Assignment 1 – course readings attached – 1 page
As a professional, in what way would you like to be involved in working with families to develop strengths? What aspect of this work sounds interesting to you? Choose one (1) of the four following work options to respond to and be sure to describe how a strengths-based perspective can change the lives of children and families. Cite your reading and one additional resource in your response.
1. If you are interested in policies, compare two policies that impacted families and/or children. Discuss how they use a strengths-based approach or how they could be improved to be more strength-focused.
2. If you would like to be a counselor, compare two family therapeutic approaches. What are the strengths and weaknesses of each? How could each be improved or applied to better work for diverse families?
3. If you are interested in working with young children, develop a program specifically dealing with some aspect of child development. Ground the program in a family-strengths perspective and cultural sensitivity principles.
4. If you are interested in working in the community with families, research family resource centers in your home state or town. What populations do they serve? What resources do they offer? How could the resource center be improved to better meet the needs of diverse families?
Course Readings
TED talk video: Want to Bring Out The Best in People? Start With Strengths (2016, 18 minutes in length, captioned, video provided with accurate captions and transcript).
Optional Resources:
Polyamory CombinationsChild Welfare Information Gateway. (2008). Family centered approach to working with families.NCFR. (2016) What is family life education?ACF. (2011). The Head Start parent, family, and community engagement framework. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Cross-cultural communication: Tools for working with families and children. By Tehseen Ladha, Mohammad Zubairi, Andrea Hunter, Tobey Audcent, Julie Johnstone Paediatrics & Child Health, Volume 23, Issue 1, February 2018, Pages 66–69, Cross-cultural communication: Tools for working with families and children | Paediatrics & Child Health | Oxford Academic (oup.com) Published: 15 February 2018
Assignment 2 – 2 pages
Select one family structural composition from Box 13.2 Family Forms (p. 267 in the textbook) to research further.
We will do from box 13.2 : childless families. Families that do not have children, either by choice or circumstance.
find two recent studies (attached) discussing families living within this composition.
Instructions:
1. Summarize both articles.
2. Describe the knowledge and skill set necessary to work with families living in this composition.
3. Finally, discuss how a strengths-based perspective can affect professional family practice with a family in this composition.
Study 1
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2765102459?accountid=8067&parentSessionId=wFm3YUv%2Ft%2BhU8VuZZV5JqC36xcFOLjBbhvZB%2FUMb%2Fm0%3D&pq-origsite=primo&sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals
Study 2
Abstract
The current study aimed to explore the roles of traditional family values (specifically, filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes), minority stress, and parenting motivation in parenting desire among Chinese lesbian women and gay men. 1042 childless lesbian women and gay men between the ages of 18 and 46 were recruited to respond to an online survey, which covered measures assessing parenting desire, traditional family values, minority stress, and parenting motivation. The results indicated that traditional family values, minority stress, and parenting motivation each showed positive correlations with parenting desire. Additionally, minority stress alone mediated the relationship between filial piety/traditional gender stereotypes and parenting desire. However, minority stress was not significantly associated with parenting desire when controlling for parenting motivation. Parenting motivation mediated the associations between filial piety/traditional gender stereotypes, and parenting desire controlling for minority stress. The findings indicated that traditional family values, minority stress, and parenting motivation can be considered predictors of the desire to become a parent among Chinese lesbian women and gay men.
Introduction
In recent years, lesbian and gay (LG) individuals’ parenting desire—the feeling that they have about wanting to become parents—has attracted increasing research attention. Contrary to the common stereotype that LG individuals are uninterested in parenthood (Badgett, 2001), there is evidence that a large percentage of them have a desire for parenthood although this proportion is lower than that of their heterosexual counterparts (Baiocco & Laghi, 2013; Costa & Bidell, 2017; Gato et al., 2019; Kranz et al., 2018; Leal et al., 2019; Riskind & Patterson, 2010; Shenkman, 2012, 2020; Shenkman et al., 2019; Simon et al., 2018; Tate & Patterson, 2019). China’s long historical and cultural traditions have a profound impact on the parenting desire of Chinese people. Family planning policy has also been relaxed in China in recent years, to encourage initiatives in parenting. Despite same-sex marriage being illegal in China, some Chinese LG individuals want to become parents (Chang, 2015; Wei, 2016; Wang et al., 2011).
Traditional Family Values and Parenting Desire
Traditional family values may be an important factor contributing to parenting desire. First, the patrilineal system, as the keystone of traditional Chinese family values, emphasizes the male-centered line of descent, which not only makes male descendants a requisite for the continuation of the family line but also obligates male heirs to keep their family line alive (Hu & Scott, 2016; Liu & Choi, 2006). Likewise, these values influence female role obligations. Traditionally, in order to help her husband carry on the family line, it is of central value to the female identity to give birth (preferably to sons) and rear children, that is, to achieve motherhood (Hu & Scott, 2016; Pan, 2002; Shek, 2006). Second, filial piety, which is a traditional virtue rooted in Confucianism (Hu & Wang, 2013), defines interactions and obligations between parents and children (Hu & Scott, 2016). For children, reproducing for maintaining the family bloodline is one of the typical filial obligations (Chow & Cheng, 2010; Shek, 2006); in other words, children should equate reproduction with of filial behavior. Filial piety also cultivates negative attitudes toward childlessness. If individuals fail to have children, they may feel shame and guilt. Their parents may also feel dissatisfied with and ashamed of them, especially when their children’s lack of progeny becomes known (Hu & Wang, 2013; Kwok & Wu, 2015; Li & Chen, 1993; Liu & Choi, 2006). It is thus to be expected that childless Chinese LG individuals who strongly endorse traditional family values may be more likely to want to have children.
Minority Stress and Parenting Desire
LG individuals experience external stigma and prejudice owing to their sexual orientation and the negative attitude toward their sexual orientation, such as homophobia, can cause internalized stress (Meyer, 2003). A few empirical studies have explored the relationship between minority stress and parenting desire among Western LG individuals. For example, Scandurra et al. (2018) found that lesbian women who scored higher on minority stressors (prejudice events, internalized homophobia, and sexual orientation concealment) and gay men who scored higher on felt stigma (another minority stressor) were less likely to report that they wanted to become parents. On the other hand, they found that both internalized homophobia and sexual orientation concealment were positively associated with parenting desire in lesbian women (Amodeo et al., 2018). Moreover, (Riskind, 2014) found that minority stress was not a significant predictor of parenting desire.
Although previous studies have provided inconsistent evidence for the association between minority stress and parenting desire, minority stressors may be related to parenting desire in the Chinese context. Two minority stressors—internalized homophobia and sexual orientation concealment—are of equal important in exploring same-sex parenthood (Amodeo et al., 2018). Both are also critical sources of minority stress among Chinese LG individuals (Wen & Zheng, 2020). First, high levels of internalized homophobia may lead to a growing tendency among LG individuals to maintain a heterosexual image and to meet societal and cultural expectations (Amodeo et al., 2018; Higgins, 2004). While parenthood remains heteronormative in current China, it cannot obliterate LG individuals’ ideals of becoming parents (Chang, 2015; Wei, 2016); instead, some LG individuals will get married and then have biological children (Higgins, 2002; Liu, 2013). In addition, due to heterosexism in society, parenthood is considered proof of heterosexual orientation. If LG individuals fail to have children, they may risk exposure of their LG status. This has sparked further the idea that childless Chinese LG individuals with high levels of internalized homophobia and sexual orientation concealment may be more likely to have a desire for parenthood.
The Mediating Effect of Minority Stress
Traditional Chinese family values may also be a factor influencing minority stress. LG people are still not widely accepted, as their LG status runs contrary to deeply rooted cultural traditions that emphasize opposite-sex marriage, fertility, and filial piety (Liu & Choi, 2006; Wei, 2016; Zhang & Chu, 2005). Several empirical studies have revealed that filial piety is associated with inner minority stress (Huang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Shao et al., 2018). Furthermore, a study has revealed that internalized homonegativity mediates the association between filial piety and depression, indicating a mediating effect of minority stress (Huang et al., 2020). Faced with the conflict between their sexual orientation and sociocultural expectations, Chinese LG individuals who have internalized traditional family values may feel stronger pressure. Thus, it is possible that Chinese LG individuals who strongly endorse traditional family values may thereby experience greater minority stress and, in turn, have a stronger desire to achieve parenthood.
The Mediating Effect of Parenting Motivation
Parenting motivation is an important variable to understand the psychological mechanism of parenting desire. The Traits-Desires-Intentions-Behavior (TDIB) framework outlines the argument that desire develops out of stable motivational dispositions; in particular, parenting motivation, which represents the disposition to react favorably or unfavorably to different aspects of parenthood, is the major determinant of parenting desire (Miller, 1994). Moreover, values have been shown to be associated with motivation (see Parks & Guay, 2009). Taking these facts together, Chinese LG individuals who strongly endorse traditional family values may have more motivation to become parents and thus be more likely to express a desire for parenthood.
The Current Study
The current study explored relationships between traditional family values, minority stress, parenting motivation, and parenting desire among childless LG individuals in China. Our first hypothesis was that traditional family values, minority stress (internalized homophobia and sexual orientation concealment), and parenting motivation were positively associated with parenting desire. Then, we hypothesized the mediating roles of minority stress and parenting motivation in the relationship between traditional family values and parenting desire.
Parenting desire is also cultivated by demographic characteristics, especially gender. Gender is a critical factor related to parenting desire (Woodward et al., 2006). Contrary to prior findings in Western nations (e.g., Baiocco & Laghi, 2013; Riskind & Tornello, 2017), gay men typically have stronger parenting desire than lesbian women in China (Chang, 2015). This may be because men but not women are traditionally seen as the carrier of family bloodline (Hu & Scott, 2016), although both have a duty to achieve parenthood. Therefore, this study also explored whether there is a significant gender difference in parenting desire. We hypothesized that gay men were more likely than lesbian women to express parenting desire.
Method
Participants and Procedures
The current study was conducted online through the Chinese survey website Wenjuanxing. Due to the covert nature of sexual minority population, participants were recruited via popular social networking sites (e.g., QQ, WeChat, Weibo, and Douban), dating apps for Chinese LG individuals (e.g., Aloha and Blued), and a LGBT-related nongovernmental organization (PFLAG China). Participants were not compensated. Inclusion criteria were unmarried childless lesbian women or gay men who were older than 18 years old and younger than 50 years old. We considered 18 and 50 years as thresholds for parenthood in the Chinese context because (1) individuals over 18 years are seen as adults in China and (2) according to the China Civil Code, if a single man adopts a girl, the age difference between the adopter and the adoptee should be more than 40 years. Before participants consented to participate, they were fully apprised of the purpose of this voluntary, anonymous study. They could provide their email address to receive the results of this study if they wished.
The total sample included 1042 participants: 259 lesbian women and 783 gay men. The mean age of these participants was 22.03 years old (SD = 3.61), ranging from 18 to 46 years old. Other demographic characteristics, including growth environment, education, and relationship status, were also measured. Table 1 shows the demographic data collected from the sample.
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (N = 1042).
Lesbian Women
Gay Men
n = 259
n = 783
Age in years, M (SD)
21.55
(3.33)
23.48
(4.01)
Education, N (%)
Senior high school or below
32
(12.36)
116
(14.81)
College
184
(71.04)
589
(75.22)
Master’s degree or above
43
(16.60)
78
(9.96)
Growth environment, N (%)
Provincial capital or
municipality
82
(31.66)
226
(28.86)
Prefecture-level city
83
(32.05)
252
(32.18)
Country town
67
(25.87)
180
(22.99)
Villages and towns
13
(5.02)
76
(9.71)
Countryside
14
(5.41)
49
(6.26)
Relationship status, N (%)
Single
122
(47.10)
535
(68.33)
In relationship
137
(52.90)
248
(31.67)
Parenting desire, M (SD)
32.43
(30.55)
42.26
(31.97)
Open in viewer
Measures
Parenting desire
Given that parenting desire is a matter of degree (Miller, 1994), participants were asked to answer the following question to assess their desire to become parents: “Please rate the degree to which you want a child.” Ratings were provided on a scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 100 (very much); a score of 0 indicates no desire to become a parent, and higher scores indicate a stronger desire for parenthood.
Minority Stress
Internalized Homophobia. Internalized homophobia was assessed with the 5-item Revised Internalized Homophobia Scale (IHP-R; Herek et al., 2009). Participants were asked to rate their agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree); higher scores indicate higher levels of internalized homophobia. In the present study, the internal reliability for this scale was 0.77.
Sexual Orientation Concealment. Sexual orientation concealment was assessed with the 4-item Self-Concealment Scale (Wen & Zheng, 2020), designed for Chinese LG individuals. This scale includes the following four items: (1) “I am cautious to decide to whom I can disclose my sexual orientation,” (2) “I am afraid for others to know my sexual orientation,” (3) “Regarding the number of people who know my sexual orientation, less is better,” and (4) “I will try to avoid any acquaintance seeing me together with my same-sex partner.” Participants were asked to rate their agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree); higher scores indicate higher levels of sexual orientation concealment. In the present study, the internal reliability for this scale was 0.83.
Traditional Family Values
Traditional family values were assessed with the 15-item Measures for Family/Gender Values scale excerpted from the 2006 China General Social Survey (CGSS 2006; Hu & Scott, 2016). CGSS is one of the largest-scale nationwide social surveys conducted in China, and CGSS 2006 included a Family Module in order to assess different aspects of Chinese family values. Hu and Scott (2016) picked out 15 items to measure Chinese attitudes toward traditional family values (e.g., “To preserve the family lineage, one should give birth to at least one male heir” and “Children should behave in ways that honor their parents”). The original scale measures five dimensions: (1) patrilineality, (2) xiao (material filial piety and unmarried), (3) xiao (material filial piety and married), (4) jing (nonmaterial filial piety), and (5) gender role. Deviating from the original scale, xiao (unmarried) and xiao (married) were merged into one (i.e., xiao) in the current study, because they formed the same dimension in CGSS 2006. Moreover, participants here responded to items not on the original measure (a 7-point Likert-type scale) but on a 5-point Likert scale where 1 = strongly agree and 5 = strongly disagree. Scores were recoded so that higher scores indicated more traditional attitudes toward family values. Then, second-order factor analysis was applied; the results indicated that four dimensions loaded onto two higher-order factors and accounted for 72.40% of the variance, Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin = 0.57, and Bartlett’s test = 534.00, p < 0.001. Two factors explained traditional family values from different angles: one from xiao and jing, the other from belief in patrilineality and traditional gender roles; thus, they were named after filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha scores for these four dimensions were .94 (xiao), .75 (jing), .73 (patrilineality), and .89 (gender roles), respectively, in the current study.
Parenting Motivation
Parenting motivations were measured using the 18-item Parenthood Motivation List (PML; van Balen & Trimbos-Kemper, 1995). This questionnaire includes six dimensions: (1) well-being, (2) social control, (3) happiness, (4) identity, (5) fatherhood/motherhood, and (6) continuity. Well-being refers to the disposition to consider children a requisite of a complete life (e.g., (“I want to have children…”) “Because it makes life complete”). Social control refers to the disposition to consider children as a means to address socially based explicit or implicit pressure (e.g., “To not be an outsider”). Happiness refers to the disposition to regard children as providers of pleasure (e.g., “Because children make me happy”). Identity refers to the disposition to consider parenthood as a valued part of one’s identity (e.g., “As a sign of being grown up”). Fatherhood/motherhood refers to the disposition to consider parenting as a way to experience fulfillment (e.g., “To experience pregnancy/birth”). Continuity refers to the disposition to continue living or the family lineage (e.g., “To continue the family name/traditions”). Each dimension consists of three items. However, participants in this study responded to items not on the original measure (a 3-point rating scale) but on a 5-point Likert scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree; higher scores indicate higher levels of parenting motivation. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the 6-factor model of parenting motivations was an acceptable fit to the data: χ2 (120) = 780.67; χ2/df = 6.51; p < 0.001; comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.952, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.939; standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) = 0.039; the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.073, 90% confidence interval (CI) = [0.068, 0.078]; Cronbach’s alpha scores for these dimensions were 0.91 (well-being), 0.69 (social control), 0.91 (happiness), 0.81 (identity), 0.80 (fatherhood/motherhood), and 0.81 (continuity), respectively.
Results
Descriptive Statistics for Parenting Desire
Among all participants, 19.2% had no desire for parenthood (lesbian women: 27.8%; gay men: 16.3%), that is, they rated their desire as 0 on a scale ranging from 0 to 100. Other participants more or less desired to become parents. In particular, 40.1% expressed a strong desire to become parents (lesbian women: 30.1%; gay men: 43.4%), rating their desire as 50 or above on the scale.
Demographic Characteristics and Parenting Desire
We examined relationships between parenting desire and demographic variables: gender, growth environments, education, relationship status, and age. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that male participants (M = 42.26, SD = 31.97) had a stronger desire to become parents than female participants did (M = 32.43, SD = 30.55), F (1, 1040) = 18.809, p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.018, d = 0.311, and that compared with participants growing up in four other environments (provincial capital or municipality: M = 40.32, SD = 32.43; prefecture-level city: M = 36.33, SD = 30.12; country town: M = 39.26, SD = 31.95; villages and towns: M = 46.54, SD = 32.48), participants who grew up in the countryside (M = 48.54, SD = 35.01) had a stronger desire for parenthood, F (4, 1037) = 3.233, p < 0.05, partial η2 = 0.012. Moreover, participants with more education (senior high school or below: M = 35.61, SD = 31.60; college: M = 39.74, SD = 31.61; master’s degree or above: M = 45.45, SD = 33.44) reported a stronger desire to achieve parenthood, F (2, 1039) = 3.195, p < 0.05, partial η2 = 0.006. However, relationship status was not associated with parenting desire, F (1, 1040) = 1.194, p = .275, nor was age, r = 0.04, p = 0.210.
Correlations Among Traditional Family Values, Minority Stress, Parenting Motivation, and Parenting Desire
Table 2 shows the means, SDs, and correlation coefficients for traditional family values, minority stress, parenting motivation, and parenting desire for all participants. All dimensions of traditional family values were positively correlated with parenting desire (rs = 0.11–0.19, ps < 0.001), as were dimensions of both minority stress (rs = 0.21 and 0.12, respectively, ps < 0.001) and parenting motivation (rs = 0.40–0.68, ps < 0.001). In addition, traditional family values were positively correlated with minority stress (rs = 0.10–0.35, ps < 0.01), as well as with parenting motivation (rs = 0.14–0.46, ps < 0.001). Minority stress also showed significant correlations with parenting motivation (rs = 0.14–0.42, ps < 0.001).
Table 2. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlation Coefficients (r) Among Variables.
M
SD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1. Parenting desire
39.82
31.89
2. Xiao
3.12
0.90
0.11∗∗∗
3. Jing
3.72
0.76
0.19∗∗∗
0.35∗∗∗
4. Patrilineality
1.59
0.62
0.14∗∗∗
0.20∗∗∗
0.19∗∗∗
5. Gender role
1.33
0.61
0.14∗∗∗
0.15∗∗∗
0.15∗∗∗
0.54∗∗∗
6. Internalized homophobia
1.90
0.76
0.21∗∗∗
0.13∗∗∗
0.20∗∗∗
0.35∗∗∗
0.29∗∗∗
7. Concealment
3.10
0.94
0.12∗∗∗
0.10∗∗
0.15∗∗∗
0.26∗∗∗
0.19∗∗∗
0.47∗∗∗
8. Well-being
6.65
3.09
0.64∗∗∗
0.14∗∗∗
0.24∗∗∗
0.40∗∗∗
0.32∗∗∗
0.34∗∗∗
0.25∗∗∗
9. Social control
7.29
2.74
0.40∗∗∗
0.18∗∗∗
0.23∗∗∗
0.41∗∗∗
0.26∗∗∗
0.42∗∗∗
0.34∗∗∗
0.60∗∗∗
10. Happiness
8.44
3.25
0.68∗∗∗
0.18∗∗∗
0.23∗∗∗
0.24∗∗∗
0.14∗∗∗
0.24∗∗∗
0.14∗∗∗
0.66∗∗∗
0.49∗∗∗
11. Identity
7.03
2.81
0.58∗∗∗
0.20∗∗∗
0.27∗∗∗
0.40∗∗∗
0.30∗∗∗
0.38∗∗∗
0.26∗∗∗
0.72∗∗∗
0.61∗∗∗
0.72∗∗∗
12. Parenthood
8.96
3.10
0.62∗∗∗
0.15∗∗∗
0.24∗∗∗
0.23∗∗∗
0.14∗∗∗
0.28∗∗
0.22∗∗∗
0.65∗∗∗
0.55∗∗∗
0.73∗∗∗
0.68∗∗∗
13. Continuity
6.86
2.95
0.53∗∗∗
0.17∗∗∗
0.30∗∗∗
0.46∗∗∗
0.34∗∗∗
0.37∗∗∗
0.28∗∗∗
0.68∗∗∗
0.56∗∗∗
0.64∗∗∗
0.72∗∗∗
0.63∗∗∗
∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.
Open in viewer
The Mediating Effect of Minority Stress on the Relationship Between Traditional Family Values and Parenting Desire
Using structural equation modeling (SEM) conducted in Mplus 8, we tested the mediating effect of minority stress on the relationship between traditional family values and parenting desire. Gender, growth environment, and education were the control variables in the SEM analyses. In the first SEM analysis, latent variables were formed for traditional family values comprising filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes, and the minority stress variable comprised internalized homophobia and sexual orientation concealment. The factor loading of filial piety for traditional family values was 0.399, which indicated that filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes could not coexist in a single variable (i.e., traditional family values). This may be attributed to the fact that people in current China have had different attitudes toward views of filial piety and old sexist attitudes. Old beliefs concerning gender stereotypes were largely discarded while filial piety still had endorsement of the majority of modern people (Hu & Scott, 2016). Thus, traditional family values were finally divided into two independent variables: filial piety (xiao, jing) and traditional gender stereotypes (patrilineality and gender role). Then, we re-conducted the SEM analysis. The results demonstrated that the model exhibited an acceptable fit to the data, χ2 (27) = 165.26, χ2/df = 6.12, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.886, TLI = 0.822, SRMR = 0.067, RMSEA = 0.070, (90% CI = [0.060, 0.081]).
Figure 1 shows the results of different pathways and indicated that minority stress had a significant partial mediating effect on the relationship between filial piety and parenting desire (β = 0.034, SE = 0.012, p < 0.01), and fully mediated the relationship between traditional gender stereotypes and parenting desire (β = 0.067, SE = 0.021, p < 0.01).Figure 1. The mediating effect of minority stress on the relationship between filial piety, traditional gender stereotypes, and parenting desire.∗∗∗p < 0.001.Open in viewer
The Mediating Effects of Minority Stress and Parenting Motivation on the Relationship Among Filial Piety, Traditional Gender Stereotypes, and Parenting Desire
A similar analysis was conducted to test the mediating effects of minority stress and parenting motivation on the relationship between traditional family values and parenting desire. In the mediation path model, the latent variables included filial piety, traditional gender stereotypes, minority stress, and parenting motivation; gender, growth environment, and education were the control variables. The results demonstrated that the model exhibited an acceptable fit to the data, χ2 (93) = 710.25, χ2/df = 7.64, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.912, TLI = 0.889, SRMR = 0.074, RMSEA = 0.080, (90% CI = [0.074, 0.085]).
Figure 2 shows the results of the different pathways. Both filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes were positively associated with minority stress and parenting motivation. However, both filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes were shown to be negatively associated with parenting desire. Parenting motivation was positively associated with parenting desire. However, minority stress was not significantly associated with parenting desire. The mediating effects of parenting motivation on the relationship between filial piety/traditional gender stereotypes and parenting desire were significant 0.367 (β = 0.38/0.29, SE = 0.052/0.043, ps < 0.001). The mediating effects of minority stress on the relationship between filial piety/traditional gender stereotypes and parenting desire were not significant.
Figure 2. The mediating effects of minority stress and parenting motivation on the relationship among filial piety, traditional gender stereotypes, and parenting desire. ∗p < 0.05; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.Open in viewer
Discussion
The present study explored relationships between traditional family values, minority stress, parenting motivation, and parenting desire among childless LG individuals in China. We found not only partial support for the hypotheses but also some unexpected results. First, as predicted, traditional family values, minority stress, and parenting motivation were each shown to be positively correlated with parenting desire. Second, minority stress was positively associated with parenting desire in the mediation model without parenting motivation. However, when minority stress and parenting motivation being mediating variables simultaneously, only parenting motivation played a mediating role in the hypothesized model but minority stress did not. In addition, contrary to our expectations, traditional family values in the mediation model including parenting motivation were negatively associated with parenting desire. These findings highlight the unique Chinese sociocultural circumstances and reflect the dilemma that Chinese LG individuals faced regarding the parenthood path.
To discuss this in more detail, traditional family values are expressive of China’s long historical and cultural traditions. The dominant economic form in ancient China was a self-sufficient natural economy. In such a long period of time, due to low productivity, individuals could hardly survive unless they could depend on families composed of multiple working-age members. Under such circumstances, children are of great importance to the family in terms of family roles and functions; theoretically, having children would increase the family’s productivity. In this opportunity, traditional family values that emphasize fertility emerged and then received popular recognition smoothly (Pan, 2002). Later, with the development of a social economy, Chinese family structure and system changed dramatically; but instead of suffering the same shocks, traditional values, especially filial piety, remain alive and well in current China (Hu & Scott, 2016). Thus, it is undoubtedly logical that individuals who strongly endorse traditional family values may be more likely to set a high value on children and have a stronger desire for parenthood.
Minority stress also has an important role in parenting desire. LG individuals who scored higher on internalized homophobia and sexual orientation concealment may be more likely to desire to meet societal and cultural expectations. In China, individuals appear to be under pressure from the society and parents to get married and then have biological children (Chang, 2015; Kwok & Wu, 2015). However, marriage and parenthood are heteronormative, both under current laws and in most people’s mind (Choi & Luo, 2016; Wei, 2016). If LG individuals refuse marriage or parenthood, they would disgrace themselves and their parents and even risk exposure of their sexual minority status. To avoid social stigma, LG individuals with higher levels of minority stress may be more likely to perform one role that conforms to sociocultural expectations to cope with additional stress despite the need to be parents (Robinson & Brewster, 2014); indeed, most Chinese LG individuals end up marrying an opposite-sex partner and then complete the task of continuity (Higgins, 2002; Liu, 2013).
Notwithstanding, since parenting desire that this study explored represents a personal feeling, the predictors described above may be not adequate alone to explain its psychological mechanism. There is a more immediate factor that needs to be investigated, namely parenting motivation, which builds the foundation of parenting desire (Miller, 1994). If it is worthwhile to become parents, individuals may have more parenthood motivations and consequently a stronger desire for parenthood. In fact, parenting motivation showed significant positive correlations with parenting desire in our sample. Unexpectedly, in the mediation model including parenting motivation, it was found that parenting motivation was significantly associated with parenting desire, while minority stress was not. Compared with the effect of parenting motivation, that of minority stress on LG individuals’ parenting desire was less significant.
More surprisingly, traditional family values were shown to be negatively associated with parenting desire in the mediation model including parenting motivation. First, in this model, traditional family values were broken up into two independent variables (i.e., filial piety and traditional gender stereotypes). Perhaps, we took a static view of filial piety. Actually, even if filial piety is regarded as old-fashioned, opposing or new perspectives do not necessarily reflect modern civilization. In contrast, education in current China has consistently inculcated filial piety as a value in youngsters; most modern people, who resist old sexist attitudes, will nevertheless express support or neutrality toward filial piety (Hu & Scott, 2016). Accordingly, we ultimately isolated filial piety from traditional family values including traditional gender stereotypes. Second, although records of same-sex attraction in Chinese history are not uncommon, any non-heterosexual form of behavior, identity, or relationships had always been regarded as heterodox and abnormal in the traditional mainstream (Liu, 2013). Traditionally, married opposite-sex couples with children are seen as the ideal family pattern, and LG individuals bringing up children were seen as in violation of nature and ethics (Chang, 2015). Thus, Chinese LG individuals who strongly endorse filial piety or traditional gender stereotypes may be more likely to internalize the belief that LG individuals should not be parents, further weakening their parenting desire.
Several limitations of the current study should be taken into account. First, the overrepresentation of young participants entails a sample bias. Newcomb and Mustanski (2010) suggested that the younger LG generation prefer to declare their sexuality in order to better pursue their own happiness. Fewer “closeted” LG individuals might therefore be included in our sample. Moreover, studies have shown the relationship between parenting desire and age (e.g., Riskind & Patterson, 2010); however, there was no significant relationship between them in this study. Thus, it is necessary to use a more representative sample. Second, since the design of the study was cross-sectional, causal interpretations of the relationships among variables should be made only with caution. Future longitudinal research is needed to determine the replicability of these findings. Third, given that the PML was developed for heterosexual people living in Western societies, measures that specialize in Chinese LG individuals should be considered in further research. Finally, as the measure of parenting desire merely consisted of a single self-reported item, future studies should use additional measures to assess parenting desire in more detail.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research is sponsored by the Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing, China (cstc2020jcyj-msxmX0416).
Assignment 3 – 1 page
Among other things, becoming culturally competent involves self-examination of one’s own values. From the list below, select one of the family populations to focus on for this assignment.
· Racialized/ethnic minority families
· Families living below the poverty line
· LGBTQIA+ families
· Families with members with disabilities
1. Briefly describe the messages that you received from your family/peers/community growing up about the selected family population. Were the messages explicitly stated (i.e., verbally), or were they more subtly implied? How so?
2. Describe how you will work towards developing greater cultural competence and sensitivity, specifically for working with your chosen family population.
3. Research and describe (include weblinks) one resource designed to support the family members in this population. What challenges does the resource attempt to mitigate?
