Family-Related Factors Influencing Child Well-Being

  • Lluís Flaquer


The purpose of this chapter is to present the analysis of a number of family-based factors that can influence child well-being. We are presently witnessing a worsening position for children, of different degrees and intensities, in various parts of the world. This is a consequence not only of the financial crisis currently ravaging many Western nations, it is also a result of the deterioration of the economic and social conditions of young parents with low education and of their children in the last decades. Although there is evidence of welfare state regimes having a positive impact on the outcomes for children in terms of enhanced social cohesion and reduction of poverty as a result of resource redistribution, it is not clear yet what aspects of material conditions really matter for achieving other dimensions of well-being. Family policies should be based on a child-centered perspective. One way this can be done is through mainstreaming standard evaluation of policy outcomes in terms of child well-being. It is important that more and more family policies be assessed in terms of their final effective outcomes for child well-being with respect to quality of life, satisfaction, and happiness.


Parental Leave Child Poverty Family Policy Father Involvement Nonresident Father 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Acock, A. C., & Demo, D. H. (1994). Family diversity and well-being. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Addio, A. C. d’ (2007). Intergenerational transmission of disadvantage: mobility or immobility across generations? A review of the evidence for OECD Countries. OECD social, employment and migration (Working Papers No. 52). Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albertini, M., & Garriga, A. (2011). The effect of divorce on parent/child contacts: Evidence on two declining effect hypotheses. European Societies, 13(2), 257–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen, S., & Daly, K. (2007). The effects of father involvement: An updated research summary of the evidence inventory. Guelph: Centre for Families, Work & Well-Being, University of Guelph.Google Scholar
  5. Amato, P. R. (2000). The consequences of divorce for adults and children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 1269–1287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Amato, P. R., & Gilbreth, J. G. (1999). Nonresident fathers and children’s well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61(3), 557–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Amato, P. R., & Rivera, F. (1999). Paternal involvement and children’s behaviour problems. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 372–384.Google Scholar
  8. Andress, H.-J., & Hummelsheim, D. (2009). When marriage ends: Results and conclusions. In H.-J. Andress & D. Hummelsheim (Eds.), When marriage ends: Economic and social consequences of partnership dissolution (pp. 361–383). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  9. Bauserman, R. (2002). Child adjustment in joint-custody versus sole-custody arrangements: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Family Psychology, 16, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Ben-Arieh, A., & Frønes, I. (2007). Indicators of children’s well being – Concepts, indices and usage. Social Indicators Research, 80, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bianchi, S. (1999). Feminization and juvenilization of poverty: Trends, relative risks, causes, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 307–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Björnberg, U. (2006). Paying for the costs of children in eight north european countries: Ambivalent trends. In J. Lewis (Ed.), Children, changing families and welfare states (pp. 90–109). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  15. Blossfeld, H. P., & Timm, A. (2003). Educational systems as marriage markets in modern societies: A conceptual framework. In H. P. Blossfeld & A. Timm (Eds.), Who marries whom?: Educational systems as marriage markets in modern societies (pp. 1–18). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bonoli, G. (2005). The politics of the new social policies: Providing coverage against new social risks in mature welfare states. Policy & Politics, 33(3), 431–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boyne, R. (2001). Cosmopolis and risk: A conversation with Ulrich Beck. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(4), 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Boyne, R. (2003). Risk (Concepts in the Social Sciences). Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Bradbury, B., & Jäntti, M. (1999). Child poverty across industrialized nations (Innocenti occasional papers, economic and social policy series no. 71). Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.Google Scholar
  20. Bradshaw, J., Hoelscher, P., & Richardson, D. (2007). An index of child well-being in the European Union. Social Indicators Research, 80, 133–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bzostek, S. H. (2008). Social fathers and child well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 950–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cabrera, N., & Peters, H. E. (2000). Public policies and father involvement. Marriage & Family Review, 29(4), 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cancian, M., & Reed, D. (2009). Family structure, childbearing, and parental employment: Implications for the level and trend in poverty. In M. Cancian & S. Danziger (Eds.), Changing poverty, changing policies (pp. 92–121). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Carlson, M. J. (2006). Family structure, father involvement, and adolescent behavioral outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 137–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chapple, S. (2009). Child well-being and sole-parent family structure in the OECD: An analysis. OECD social, employment and migration (Working Papers No. 82). Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Chung, Y. (2012). The effects of paternal imprisonment on children’s economic well-being. The Social Service Review, 86(3), 455–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cliquet, R. L. (1991). The second demographic transition: Fact or fiction? (Population studies, council of Europe, no. 23). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  28. Comfort, M. (2007). Punishment beyond the legal offender. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3, 271–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Corak, M. (2004). Generational income mobility in North America and Europe: An introduction. In M. Corak (Ed.), Generational income mobility in North America and Europe (pp. 1–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Corak, M. (2005). Principles and practicalities in measuring child poverty for the rich countries. Innocenti (Working Paper 2005–01). Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.Google Scholar
  31. Cornia, G. A., & Danziger, S. (1997). Common themes, methodological approach, and main findings. In G. A. Cornia & S. Danziger (Eds.), Child poverty and deprivation in the industrialized countries, l945-1995 (pp. 1–22). Oxford/New York: Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Daly, M. (2007). Parenting in contemporary Europe: A positive approach. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  33. de Singly, F. (2010). Comment aider l’enfant à devenir lui-même? Paris: Fayard/Pluriel.Google Scholar
  34. de Singly, F. (2011). L’individualisme est un humanisme. La Tour-d’Aigues: Éditions de l’Aube.Google Scholar
  35. Dronkers, J., & Härkönen, J. (2008). The intergenerational transmission of divorce in cross-national perspective: Results from the fertility and family surveys. Population Studies: A Journal of Demography, 62(3), 273–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Duvander, A.-Z., & Jans, A.-C. (2008). Consequences of fathers’ parental leave use: Evidence from Sweden. Stockholm research reports in demography 2008 (Vol. 9). Stockholm: Stockholm University.Google Scholar
  37. Ellwood, D. T., & Jenks, C. (2004). The spread of single-parent families in the United States since 1960. In D. P. Moynihan, T. M. Smeeding, & L. Rainwater (Eds.), The future of the family (pp. 25–65). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Emery, R. E., Otto, R. K., & O’Donohue, W. T. (2005). A critical assessment of child custody evaluations: Limited science and a flawed system. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Engster, D., & Stensöta, H. O. (2011). Do family policy regimes matter for children’s well-being? Social Politics, 18(1), 82–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Escobedo, A., Flaquer, L., & Navarro-Varas, L. (2012). The social politics of fatherhood in Spain and France: A comparative analysis of parental leave and shared residence. Ethnologie Française, 42(1), 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Esping-Andersen, G. (2002). A child-centred social investment strategy. In G. Esping-Andersen et al. (Eds.), Why we need a new welfare state (pp. 26–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Esping-Andersen, G. (2005). Inequality of incomes and opportunities. In A. Giddens & P. Diamond (Eds.), New egalitarianism (pp. 8–38). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  44. Fehlberg, B., Smyth, B., Maclean, M., & Roberts, C. (2011a). Caring for children after parental separation: Would legislation for shared parenting time help children? Family policy briefing 7. Oxford: Department of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  45. Fehlberg, B., Smyth, B., Maclean, M., & Roberts, C. (2011b). Legislating for shared time parenting after separation: A research review. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 25(3), 318–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Flaquer, L. (2009). Coming in from the cold: Single parenthood as an issue of social policy in Spain. In U. von der Leyen & V. Spidla (Eds.), Voneinander lernen – Miteinander handeln: Aufgaben und Perspectiven der Europäischen Allianz für Familien (pp. 203–214). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  47. Flaquer, L., & Garriga, A. (2009). Marital disruption in Spain: Class selectivity and deterioration of economic conditions. In H.-J. Andreß & D. Hummelsheim (Eds.), When marriage ends: Economic and social consequences of partnership dissolution (pp. 178–210). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  48. Furstenberg, F. F., Jr., & Cherlin, A. J. (1991). Divided families: What happens to children when parents part. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Gilmore, S. (2006). Contact/shared residence and child well-being: Research evidence and its implications for legal decision-making. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 20(3), 344–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Glaze, L. E., & Maruschak, L. M. (2008). Parents in prison and their minor children. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.Google Scholar
  51. Goode, W. J. (1966). Marital satisfaction and instability: A cross-cultural class analysis of divorce rates. In R. Bendix & S. M. Lipset (Eds.), Class, status and power. Social stratification in comparative perspective (pp. 377–387). New York: The Free University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Goode, W. J. (1993). World changes in divorce patterns. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Hantrais, L. (2004). Family policy matters: Responding to family change in Europe. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  54. Harris-Short, S. (2010). Resisting the march towards 50/50 shared residence: Rights, welfare and equality in post-separation families. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 32(3), 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Heckman, J., & Lochner, L. (2000). Rethinking education and training policy. In S. Danziger & J. Waldfogel (Eds.), Securing the future: Investing in children from birth to college (pp. 47–86). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Hetherington, E. M., & Kelly, J. (2002). For better or for worse: Divorce reconsidered. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  57. Hosking, A., Whitehouse, G., & Baxter, G. (2010). Duration of leave and resident fathers’ involvement in infant care in Australia. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(5), 1301–1316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hunt, J., & Roberts, C. (2004). Child contact with non-resident parents (Family policy briefing 3). Oxford: Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  59. Iceland, J. (2006). Poverty in America: A handbook. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  60. Jackson, S., & Cameron, C. (Eds.). (2010). Young people from a public care background: Establishing a baseline of attainment and progression beyond compulsory schooling in five EU Countries. London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
  61. Jekielek, S. M. (1998). Parental conflict, marital disruption and children’s emotional well-being. Social Forces, 76(3), 905–936.Google Scholar
  62. Jenson, J. (2006). The LEGO™ paradigm and new social risks: Consequences for children. In J. Lewis (Ed.), Children, changing families and welfare states (pp. 27–50). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  63. Kamerman, S., & Moss, P. (Eds.). (2009). The politics of parental leave policies: Children, parenting, gender and the labour market. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  64. Kelly, J. B. (2007). Children’s living arrangements following separation and divorce: Insights from empirical and clinical research. Family Process, 46(1), 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. King, V., & Sobolewski, J. M. (2006). Nonresident fathers’ contributions to adolescent well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 537–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kisthardt, M. K. (2005). The AAML model for a parenting plan. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 19, 223–236.Google Scholar
  67. Lamb, M. E. (2000). The history of research on father involvement. Marriage and Family Review, 29(2), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lamb, M. E. (2010a). How do fathers influence children’s development? Let me count the ways. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (pp. 1–26). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  69. Lamb, M. E. (Ed.). (2010b). The role of the father in child development. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  70. Leira, A. (1998). Caring as social right: Cash for child care and daddy leave. Social Politics, 5(3), 362–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lewis, J. (2002). Individualisation, assumptions about the existence of an adult worker model and the shift towards contractualism. In A. Carling, S. Duncan, & R. Edwards (Eds.), Analysing families: Morality and rationality in policy and practice (pp. 51–63). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Lewis, J. (2006). Introduction: Children in the context of changing families and welfare states. In J. Lewis (Ed.), Children, changing families and welfare states (pp. 1–24). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  73. Lewis, J., & Sarre, S. (2006). Risk and intimate relationships. In P. Taylor-Gooby & J. O. Zinn (Eds.), Risk in social science (pp. 140–159). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Lister, R. (2006). An agenda for children: Investing in the future or promoting well-being in the present? In J. Lewis (Ed.), Children, changing families and welfare states (pp. 51–66). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  75. Lopoo, L. M., & Western, B. (2005). Incarceration and the formation and stability of marital unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 721–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Mankiw, N. G. (2004). Principles of economics. Mason: Thomson South-Western.Google Scholar
  77. Mantle, G., Leslie, J., Parsons, S., Plenty, J., & Shaffer, R. (2006). Establishing children’s wishes and feelings for family court reports: The significance attached to the age of the child. Childhood, 13(4), 499–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Mare, R. D. (2001). Assortative mating, intergenerational mobility, and educational inequality. california center for population research, Online (Working Paper Series, paper CCPR-004-00).
  79. Marsiglio, W., & Roy, K. (2012). Nurturing dads: Social initiatives for contemporary fatherhood. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  80. Marsiglio, W., Day, R. D., & Lamb, M. E. (2000). Exploring fatherhood diversity: Implications for conceptualizing father involvement. Marriage & Family Review, 29(4), 269–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Martin, C. (2007). Le souci de l’autre dans une société d’individus: Un débat savant et politique a l’échelle européenne. In S. Paugam (Ed.), Repenser la solidarité. L’apport des sciences sociales (pp. 219–240). Paris: PUF “Le lien social”.Google Scholar
  82. McCall, L., & Percheski, C. (2010). Income inequality: New trends and research directions. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 329–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. McLanahan, S. (2000). Family, state, and child well-being. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 703–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. McLanahan, S. (2004). Diverging destinies: How children are faring under the second demographic transition. Demography, 41(4), 607–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. McLanahan, S., & Carlson, M. J. (2002). Welfare reform, fertility, and father involvement. The Future of Children, 12(1), 147–165.Google Scholar
  86. McLanahan, S., & Percheski, C. (2008). Family structure and the reproduction of inequalities. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 257–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. D. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: What hurts, what helps. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Montserrat, C., Casas, F., Malo, S., & Bertran, I. (2011). Los itinerarios educativos de los jóvenes extutelados. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad, Política Social e Igualdad, Centro de Publicaciones, Informes, Estudios e Investigación.Google Scholar
  89. Montserrat, C., Casas, F., & Malo, S. (2012). Delayed educational pathways and risk of social exclusion: The case of young people from public care in Spain. European Journal of Social Work. DOI: Scholar
  90. Morgan, K. J., & Zippel, K. (2003). Paid to care: The origins and effects of care leave policies in Western Europe. Social Politics, 10(1), 49–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. O’Brien, M. (2009). Fathers, parental leave policies and infant quality of life: International perspectives and policy impact. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 624, 190–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. OECD. (2012). Starting strong III – A quality toolbox for early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  93. Pearce, D. (1978). The feminization of poverty: Women, work, and welfare. Urban Sociological Change, 11, 128–136.Google Scholar
  94. Pong, S.-L., Dronkers, J., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2003). Family policies and children’s school achievement in single- versus two-parent families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(3), 681–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Rainwater, L., & Smeeding, T. M. (2003). Poor kids in a rich country: America’s children in comparative perspective. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  96. RAND Europe. (2012). Parenting support policy brief, European commission: Employment, social affairs & inclusion. Cambridge: RAND Europe.Google Scholar
  97. Rodrigo, M. J. (2010). Promoting positive parenting in Europe: New challenges for the European society for developmental psychology. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 7(3), 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Rosenberg, J., & Wilcox, W. B. (2006). The importance of fathers in the healthy development of children. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  99. Sarkadi, A., Kristiansson, R., Oberklaid, F., & Bremberg, S. (2008). Fathers’ involvement and children’s developmental outcomes: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. Acta Paediatrica, 97, 153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Sigle-Rushton, W., & McLanahan, S. (2004). Father absence and child wellbeing: A critical review. In D. Moynihan, L. Rainwater, & T. Smeeding (Eds.), The future of the family (pp. 116–155). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  101. Smart, C. (2003). Introduction: New perspectives on childhood and divorce. Childhood, 10(2), 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Smart, C., Neale, B., & Wade, A. (2001). The changing experience of childhood: Families and divorce. Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press/Blackwell.Google Scholar
  103. Smock, P. J. (1993). The economic costs of marital disruption for young women over the past two decades. Demography, 30(3), 353–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Sorensen, A. (2005). Family structure, gender roles, and social inequality. In S. Svallfors (Ed.), Analyzing inequality: Life chances and social mobility in comparative perspective (pp. 108–128). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Sullivan, O., Coltrane, S., Mcannally, L., & Altintas, E. (2009). Father-friendly policies and time-use data in a cross-national context: Potential and prospects for future research. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 624(1), 234–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Swisher, R. R., & Waller, M. R. (2008). Confining fatherhood: Incarceration and paternal involvement among nonresident White, African American, and Latino fathers. Journal of Family Issues, 29(8), 1067–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Taylor-Gooby, P. (2004). New risks and social change. In P. Taylor-Gooby (Ed.), New risks, new welfare: The transformation of the European welfare state (pp. 1–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. The Fatherhood Institute. (2010). The fatherhood report 2010–11: The fairness in families index. Abergavenny: The Fatherhood Institute.Google Scholar
  109. UNICEF. (2005). Child poverty in rich countries, 2005. Innocenti (Report Card No. 6). Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.Google Scholar
  110. UNICEF. (2007). An overview of child well-being in rich countries. Innocenti (Report Card No. 7). Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.Google Scholar
  111. Veenhoven, R. (2000). Well-being in the welfare state: Level not higher, distribution not more equitable. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 2, 91–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Waddington, H. (2004). Linking economic policy to childhood poverty: A review of the evidence on growth, trade reform and macroeconomic policy (CHIP Report 7). London: CHIP.Google Scholar
  113. Wakefield, S., & Uggen, C. (2010). Incarceration and stratification. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 387–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Waldfogel, J. (2006). What children need. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Waldfogel, J. (2009). The role of family policies in antipoverty policy. In M. Cancian & S. Danziger (Eds.), Changing poverty, changing policies (pp. 242–265). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  116. Wildeman, C. (2009). Parental imprisonment, the prison boom, and the concentration of childhood disadvantage. Demography, 46(2), 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Wildeman, C. (2010). Paternal incarceration and children’s physically aggressive behaviors: Evidence from the fragile families and child wellbeing study. Social Forces, 89(1), 285–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Wilson, K. R., & Prior, M. R. (2011). Father involvement and child well-being. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 47, 405–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Wolfinger, N. H. (2005). Understanding the divorce cycle: The children of divorce in their own marriages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Zinn, J. O., & Taylor-Gooby, P. (2006). Risk as an interdisciplinary research area. In P. Taylor-Gooby & J. O. Zinn (Eds.), Risk in social science (pp. 20–53). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBellaterraSpain

Personalised recommendations