Caitlin Herrmann Peterson and Dr. Barbara Mandleco, Nursing
Background and Significance
Parents raising children with disabilities (CWD) experience a number of situations and stresses parents not raising a CWD experience. How families adapt to the situation of raising a CWD may be related to a number of variables including the parent’s religiosity and the depression level of the parents. Clearly, religion serves as an important resource to families; however, it may also act as a resource for families who are raising a CWD. In fact, qualitative and empirical studies alike show religious practices and spiritual beliefs predict relational outcomes (Richards & Bergin, 1997). There is minimal literature examining differences in religiosity according to parent gender and according to the type of disability the child has. Also, data suggest mothers raising a CWD tend to have more depression than families raising typically developing children. However, there is minimal data related to differences in depression according to parent gender and according to the type of disability the child has. This indicates a need for further assessment of parental depression in these families. Therefore the purpose of this quantitative study is to examine parental perceptions of religiosity and depression in families raising a child with disabilities to determine 1) If there are differences in these variables according to parent gender and type of disability, and 2) If there is a relationship between the variables.
Methods
The 120 sets of parent participants were selected from parents who have previously consented to participate in the Families Adapting to a Child with a Disability/Chronic Condition (FAD) study that has ongoing BYU IRB approval. Families are raising children with autism, Down syndrome, multiple disabilities, diabetes, or orthopedic conditions. Procedure: After receiving IRB approval, and consenting, mothers and fathers raising a CWD independently completed a set of questionnaires measuring religiosity and depression. The mothers also completed a demographic questionnaire.
Measures
The 21-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale (Radloff, 1977) measures depression in the general population. The CES-D includes statements describing typical feelings (e.g., I felt I was just as good as other people, I felt hopeful about the future, My sleep was restless). Mothers and fathers rated how often these feelings occurred (1= rarely or none of the time, 4= most or all of the time). Higher scores indicated higher levels of depression. Parents also completed a 13-item religiosity instrument measuring spirituality, and public and private religious practices (adapted from Litchfield, Thomas, and Li, 1997). Private practices included four items measuring how often individuals read scriptures, read religious materials (not scriptures), prayed, and felt they led a religious life by treating others with kindness and respect. Public practices included three items measuring how often individuals attended church meetings on Sundays and throughout the week. The Spirituality scale was composed of six items and included how often individuals felt their prayers were answered and how much they felt God influenced their life. Parents used a seven point Likert scale to evaluate their religious behavior (1= rarely, 7= daily) and their spirituality (1= very, 7= not at all). The measures had acceptable reliability, with Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .78 to .89. The higher the Cronbach’s alphas, the more reliable the measure. Chronbach alphas for the items are as follows: private practices: M= .89, F= .78; public practices: M= .85, F= .82; spirituality: M= .89, F= .86.
Results
Descriptions: Parents had fairly high levels or religiosity. Both were very spiritual, attended services monthly, and practiced private religion weekly. Mothers’ perceptions of her spirituality, public religiosity, and private religiosity were higher than fathers’ perceptions of all the same variables. Mothers reported more depression than fathers (1.67 to 1.54).
Correlations: The religiosity measures were correlated with each other (closer to 1.00 = more highly correlated). For mothers, the depression is negatively correlated with religion; high scores on all religiosity variables were correlated with lower levels of depression. For fathers, depression was only correlated with the spirituality variable. There were no significant relationship between father’s perception public or private religion and depression.
Coefficients/Regressions: There was a significant relationship between all religiosity variables for fathers and autism. Fathers scored higher on depression than other fathers of typically developing children. Mothers had a significant relationship between spirituality and income.
Discussion
There is minimal data related to differences in depression according to parent gender and according to the type of disability the child has. I discovered that there is a significant relationship between autism and father’s depression. I found that there was a significant correlation between mother’s perception of depression and all religiosity variables; also that father’s perception of depression was only correlated with spirituality. I was hoping to find more of a correlation with father’s perception of depression and public/private religiously. Overall, this was a valuable learning experience for me. I plan to implement my findings from this research in my nursing practice. With these results, it would useful to be aware of parental perceptual differences related to their spirituality so appropriate interventions can be offered.
References
- Litchfield, A. W., Thomas, D.L., & Li, B.D. (1997). Dimensions of religiosity as mediators of the relations between parenting and adolescent deviant behavior. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 199-226.
- Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (1997). A spiritual strategy for counseling and psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
- Radloff, L. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401