The Role of Parent Engagement in Overcoming Barriers to Care for Youth Returning Home After Incarceration
We sought to understand the role of parent engagement in overcoming barriers to care for youth re-entering the community following incarceration. For this mixed methods study, we conducted quantitative surveys on healthcare needs and access with youth (n = 50) at 1-month post-incarceration, and semi-structured interviews with a subset of these youth (n = 27) and their parents (n = 34) at 1, 3, and 6-months post-incarceration (total 94 interviews). Differences by race/ethnicity and gender were assessed using Chi square test of proportions. We performed thematic analysis of interview transcripts to examine the role of parent engagement in influencing youths’ access to healthcare during reentry. Most youth were from racial/ethnic minority groups and reported multiple ACEs. Girls, compared to boys, had higher ACE scores (p = 0.03), lower family connectedness (p = 0.03), and worse general health (p = 0.02). Youth-identified barriers to care were often parent-dependent and included lack of: affordable care (22%), transportation (16%), and accompaniment to health visits (14%). Two major themes emerged from the qualitative interviews: (1) parents motivate youth to seek healthcare during reentry and (2) parents facilitate the process of youth seeking healthcare during reentry. Parents are instrumental in linking youth to healthcare during reentry, dispelling prevailing myths that parents of incarcerated youth are inattentive and that youth do not want their help. Efforts that support and enhance parent engagement in access to care during reentry, such as by actively involving parents in pre-release healthcare planning, may create stronger linkages to care.
KeywordsIncarceration Reentry Aftercare Parent engagement Access to care
The authors would like to thank participating families and community partners at the probation and health department. Dr. Barnert’s time was supported by a KL2 Grant from the UCLA CTSI (NIH KL2U000124), by a NIDA Career Development Award (K23 DA045747-01), and by the California Community Foundation. UCLA/Drew medical student Bria Pettway received a UCLA CTSI TL1 Summer Fellowship and UCLA medical student Nivedita Keshav participated in the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine STTP.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflict of interest.
- 1.Laub, J. H. (2014). Understanding inequality and the justice system response: Charting a new way forward. New York: William T. Grant Foundation.Google Scholar
- 4.Sedlak, A. J., & Bruce, C. (2010). Youth’s characteristics and backgrounds: Findings from the survey of youth in residential placement. Washington, DC: Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
- 18.Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
- 20.Bucci, M., Wang, L. G., Koita, K., Purewal, S., Marques, S. S., & Harris, N. B. (2015). Center for youth wellness ACE-questionnaire user guide. San Francisco, CA: Center for Youth Wellness.Google Scholar
- 21.Stevens-Watkins, D., & Rostosky, S. (2010). Binge drinking in African American males from adolescence to young adulthood: The protective influence of religiosity, family connectedness, and close friends’ substance use. Substance Use and Misuse, 45(10), 1435–1451. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826081003754765.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Harris, K. M., Halpern, C. T., Whitsel, E., et al. (2009). The national longitudinal study of adolescent health: Research design. http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design
- 25.Cohen, S., & Williamson, G. M. (1988). Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United-States. In S. Spacapan & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology of health: Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 31–67). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- 29.Herz, D. C., Chan, K., Lee, S. K., et al. (2015). The Los Angeles county juvenile probation outcomes study. Los Angeles, CA: Advancement Project.Google Scholar
- 30.US Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2018). Family engagement in juvenile justice. Washington DC: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
- 31.Barnert, E. S., Perry, R., Azzi, V., et al. (2015). Incarcerated youths’ perspectives on protective factors and risk factors for juvenile offending: A qualitative analysis. American Journal of Public Health, 105(7), 1365–1371. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302228.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar