Ninoslava Pecnik, Professor, Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb - Drivers of parenting support, policy and provision in Croatia, Expert Consultation on Family and Parenting Support, UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti Florence 26-27 May 2014
Drivers of parenting support, policy and provision in Croatia
1. Consultation on family and parenting
support, UNICEF OoR Innocenti Florence,
27.-28.5.2014.
Drivers of parenting support
policy and provision
in Croatia
Prof. N. Pećnik, University of Zagreb
ninoslava.pecnik@gmail.com
2. Why has there been an emerging interest in family
and parenting support (PS) and what are the
implications?
Presentation outline
Overview of PS in Croatia
Drivers of development of the PS
policy and provisions:
a turn in the national family policy
Council of Europe Rec (2006) on
policy to support positive
parenting
UNICEF Office for Croatia
Research on parenting and PS
3. Development of parenting support
policy and provision in Croatia
25 years long tradition in child protection, through 80 centers for social
welfare
The concept of ‘parenting support’ introduced in 2006 (paired with ‘family
support’)
For their provision Ministry of Family, etc. (2003) establishes 19
multiprofessional family centers (2008-2011), universal and targeted PS
The National Plan of Activities for the Rights of Child (2006–2012) had a
section on ‘supporting families in their educational function’ (diverse
activities, multisectorial providers) , alongside ‘protection of the abused &
neglected children’
Under the new Ministry of Social Policy and Youth, family centers became
part of the centers for social welfare (Jan. 2014)
Conference ‘Perspectives of PS programs’ by family centre for Istria (Dec.
2013)
In 2014: the new family law uses the term ‘parenting support’
4. Contextual factors, professional and state
initiatives
contributing to emerging of the parenting
support field
Gradual acknowledgement of demandingness of contemporary parental
role, concern for social conditions of parenting, growing commitment to
supporting families/parents – facilitated by formulation of the National
Family Policy (2003); research on (one-parent) families, activities of NGO
‘Parents in Action’,…
Emphasis on the UN CRC implementation (violence, child participation)
Recognition of social changes that have affected parent - child
relationships and understanding of the parental role (including the ban of
corporal punishment in1999); a crisis of (authoritarian) parenting
Parenting practices became a subject of public policy - not just socially
unacceptable parenting (as prior to 2000), but also socially desirable
parenting
PS increasingly seen as a solution to the lack of services for ‘families at
risk’ and poor effectivenes of child protection interventions in preventing
institutionalization
5. CoE Rec (2006)19 on policy to support positive
parenting & defining socialy desirable
parenting in Croatia
CoE: WP on parenting skills,
especially combating
violence…(2005)
Parenting in the UN CRC
• Provide appropriate direction and
guidance (respecting the evolving
capacities and the views of the child,
violence-free);
• Provide for full and harmonious
development
nurturing behaviour,
structure and guidance,
recognition,
enabling empowerment
Cro: WP on defining responsible
parenting, early help to families at
risk…(2010)
‘parental behaviors based on the
best interest of the child, which
include nurturing, providing
structure and guidance,
recognition of the child as a person
and which enables empowerment
of the child.’
‘Responsible parent embraces
responsibility for the child's
wellbeing and development,
responsibility for the quality of
relationship with the child and
responsibility for own wellbeing
and development as a parent’.
6. CoE Rec(2006)19 on the policy to support positive
parenting &
setting standards for parenting support in
Croatia
In Croatian (2008)
Min. of Family
stimulated:
situation analysis
from service
providers’ view
new PS programs
Supported
comprehensive
research on:
parental beliefs,
practices , needs
for and obstacles to
PS
Daly (2007)
New views of
parenting
and parenting support
• Key massages for
parents
• Guidelines for
professionals
Core principles of PS programs
facilitated the paradigm shift from the
deficit model towards the empowerment
model
7. Research with a nationally representative sample of 13-
year-olds (N=1074), their mothers (N=983) and fathers
(N=850)
(Pećnik & Tokić, 2011)
• 73,3% children report being hit by mothers and 66,2% by fathers
• For a correct upbringing, it is necessary to hit the child sometimes.
24.4
40.6
7.4
13.7
50
40
30
20
10
0
Fathers Mothers
needed PS
used PS
15% mothers agree, 19% undecided
• children’s views: Parenting schools should teach parents how to talk to
children
• Parental (unmet) needs for counseling on parenting
issues:
8. Contribution of the UNICEF Office for Croatia
to parenting support promotion, provision and
research
Since 2006 continually engaged with positive parenting and parenting
support, in the context of the ECD programme
facilitated PS-related development within the health, (preschool) education
and social sectors, as well as in the public opinion sphere
Research on
- General population beliefs about parenting of a young child (2006)
- Parental practices, attitudes and needs for support in 1400 parents of
infants,2007
Awareness-raising and fund-raising campaigns
The first three are the most important! (2007)
The first thee are even more important! (2009)
Provision of DVDs on ECD and PP, breast-feeding groups, ‘baby fitness’
groups, hotlines for parents of young children, ‘Read to me’community
9. The first three are the most important!
Campaign by UNICEF Croatia (2007)
SENTENC
ED FOR
LIFE?
N.N.(3)
lack of
self-estee
m
From a kiss the child
grows, from beatings
she becomes smaller.
And parents have a right
to help in child rearing.
10. Workshops with parents ‘Growing Up Together’
a nationally-recognized parenting support program
UNICEF Office for Croatia (2008-2010)
Objective of program development:
To strengthen capacity of local community professionals for supporting
positive parenting of parents of young children (1-4 years)
The program is respectful of the CoE Rec (2006)19 provisions on good
parenting and good PS
developed in participation with 36 groups of parents and professionals
through 2 pilot projects
11 weekly, 2 hours manualized workshops; follow-up in ‘Clubs of Parents’
Groups consist of 8-12 parents,
Implemented in kindergartens and family centers throughout Croatia
(>300 groups of parents), Bosnia&Herzegovina (40 groups) and
Bulgaria (50 groups)
11. Workshops with parents ‘Growing Up Together’
Aim
to support parents in understanding
and carrying out their parental
responsibilities in consistence with the
values of positive parenting in the best
interest of the child
Approach
to facilitate the exchange of
information, skills and support that
parents have found useful for promoting
growth of competence, both of parents
and children.
12. 2010 2014
1. Parents of the 21st century
2. The four pillars of parenting
3. Child's psychological needs and
parental goals
4. All of our children and how we love
them
5. Listening - an important parenting skill
6. How does the child learn about the
world?
7. Boundaries: why and how?
8. Choosing and creating solutions
9. Parental responsibilities and more
questions
10. Being a parent: Influences and choices
11. The ending and a new beginning
Additions: Conflicts of parents and
1. Every child is special, every
parent is special
2. Between expectations and
adjustment
3. The four pillars of parenting
4. Child's psychological needs…
5. All of our children and how we
love
6. Listening- an important
parenting…
7. How does the child learn …
8. Boundaries: why and how?
9. Parental responsibilities…
10. Being a parent: Influences and…
11. The ending and a new beginning
Growing Up Together
workshops with parents of young
children
Growing Up Together Plus
workshops with parents of young
CWDisabilities
13. Outcome evaluations of ‘Growing Up Together’
Outcome evaluation within
development of ‘Growing up
together’ (Pecnik and Starc, 2010)
and ‘Growing up together Plus’
(Pecnik et al., 2014)
quasi-experimental design
Ongoing evaluation (N>1800):
pre-post intervention quantitative and
qualitative data
After the program changes in:
• perceived parental competence,
• parental violent and supportive
behaviors
• beliefs respectful of child’s
needs/rights
Perceived gains from participation,
N=1273:
Feeling more confident as a parent
Insight into own strengths and
weakneses
Change in interactions with the child
Acquiring new useful knowledge
Better understanding of the child’s
perspective/needs/reasons of
behaviors
Support for being more sensitive and
responsive to childs needs and
rights
Support for taking care of own personal
needs
14. Outcome evaluations of ‘Growing Up Together
Plus’
Outcome evaluation within
development of ‘Growing up
together’ (Pecnik and Starc,
2010) and ‘Growing up
together Plus’ (Pecnik et al.,
2014) Pre-post intervention
design, with comparison
groups
Ongoing evaluation (N>1800):
pre-post intervention
quantitative and qualitative
data
After the program: higher
perceived competence,
lower violence,
beliefs more in tune with
Perceived gains (N=1273):
Feeling more confident as a parent
More insight into own strong and
weak sides in parenting
Change in interactions with the child
Acquiring new useful knowledge
Better understanding of the child’s
perspective/needs/reasons of
behaviors
Support for being more sensitive and
responsive to childs needs and
rights
Support for taking care of own
personal needs
Sharing experiences, dilemas and
problems, feeling that you are not
alone
15. HOW PARENTS AND COMMUNITIES CARE FOR THE
YOUNGEST CHILDREN IN CROATIA (UNICEF Office
for Croatia, 2013)
Parenting in the period from 0 to 6
- Parents’ experiences, attitudes, practices
- Personal wellbeing and experience of
parental role
- Resources for parenting
- Acessibility and use of PS services and other
community resources for young children and
their parents
Integrates different systems (health, education,
welfare)
Quota samples: 6 months, 1, 3 and 6 years
(preschool) (representative of child’s gender,
parents’ education, community size, region) total
N=1621 (22% fathers) + boost 98 parents of children
with disability (n=203)
+ perspectives of low SES parents, parents of
CWD
Parenting support services
=interventions for parents
aimed at promoting the
child's welfare and
development by
influencing parents'
understanding and
fulfilment of their parental
responsibilities. Address
knowledge, skills and
values.
16. Selection of findings:
Parent-child interaction
Breast-feeding drops sharply at 2-4
months
Less breastfeeding by young, low
SES mothers, by parents of CWD
Developmentaly stimulating
parents’ behaviors (playing,
reading, singing, problem-solving)
reported for last 7 days by
majority, except 10%
less frequent among low SES
parents, rural communities
Corporal
punishment/violence
5 % parents of 6-month-olds
15 % parents of 1-year-olds
35 % parents of 3-year-olds
(3% every day)
20% parents of 6-year-olds
reported hitting that child
in the last 7 days
Among 1- and 6-year-olds,
more frequent hitting among
low SES parents, rural
communities
What is the best way to stop CP?
66% Parents should be helped with their problems so they do not take out
their dissatisfaction or exhaustion on their children.
50% Parents should be advised how to bring up children without beatings.
20% Parents need help in cutting down alcohol consumption and with
psychological difficulties.
17. Coping with parental role, balancing parenting
responsibilities with paid work, gender division of
household labour
More stressed parents engaged in less supportive
/stimulating and in more violent interactions with the child
low SES parents and parents of CWD more stressed, poorer health,
express more difficulties in coping with demands of parenting
1/3 employed fathers reported that their job responsibilities often or
always prevent fulfilling their parental role
This conflict is more often experienced by parents of low SES
2/3 of the mothers perceive themselves as taking up all or most of
the activities related to child care/activities with children.
3/4 of mothers consider they do all or most of household labour
These differences more pronounced for low SES mothers. They
also receive less unpaid or paid support for household or parenting
from outside family
Mothers experience more parental stress, fathers experience less
parental competence
18. Needed, used and desirable professionals’ support
around parenting issues
64%
38%
23%
78%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
thought they need
professional's
advice in
parenting
often and
sometimes
thought they need
professional's
advice in p.
personally
consulted with
professional on
parenting issues
would use
professional's
help if available
≠ low SES parents, in rural areas less frequently felt they needed professionals
advice in parenting, read less on parenting, expressed less interest in
contacting a professional
19. Resources for parenting: 3. INFORMATIONS FOR PARENTS
What would help you most in your everyday care for the child?
33%
30%
28%
24%
23%
16%
15%
11%
More available information on legal rights of parents
and children
More available information on existing services for
parents
More available texts from parenting professionals
More TV and/or radio programs on parenting
Free of charge and more frequent workshops,
‘parenting schools’
Hotline for parenting questions
More accessibly written texts of parenting
professionals
Free DVD-s with professionals’ advice
20. Which parenting-ralated information do parents need?
58%
34%
26%
21%
20%
20%
17%
16%
16%
15%
13%
13%
12%
11%
7%
How to support positive development of my child
Health
What to expect as normal child’s behavior at certain age
How to solve problems in child’s behavior
Feeding of children
How do children learn
‘PRO’ et ‘CONTRA’ for various parenting/educational practices
How to play or speak with the child
Problems between siblings, fighting, jelousy
How to help a child to become ‘school-ready’
Toilet training
Adjustment to kindergarten
How to balance parental and marital/parter relationships
Problems of child’s sleeping or crying
Postpartal depression
How to share child care with the other parent
21. Attitudes towards seeking professionals’ support around
parenting issues – a barrier to help-seeking?
• 85% parents think that seeking professional help is a sign of parental
responsibility
• 66% parents think that professionals are needed by problematic
families, while an average parent deals with parenting difficulties by
himself.
Beliefs about desirable and undesirable outcomes of help-seeking
and prejudices towards professionals
predict intention to seek help
reflect past experience with receiving help with parenting issues
≠ Low SES parents, in rural areas, have less positive attitudes to
seeking PS
22. Which parenting support services were used?
(N=1621)
%
Courses for pregnant women /future parents 20%
Individual counseling with a paediatrician even when the child is not
11%
sick
Developmental gymnastics for babies (e.g.‘baby fitness’, baby
massage)
5%
Joint programs (workshops etc.) for parents and children 5%
Breastfeednig support groups 4%
Individual counseling with a psychologist or pedagogue (e.g. in
4%
kindergarten)
Drop-in parents’ groups 2%
UNICEF ‘Growing up together’ workshops with parents of young
children
1%
Other group-based programs for parents (‘parenting schools’, lectures
etc.)
1%
Support groups for parents of children with disabilities 1%
Hotline counseling 0%
23. Research implications on
PS policy, provision and further research
Identified inequalities in children’s access to supportive,
stimulating and nonviolent parenting and in their parent’s
access to PS and other community resources for positive
parenting
Stimulated discussion about the position of PS on local and national level,
contributed to building intersectorial cooperation
Mobilized support for changes of PS-related paradigms:
towards the ‘dual focus’ on the child’s AND the parent’s wellbeing
towards viewing PS as a tool in realizing UNCRC, enhancing community
development but also as investment in human capital development
New activities to build local partnerships for improving universal and
targeted PS
Multivariate analyses of collected data underway to understand
24. References
Daly, M. (Ed.) (2007) Parenting in contemporary Europe: A positive
approach Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publ.
Pećnik, N.( Ed.)(2013) . How Do Parents and Communities Care About
Young Children In Croatia (in Croatian) Zagreb: UNICEF Office for Croatia
(www.unicef.hr)
Pećnik, N. & Starc, B. (2010) Parenting in the Best Interest of the Child and
Supporting Parents of Young Children (in Croatian) Zagreb: UNICEF Office
for Croatia (www.unicef.hr)
Pećnik, N. i Tokić, A. (2011) Parents And Children At The Doorstep Of
Adolescence: Views From Three Angles, Challenges And Support (in
Croatian). Zagreb: MOBMS.
http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/513138.Penik_Toki_2011_RODITELJI_I_DJECA_
NA_PRAGU_ADOLESCENCIJE.pdf
Pećnik, N. & Starc, B. (2010) ‘Growing Up Together’ Workshops with
parents of young children: Manual( in Croatian) Zagreb: UNICEF Office for
Croatia.
Pećnik, N., Starc, B., Ljubešić, M., Jejić, M., Probela-Hodap, S. i Grubić,
M. (2014) ‘Growing Up Together Plus’ : Manual. Zagreb: UNICEF Office
Hinweis der Redaktion
Program effectiveness assessment was based on the pre-post intervention model, with a comparison group of parents
who did not participate in the program
Prisutne dileme, konflikti interesa, tenzije u području pružanja podrške roditeljstvu
Edukacija roditelja vs. poštivanje intimnog, bliskog odnosa roditelja i djeteta
S jedne strane je ideja da su bolje informirani roditelji i bolji roditelji/bolje u stanju ispunjavati zahtjeve roditeljske uloge, poduprijeti optimalan razvoj djeteta (poticaj, granice)
(u školi se pripremamo za razne aktivnosti, a nitko nas nije učio kako biti roditelj)
S druge strane je ideja da je roditeljstvo u svojoj biti jedinstven, osoban, blizak odnos – veza, kontakt između dvije individue
(roditeljstvo nije profesija, nije zanat, tehnika)
Mene osobno ponekad to podsjeća na antagonizam između između tradicionalnog (jednosmjernog) i relacijskog/odnosnog (dvosmjernog) viđenja socijalizacije – social relational theory
A čini mi se i da postoji određena tenzija između dominantno američke, pa čak i anglo-saksonske literature o podršci roditeljstvu pa i psihologiji roditeljstva i europske (skandinavske+benelux) koja je nekako otvorenija stvarnom uvažavanju implikacija viđenja i djeteta i roditelja kao subjekata (radikalni?)
-lanin slajd? – ili to kasnije kd govorim o rz (podrška – a ne edukacija – implicira poziciju stručnjaka u odnosu na roditelja)
Poučavanje/nametanje standardizirane slike dobrog rodtieljstva vs. uvažavanje različitosti, konteksta životne situacije, osobnih vrijednost i životnih stilova
(npr. autoritativno roditeljstvo nije povezano s najboljom prilagodbom ako se živi u opasnom okruženju siromađnih gradskih četvrti)
– osim toga savjeti stručnjaka se mijenjaju – npr dosljednost, tajm out, uključenost rodtielja u djetetovo učenje, roditeljska kontrola…?
Prisutne dileme, konflikti interesa, tenzije u području pružanja podrške roditeljstvu
Edukacija roditelja vs. poštivanje intimnog, bliskog odnosa roditelja i djeteta
S jedne strane je ideja da su bolje informirani roditelji i bolji roditelji/bolje u stanju ispunjavati zahtjeve roditeljske uloge, poduprijeti optimalan razvoj djeteta (poticaj, granice)
(u školi se pripremamo za razne aktivnosti, a nitko nas nije učio kako biti roditelj)
S druge strane je ideja da je roditeljstvo u svojoj biti jedinstven, osoban, blizak odnos – veza, kontakt između dvije individue
(roditeljstvo nije profesija, nije zanat, tehnika)
Mene osobno ponekad to podsjeća na antagonizam između između tradicionalnog (jednosmjernog) i relacijskog/odnosnog (dvosmjernog) viđenja socijalizacije – social relational theory
A čini mi se i da postoji određena tenzija između dominantno američke, pa čak i anglo-saksonske literature o podršci roditeljstvu pa i psihologiji roditeljstva i europske (skandinavske+benelux) koja je nekako otvorenija stvarnom uvažavanju implikacija viđenja i djeteta i roditelja kao subjekata (radikalni?)
-lanin slajd? – ili to kasnije kd govorim o rz (podrška – a ne edukacija – implicira poziciju stručnjaka u odnosu na roditelja)
Poučavanje/nametanje standardizirane slike dobrog rodtieljstva vs. uvažavanje različitosti, konteksta životne situacije, osobnih vrijednost i životnih stilova
(npr. autoritativno roditeljstvo nije povezano s najboljom prilagodbom ako se živi u opasnom okruženju siromađnih gradskih četvrti)
– osim toga savjeti stručnjaka se mijenjaju – npr dosljednost, tajm out, uključenost rodtielja u djetetovo učenje, roditeljska kontrola…?
Poučavanje/nametanje standardizirane slike dobrog rodtieljstva vs. uvažavanje različitosti, konteksta životne situacije, osobnih vrijednost i životnih stilova, a prije svega dvosmjernog shvaćanja socijalizacije! Roditeljstvo kao proces a ne zbroj radnji koje treba naučiti , u okviru jasno definirane uloge majke ili oca…
Educating parents versus respecting intimate relationships
a.Better informed parents are better parents
b.The heart of parenting is an intimate, unique and personal relationship Issues: Parenting as an occupation, ‘creeping professionalism’ Democratic deficit Professionals often turn out to be wrong
- (miller i sambel 2003) engleski ps - vrste tzv 'dispensing model (širenje, podjela informacija, savjeta – više na razini 'što', sadržaj
Programi s dokazanom djelotvornosti / strukturirani (‘evidence-based’)
vs.
fleksibilnost/IPP(‘client-driven’)
Ideja da prednost trebaju imatiTeorijski utemeljeni, standardizirani programi s provjerenom učinkovitošću
Teško pomirljiva sa zahtjevom da roditeljska precepcija problema i (samo)procjena roditeljevih potreba oblikuju ciljeve, poželjne ishode i sadržaj intervencije
(ideja da od programa ne vidimo roditelja – tko je vlasnik problema? Tko je u poziciji definirati problem/ciljeve/poželjne ishode programa – a to je obilježje strukturiranih evidence based programa da su ciljevi unaprijed definirani
(Povezana s tim je i kritika RTC kao zlatnog standarda u hijerarhiji dokaza učinkovitosti)
Problem se vidi kao nemotivirani roditelj, a ne kao razlika u očekivanjima stručnjaka (ili institucije – npr. škole) i očekivanjima roditelja
Argument u prilog 'podrške roditeljstvu/roditeljima u ispunjavanju roditeljskih odgovornosti' a ne 'prevenciji npr. delinkventnog ponašanja' ili prevenciji ovisnosti – roditejli se ne vide u tome (mi nemamo budućeg delinkventa/ovisnika, nego teško/zahtjevno dijete'
Argument zašto govorimo o podršci roditeljstvu / promociji razvoja, a ne prevenciji lošeg roditeljstva (npr zlost i zanem) odnosno njegovih učinaka (problema mentalnog zdravlja, problema ponašanja)
To su konflikti koje treba prepoznati, učiniti vidljivima, ona još uvijek predstavljaju otvorena pitanja u ovom području
… pitanje tko definira poželjne ishode !
Hermanovih 5 pitanja roditelju staviti u oblačić!! – ili to kod one zadnje dileme
Child – directed interventions versus parental need-oriented interventions
a.Better perspectives for children whose parents are supported
b.Need of parents should be point of departure. Context matters! Issues Are parents only gateways to their children? Needs of parents do not always correspond with needs of children Parents will not participate if their needs are not met Again: professionals are not always right
Dilema: Encouraging mainstreaming versus encouraging diversity (rz s romima!)
a.Inclusion and participation are important and can be facilitated by parenting support
b.Diversity in life style, personal choices, culture and religion are important for parents, children and society Issues a top-down projection of mainstream values and standards on to families a denial of parental capabilities families distrusting authorities and professionals Mismatch lifestyles families and services professionals
Edukacija roditelja
vs.
poštivanje intimnog, bliskog odnosa roditelja i djeteta
Intervencije usmjerene interesom djeteta
vs.
intervencije usmjerene roditeljskim potrebama
Programi s dokazanom djelotvornosti /strukturirani (‘evidence-based’)
vs.
Fleksibilnost (‘client-driven’)
Program effectiveness assessment was based on the pre-post intervention model, with a comparison group of parents
who did not participate in the program
Prisutne dileme, konflikti interesa, tenzije u području pružanja podrške roditeljstvu
Edukacija roditelja vs. poštivanje intimnog, bliskog odnosa roditelja i djeteta
S jedne strane je ideja da su bolje informirani roditelji i bolji roditelji/bolje u stanju ispunjavati zahtjeve roditeljske uloge, poduprijeti optimalan razvoj djeteta (poticaj, granice)
(u školi se pripremamo za razne aktivnosti, a nitko nas nije učio kako biti roditelj)
S druge strane je ideja da je roditeljstvo u svojoj biti jedinstven, osoban, blizak odnos – veza, kontakt između dvije individue
(roditeljstvo nije profesija, nije zanat, tehnika)
Mene osobno ponekad to podsjeća na antagonizam između između tradicionalnog (jednosmjernog) i relacijskog/odnosnog (dvosmjernog) viđenja socijalizacije – social relational theory
A čini mi se i da postoji određena tenzija između dominantno američke, pa čak i anglo-saksonske literature o podršci roditeljstvu pa i psihologiji roditeljstva i europske (skandinavske+benelux) koja je nekako otvorenija stvarnom uvažavanju implikacija viđenja i djeteta i roditelja kao subjekata (radikalni?)
-lanin slajd? – ili to kasnije kd govorim o rz (podrška – a ne edukacija – implicira poziciju stručnjaka u odnosu na roditelja)
Poučavanje/nametanje standardizirane slike dobrog rodtieljstva vs. uvažavanje različitosti, konteksta životne situacije, osobnih vrijednost i životnih stilova
(npr. autoritativno roditeljstvo nije povezano s najboljom prilagodbom ako se živi u opasnom okruženju siromađnih gradskih četvrti)
– osim toga savjeti stručnjaka se mijenjaju – npr dosljednost, tajm out, uključenost rodtielja u djetetovo učenje, roditeljska kontrola…?
Prisutne dileme, konflikti interesa, tenzije u području pružanja podrške roditeljstvu
Edukacija roditelja vs. poštivanje intimnog, bliskog odnosa roditelja i djeteta
S jedne strane je ideja da su bolje informirani roditelji i bolji roditelji/bolje u stanju ispunjavati zahtjeve roditeljske uloge, poduprijeti optimalan razvoj djeteta (poticaj, granice)
(u školi se pripremamo za razne aktivnosti, a nitko nas nije učio kako biti roditelj)
S druge strane je ideja da je roditeljstvo u svojoj biti jedinstven, osoban, blizak odnos – veza, kontakt između dvije individue
(roditeljstvo nije profesija, nije zanat, tehnika)
Mene osobno ponekad to podsjeća na antagonizam između između tradicionalnog (jednosmjernog) i relacijskog/odnosnog (dvosmjernog) viđenja socijalizacije – social relational theory
A čini mi se i da postoji određena tenzija između dominantno američke, pa čak i anglo-saksonske literature o podršci roditeljstvu pa i psihologiji roditeljstva i europske (skandinavske+benelux) koja je nekako otvorenija stvarnom uvažavanju implikacija viđenja i djeteta i roditelja kao subjekata (radikalni?)
-lanin slajd? – ili to kasnije kd govorim o rz (podrška – a ne edukacija – implicira poziciju stručnjaka u odnosu na roditelja)
Poučavanje/nametanje standardizirane slike dobrog rodtieljstva vs. uvažavanje različitosti, konteksta životne situacije, osobnih vrijednost i životnih stilova
(npr. autoritativno roditeljstvo nije povezano s najboljom prilagodbom ako se živi u opasnom okruženju siromađnih gradskih četvrti)
– osim toga savjeti stručnjaka se mijenjaju – npr dosljednost, tajm out, uključenost rodtielja u djetetovo učenje, roditeljska kontrola…?
Poučavanje/nametanje standardizirane slike dobrog rodtieljstva vs. uvažavanje različitosti, konteksta životne situacije, osobnih vrijednost i životnih stilova, a prije svega dvosmjernog shvaćanja socijalizacije! Roditeljstvo kao proces a ne zbroj radnji koje treba naučiti , u okviru jasno definirane uloge majke ili oca…
Educating parents versus respecting intimate relationships
a.Better informed parents are better parents
b.The heart of parenting is an intimate, unique and personal relationship Issues: Parenting as an occupation, ‘creeping professionalism’ Democratic deficit Professionals often turn out to be wrong
- (miller i sambel 2003) engleski ps - vrste tzv 'dispensing model (širenje, podjela informacija, savjeta – više na razini 'što', sadržaj
Programi s dokazanom djelotvornosti / strukturirani (‘evidence-based’)
vs.
fleksibilnost/IPP(‘client-driven’)
Ideja da prednost trebaju imatiTeorijski utemeljeni, standardizirani programi s provjerenom učinkovitošću
Teško pomirljiva sa zahtjevom da roditeljska precepcija problema i (samo)procjena roditeljevih potreba oblikuju ciljeve, poželjne ishode i sadržaj intervencije
(ideja da od programa ne vidimo roditelja – tko je vlasnik problema? Tko je u poziciji definirati problem/ciljeve/poželjne ishode programa – a to je obilježje strukturiranih evidence based programa da su ciljevi unaprijed definirani
(Povezana s tim je i kritika RTC kao zlatnog standarda u hijerarhiji dokaza učinkovitosti)
Problem se vidi kao nemotivirani roditelj, a ne kao razlika u očekivanjima stručnjaka (ili institucije – npr. škole) i očekivanjima roditelja
Argument u prilog 'podrške roditeljstvu/roditeljima u ispunjavanju roditeljskih odgovornosti' a ne 'prevenciji npr. delinkventnog ponašanja' ili prevenciji ovisnosti – roditejli se ne vide u tome (mi nemamo budućeg delinkventa/ovisnika, nego teško/zahtjevno dijete'
Argument zašto govorimo o podršci roditeljstvu / promociji razvoja, a ne prevenciji lošeg roditeljstva (npr zlost i zanem) odnosno njegovih učinaka (problema mentalnog zdravlja, problema ponašanja)
To su konflikti koje treba prepoznati, učiniti vidljivima, ona još uvijek predstavljaju otvorena pitanja u ovom području
… pitanje tko definira poželjne ishode !
Hermanovih 5 pitanja roditelju staviti u oblačić!! – ili to kod one zadnje dileme
Child – directed interventions versus parental need-oriented interventions
a.Better perspectives for children whose parents are supported
b.Need of parents should be point of departure. Context matters! Issues Are parents only gateways to their children? Needs of parents do not always correspond with needs of children Parents will not participate if their needs are not met Again: professionals are not always right
Dilema: Encouraging mainstreaming versus encouraging diversity (rz s romima!)
a.Inclusion and participation are important and can be facilitated by parenting support
b.Diversity in life style, personal choices, culture and religion are important for parents, children and society Issues a top-down projection of mainstream values and standards on to families a denial of parental capabilities families distrusting authorities and professionals Mismatch lifestyles families and services professionals
Edukacija roditelja
vs.
poštivanje intimnog, bliskog odnosa roditelja i djeteta
Intervencije usmjerene interesom djeteta
vs.
intervencije usmjerene roditeljskim potrebama
Programi s dokazanom djelotvornosti /strukturirani (‘evidence-based’)
vs.
Fleksibilnost (‘client-driven’)
General population parent perspective + parents of low SES, parents of children with disabilities
a third of employed fathers reported the feeling that their job responsibilities often or always create difficulties fulfilling their parental role, while a quarter of employed mothers reported the same. The necessity of balancing paid work with parenting is more often experienced by parents with multiple children and parents of a low and middle socioeconomic status.
Preporuka Ova latentna struktura stavova prema traženju stručne kao da odražava konflikt istovremenog privlačenja i odbijanja Poželjni ishodi traženja stručne pomoći u roditeljstvu (α = 0.79, k=4)
Nepoželjni ishodi traženja stručne pomoći u roditeljstvu (α= 0.83, k=6)
Predrasude prema stručnjacima (α = 0.822, k=3)
1= uopće se ne slažem, 5=u potpunosti se slažem
Poželjni ishodi traženja stručne pomoći u roditeljstvu
viši kod majki, obrazovanijih roditelja, roditelja djece s TUR,
u gradovima, regionalne razlike (u Lici i Banovini te u Zagrebu i okolici su viši nego u Slavoniji)
Nepoželjni ishodi traženja stručne pomoći
viši kod očeva, slabije obrazovanih roditelja, roditelja s većim brojem djece, kod roditelja zdrave djece, na selu,
regionalne razlike (viši u Slavoniji nego u Zagrebu i okolici te u Dalmaciji, viši u Istri nego u Zagrebu i okolici)
Predrasude prema stručnjacima
više kod očeva, slabije obrazovanih roditelja, kod roditelja zdrave djece, na selu, u Sjevernoj Hrvatskoj i u Zagrebu i okolici nego u Dalmaciji