Child and adolescent caregiving for family: Emotional, social, physical, and academic risk and individual differences.

Abstract

In the United States, it is estimated that more than 5.4 million children and adolescents under age 18 provide care for adult family members who are aging or have a chronic illness, disability, or other health conditions that require assistance. However, little is known about how providing care to the family during childhood and adolescence impacts youth development. We examined whether caregiving as a youth is associated with emotional challenges, peer difficulties, course grades, and physical health risk behaviors. A large, diverse sample of middle and high school students in Florida completed the first systematic school-based survey in the U.S. to date to count caregiving youth (N = 10,880; 52% female; M age = 14.40, 40% Latinx). Youth reported the amount of caregiving they provided to the family each week, in addition to items reflecting their emotional challenges (e.g., suicidality), peer difficulties (e.g., experiences of conflict or victimization), academic course grades, and health risk behaviors (e.g., diet, physical activity, sleep). We found that Latinx and Black youth provided higher levels of caregiving to the family compared to youth from White non-Latinx, Asian, or Other ethnicities. Caregiving was associated with more emotional challenges, more peer difficulties, and lower course grades for all groups. In addition, providing caregiving was associated with a less healthy diet among older youth and sleeping less than 8 hr per night among White non-Latinx youth. These findings highlight a need to support caregiving youth and their families via policies and institutional supports.

Middle and High School Students Who Take Care of Siblings, Parents, and Grandparents: Associations With School Engagement, Belonging, and Well-Being

“…These racial and ethnic disparities in youths’ experiences providing care are largely consistent with prior research. In Florida, Latinx and Black youth provided higher levels of caregiving compared to youth from White non-Latinx, Asian, or other/mixed-race backgrounds (Armstrong-Carter et al, 2022). Because that sample was less than 3% Asian and other/mixed race, our larger and more diverse sample offered greater statistical power to detect differences between these groups.…”

“…In addition, a few studies have revealed gender and age differences in students’ experiences of providing caregiving for the family. In the Florida study, boys and younger children provided more caregiving compared to older children and girls, contrasting societal stereotypes of girls and older individuals as caretakers (Armstrong-Carter et al, 2022). In other research, girls and older adolescents more frequently completed household chores compared with boys and younger children (Armstrong-Carter & Telzer, 2021; Telzer & Fuligni, 2009b; Tsai et al, 2013).…”

“…In one study more closely focused on caregiving, middle and high school students who cared for aging or ill family members reported missing school and not being able to consistently study and complete homework (Siskowski, 2006). Caregiving middle and high school students also reported greater sadness, hopelessness, and suicidality (Armstrong-Carter et al, 2022). However, these studies did not include caregiving for typically developing siblings.…”

“…Due to these inequalities, Black, Latinx, and Native American families may have less access to paid babysitters or caretakers at home, so youth in these families may provide care more frequently to meet household needs. Indeed, the Florida school-based study found that middle and high school students from Latinx and Black backgrounds provided higher levels of caregiving to chronically ill or elderly parents and grandparents compared to those from White non-Latinx, Asian, or other ethnicities (Armstrong-Carter et al, 2022). However, most other studies that have examined youths' provision of caregiving have relied on small samples (often with qualitative methods) and lacked sufficient statistical power to detect potential differences by race or ethnicity (for a review, see Kavanaugh et al, 2016).…”

“…Race/ethnicity data were missing for 8.79% of students. Family socioeconomic status data were not available due to the legal constraints of collecting this information in government-funded school-based surveys and the potential for breach of participant anonymity, consistent with prior publications about caregiving youth (Armstrong-Carter et al, 2022). The sample was evenly distributed across the seven grades (Grades 6-12), such that 10.96%-17.13% of students represented each grade.…”