Family support, enriched preschool and serious youth offending

Line drawing of people
Abstract

This paper investigates the effects on court-adjudicated offending to age 17 of comprehensive, community‑based support offered through the Pathways to Prevention Project to families of preschool and primary age children. The sample is 543 children from a disadvantaged region in Brisbane, 192 of whom, at age four in 2002 or 2003, participated in the standard preschool curriculum plus a program designed to strengthen oral language and communication skills, and who transitioned to a local primary school where family support remained available.

Family support (involving 41% of families) was associated overall with a heightened risk of offending, reflecting the high level of need in these families, particularly in the later primary years. However, family support combined with the communication program corresponded to a very low offending rate. This suggests that family support should be combined with both high-quality, early-in-life preventive initiatives and with evidence-based child and parent programs in late primary school.

References

URLs correct as May 2024

Allen J, Homel R, Vasco D & Freiberg K 2024. The Impact of a preschool communication program and comprehensive family support on serious youth offending: New findings from the Pathways to Prevention Project. Report to the Criminology Research Advisory Council. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.52922/crg77574

Allen J, Homel R, Vasco D & Freiberg K 2023. Family support, parent empowerment, and children’s classroom behaviour in the Pathways to Prevention Project. Working Paper 1. Griffith Criminology Institute

Beitchman JH et al. 2001. Fourteen-year follow-up of speech/language impairment and control children: Psychiatric outcomes. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 40: 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200101000-00019

Blank M, Rose SA & Berlin LJ 2003. The Preschool Language Assessment Instrument, 2nd ed. Austin, Texas: PRO-ED. https://www.proedinc.com/Products/10895/preschool-language-assessment-instrument—second-edition-plai2.aspx

Brady E, Holt S & Whelan S 2018. Measuring success in family support services. Child Care in Practice 24: 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/13575279.2017.1299113

Breiman L, Friedman J, Olshen R & Stone C 1984. Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth Int. Group 37(15): 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315139470

Clark K, Cahill R & Ansell D 2022. Early childhood development and the role of neighbourhood hubs for supporting children’s development and wellbeing in disadvantaged communities: A review of the literatureLife Course Centre Working Paper No. 2022–11https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4118008

Crable EL, Drainoni M-L, Jones DK, Walley AY & Hicks JM 2022. Predicting longitudinal service use for individuals with substance use disorders: A latent profile analysis. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 132: 108632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108632

Crosnoe R, Mistry RS & Elder Jr GH 2002. Economic disadvantage, family dynamics, and adolescent enrollment in higher education. Journal of Marriage and Family 64(3): 690–702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00690.x

Deković M et al. 2011. Effects of early prevention programs on adult criminal offending: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 31: 532–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.12.003

Developmental Crime Prevention Consortium 1999. Pathways to Prevention: Developmental and early intervention approaches to crime in Australia (Summary Report, Full Report and Appendices). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16749.56800

Dolan P, Pinkerton J & Canavan J 2006. Family support: From description to reflection. In P Dolan, J Canavan & J Pinkerton (eds), Family support as reflective practice. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers: 11–23

Doyle FL et al. 2023. Policies are needed to increase the reach and impact of evidence-based parenting supports: A call for a population-based approach to supporting parents, children, and families. Child Psychiatry & Human Development 54: 891–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-021-01309-0

Fagan AA 2013. Family‐focused interventions to prevent juvenile delinquency: A case where science and policy can find common ground. Criminology & Public Policy 12(4): 617–650. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12029

Farrington DP 2007. Childhood risk factors and risk-focussed prevention. In M Maguire, R Morgan & R Reiner (eds), The Oxford handbook of criminology, 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 602–640

Farrington DP, Ttofi M & Lösel F 2016. Developmental and social prevention. In D Weisburd, DP Farrington & C Gill (eds), What works in crime prevention and rehabilitation: Lessons from systematic reviews. New York: Springer: 15–76

Feldman BJ, Masyn KE & Conger RD 2009. New approaches to studying problem behaviors: A comparison of methods for modeling longitudinal, categorical adolescent drinking data. Developmental Psychology 45(3): 652–676. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014851

Fernandez E 2007. Supporting children and responding to their families: Capturing the evidence on family support. Children and Youth Services Review 29: 1368–1394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.05.012

Homel R, Bumbarger B, Freiberg K & Branch S 2017. Sustaining crime prevention at scale: Transforming delivery systems through prevention science. In B Teasdale & M Bradley (eds), Preventing crime and violence: Volume 3 of Advancing Prevention Science. New York: Springer: Chapter 29: 351–376

Homel R, Freiberg K, Branch S & Le H 2015. Preventing the onset of youth offending: The impact of the Pathways to Prevention Project on the behaviour and wellbeing of children and young people. Canberra: Report to the Criminology Research Advisory Council, May. Grant: CRG 30/11–12. https://www.aic.gov.au/crg/reports/crg-3011-12

Homel R et al. 2006. The Pathways to Prevention Project: The first five years, 1999–2004. Sydney: Griffith University & Mission Australia. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/29461951

Howe GW 2019. Preventive effect heterogeneity: Causal Inference in personalized prevention. Prevention Science 20: 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-017-0826-9

Kumpfer KL & Alvarado R 2003. Family-strengthening approaches for the prevention of youth problem behaviors. American Psychologist 58(67): 457–465. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.457

Layzer J, Goodson B, Bernstein L & Price C 2001. National evaluation of family support programs: Final report volume A: The meta-analysis. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/opre/fam_sup_vol_a.pdf

Leijten P et al. 2017. Research Review: Harnessing the power of individual participant data in a meta-analysis of the benefits and harms of the Incredible Years parenting program. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry 29: 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12781

Manning M, Homel R & Smith C 2010. A meta-analysis of the effects of early developmental prevention programs in at-risk populations on non-health outcomes in adolescence. Children and Youth Services Review 32: 506–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.11.003

McCarthy P & Kerman B 2010. Inside the belly of the beast: How bad systems trump good programs. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research 37: 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0273-4

McConnell D, Breitkreuz R & Savage A 2012. Parent needs and family support service outcomes in a Canadian sample. Journal of Social Work 13: 447–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017311434819

Muthén LK & Muthén BO 1998–2017. MPlus user’s guide, 8th ed. Muthén & Muthén

Nylund K, Asparouhov R & Muthén B 2007 Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling 14: 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396

Piquero A et al. 2016a. A meta-analysis update on the effects of early family/parent training programs on antisocial behavior and delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology 12: 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9256-0

Piquero A et al. 2016b. A meta-analysis update on the effectiveness of early self-control improvement programs to improve self-control and reduce delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology 12: 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9257-z

R Core Team 2022. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

Rowe KJ & Rowe KS 1997. RBRI profile user’s guide: Interactive software for the assessment and monitoring of child/student externalizing behaviours at home and school (Version 1.2, Clinical). Melbourne: Centre for Applied Educational Research. ISBN 0 7325 0828 2

Sanders MR 2023. The Triple-P system of evidence-based parenting support: Past, present, and future directions. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 26(4): 880–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-023-00441-8

Sanders MR 2012. Development, evaluation, and multinational dissemination of the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 8: 345–379. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143104

StataCorp 2021. Stata Statistical Software: Release 17. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC

Therneau T & Atkinson B 2022. _rpart: Recursive Partitioning and Regression Trees_. R package version 4.1.19. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rpart

Thurber KA et al. 2020. Strengths-based approaches for quantitative data analysis: A case study using the Australian Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children. SSM-Population Health 12: 100637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100637

Whittaker K, Cox P, Thomas N & Cocker K 2014. A qualitative study of parents’ experiences using family support services: Applying the concept of surface and depth. Health and Social Care in the Community 22(5): 479–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12101