Article Type : Review Article
Authors : Walga TK
Keywords : Juvenile Delinquency; Schools; Criminal Responsibility; Prevention
It is widely accepted that human development, behavior and
characteristics are joint outcomes of genetic and environmental factors. Family
is the first-line environmental factor or context that influences an
individual’s development, behaviour and characteristics for better or worse
throughout the life course. Peers also play key roles in an individual’s
behaviour and development. This paper presents how family and peer relations
influence persons’ overall development either positively or negatively across
the lifespan with an aim to help in overcoming the dearth of theoretical and
empirical evidences for all stakeholders of child and youth development. To
this end, it emphasises on how family and peer relations operate as
risk-factors for maladaptive development and as protective factors against
maladaptive development across the lifespan. Finally, the paper draws
implications that might be helpful in guiding all stakeholders in charge of and
responsible for healthy child and youth development in this nation and
beyond.
Human development entails
change and stability in multiple domains across the lifespan. In other words,
development is a continuous process of change and stability throughout the
lifespan and it happens in different but interdependent domains. Furthermore,
this multi-faceted lifelong process does not occur in a vacuum. It occurs in
several interrelated and interdependent contextual settings. Family is one of these contexts where
development takes place. Indeed, it is the first line developmental context
with broad and long-lasting influences that may lead to either positive or
negative developmental outcomes based on the nature of the family. It is common to hear comments like ‘family is
a principal socializing agent’; ‘family/ home is the first school’; ‘family is
the foundation of a society’, etc. all of which speak to the importance of
family to an individual child’s development. In fact, the notion ‘family is the
foundation of a society’ implies that a society is a collection of individuals
and strength of a given society is contingent on the strength of each
constituent individuals which in turn is dependent on the quality of the family environment in which they grew
up. Individuals are molecules that make up the given society and these
molecules are created and shaped within a family. There appears to be a
consensus among contemporary development lists that parents pass their assets
and liabilities to their off-springs not only via their genes and but also via
their socialization. In this paper the
focus is not the importance of genetic or hereditary factors, however. The
paper is about how family environment as a context and as a socializing agent
influences a child’s holistic development across the lifespan. Additionally, it
touches up on how peer relations influence an individual’s development
independently or conjointly with the family. Although it is difficult to provide a
universal and definitive definition to the term ‘family’, it is a physical and
social entity that usually, but not necessarily, contains the child and its
parents and siblings. Family is simply an environment where the child is likely
to experience first-hand and early interpersonal and/or social relationships.
Social relationships also are viewed by many theorists as important contexts
within which development emerges and persists. A child’s social relationship
networks begin within a family and then expand to include peers. Peers provide
an invaluable context for a given child’s overall development. Peers and peer
relationships as a social developmental context exert paramount and enduring
positive or negative influence on a developing person.
In fact, interpersonal
and social relationships are pivotal for studying development in general and
psychosocial development in particular. This is so at multiple levels of
analysis, from defining development/ psychosocial development, to describing
preconditions and contexts, and to understanding its origins and nature. In
this paper, I will try to shed light on how family and peers as contexts of
development impact the growing person’s development across the lifespan. In
particular, the paper emphasizes on what and how family and peer relationships
contribute to the origination and development of adaptive (normative) and
mal-adaptive (developmental psychopathologies) across the lifespan. But, before
that I present a brief overview of the importance that some well established
(developmental) psychological theories ascribe to the influences of family as a
context of development on children’s development across the lifespan [1-10].
A closer look at the well
established psychological theories reveals that almost all the theories
recognize family’s contributions to the overall development of the growing
child. In Freud’s psychoanalytic theory, a greater value has been ascribed to a
child‘s interaction, in the first few years of life, with parents (or
parent-figures) in determining the establishment and maintenance of the child’s
personality. Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development attributes
special importance to family environment in resolving the psychosocial crises
of, at least, the first five psychosocial stages. In Erikson’s theory of
psychosocial development, the importance of child-mother/caregiver
relationships in the first stage, of child-parents interaction in the second
stage and the child‘s interaction with the entire family members at the third
stage has been underscored in laying foundation for subsequent psychosocial
development. In attachment theory, early child-caregiver (usually the mother)
experience which takes place in the family environment is assigned a special
value. It is widely accepted that children establish an internal working model
that guides and determines their subsequent relationships with significant
others from their early child-caregiver experiences. In short, according to
attachment theory, template for social relationships that individual engage in
across their lifetime is formed during the first few years of their life from
their early interactions with their primary care providers within a family.
Attachment theory posits that social template established early in life is not
amenable to change under normal conditions and thus is likely to persist across
the lifespan. In Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological theory of development, family
and peer as well is the inner most system of the five environmental systems in
which the child is embedded. Behavioural theories emphasize how children learn
and develop adaptive and mal-adaptive behaviours through association,
reinforcement and punishment in a family environment and peer friendships.
Social Learning theory also emphasizes the role of family as main source of
socialization via modelling and/or observational learning. For most part of
childhood, parents are the only models of behavior and the actions of parents
tend to leave a lasting impression on children. In family systems theory,
family is viewed as a system, with parents and children as subsystems and
development is considered as the result of interaction within the whole family
system and between sub-systems. Family is an organic whole with its own
identity and dynamics. The family system is more than a collection of
individuals. Members function in the system differently than they do in
isolation [11-15].
Children’s relationships
with others such as parents and peers, and the broader relationship context in
which they are developing have been identified as risk factors for
developmental psychopathology and as protective factors against it as well.
When we say that an individual is "at risk" for a certain developmental
psychopathology, it is to indicate that he or she is a member of a group that
has an increased likelihood of later manifesting the disorder in question. A
causal role is not necessarily implied, but risk factors are often seen as part
of a causal network. On the other hand when factors are generally associated
with positive outcomes (often simply being the other end of a risk dimension),
they are best described as assets or, protective factors. Of course, there is a
distinction between the two concepts though it is not always easy to make, and
the same variable may be viewed as an asset or protective factor depending on
the context. The case in point is a given child’s relationships can be either
an asset or a protective factor against the development of a certain
developmental disorder. In the sections that follow, when family and peer
relationships operate as risk factors for maladaptive development and when they
operate as protective factors (or assets) against maladaptive development would
be highlighted.
Family as an asset for
brain and cognitive development in infancy and early childhood
The biological
architecture of infants and toddlers’ brains is heavily influenced by the
social interactions they have with others around them and their ability to both
relate and appreciate their differences. The psychological development of
toddlers’ minds is interconnected with their biology; their biology influences
their psychological experience and their psychological experience influences
their biological development. In essence, nature depends on nurture.
In fact, due to advances in technology,
neuro-cognitive developmental science and public health researchers were able
to reveal that stressful and traumatic childhood and adolescent experiences
literally become embedded as “biology” affecting brain structure and function
as well as endocrine, immune, and other biologic functions thus leading to
persistent effects [16-22].
Attachment theory, which
is often thought as a joint work of John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, provides
invaluable insight into how early child-caregiver interaction within a
family contributes to brain and
cognitive development. More recently, the link between attachment and brain
development has become the focus of research furthering understanding of the
significance of attachment. During the first three years of life, the brain
develops rapidly, establishing neural pathways that allow for the development
of more complex structures of the brain. This brain development is sequential
and use-dependent. Different areas of the central nervous system are in the
process of organisation at different times, and disruptions of
experience-dependent neuro-chemical signals during these periods may lead to
major abnormalities or deficits in neurodevelopment. The role of the family
environment is crucial, and Perry and Pollard identify the primary caregiver as
the major provider of the environmental cues necessary to this development. The
central idea here is that caregivers who are consistent and responsive provide
young children with early positive experience and by so doing they nurture the
development of these complex states in the brain.
Ainsworth’s original
three categories of attachment and the later addition represent internal
working models. The secure pattern provides the context for optimal
development. Consistent and sensitive
responsiveness of a primary attachment figure facilitates the development of an
internal working model in which the self is perceived as worthy, others are
perceived to be reliable and available, and the environment is experienced as
challenging but manageable with support. The attachment figure provides a stable
base that facilitates the exploration of the environment so crucial to early
brain development. When faced with threat the infant is able to respond with
both affect and cognition in order to elicit a supportive and timely response.
Neural integration is promoted, allowing flexible and complex networks to
develop. The child achieves balance, and mastery is the primary strategy when
confronted with new situations. The secure child acquires an understanding of
the mind and the capacity to reflect on the internal state of self and others.
In contrast, research suggests that early childhood adversities such as
insecure attachment, child maltreatment, exposure to interparental violence,
and other negative family scenarios
affect children‘s neuro-cognitive development leading to lower
intelligence. For instance, Koenen and associates’ twin study revealed that
children exposed to high levels of domestic violence had IQs that were, on
average, 8 points lower than unexposed children. It also has been well documented
that such early adversities are noted risk-factors for subsequent unhealthy
psychosocial development across the lifespan.
Functional family is an
asset for a child‘s all-rounded healthy development across the lifespan. The
most widely studied assets and protective factors in the parent-child
relationship are parental warmth and emotional support, and the security of the
attachment between infant and caregiver. Numerous studies have documented the
link between parental warmth and psychological well-being and emotional health
of a child. Infant attachment security has been linked with later self-esteem,
social competence, pro-social behaviour, ego resiliency, and overall
adjustment. Attachment security also is associated with recovery from
behavioural problems and is a protective factor with regard to family life
stress; that is, children with histories of secure attachment show fewer
problems in the face of family stress than do children with histories of
anxious attachment; they do not fall prey easily to the ill effects of adverse
situations they encounter in life across the lifespan [23-30].
Family relationship is
not limited to the interaction between parents and their children. It includes
interactions and relationships between siblings and encompasses children’s
relationships with grandparents and other members of the extended family. The
contributions of relationships between and among siblings and children’s
relationship with adults other than parents (e.g. grandparents) as an asset and
protective factor have not yet been well researched. However, the sparsely
available empirical evidence points to the importance of such social networks
(i.e., social networks among siblings and with grandparents). For instance,
Jenkins found that in disharmonious homes, children with a close sibling
relationship had less symptomatology than children without such a relationship.
Similarly, Jenkins and Smith reported that a close relationship with an adult
outside of the family (usually a grandmother) moderated the effect of
disharmonious marriages on child developmental psychopathology. Egeland,
Jacobvitz and Sroufe found that an "alternative" close relationship
with an adult predicted breaking the cycle of abuse; those parents who
themselves were abused but did not mistreat their own children much more often
had such a factor present.
In socio-cultural
contexts such as ours where older siblings, grandparents and older female siblings in most instances share the tasks
and responsibilities of parenting and act as co-parents, the contribution of
sibling and grandparent relationships may be far-reaching and thus worthy of
investigation. In collective cultures where extended family is not an exception
but a rule, older siblings and grandparents are co-parents. Children may use them as a source of comfort
and confide in them in the face of adversity.
Peer Relationships as
Assets for healthy psychosocial development and wellness
As with family
relationships, peer relationships may represent assets. That is, peer
friendships can be a healthy venue for positive children and youth development.
Peer competence is associated with low behaviour problem scores or absence of
developmental psychopathology. Moreover, peer competence measures have been
associated with academic achievement and school completion, which themselves
may be viewed as assets. Generally speaking peer groups provide a variety of
positive experiences for children and youth. As it applies to adolescents,
Castrogiovanni cited in Dean and Br states that peer groups provide: (1) the
opportunity to learn how to interact with others; (2) support in defining
identity, interests, abilities, and personality; (3) autonomy without control
of adults and parents; (4) opportunities for witnessing the strategies others
use to cope with similar problems, and for observing how effective they are;
(5) involved emotional support and; (6) building and maintaining friendships.
Adolescents begin looking more often to their peers, rather than their parents,
to satisfy their needs to belong, be recognized, and accepted. A sense of
belonging and support of a peer group in turn is significantly associated with
intrinsic values for schools and academic/school achievement among others
[31-34].
While many teens satisfy
these needs through positive peer groups and interactions such as youth clubs, sport teams, or other
nonviolent groups, some teens who have
grown up surrounded by violence in their homes and neighbourhoods may develop
alternative antisocial solutions to accomplish the fulfilment of their needs
for belonging, recognition, and acceptance by peers. Violent gangs represent
one form of peer-influenced antisocial behavior.
Parenting dimensions
Harsh treatment
(hostility, criticality, rejection) and lack of clear, firm discipline or
supervision together, and in interaction with other variables, are often
especially predictive and at times capable of differentiating various
developmental psychopathological outcomes. Countless studies have underscored
the predictive power of harsh treatment or rejection, with findings especially
consistent for externalizing problems in boys. Rejections, lack of support and
hostility have also been consistently related to depression. Feldman and
Weinberger found that parental rejection and power assertive discipline
predicted delinquent behaviour of sixth-grade boys 4 years later. Ge, Best,
Conger and Simons found that parental hostility predicted 10th graders'
behaviour problems, even after controlling for 7th-grade symptom levels, and
distinguished between those with conduct disorders and those with depression.
Using a behaviour genetic design, Reiss found that the specific level of
parental negativity directed to one member of a sibling pair predicted that
child's level of conduct problems, thus showing this effect above and beyond
any genetic contribution. Likewise, Patterson and Dishion reported that aggressive
treatment of children was more predictive of conduct problems than parent trait
measures of aggressiveness (a genetic surrogate). Sroufe also found that low
parental warmth predicted childhood depression, even after controlling for
maternal depression. Many of the studies cited here also demonstrated the
impact of inconsistent discipline and the degree of parental monitoring has
been the most powerful variables.
Interpersonal conflict
Divorce, parental
disharmony, and family violence all have been consistently associated with
child behavioural and emotional problems. Across eight studies reviewed, Amato
and Keith found that children from high-conflict, intact families showed more
problems (including depression and anxiety) than children from divorced
families in general. Family violence has also been found to be associated with
childhood pathology. The adults exposed to interparental violence during
childhood had a higher risk of psychosocial maladjustment such as depression,
conjugal violence, child maltreatment and alcohol dependence. In their study of
the link between commonly occurring ACEs and teen dating violence Miller and
co-authors, having adjusted for the number of co-occurring adversities, found
out that 10 of the 12 childhood adversities were significantly associated with
partner dating violence perpetration or victimisation. Edwards reported a
dose-response relation between the number of types of maltreatment reported and
mental health scores. Both an emotionally abusive family environment and the
interaction of an emotionally abusive family environment with the various
maltreatment types had a significant effect on mental health scores of the
subjects [35-37].
Child maltreatment
The substantial
literature on child maltreatment confirms the role of parental hostility and
harshness outlined earlier. Prospective studies show that maltreatment
(including physical abuse and emotional unavailability) is associated with
conduct problems, disruptive behaviour disorders, attention problems, anxiety
disorders (including PTSD and mood disorders. Sexual abuse, the extreme of
boundary violation, appears to be especially pathogenic, being related to a
variety of problems. Even in comparison to other maltreatment groups, those who
are sexually abused manifest more forms of psychopathology and more extreme
psychopathology. Afifi have found that harsh physical punishment was associated
with increased odds of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug
abuse/ dependence, and several personality disorders after adjusting for
socio-demographic variables and family history of dysfunction. From their
research in Nigeria Oladeji, Makanjuola and Gureje concluded that adverse
childhood experiences reflecting violence in the family, parental criminality
and parental mental illness and substance misuse were more likely to have
significant mental health consequences in adulthood. Hills, Anda and their
associates (2004) found strong and graded relationships between Adverse
Childhood Experiences (ACEs; emotional, physical, or sexual abuse; exposure to
domestic violence, substance abusing, mentally ill, or criminal household
member; or separated/divorced parent) and adolescent pregnancy. Moreover, they
concluded that the negative psychosocial sequelae and fetal deaths commonly
attributed to adolescent pregnancy seem to result from underlying ACEs rather than
adolescent pregnancy per se. In their study of the association between sets of ACEs( such as Childhood Abuse,
Neglect, and Household Dysfunction) Dube found that each ACE increased the
likelihood for early initiation of illicit drug use by 2- to 4-fold; the ACE
score had a strong graded relationship to initiation of drug use in all 3 age
categories ( less than 14 years, 15 to 18 years, or as adults of 19 years &
older) as well as to drug use problems, drug addiction, and parental drug use.
Peer Relationships as Risk Factors for
Maladaptive Development and Maladjustment
Ample research shows that
poor peer relationships and association with deviant peers themselves are risk
factors for psychopathology. Numerous studies have found that general problems
with peers, lack of social competence, or unpopularity (based on observation,
teacher ratings, or peer sociometrics) are related to later behavioural and
emotional problems. Numerous studies have documented a relation between a
history of peer rejection and later maladjustment, both externalizing and
internalizing problems, sometimes even with earlier behaviour problems
controlled. Broll, Crooks and their associates note that today youth’s lives
have become increasingly infused with all types of media. The same holds true
for children. Globalization and current revolution in cyber technology have
fuelled the infusion already there. Although research on the effects of children
and youth’s use of media is not conclusive yet, growing evidence shows that
improper and overuse of media affects children and youth negatively in many
ways. This in turn necessitates parents’ monitoring children and youth media
use. Parental monitoring of children and youth media use has been identified as
an important protective factor against some negative outcomes that might have
resulted from improper media usage [38-41].
The Interplay between family
and peer relationships
Family and peer relationships
also tend to influence an individual‘s overall development and behavioural
functioning, or malfunctioning, not only independently but also jointly. For
example, Patterson and associates' work specifically points to the mediating
role for peer experiences in the perpetuation of conduct problems. In their
model, poor parental discipline and monitoring lead to conduct problems, which
in turn are associated with peer rejection and academic failure. These factors
converge to promote commitment to a deviant peer group, leading to
consolidation of antisocial behaviour. Problem behaviours and peer competence
during childhood and adolescence are best viewed as drawing upon the
convergence of previous family and peer experiences. The case in point is that
concurrence in previous family and peer experiences determine an individual’s
current and future behavioral functioning. An individual’s poor functioning or
maladaptive developmental outcome is more likely to be the consequence of the
convergence between negative family and peer relationship experiences.
Convergence of prior positive experiences is also likely to lead positive
developmental outcome and that of adverse experiences is likely negative one.
In short, family and peer experiences operate together toward a common
developmental outcome when they are convergent and they operate against each
other (the effect of former buffers the effect of the latter and vice-versa)
when they are divergent.
Implications
It is often claimed that
‘children and youth are a nation’s future generation’ and the fate of a given
nation is dependent on how the nation nurtures its children and youth today.
Healthy development of children and youth provides a strong foundation for
healthy and competent adulthood, responsible citizenship, economic
productivity, strong communities, and a sustainable society. As has been
highlighted in previous sections, healthy youth and child development is by and
large contingent on the quality of the contexts in which they grow up. That is, children and youth develop healthily
when the family, peer networks, school, and the neighborhood and community in
which they grow up are free from adversities and toxics and are child- and youth friendly. Family and peers
are pivotal in that both exert first-hand and long-lasting influence on
persons’ overall development across the lifespan. Based on evidences that have
been reviewed in this paper, the author would like to draw the attentions of
all stakeholders of children and the youth in this nation to the points
outlined next.
·
Children
and youth develop well in families where parents are warm, responsive,
consistent, caring and accepting. Biological parenthood does not necessarily
confer the desire or ability be warm, responsive, consistent, caring and accepting
and to care for a child or youth adequately. In other words, parents are not
born with all the desirable parenting qualities such as being warm, responsive,
accepting, and consistent. Furthermore, deep rooted socio-cultural beliefs
about children and their development may misinform parents and prevent them
from exercising good parenting. Therefore, there should be access to parenting
education and training programs aimed at promoting parenting knowledge and
skills. This does not necessarily mean that parents need to undertake
structured training courses in parenting. Rather, issues pertaining to child
care and development and parenting can be integrated into agricultural and
health extension programs. Public media can also be used to reach parents in
this regard. Adult education curricula can be a valuable platform for this
purpose. In line with this, Broll, Crooks, Burns, Hughes, and Jaffe (2013)
conclude that even short, one-time intensive workshops for parents can move
parents’ behaviours in the intended direction and positively impact their
monitoring strategies of their children and youth.
·
Harsh
treatment (hostility, criticality, rejection) and lack of clear, firm
discipline or supervision together, and in interaction with other variables,
are often especially predictive and at times capable of differentiating various
developmental psychopathological outcomes. Divorce, parental disharmony, and
family violence all have been consistently associated with child behavioural
and emotional problems. Prospective studies show that child maltreatment
(including physical abuse and emotional unavailability) is associated with
conduct problems, disruptive behaviour disorders, attention problems, anxiety
disorders (including PTSD and mood disorders. Therefore, families need to be
free from such adversities if healthy child and youth development is really desired.
This in turn requires viable family, child, and youth development and welfare
policies and legal instruments to help with the implementation of the policies.
·
Functional
family is an asset for a child’s overall healthy development across the lifespan.
Attachment security also is associated with recovery from behavioural problems
and is a protective factor with regard to family life stress; that is, children
with histories of secure attachment show fewer problems in the face of family
stress than do children with histories of anxious attachment; they do not fall
prey easily to the ill effects of adverse situations they encounter in life
across the lifespan. Therefore, best practices pertaining to parenting and
family functioning should be spelled out, scaled up and promoted.
·
Ample
research shows that poor peer relationships and association with deviant peers
themselves are risk factors for psychopathology. On the other hand, good peer
relations and associations with better achieving peers protect children and
youth against maladaptive behavioural development. Furthermore, family and peer
relationships also tend to influence an individual‘s overall development and
behavioural functioning, or malfunctioning, not only independently but also
jointly. These points signal the essence of parents’ monitoring and supervision
of their children and youth’s peer interactions and media use. In other words,
parents need to make developmentally appropriate monitoring of their
off-springs’ peer interaction.
Children and youth grow
up in several contexts which affect their overall development for better or
worse either directly or indirectly. These contexts include family, peer,
school, neighborhood, community, media, cultural norms, and a nation’s level of
social, political, and economic development among others. Healthy youth and
child development requires favorable contextual factors. This paper has
discussed how family and peer as contexts of development operate as
risk-factors for and protective-factors against unhealthy and maladaptive
development across the lifespan. The author believes that the implications
drawn would be very much helpful in dictating all stakeholders in charge of and
responsible for healthy child and youth development in this nation and
beyond. The author acknowledges,
however, that research studies reviewed were carried out in other cultures and
thus alerts readers and consumers to be cautious in using the resource until
these evidences are substantiated by cross-cultural research studies.