with a daughter on probation the least (25.0%; χ² (5) = 34.3, p < .001). Finally, caregivers with daughters in pretrial detention used distraction the most (53.8%), and those who had daughter with a truancy petition (0.0%) or a daughter on probation (16.7%) used distraction the least (χ² (5) = 13.5, p = .015).

Factors Associated with Different Caregiver Coping Strategies

Table 4 presents unstandardized coefficients from models of each of seven coping strategies specific to the stress of having a daughter with juvenile legal system involvement. Control variables (i.e., caregiver gender, caregiver income, caregiver and daughter age) are not reported in text, though it is worth mentioning that associated effect sizes were often robust among these variables compared with variables specific to daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. Problems due to having a daughter with juvenile legal system involvement were associated with a significant increase in use of prayer (OR = 1.3), therapy (OR = 1.3), and exercise (OR = 1.4), and with a significant decrease in use of distraction to cope (OR = 0.8). Family connectedness was only significantly associated with increased use of exercise (OR = 1.2). Worry about daughter’s system involvement was significantly but modestly (ORs = 0.9–1.1) associated with the use of most coping strategies, excepting prayer and distraction.

Table 4.

Coefficients from Models of Coping Strategies Used by Caregivers of Girls with Juvenile Legal System Involvement.

	Alcohol	Marijuana	Prayer	Talk	Therapy	Exercise	Distraction
	OR (p)	OR (p)	OR (p)	OR (p)	OR (p)	OR (p)	OR (p)
Problems from DJI	1.2 (.134)	1.0 (.729)	1.3 (.002)	1.1 (.331)	1.3 (.006)	1.4 (.001)	0.8 (.015)
Family connectedness	1.0 (.966)	1.0 (.896)	0.9 (.468)	1.1 (.585)	1.0 (.784)	1.2 (.037)	0.9 (.097)
Worry about DJI	1.1 (.021)	1.1 (.005)	1.0 (.611)	1.0 (.003)	0.9 (.002)	0.9 (<.001)	1.0 (.477)
DJI severity	0.7 (.017)	1.1 (.402)	1.3 (.050)	1.4 (.011)	1.1 (.445)	1.3 (.063)	1.2 (.123)
Caregiver gender	0.3 (.040)	0.3 (.006)	2.4 (.034)	2.1 (.070)	3.0 (.019)	3.9 (.004)	2.3 (.063)
Single caregiver	0.6 (.256)	1.2 (.675)	0.9 (.709)	0.6 (.233)	2.2 (.079)	1.9 (.150)	0.9 (.763)
Low income family	0.3 (.008)	1.7 (.241)	1.8 (.099)	1.9 (.086)	2.8 (.006)	1.6 (.215)	0.7 (.366)
Caregiver age	1.1 (.002)	1.0 (.190)	1.0 (.783)	1.0 (.173)	1.0 (.828)	1.0 (.066)	1.0 (.367)
Daughter age	1.0 (.846)	0.7 (.016)	1.1 (.216)	0.9 (.438)	1.1 (.411)	1.2 (.139)	1.2 (.181)

Note. Bolded text = significant. DJI = daughter’s juvenile legal system involvement. Age, gender, and family income level were included as a control variable in all tested models.

Improving Outcomes for Caregivers

In Table 5, we display which activities or services caregivers selected as desirable to strengthen their relationship with their daughter and separately to improve their own mental health. The top three activities or services to strengthen caregiver–daughter relationships were learning effective communication strategies (62%), participating in programming specific to strengthening the parent–child relationship (62%), and spending time together (54%). The top three ways caregivers reported they thought they could improve their own mental health were if their daughter had less juvenile legal system involvement (53%), receiving financial support (48%), and for the caregiver to spend more time with their own friends (43%).

Table 5.

Support Services Desired by Caregivers of Girls with Criminal Legal System Involvement.

Support Service or Activity	n (%)
Strengthen Caregiver–Daughter Relationship
Learning effective parent–child communication strategies	113 (62.1)
Doing activities or participating in programs that offer activities to bond	112 (61.5)
Spending more time together (with my daughter)	99 (54.4)
Learning about community activities	74 (40.7)
Developing a hobby together (with my daughter)	72 (39.6)
Praying together (with my daughter)	67 (36.8)
School parent–daughter activities	46 (25.3)
Spending more time with daughter’s friends	39 (21.4)
Getting hair done together (with my daughter)	25 (13.7)
Help Improve Caregiver’s Mental Health
If my daughter stopped getting into trouble	96 (52.5)
Financial support	88 (48.1)
Spending more time with my own friends	79 (43.2)
Individual therapy for me	73 (40.1)
Exercising	71 (39.0)
Me time	47 (25.7)

Note. Bolded text = significant with Bonferroni correction. DCI = daughter’s criminal legal system involvement. Age, gender, and family income level were included as a control variable in all tested models.

Discussion

This was the first study to examine coping strategies used by caregivers of girls with criminal legal involvement. Talking with friends and prayer were the two most commonly reported strategies for coping with daughter’s criminal legal involvement in our sample of Black and Indigenous caregivers. Female caregivers were more likely pray, talk with friends, go to therapy, and exercise, whereas male caregivers were more likely to smoke marijuana. Caregivers in low income households were more likely than those in high income households to pray and go to therapy as coping mechanisms. Problems and worries about daughter’s criminal legal involvement were associated with use of the widest range of measured coping strategies, whereas family connectedness and demographic factors such as caregiver’s partner status and caregiver and daughter age were minimally or not at all associated with the coping strategies assessed. Caregivers also reported interest in several strategies to improve their relationship with their daughters and to improve their mental health.

Our sample of Black and Indigenous caregivers reported high levels of problems associated with their daughter’s criminal legal involvement, as well as low levels of family connectedness. These findings highlight the importance of implementing strategies and programs to address the needs not only of young people in the juvenile justice system but also of their caregivers and families. Caregiver stress, distress, and mental health problems are associated with more negative emotional and behavioral outcomes for children, including young adults (Kamis, 2021; Kim et al., 2019). Family connectedness is also linked with children’s mental, emotional, and behavioral health, and its absence is associated with more problems among children, including suicidal ideation (Ackard et al., 2006; Kuramoto-Crawford et al., 2016). Reducing perceived problems and enhancing family connectedness may thus have beneficial effects on reducing daughter’s recidivism and social-emotional functioning. In addition, almost all caregivers reported having a personal history of criminal legal involvement, and most discussed this with their daughters. It would be helpful for subsequent research to investigate the different ways caregivers conduct these discussions, the usefulness of the discussions, and the extent to which increasing family connectedness may improve caregivers’ ability to communicate effectively with their daughters regarding lessons learned from their own past experiences.

This study identified prayer and talking with friends as particularly common coping strategies, particularly for female caregivers. It is unclear, however, to what extent or under what circumstances caregivers viewed these strategies as effective. Future qualitative research may help clarify caregivers’ experiences with these and other coping strategies assessed in this study to identify aspects of helpful versus ineffective strategies and inform intervention approaches. Evaluating caregivers’ experiences in therapy would be particularly beneficial for optimizing the impact of mental health services for this population.

Female caregivers reported using four coping strategies commonly conceptualized as adaptive (prayer, talking with friends, therapy, and exercise) more often than male caregivers; in contrast, men reported using only one coping strategy more often than women (smoking marijuana), a strategy that may be associated with negative health outcomes in some cases. This pattern of gender differences suggests that male caregivers may not employ as wide a range of coping strategies as women and may benefit from support in identifying healthy coping strategies. Gender differences in openness to—and use of—therapy to improve one’s situation are of particular importance and highlight the need to reduce stigma associated with mental health service solicitation while replicating previous findings concerning gender and help-seeking (Wu et al., 2017). Future research should further explore gender differences in caregiver coping and, potentially, ways to expand men’s coping repertoires. Fewer differences in coping styles emerged between caregivers of low versus higher incomes, although caregivers in lower-income households were more likely to use prayer and therapy. Subsequent qualitative research should further explore potential differences in coping strategy preferences and access by family socio-economic characteristics to investigate whether tailoring of coping interventions is needed.

Caregivers whose daughters were sentenced to court ordered therapy were the most likely to report being involved in therapy themselves, to talk with friends, and exercise and also were often least likely to cope using alcohol and marijuana. For caregivers with daughters on probation (another point in the juvenile legal system where family intervention and involvement is perhaps more feasible), coping mechanisms such as marijuana use were reported at an elevated rate whereas mechanisms like exercise were reported infrequently. Such outcomes suggest diversion tactics (and court ordered therapy in particular) may be the best way to promote effective coping at the family level and thus reduce recidivism. Formative data emphasize the need to further this line of inquiry and encourage involvement in family therapy for families at all stages of the juvenile legal system (Folk et al., 2019; Herrera, 2020).

Moreover, given the racial bias associated with availability of diversion opportunities which is often due to concerns about family structure (Love & Morris, 2019), diversion programs should be prioritized for Black and Indigenous families and diversion programming should not be contingent on two-caregiver, single household family structures. Given the promise of family-oriented diversion programming (Schwalbe et al., 2012), we should work to meet the needs of (and provide resources to address racial discrimination experienced within the legal system by) Black and Indigenous families who have a child enmeshed in the U.S. juvenile legal system. Programs like EMBRace which aim to reduce race-based stress (Anderson et al. 2019) coupled with race conscious and culturally informed direct diversion programming could be a good starting point. And within the field of policing, emphasizing the importance of indirect diversion particularly for Black and Indigenous youth is key (Schlesinger, 2018).

Contextual, family, and sociodemographic factors (except caregivers’ relationship status) were associated to some extent with use of specific coping strategies. Caregiver gender was the factor that most strongly differentiated use of five specific coping strategies. Having problems and having worries relating to daughter’s criminal legal involvement were each associated with use of several different coping strategies. Overall, however, analyses revealed relatively few and modest associations of the factors assessed with the seven coping strategies. Other factors, such as caregivers’ socialization experiences growing up and/or current social networks, may be more relevant for their choice of coping strategies.

When asked about improving their relationship with their daughter, caregivers most frequently endorsed wanting to learn effective communication strategies and to participate in programming to strengthen the parent–child bond. These responses suggest promising avenues for caregiver- or family-focused interventions. Future research should explore in greater depth the sorts of intervention content, formats, and modalities that this population would prefer. Existing interventions, such as Multisystemic Therapy (Henggeler et al., 2009) can potentially be further tailored or adapted to meet caregiver needs, or development of new intervention approaches may be needed to promote equity in treatment and legal system outcomes.

When asked about improving their mental health, daughters having less juvenile legal system involvement and receiving financial support were the most frequent selections, highlighting the key role that daughters’ circumstances and financial pressures played in caregivers’ lives. Caregiver responses make it clear that reducing youth recidivism will not only benefit young people but will also improve caregiver health, affecting even greater financial and social benefits at a population level. These associated benefits are important to consider in the context of advocacy for policies and practices that prioritize effective strategies to reduce youth juvenile legal system involvement. Combining strategies to reduce youth recidivism with interventions to promote caregiver–youth bonding and caregivers’ mental health may also be helpful (Herrera, 2020). In this way, caregivers can perhaps become more engaged in productive approaches to help reduce their daughters’ juvenile legal system involvement while also receiving support for relationship building and improving their own mental health. The fact that caregivers also reported significant negative impacts from financial pressures suggests that policies and interventions to support families should take steps to address their financial needs. Indeed, increasing financial supports may produce long-term societal cost savings if caregiver mental health needs are reduced and workforce productivity is enhanced.

This study had several limitations. As data were gathered cross-sectionally, study findings do not establish causal relationships among the variables. Our study sample was not entirely representative of Black and Indigenous caregivers nationally; however, participants were enrolled from across 30 U.S. states. Some researchers have raised concerns about the number of participants failing validity indicators on MTurk (Chmielewski & Kucker, 2020); as a result, we included validity indicators and excluded participants who showed evidence of questionable validity, which was not a substantial number in those who were included in the data we considered for analytic usage purposes (n = 11, 5.7%). Seven specific coping strategies were assessed; additional unmeasured coping strategies may play important roles in caregivers’ lives. It is worth noting, however, that no caregivers endorsed using “other” coping strategies not listed on the measure.

In conclusion, study findings indicate that daughters’ criminal legal involvement was associated with significant stress and worry among caregivers, which they attempted to address using a variety of coping strategies. Caregivers were also interested in learning additional strategies for strengthening bonds with their daughters, suggesting the potential benefit of intervention strategies to improve family connectedness, mental health, and coping in this vulnerable population. Future research should further explore caregiver coping strategies and their effectiveness, as well as intervention needs and preferences, using qualitative, mixed-methods, and longitudinal designs. This line of research holds promise for improving whole-family approaches for addressing juvenile and criminal legal system involvement.

Footnotes

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: Funding for the current study was provided by the Bloomberg American Health Initiative and through a grant from the Johns Hopkins Urban Health Institute (UHI). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Bloomberg American Health Initiative or the UHI.

ORCID iD

Rebecca L. Fix

References

Ackard

D. M.

Neumark-Sztainer

Story

Perry

(2006). Parent–child connectedness and behavioral and emotional health among adolescents. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 30(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2005.09.013

Anderson

R. E.

McKenny

M. C.

Stevenson

H. C.

(2019). EMBR ace: Developing a racial socialization intervention to reduce racial stress and enhance racial coping among Black parents and adolescents. Family Process, 58(1), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12412

Bailey

Z. D.

Krieger

Agénor

Graves

Linos

Bassett

M. T.

(2017). Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: Evidence and interventions. The Lancet, 389(10077), 1453–1463. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-X

Buhrmester

M. D.

Talaifar

Gosling

S. D.

(2018). An evaluation of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, its rapid rise, and its effective use. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 149–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617706516

Burgdorf

Szabó

Abbott

M. J.

(2019). The effect of mindfulness interventions for parents on parenting stress and youth psychological outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1336. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01336

Chmielewski

Kucker

S. C.

(2020). An MTurk crisis? Shifts in data quality and the impact on study results. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(4), 464–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619875149

Cryer-Coupet

Q. R.

Dorsey

M. S.

Lemmons

B. P.

Hope

E. C.

(2020). Examining multiple dimensions of father involvement as predictors of risk-taking intentions among black adolescent females. Children and Youth Services Review, 108(4), Article 104604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104604

Dishion

T. J.

Burraston

(2006). Family management practices: Research design and measurement issues. In Handbook of drug abuse prevention (pp. 587–607). Springer.

Dragomir

R. R.

Tadros

(2020). Exploring the impacts of racial disparity within the American juvenile justice system. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 71(2), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12165

10.

Duque

R. B.

(2020). Black health matters too… Especially in the era of COVID-19: How poverty and race converge to reduce access to quality housing, safe neighborhoods, and health and wellness services and increase the risk of co-morbidities associated with global pandemics. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 8(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-020-00857-w

11.

Eisenberg

M. E.

Resnick

M. D.

(2006). Suicidality among gay, lesbian and bisexual youth: The role of protective factors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39(5).

12.

Fix

R. L.

Mendelson

(2022). Stress, worry, and health problems experienced by Black and Indigenous caregivers of girls with juvenile legal system involvement. Children and Youth Services Review, 138(106529). DOI:10.1016/j.childyouth.2022.106529

13.

Folk

J. B.

Stuewig

Mashek

Tangney

J. P.

Grossmann

(2019). Behind bars but connected to family: Evidence for the benefits of family contact during incarceration. Journal of Family Psychology, 33(4), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000520

14.

Henggeler

S. W.

Schoenwald

S. K.

Borduin

C. M.

Rowland

M. D.

Cunningham

P. B.

(2009). Multisystemic therapy for antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. Guilford Press.

15.

Herrera

(2020). Family-focused interventions for juvenile Offenders: A systemic review. California State University.

16.

Hockenberry

Sarah

Puzzanchera

Charles

(2020). Juvenile Court Statistics, 2018. National Center for Juvenile Justice.

17.

IBM Corp . (2019). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. In

18.

Kamis

(2021). The long-term impact of parental mental health on children’s distress trajectories in adulthood. Society and Mental Health, 11(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156869320912520

19.

Kim

D. H.

Bassett

S. M.

Voisin

D. R.

(2019). Family stress and youth mental health problems: Self-efficacy and future orientation mediation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 89(2), 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000371

20.

Kuramoto-Crawford

S. J.

Ali

M. M.

Wilcox

H. C.

(2016). Parent–child connectedness and long-term risk for suicidal ideation in a nationally representative sample of US adolescents. Crisis.

21.

Lippold

M. A.

Hussong

Fosco

G. M.

Ram

(2018). Lability in the parent’s hostility and warmth toward their adolescent: Linkages to youth delinquency and substance use. Developmental Psychology, 54(2), 348–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000415

22.

Louie

A. D.

Cromer

L. D.

Berry

J. O.

(2017). Assessing parenting stress: Review of the use and interpretation of the parental stress scale. The Family Journal, 25(4), 359–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480717731347

23.

Love

T. P.

Morris

E. W.

(2019). Opportunities diverted: intake diversion and institutionalized racial disadvantage in the juvenile justice system. Race and Social Problems, 11(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-018-9248-y

24.

Lowery

P. G.

(2019). The independent and joint effects of race, crime, and social location on the dispositional decisions of juvenile girls. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 17(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377938.2019.1575780

25.

Miranda

Mira

Berenguer

Rosello

Baixauli

(2019). Parenting stress in mothers of children with autism without intellectual disability: Mediation of behavioral problems and coping strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00464

26.

Paolacci

Chandler

(2014). Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(3), 184–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414531598

27.

Rajgariah

Chandrashekarappa

S. M.

Babu

K. V.

Gopi

Ramaiha

N. M. M.

Kumar

(2021). Parenting stress and coping strategies adopted among working and non-working mothers and its association with socio-demographic variables: A cross-sectional study. Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 9(2021), 191–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2020.08.013

28.

Schlesinger

(2018). Decriminalizing racialized youth through juvenile diversion. The Future of Children, 28(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2018.0003

29.

Schwalbe

C. S.

Gearing

R. E.

MacKenzie

M. J.

Brewer

K. B.

Ibrahim

(2012). A meta-analysis of experimental studies of diversion programs for juvenile offenders. Clinical Psychology Review, 32(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.10.002

30.

Sentino

Thompson

P. L.

Nugent

W. R.

Freeman

(2018). Adolescent daughters’ perceptions of their fathers’ levels of communication and care: How these variables influence female adolescent sexual behaviors. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 28(5), 632–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2018.1449693

31.

Simons

Mulder

Breuk

Mos

Rigter

van Domburgh

Vermeiren

(2017). A program of family-centered care for adolescents in short-term stay groups of juvenile justice institutions. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 11(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-017-0203-2

32.

Sullivan Lavoie

(2021). Footing the bill for juvenile justice: The impacts of legal financial obligations on Washington youth. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 19(2), 16.

33.

Vernhet

Dellapiazza

Blanc

Cousson-Gélie

Miot

Roeyers

Baghdadli

(2019). Coping strategies of parents of children with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 28(6), 747–758. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-018-1183-3

34.

Walker

S. C.

Bishop

A. S.

Pullmann

M. D.

Bauer

(2015). A research framework for understanding the practical impact of family involvement in the juvenile justice system: The juvenile justice family involvement model. American Journal of Community Psychology, 56(3-4), 408–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-015-9755-6

35.

Whittle

Bray

Lin

Schwartz

(2020). Parenting and child and adolescent mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

36.

Williams

D. R.

Cooper

L. A.

(2019). Reducing racial inequities in health: Using what we already know to take action. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(4), 606. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16040606

37.

I. H. C.

Bathje

G. J.

Kalibatseva

Sung

Leong

F. T. L.

Collins-Eaglin

(2017). Stigma, mental health, and counseling service use: A person-centered approach to mental health stigma profiles. Psychological Services, 14(4), 490–501. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000165