Father-Son Communication About Consistent and Correct Condom Use

Abstract

With this study, we explore communication about consistent and correct condom use among African American and Latino male adolescents ages 15 to 19 and their fathers. METHODS: Twenty-five father-son dyads completed semistructured interviews designed to elicit specific preferences for teaching and learning about consistent and correct condom use and strategies for addressing common condom use errors and problems. For analysis, we used in vivo coding and vertical and horizontal analysis techniques. RESULTS: Fathers and sons agreed that communication about condom use is feasible and acceptable. However, fathers tended to convey vague messages regarding protecting oneself from the negative consequences of sexual activity. Furthermore, both fathers and sons reported barriers hindering conversations. Secondly, the style and frequency of condom use conversations can help overcome barriers and support father-son relationship management. Talking frequently in 1-on-1 settings and using strategies to reduce discomfort made communication easier. Lastly, fathers and sons reported distinct preferences for teaching and learning about condom use. Sons wanted fathers to give specific guidance on the use and management of condoms. Fathers expressed interest in opportunities for improving their own condom knowledge and skills. Fathers identified gaps in their own condom use knowledge as a limitation to effective instruction of their sons. CONCLUSIONS: A father-focused communication intervention about condom use is feasible and acceptable. Enhancing the intergenerational benefits of father-son communication by addressing specific father-son preferences and learning needs for condom use instruction, as well as communication barriers, represents a novel mechanism for reducing male sexual reproductive health disparities.

Methodological strategies to engage young black and Latino heterosexual couples in sexual and reproductive health research

“…Consistent with other couple-based studies, there was considerable attrition from initial screening to the completion of study activities. While our enrollment rates were slightly lower than other couple-based survey and intervention studies [27], they were fairly consistent with other dyadic, qualitative studies [37]. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that more couples will need to be approached and screened in order to meet study enrollment goals.…”

A Triadic Intervention for Adolescent Sexual Health: A Randomized Clinical Trial

“…[23][24][25] Parent-targeted interventions are less common, which is surprising given well-established evidence supporting the important parental role of shaping adolescent SRH outcomes and behaviors. [26][27][28] Even more striking is the limited programming that combines parent and HCP efforts to jointly support adolescent SRH. 27,29 National health organizations and practice guidelines support HCP efforts to involve parents in providing SRH services to adolescent patients.…”

Fathers’ Engagement in Their Sons’ Sexual and Reproductive Health

“…As SRH evolves, the unique experiences and viewpoints of male adolescents are becoming better recognized and understood. Guilamo-Ramos et al 6 take us back to the basics, reminding us that fathers may be an underused resource for teenaged boys learning about condom use and one worthy of support. Empowering fathers to educate their sons not only regarding condom use but also about sexual health and health education more broadly is a key next step for clinicians caring for male adolescents and their families.…”

“…5 As the culture of SRH changes, so must our tactics for sexual health education. In this issue of Pediatrics, Guilamo-Ramos et al 6 identify a resource for SRH that is not new or edgy; in fact, it is the opposite. It is a simple resource that has always existed: the father.…”

“…Fathers' impacts on their children's overall health and well-being are widely documented, 7 yet fathers are often overlooked as contributors to their children's SRH. 8 There are 27 million boys under the age of 18 living with fathers in the United States 9 ; Guilamo-Ramos et al 6 take a first step in examining the feasibility and acceptability of engaging fathers and their sons more effectively in SRH.…”