The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 8 PARENTAL SUPPORT

8.1 Introduction

Although parents have the main responsibility for their children, they depend on both informal and formal sources of support, ranging from information and advice to help with childcare and help from health and other professionals. The quality and quantity of informal sources of support will in turn depend crucially on parents' family and social networks in which that support is embedded. Parents' use of formal sources of support, whether from statutory or voluntary agencies, should also be seen in the context of informal support, and the extent to which these are complementary to each other.

The key support that grandparents provide was examined in some depth in the report of the first sweep of Growing up in Scotland. In this chapter, we look at parents' wider informal social networks of family and friends, how these networks are related to parents' access and use of informal support for help with childcare, and parents' assessment of how well that support meets their needs. We then turn to more formal sources of support, such as parenting classes, professionals in health and welfare services, how service access and use varies, and parents' views about the formal support they use.

Many of these topics were explored at sweep 1 including emergency childcare and attendance at groups and classes for parents and children, but several new questions were asked at sweep 2 in order to broaden our understanding of parental support - for example, sweep 2 included a new series of questions on informal social networks and asked about use of specific formal support services.

8.1.1 Types of analysis

The tables in this chapter present the following main types of analysis:

• Comparison of the different answers given by respondents at sweep 2. This includes both straightforward comparisons of the proportions of main respondents giving particular responses, and analysis of the answers by factors that might help explain these answers (for example, the age or educational background of the respondent).
• Where the same questions were asked at sweeps 1 and 2, comparison of the answers given by the main respondent at both sweeps. This includes comparing the proportion of respondents who gave particular responses at each sweep, analysis of whether the answers given by individual respondents changed or not, and comparison of the characteristics of those whose answers did change and those whose did not.

8.2 Informal social networks

Four questions, contained within the self-completion section of the interview, were used to explore aspects of respondents' informal social networks, including their perceived relationships with friends and family members and the amount of support received from informal sources. These questions were not included at sweep 1.

8.2.1 Number of close relationships

In the first question, respondents were asked with how many people they had a close relationship, not including people they lived with. The spread of responses by cohort are shown in Table 8.1. The vast majority of parents reported close relationships with 'some' or 'lots' of people, although a significant minority (around a fifth in both cohorts) said they had close relationships with just one or two people. Almost no-one said they didn't have any close relationships.

Table 8.1 Number of close relationships by cohort

Maternal age at the birth of the cohort child was a key factor here, with younger mothers significantly more likely than older mothers to report they had lots of close relationships. In the birth cohort, 44% of mothers aged under 20 at the cohort child's birth said they had lots of close relationships compared with 22% of those aged 40 or older. In contrast, 53% of mothers in the oldest age group said they had some close relationships compared with 37% in the youngest age group. There were also small, but significant, variations by level of maternal education and household income; mothers living in higher income households and those with any qualifications reported slightly more close relationships than mothers in lower income households and those with no qualifications. This seemingly contradictory trend may be explained by the small proportion of younger mothers who have higher incomes and qualifications.

8.2.2 Closeness to family

The second question examined respondents' familial relationships by asking how much they agreed or disagreed with the statement "I feel close to my family" when thinking about their immediate family. The vast majority (83%) of respondents in both cohorts agreed with the statement including around two-fifths who agreed strongly. Less than
one in ten (8%) disagreed with the statement.

Although the majority of parents across the sample agreed with the statement, there was some slight variation by maternal age and household income. For example, mothers aged 40 or older at the cohort child's birth were less likely to agree with the statement, and more likely to disagree, than mothers in any other age group (although the majority did still agree). Differences by income were smaller, but still significant, with agreement higher among parents in higher income households than among those in lower income households.

Figure 8-A Agree/disagree with the statement "I feel close to my family" by number of close relationships: birth cohort

As expected, the number of close relationships reported by respondents was closely related to their perceived closeness to their family (Figure 8-A). Almost all (95%) those who reported lots of close relationships agreed that they were close to their family. As the number of reported close relationships decreased so too did perceived familial closeness.

8.2.3 Closeness to friends

Respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with a further statement, this time exploring their relationships with friends - "My friends take notice of my opinions". Agreement with the statement was considered to suggest stronger friendship bonds. More than four in five parents in both cohorts agreed with the statement (83% birth cohort, 87% child cohort) although they were more likely to agree than strongly agree.

Although overall agreement with the statement varied little by maternal age, younger mothers were more likely than older mothers to 'strongly agree'. In the child cohort, 28% of mothers aged under 20 agreed strongly, compared with 14% of those aged 40 or older. Mothers with qualifications at Higher grade or above were more likely to agree with the statement than those with Standard grades or no qualifications. Respondents living in higher income households also more readily agreed with the statement than did those in lower income households.

Again, responses on this item were closely related to responses on the previous two questions. Parents who reported more close relationships generally, and those who had closer relationships with their family, were more likely to agree that their friends took notice of their opinions than those with fewer close relationships and those who were less close to their family (Figure 8-B). This suggests that a significant minority of parents in both cohorts have a limited and weak informal social network where relationships with both friends and family are often absent, or, when they are present, are distant.

Figure 8-B Agree/disagree with the statement "My friends take notice of my opinions" by closeness to family: birth cohort

To explore variations in informal social networks further, and to allow analysis of the relationship between informal social networks and other variables of interest, the three above items were converted into a single scale indicating the strength of the respondent's social network. A high score on the scale, which ranges from 0 to 11, indicates strong and numerous relationships with family and friends. Mean scores on the scale by cohort and by a range of key independent variables are shown in Table 8.2.

The data in the table confirm the small, but significant, differences seen in the individual items - that older mothers, those with no qualifications and those living in lower income households all appear to have weaker informal social networks. Note however, that only mothers aged 40 or older, and those with no qualifications record a mean score lower than the overall average in each cohort.

Table 8.2 Mean scores on the strength of informal social networks scale by cohort and key independent variables

8.2.4 Perceived level of support from family and friends

The final question asked respondents whether they felt they received enough help or support from family or friends living elsewhere. Parents could indicate that they got enough help, didn't get enough help, didn't get any help or didn't need help. Responses by cohort are displayed in Table 8.3.

Table 8.3 Perceived level of help and support from family and friends by cohort

Three-quarters (75%) of parents in both cohorts said they got enough help from family and friends. Of the remainder, most felt they didn't get enough help, but a small amount said they didn't get any or didn't need any help.

As expected, those groups who reported weaker informal social ties were less likely to feel they received enough help from family and friends. For example, in the birth cohort 53% of mothers aged 40 or older said they got enough help, compared with 81% of mothers aged under 20 and 77% of those in their twenties. Although less stark, differences were also evident by maternal education: mothers with no qualifications were more likely than those with at least Standard grade or Higher grade qualifications to report not getting any or not needing any help.

To explore this relationship further mean scores on the strength of informal network scale were compared across the four categories of perceived support. The results are shown in Table 8.4. Unsurprisingly, those respondents who said they received no help had the weakest informal social network according to the scale, and all groups, with the exception of those who said they got enough help, produced an average score lower than that for the respective cohort as a whole. In other words, those with stronger social networks were more likely to feel that they received adequate informal support than were those with weaker social networks.

Table 8.4 Mean scores on strength of informal social networks scale by cohort and perceived level of informal support

8.2.5 The relationship between informal support and emotional wellbeing

Research has shown that access to and use of informal support can be related to individual wellbeing. For example, Wenger and Tucker (2002) demonstrated that older people who have strong social networks are happier and more likely to perceive themselves as healthy. A brief consideration of this in relation to parents in the GUS cohort was undertaken by examining information on respondents' informal social networks in relation to their responses to six items from the Depression, Anxiety and Stress ( DASS) scale (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). These six items were used to create a measure of negative emotional symptoms ranging from -1 to 4. A higher score indicated an increased level of negative emotional symptoms.

While scores on the scale are generally low, the data do indicate that, on average, those respondents who have a weaker informal social network demonstrate a higher level of negative emotional symptoms than those who have a strong social network, and than parents generally. Furthermore, parents who believe they get enough help from friends and family scored lower on the DASS scale than those who don't get enough help, don't get any help or don't need any help.

Whilst this analysis is far from conclusive, there is nevertheless some indication that a stronger social network promotes positive emotional wellbeing among parents or at least inhibits negative emotional symptoms. As might be expected, emotional wellbeing is also related to other respondent socio-demographic characteristics. For example, parents in lower income households score higher on the DASS scale than do those in higher income households. Mothers with no qualifications also score higher on the scale than those with Standard grades, Higher grades or above. As such, further analysis is necessary to determine the independent effect of informal social networks on parental wellbeing.

Table 8.5 Mean scores on the reduced DASS scale by cohort and key independent variables

8.3 Access to informal support

To explore further parents access to and use of informal support, the questionnaire included three practical measures of the extent to which respondents could draw on informal sources for help with short notice childcare - for a few hours during the day, for a whole day and overnight. These items were also included at sweep 1, thus some comparison is made with the sweep 1 data.

8.3.1 Leaving the child with someone for a couple of hours during the day

The majority of parents in both cohorts (74% birth cohort, 77% child cohort) continued to find it very or fairly easy to organise someone to look after their child for a few hours during the day, although there was a slight drop relative to the findings at sweep 1. There were no statistically significant differences between cohorts. For around half of all parents in both cohorts there had been no change between sweeps in the ease or difficulty of organsing this type of arrangement. Among those for whom the status had changed, around half reported it as more difficult to organise and half easier to organise. In the birth cohort, 52% of parents gave the same response at both sweeps, 24% indicated increased difficulty with the arrangement and 24% indicated increased ease with the arrangement. There were no notable differences in the characteristics of those whose circumstances had or had not changed.

Patterns observed at sweep 1 in ease or difficulty of arranging this care across the sample remained at sweep 2. For example, younger mothers continued to be more likely to say they would find it easy to organise someone to look after the child for a few hours during the day than older mothers were.

8.3.2 Leaving the child with someone for a whole day

The majority of parents (60% birth cohort, 64% child cohort) also continued to find it fairly or very easy to arrange for someone to look after their child for a whole day with the data again indicating, as might be expected and in similarity to patterns observed at sweep 1, that this was not considered to be quite as easy as the previous arrangement of leaving the child for a few hours.

A change between sweeps in the ease or difficulty of organising this arrangement was slightly more likely than with the previous arrangement. Just under half of parents in both cohorts provided the same response as at sweep 1 (46% birth, 48% child). Amongst those whose response had changed between sweeps (birth cohort: n = 2457, child cohort: n = 1299), the direction of change was again split quite evenly with around half of those parents reporting it to be easier and half reporting it to be more difficult. Younger mothers were slightly more likely than older mothers to report a change, and to say a whole day's care was easier to arrange at sweep 2 than at sweep 1. Furthermore, as with the previous arrangement, younger mothers in both cohorts continued to report making this arrangement to be easier than did older mothers.

8.3.3 Leaving the child with someone overnight

Organising to leave the child with someone overnight at short notice again proved to be the most difficult arrangement for parents to make, although the majority of parents in both cohorts (56% birth cohort, 59% child cohort) continued to say that they would find this very or fairly easy.

This arrangement saw slightly more change between sweeps with only around two-fifths of parents in both cohorts (43%) giving the same response at both sweeps. As in relation to the previous arrangements however, around half of those who had changed response between sweeps (respondents who changed response between sweeps - birth cohort: n = 2531, child cohort: n = 1412) reported the arrangement easier to organise than at sweep 1, and half reported it to be more difficult.

The stark differences observed at sweep 1 between mothers of different ages in ease of organising this arrangement remained at sweep 2. In both cohorts, mothers aged 40 or older were more than twice as likely as those under 20 to say they would find it very or fairly difficult to arrange overnight care for their child (Figure 8-C). This reflects, to some extent, the weaker informal social networks identified among mothers in the oldest age group as seen above, and data from sweep 1 which illustrates key differences in the availability of the child's grandparents as a key resource in this circumstance; that is, at sweep 1, that younger mothers were more likely to report the availability of the child's grandparents as a resource than older mothers were.

Figure 8-C Ease with which respondent could arrange at short notice to leave child with someone overnight by age of mother at birth of cohort child: birth cohort

8.3.4 Main source of informal support/short-notice childcare

Parents were asked who they would be most likely to call on for help with looking after the cohort child. The responses by cohort are shown in Figure 8-D. In similarity to sweep 1, the most common source of support of this kind by far was grandparents, and especially maternal grandparents. Friends or neigbours of the respondent, and parents' siblings remained the next most common sources of informal support in this context.

Figure 8-D Person(s) who respondent would call on in the first instance for help with looking after the cohort child by sample type

Around a third (30% birth cohort, 31% child cohort) of parents in each cohort changed their main source of short-notice childcare between sweeps. Those using the child's grandparents were least likely to change - almost nine out of ten parents who said the child's grandparents were the main source of childcare at sweep 1 had also done so at sweep 2. Most parents who used other family members or friends or neighbours had also remained with the same main source between sweeps. For example, in the birth cohort, 60% of those who chose other family members as their response at sweep 1 had also done so at sweep 2. Parents who used a former spouse or a non-family member other than a friend or neighbour were most likely to have changed between sweeps.

As with sweep 1, older mothers were less likely to name the child's grandparents as their main source of support - less than two-fifths (38%) of those aged 40 or older did so, compared with a little over three-quarters of mothers (77%) aged under 20 and 59% of mothers in their twenties. In contrast, and again as in sweep 1, older mothers, particularly those aged 40 or older, were significantly more likely than younger mothers to name a friend or neighbour as their main source of informal support. Differences observed by area urban-rural classification at sweep 1, where parents in rural areas were more likely to draw on friends and neighbours for this type of support, remain.

8.4 Attendance at groups and classes for parents and children

We again asked respondents whether they had attended any parent and child groups in the last year. In cases where the respondent had not attended any such groups, they were asked why not. Questions on attendance at parenting classes or groups in the last year were also repeated from sweep 1.

8.4.1 Parent and child/toddler groups

Half of parents in the birth cohort (50%) and just a quarter in the child cohort (26%) said they had attended a parent and toddler or parent and child group in the last year. In the birth cohort, this represents an increase from 40% at sweep 1. On the other hand, the figure for the older cohort represents a decrease in attendance, down from 40% at sweep 1, suggesting that the peak age for attendance at such groups is somewhere around 2.

Around 42% of all parents in the birth cohort, and 51% of those in the child cohort did not report attendance at a parent and child group at either sweep. Among those who did report attendance at sweep 2, the majority had also reported attendance at sweep 1. In the birth cohort, around 61% of those who reported attendance at sweep 2 were also using the groups at sweep 1. The proportion was higher in the child cohort where 76% of users at sweep 2 had also reported use at sweep 1.

As in sweep 1, in both cohorts, mothers from couple families and older mothers were more likely than lone mothers and younger mothers to say they had attended a group in the last year. In the birth cohort for example, 54% of mothers in couple families said they had attended a group compared with 36% of lone mothers. Differences by urban rural classification also remained: parents in remote areas were significantly more likely than those in accessible areas to have attended parent and child groups in the previous
12 months (Figure 8-E). Even in the older cohort, where overall attendance dropped at sweep 2, parents in remote areas were almost twice as likely as those in accessible areas to report having attended a group.

Figure 8-E Attendance at parent and toddler/child groups by cohort and area accessible/remote classification

Figure 8-F Reasons given for not attending mother and baby or mother and toddlers groups by cohort

The pattern of reasons given for non-attendance varied considerably by cohort (Figure 8-F). In the birth cohort, the most common reason given by parents was lack of time - mentioned by around a quarter of those who had not attended groups. In the child cohort, as might be expected, the most common reason, given by three-quarters of parents who did not use parent and child groups, was that the child attended nursery. In general, parents in the birth cohort were more likely than those in the child cohort to give any reason other than 'child attends nursery' or 'child is too old'.

As in sweep 1, maternal age and family type affected the types of reasons given. Younger mothers and lone parents were again more likely than older mothers and those in couple families to mention feeling shy or awkward about attending a group. Older mothers and those in couple families, on the other hand, were significantly more likely to say they didn't have time to attend such groups. Notably however, the 'dislike of groups' evident amongst younger mothers at sweep 1 is less obvious at sweep 2.

In the birth cohort, the predominant reasons given by those parents who had attended at sweep 1 but were not using these groups at sweep 2 ( n = 401) were that the child was now attending nursery (30%) and that they did not have time to go to such groups (26%). In the child cohort ( n = 568), the main reason remained the child's nursery attendance (74%).

8.4.2 Parenting classes

Respondents were also asked whether they had attended any parenting classes or groups "where parents have the chance to improve their parenting skills and knowledge". Those who had, were asked how useful they found the classes.

An even smaller proportion of parents than in sweep 1 said they had attended a parenting class or group in the last year - just 2% in the birth cohort and 3% in the child cohort. Of those parents who reported attendance at sweep 2, 28% in the birth cohort and 33% in the child cohort had also reported attendance at sweep 1. It is likely that for some of these parents the timetable for the class they were attending spanned some of the reference period of both interviews and as such they were referring to the same class at each time.

Small but significant variations in attendance were evident. For example, parents in lower income households and mothers with no qualifications were slightly more likely than those in higher income households or with any qualifications to say that they had attended a class in the last year. Only 1% of parents in the highest income group (annual income of £44,000 and above) reported attendance compared with 3% in the lowest income group (annual income of less than £15,000). However, the small numbers involved mean these findings should be treated with caution. In the vast majority of cases in couple households, in both cohorts, the child's mother attended classes on her own (79% birth cohort, 69% child cohort). For most of the remainder the child's mother and father attended. The child's father attended on his own in a very small number of cases.

As in sweep 1, virtually all parents who had attended a parenting class or group reported that they found it to be very useful (63% both cohorts) or fairly useful (27% both cohorts). With such small numbers and a strong response pattern, there is little statistically significant variation in appraisals of the usefulness of parenting classes across the sample.

8.5 Use of formal support and professional advice on parenting issues

Parents were asked a number of questions exploring their attitudes to parenting support from professionals and formal services and their use of certain key health, education and social support services for help and advice either in relation to the cohort child, the respondent themself or someone else in the household. Some examination of parents' contact with health professionals has already been made in section 6.5, the questions included here differ in that they do not specify which type of help, information or advice the parent was seeking, they cover a broader range of support services beyond those which fall under the 'health-related' banner and they ask about contact both in relation to the child and for other reasons.

8.5.1 Attitudes towards parenting advice/support given by professionals

To tap attitudes towards and perceptions of parenting advice offered by formal support services, respondents were asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed with the following statements.

• If you ask for help or advice on parenting from professionals like doctors or social workers, they start interfering or trying to take over.
• If other people knew you were getting professional advice or support with parenting they would probably think you were a bad parent.
• Professionals and health visitors and social workers do not offer parents enough advice and support with bringing up their children.

Agreement with the first two statements would suggest certain wariness towards professional support, whereas agreement with the third statement would indicate a desire for increased levels of formal support. The results for both cohorts as a whole are summarised in Table 8.6.

Table 8.6 Attitudes towards parenting advice

Overall, the results suggest that most people are not wary of the impact or connotations of receiving parenting advice or support from professionals and believe that enough support of this kind is already provided. Whilst there is a certain amount of 'indecision', demonstrated by the relatively high proportions who neither agreed nor disagreed with each statement, it is notable that a significant minority of one-fifth in the birth cohort, and over one quarter in the child cohort, agreed that receipt of formal parenting support carried certain negative associations.

There are also some variations of note across the different sub-groups. On all three measures, younger mothers were significantly more likely to agree than older mothers with agreement decreasing gradually as age increases. This presents a complicated picture. Higher agreement with the first two statements by younger mothers would suggest a greater degree of wariness towards professional support or intervention amongst these groups, yet respondents in these groups were also more likely to suggest that professionals do not offer enough parenting advice and support. This may indicate that whilst younger mothers wish for a greater level of support from formal agencies, they are less sure of the implications of that support.

8.5.2 Use of formal support services

To get a measure of the extent to which families in the cohort are using different formal support services, we asked parents if the cohort child had been seen by any of a range of professionals or formal support services in the last 12 months, and if the respondent had been in contact with any of the same services for any other reason. Details of the services and the proportions who had accessed them are diplayed in Table 8.7.

Table 8.7 Use of formal support services by cohort

As might be expected, health-related services were those most commonly accessed both for the cohort child and more generally, ²⁵ with respondents from both cohorts most likely to have contacted their local doctor/ GP. Some differences were evident between the cohorts in reference to contact with the sample child (although there were no significant differences between cohorts in patterns of contact for 'other reasons'). Children in the birth cohort were more likely than those in the child cohort to have been seen by any service but particularly by a doctor, health visitor or practice nurse. Older children, on the other hand, were more likely than the younger cohort to have been seen by another type of health professional.

Most children in both cohorts had typically only been seen by two or three of the professionals or services listed (70% in the birth cohort, 64% in the child cohort). A little over a quarter in the child cohort (28%) and a little under a quarter in the birth cohort (22%) had been seen by just one service. Only around 5% had been seen by four or more services.

There were no significant variations in the extent to which parents from different sub-groups had used any service for the cohort child in the last year, only small variations existed in the number of services used and these were restricted to the birth cohort. Mothers in the youngest age group, those on lower incomes, and those with no qualifications were more likely than older mothers, those with higher incomes and those with any qualifications to have used fewer services in the last 12 months. For example, 72% of mothers aged 20 or under at the cohort child's birth had accessed only one or two services compared with 63% of mothers in each of the other age groups. In contrast, 29% of mothers in each of the three older age groups had accessed three services compared with 22% of teenage mothers. This contrasts with earlier findings in section 6.5 where there was almost no variation in the number of different core health services accessed by mothers of different ages in relation to the child's health suggesting that much of the variation exists in use of services beyond core health provision.

In fact, the latter statement is supported by further analysis of the data which revealed some notable and substantial differences by sub-group in the different types of services that different children had seen. Key differences by maternal age, household income and family type were observed, in particular, in contact with health visitors, practice nurses, other health professionals and social workers (Table 8.8). For example, in both cohorts, children of younger mothers, particularly those with mothers aged under 20 at the cohort child's birth, were more likely than children with older mothers to have been seen by a health visitor or a social worker. A higher level of contact with health visitors and social workers amongst the same sub-groups who, as we saw earlier, are most wary of professional intervention appears contradictory. However, it appears that service contact is only higher among these sub-groups in services where contact is service-led and targeted; that is, where the impetus is on the service provider to maintain contact. Those services where the responsibility lies with the user - i.e. the parent - to make contact and seek advice see lower use from the same sub-groups. For example, in the birth cohort, children with older mothers were more likely than those with younger mothers to have been seen by a practice nurse, and in both cohorts, by another health professional. Differences in use of the latter services are particularly stark: whereas over half of children (54%) in the birth cohort with mothers in their thirties had been seen by another health professional, only around a quarter (28%) with mothers under 20 had done so. Yet analysis of child health indicators by maternal age (see section 6.2) does not suggest that children with younger mothers experience significantly better health than those with older mothers, suggesting again that this is a service-related rather than health-related issue. These same patterns are also observed between parents on low and high incomes and between lone parents and couple families.

Table 8.8 Selected services/individuals who had seen cohort child by cohort and age of mother at birth of cohort child

These patterns of service use among different sub-groups are also evident in data about contact in other circumstances not related to the cohort child. Contact with health visitors and social workers is generally higher among younger mothers, lone parents and lower income families, whereas contact with other health professionals is lower, than among older mothers, those in couple families and those with higher incomes. Differences in contact with practice nurses are not significant.

8.6 Key points

• Most parents had good relationships with family and friends, were part of a wide and strong informal social network and as a result felt they received enough support from this network.
• However, mothers aged over 40, those with no qualifications and those living in lower income households all appear to have weaker informal social networks and were also more likely to have support deficit.
• Attendance at parent and toddler/child groups had increased between sweeps among parents in the birth cohort, and decreased among parents in the child cohort. As in sweep 1, in both cohorts, mothers from couple families and older mothers were more likely than lone mothers and younger mothers to say they had attended such a group in the last year.
• Most parents are not wary of the impact or connotations of receiving parenting advice or support from professionals and believe that enough support of this kind is already provided. However, a significant minority believed that receipt of formal parenting support carried certain negative associations.
• Younger mothers and parents in lower income households were more wary of professional support or intervention than were older mothers and those in couple families. Yet respondents in the former groups were also more likely to suggest that professionals do not offer enough parenting advice and support suggesting a degree of misunderstanding around the implications of that support.
• Service contact is higher among younger mothers, lone parents, lower income families - in services where contact is service-led and targeted; that is, where the impetus is on the service provider to maintain contact. Those services where the responsibility lies with the user - i.e. the parent - to make contact and seek advice see lower use from the same sub-groups.

8.7 Conclusion

Almost all parents reported having close relationships, ranging from just under one-third 'with lots of people' to about one-fifth 'with one or two people'. Younger mothers were more likely to report close relationships with lots of people than older mothers. Family relationships are especially important; 83% of respondents felt close to their immediate families (only 8% did not). A similar proportion felt close to their friends. However, there was a (fairly small) minority whose links to both family and friends were weak or absent, and the capacity of this group to get informal support may therefore be a matter of concern. This is supported by the finding that, while about three quarters of respondents thought they got enough help from family and friends, about one in five said they didn't get enough or any help, and those with weaker social networks were disproportionately found in this group. Older mothers were less likely to say they got enough help than younger mothers in their twenties or younger. The importance of strong social networks is also shown by the finding that there is a positive association between the strength of these networks and the perceived levels of support. Strong social networks are not only important to parents for securing help but also for fostering a sense of positive wellbeing. That link is demonstrated by the positive association between weak social networks and a higher number of negative emotional symptoms, as measured by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale.

Parents' access to informal sources of support was measured in three ways: by the extent to which they could access support to leave the child with someone for a few hours during the day, or for a whole day, or overnight at short notice. These measures showed decreasing levels of ease between sweeps 1 and 2, although more than one half of parents in both cohorts found all of them very or fairly easy to organise. Younger mothers found making such arrangements easier than older mothers, and this may be indicative of the greater availability of grandparents and the stronger social networks of the younger group. This is borne out by responses that grandparents, especially maternal grandparents, were by far the most likely sources of this kind of help. The source of short notice childcare support changed for about one third of respondents between sweeps, mainly those whose support came from a former partner or a non-family member.

Participation in groups and classes for parents and children was reported by about half of parents in the birth cohort, up by 40% from sweep 1, and one quarter of parents in the child cohort, down by 40% from sweep 1, suggesting that the peak age for attending these groups is when the child is aged around 2. However, about 42% of parents in the birth cohort and 51% in the child cohort had not attended such groups at either sweep. More likely to attend were partnered mothers, older mothers and mothers living in remote areas. The most common reason given for non-attendance was a lack of time or, especially for the child cohort, that the child attended nursery. A small minority of younger mothers also mentioned a dislike of groups. Attendance at parenting classes was much less common, and less common than in sweep 1, reported by 2% to 3% of parents, although it was slightly more common for mothers from lower income households or with no educational qualifications. However, almost all who attended found them very or fairly useful.

Parents' attitudes to using formal and professional services in health, education and social support are somewhat double-edged: some wariness combined with a desire for more support, a pattern more pronounced for younger mothers, lone mothers and those in low income households. All parents' actual use of health services was high, with most cohort children seen in the last year by a doctor/ GP, health visitor (birth cohort) or another health professional. In contrast, the use of other professional services was very infrequent, with fewer than 3% of families having seen a social worker, psychologist or other social or educational professional, although younger mothers were more likely to report having seen a social worker. However, non-use should not be confused with a lack of need or potential to benefit from such services. As noted in the report of the first sweep of GUS, parents have only limited knowledge of the range of services that might support them and their child's development such as those that have developed through Sure Start. Only a small minority of parents (2% of the birth cohort and 5% of the child cohort) had not seen any professional over the previous year. Most typical was for children to have been seen by two or three professionals in the previous year, mainly in health-related services. There was only a slight tendency for more advantaged mothers to use health-related services more than other mothers.

The findings reported in this chapter are consistent with the broad conclusions of recent qualitative research on family support, such as Hansen's 'Not so nuclear families' (2005). As she observes about the importance of social networks and community and understanding how family operate in their social context, "Families are not nuclear in how they conducted their everyday lives." 'Nuclear' families, whatever their social class, rely on the informal support provided by their social networks of family and friends for managing their family practices. Here we have evidence of what John Gillies (1996) has termed 'the families we live with', the family life that consists of actual family practices, in contrast to nostalgic and imagined pictures of family life, the 'families we live by'.

« Previous | Contents | Next »