Psychological Well-being of Ghanaian Children in Transnational Families

Abstract

This study is one of the first large‐scale analyses on child psychological well‐being in the context of parental migration when children remain in an African country. As such, it contributes to the literature by investigating some of the insights gained from in‐depth transnational family studies, and it also provides evidence from Africa where normative contexts around family life differ from Latin America, Southeast Asia, and East Asia where most studies have been conducted to date. A survey was conducted in 2010/2011 with 2,760 secondary school children and youths in high out‐migration areas of Ghana. Using multiple regression analysis, we find that being in a transnational family is associated with lower levels of psychological well‐being, yet only in families where parents are divorced or separated. Furthermore, when parents are in a relationship, specific characteristics of transnational family arrangements are associated with lower levels of child psychological well‐being, while others are not. In particular, whether a parent migrates internally or internationally, who the caregiver is, and having a good relationship with the migrant parent are not associated with poorer well‐being outcomes. Instead, if a father migrates, if the child changes caregivers more than once, and if the child has a bad relationship with his or her migrant father are associated with lower levels of well‐being. This study adds nuance to a field of research that has emphasised negative outcomes and helps identify policy areas to improve the well‐being of children in transnational families. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Child Development and Migrant Transnationalism: The Health of Children Who Stay Behind in Ghana and Nigeria

“…In Malawi, Carling and Tønnessen (2013) found that children whose father is deceased or whose parents are divorced are worse off in terms of nutrition, fever and diarrhoea, when compared to children whose fathers are either present or migrants. In Ghana, Mazzucato and Cebotari (2016) emphasised similar costs of separation when measuring psychological health of children whose parents migrated and were divorced. On the contrary, research based on Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) found no difference in nutritional outcomes among orphan and non-orphan children in 23 African countries, including Ghana and Nigeria (Rivers et al, 2008).…”

Under one roof? Left‐behind children's perspectives in negotiating relationships with absent and return‐migrant parents

“…Transnational familyhood as a social formation sustained through cultivating multifaceted social and emotional ties across borders is characterised by the frequent physical comings and goings of key family members (Basch, Glick Schiller, & Blanc‐Szanton, ; Bryceson & Vuorela, ; Sørensen & Vammen, ). Although much attention has been paid to the formation, maintenance, and practices of transnational families, the research focus has been distributed unevenly in favour of adults'—both migrant and left‐behind members'—perspectives thus far, with less consideration of children's experiences (exceptions include Dreby, ; Graham, Jordan, Yeoh, Lam, & Asis, ; Mazzucato & Cebotari, ). To address this gap, recent literature has begun encouraging a more “children‐inclusive approach” to studying transnational families.…”

Strategic actions of transnational migrant parents regarding birth registration for stay‐behind children in Lombok, Indonesia

“…Families with histories associated with negative outcomes for children, including divorce or separation of parents, migration of mother, poor school record, or child behavioural problems, and families with few supportive family members were ranked lower (Hoang, Lam, Yeoh, & Graham, ; cf. Mazzucato & Cebotari, ). We produced a continuum of family provisioning for children.…”

“…Often referred to in academic literature as “left‐behind” children, we advocate the term stay‐behind to avoid implying that parents have neglected or abandoned their children, and to emphasise the relatively sedentary circumstances of the children compared with their parents' mobility. The impacts of parental migration on stay‐behind children have received growing attention internationally (e.g., Coe, ; Dreby, ; Leinaweaver, ; Mazzucato & Cebotari, ), including in Asia and the Pacific region (e.g., Alipio, Lu, & Yeoh, ; Choi, Yeoh, & Lam, ; Graham & Jordan, ; Graham, Jordan, Yeoh, Lam, & Asis, ; Murphy, Zhou, & Tao, ; Toyota, Yeoh, & Nguyen, ). However, largely neglected by investigators are the strategic actions of parents around registering stay‐behind children in order to gain access to services and resources such as education, health care, or food subsidies.…”