Sentences with phrase «life than the biological parent»

In many households, the stepparent is more involved with a child's life than the biological parent.

Not exact matches

Children living with both biological parents are 20 to 35 percent more physically healthy than children from homes without both biological parents present.

Those who had lost a parent through death felt no more marital anxiety than those from intact families, while those who'd never lived with a biological father had the same feelings of anxiety as the offspring of divorce.

Pamela Webster, Ph.D., and colleagues surveyed more than 13,000 adults whose parents had divorced, who had experienced the death of a parent, or who had never lived with their biological father.

Ruby's horrid adoptive parents were no more ready for her than her biological parents, who had lost a child too soon before they brought her into their lives.

Using the 1999 National Survey of American Families, Brown found that only 1.5 percent of all children lived with two cohabiting parents at the time of the survey.17 Similarly, an analysis of the 1995 Adolescent Health Study (Add Health) revealed that less than one - half of 1 percent of adolescents aged sixteen to eighteen had spent their entire childhoods living with two continuously cohabiting biological parents.18

They have less education, earn less income, report poorer relationship quality, and experience more mental health problems.12 These considerations suggest that children living with cohabiting biological parents may be worse off, in some respects, than children living with two married biological parents.

«A longitudinal study on over 1,000 children who lived with both biological parents found that children whose fathers wore seat belts, had car insurance, and had precautionary savings were more successful as adults than their peers whose fathers did not engage in these activities.»]

One study5 found that children in both single - parent families and stepfamilies were more likely to experience hospitalization or an injury attributable to accident than were children living with both biological parents.

There can be no more than eight children, including the foster parents biological children, living in the home.

It's primarily about economic well - being, but: «Children living with both biological parents reported higher levels of life satisfaction than children living with a single parent or parent / step - parent... Controlling perceived family affluence, the difference between joint physical custody families and single mother or mother / stepfather families became non-significant... [and] children in the Nordic countries characterised by strong welfare systems reported significantly higher levels of life satisfaction in all living arrangements except in single father households.

Moreover, research shows that even after one controls for a range of family background differences, children who grow up living in an intact household with both biological parents present seem to do better, on average, on a wide range of social indicators than do children who grow up in a single - parent household (McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994).

Child Abuse: While children living with their unmarried biological mother and her live - in boyfriend face a higher risk of suffering child abuse than kids in any other type of family, children who live with their own cohabiting parents are more likely to be abused than children of married parents.

Children raised by never - married mothers are seven times more likely to live in poverty than children raised by their biological parents in intact marriages.

«Children who live with their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely not to be poor, less likely to use drugs, less likely to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, less likely to be victims of child abuse, and less likely to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live without their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.»

Dr. Coleman writes: «Divorce may introduce new adults into children's lives — adults who can cause the child to feel disloyal to the parent who's not there; adults who may compete for the love, attention, and resources from the parent who is; adults who generally have less investment in the child's well - being than the biological parent.»

Other results show that children who live absent their biological fathers are more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.

Among young children, for example, those living with no biological parents, or in single - parent households, are less likely than children with two biological parents to exhibit behavioral self - control, and more likely to be exposed to high levels of aggravated parenting, than are children living with two biological parents.

Among children in two - parent families, those living with both biological parents in a low - conflict marriage tend to do better on a host of outcomes than those living in step - parent families.

[3] Children living with two married adults (biological or adoptive parents) have, in general, better health, greater access to health care, and fewer emotional or behavioral problems than children living in other types of families.

Fact: «Although early research suggests that youth living in two - parent biological families fare better on a range of developmental outcomes than those in single - parent or alternative structures (Amato and Keith, 1991), this research typically finds that effects of family structure on developmental outcomes such as delinquency are not strong (Hetherington and Kelly, 2002)... More tangible differences in family dynamics or circumstances — such as supervision practices — are largely responsible when study groups have different outcomes... The highest rates of delinquency were for youth in father - only households, followed by father - stepmother...»

Fact: «Although children living with married rather than cohabiting parents fare better in terms of material well - being, this advantage is accounted for by race and ethnic group and parents» education... the initial marriage advantage for children living with two biological parents (cohabiting two biologicals vs. married two biological) and stepparents (cohabiting stepparents vs. married stepparents) are explained by the covariates included in the models.

Fact: «Nonresident fathers showed slightly lower levels of involvement when their adolescents did not live with their biological mothers, supporting previous work that suggests a pattern of mothers pulling nonresident fathers into parenting (Harris & Ryan, 2004), rather than gatekeeping to limit contact with the adolescent.»

Child gender and birthweight (in grams) were also included, as were whether the child resided in a family with more than three biological children or not (large family size), and whether or not parents of the study child had experienced depression in the first 2 years of the child's life based on a score of 13 or more on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale.

Overall, the distributions of the different attachment styles in children living in institutions have been shown to have lower rates of secure and higher rates of disorganised attachment than those observed in children living with their biological parents in the general population (Bakermans - Kranenburg et al. 2011; Katsurada 2007; Muadi et al. 2012; Zeanah et al. 2005).