A family's economic resilience is dependent on a family having sufficient resources to fulfil life needs (Nursaid and Armawi, 2016). It has been observed that physical resilience (consisting of three key variables: food and nutrition adequacy, family health, availability of a fixed location for sleeping) and economic resilience (composed of four variables: family residence, family income, financing children's education, family financial security) are latent factors in achieving family resilience (Apriliani and Nurwati, 2020).
A family with strong economic resilience will create strong national economic resilience(Wulandari, 2017). Families who are financially stable and resilient can better weather economic shocks and continue contributing to the economy. When families struggle financially, they are more likely to require government assistance or social services. Consequently, poverty can cause severe problems and threaten family resilience. Family economic pressures are also closely related to the quality of marriage and child care, with economic problems being shown to be a significant factor in divorce (Amalia et al, 2018).
Studies have consistently shown a negative relationship between poverty and children's physical, cognitive and social-emotional development. Poverty is often associated with inadequate nutrition, stress, difficulties with peer friendships, psychosocial adjustment and child disaffection or problem behaviour (Golberstein et al, 2019; Shong et al, 2019). Parenting behaviour is a protective factor that is influenced by family economic pressures, having a resultant impact on family and child welfare. Children with a high risk of health and social problems are often exposed to a high-stress environment, especially children living in poverty who consistently face adverse situations (Cheng et al, 2016; Hodgkinson et al, 2017; Francis et al, 2018; Schmidt et al, 2021).
Economics and parenting are important internal factors that families' and children's resilience and wellbeing. Parenting, child growth and development are crucial to family resilience. Parenting through active and responsive interactions between parents and children can stimulate optimal childhood development, and has been shown to reduce the incidence of chronic undernutrition (Rockers et al, 2018; Primasari and Keliat, 2020; Fazrin et al, 2022).
The Indonesian context
Family plays an important role in child care, which influences the success of the nation's plan to realise a ‘golden Indonesia’. This concept prioritises family development to encourage creation of a generation of the population equipped to improve the nation as a whole (National Development Planning Agency, 2018). Efforts to encourage high-quality family life in Indonesia are carried out by the Family Development Program, based on legal changes made in the Republic of Indonesia in 2009 concerning population and family development. As part of the comprehensive and integrated family development concept, parenting and economics are highlighted as two important aspects of increasing family resilience (National Development Planning Agency, 2018). Family resilience is defined as a family's ability to function when experiencing stressful social events; this can help family members develop and strengthen the family unit (Walsh, 2016).
The National Population and Family Planning Agency (2020a) developed a strategic plan for 2020-2024, which included increasing the Family Development Index, a measurement of family quality, incorporating three dimensions: family peace, independent and happiness (Ardiana et al, 2021). This was to be implemented through output targets, namely expanding the ability of families to care for and assist children as well as maintain economic independence.
The national Program Perfor mance and Accountability Survey in Indonesia on population, family planning and family development included data on the Toddler Parenting Index, which measures family experiences in the care and development of toddlers (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2019a). The index incorporates three aspects of growth and development: physical, psychological or emotional and social. These data showed that the national target score for the index of 70.5% was met in 2019, although there was only a small annual increase (from 74.3% in 2018 to 74.4% in 2019) (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2018). Indonesia's Family Economic Independence Index is a measure of economic independence calculated as a composite of multiple variables, including wealth quintile, employment status and health insurance ownership. In 2019, this index was measured at 34.85 (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2020b), falling short of the national target of 36.00 by 2024.
Several initiatives in Indonesia have been established that aim to improve family resilience, economic function and parenting practice. The Family Economic Resilience and Empowerment Group aims to improve its members' economic abilities and independence, seeking to support family resilience and wellbeing (Oktriyanto et al, 2023). The group is a National Population and Family Planning Agency forum that was established in order to improve family welfare, and conducts joint activities integrated with the Family Planning Program. These activities are conducted by, from and for group members and include small-scale productive economic activities that aim to improve families' economic situations (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2019b; Fitri, 2023). The first stage of group activities involves engagement in the family planning acceptor group, which focuses on those who use family planning (contraceptive) methods, including couples of childbearing age, adolescents and those who wish to begin using family planning methods (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2021).
Every family in Indonesia needs resilience and economic independence to build and protect their family and fulfil their child's needs for parenting. This study aimed to identify the impact of family economic resilience on early childhood parenting practice. The two objectives were to explore family resilience related to the economy and family involvement in the Family Economic Resilience And Empowerment Group, and to identify childcare practices based on family characteristics and level of economic resilience. This study is intended to provide recommendations for interventions in early childhood care, especially for children from families with difficult economic conditions.
Methods
This study used a cross-sectional design to carry out quantitative data analysis of data from the family module of the 2019 survey of population, family planning, and family development. This annual survey, the Program Performance and Accountability Survey, is carried out in 34 Indonesian provinces, providing national and provincial data (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2019a). Data collection was performed using the MOCO (Mobile Collection) application by enumerators.
Survey sampling
The final sample of the 2019 survey included 69 662 family respondents selected via three-stage stratified sampling. The first stage selected villages through probability proportionate to size sampling. Village sample selection was carried out independently between urban and rural areas in a district. The second stage selected one cluster from each village. The third stage selected 35 households using systematic random sampling based on the results of household listings collected door to door by enumerators.
Participants
The study population was 67 594 households in 1935 clusters. The survey involved 69 662 families who were successfully interviewed. For the present study, families with early-age children aged 0–6 years old were selected, leaving 20 413 families as the final sample.
Data collection
The data taken from the survey for the purposes of this study included sociodemographic characteristics for the families, assessment of family engagement in the Family Economic Resilience and Empowerment Group and the Prosperous Family Improvement Effort, assessment of family economic function and economic resilience, and assessment of parenting practices, based on the Toddler Parenting Index.
Economic function was based on economic function practice, which measured management or organisation of daily finances, sources of income, managing income to meet family needs and saving for the future (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2019a). Economic function also considered family engagement in the prosperous family income improvement effort group. Family economic resilience was defined as economic independence in families with children aged 0–6 years old, based on three key indicators (wealth quintile, health insurance, employment status).
Data analysis
The Booysen (2002) formula was used to standardise indicator scores (Iij). Each indicator for economic function practice, economic resilience and parenting practice was scored in a binary manner (1 or 0), with 1 indicating positive practice or resilience. Economic function practice consisted of five indicators (respondents answered the question ‘what have you done to instil economic values in the family’, selecting as many options as were applicable from a list of five options: frugality, tenacity, saving, prioritising primary needs, and ‘other’). Economic resilience consisted of three indicators (wealth quintile, health insurance and employment status). Parenting consisted of three dimensions: physical parenting (eight indicators), psychological, mental and spiritual parenting (nine indicators) and social parenting (six indicators).
The minimum and maximum total scores for each element of economic function practice, economic resilience and parenting practice were calculated to obtain a total score. These scores were composited into total scores for each dimension. Scores were given exact average weighting, as can be used for cause-and-effect relationships for unknown indicators (Mekonen, 2010). All aspects of economic function practice, economic resilience and parenting were therefore treated equally.
Scores for economic function practice were categorised as low (<60) or high (≥60) function. Scores for economic resilience were categorised into three levels: high (index score: >70), moderate (index score: 40-70), and low (index score: <40). Early childhood parenting practices were categorised into effective (index score: ≥60) and less effective (index score: <60).
Descriptive and inferential analysis was conducted on each correlated variable using cross-tabulation, the Pearson Chi-squared test and a logistic regression model. The descriptive analysis examined families' characteristics and the relationship between engagement in the Family Economic Resilience And Empowerment Group and family economic function practice. The inferential analysis explored the effect of economic resilience and other family characteristics on early childhood parenting practices.
Results
Sociodemographic characteristics
Table 1 outlines the overall sociodemographic characteristics for families with children aged 0–6 years old. Most (69.7%) heads of household were aged 25–40 years old. Almost all families were recorded as ‘intact’, indicating that the child's parents were together (97.5%), with few single parents noted (2.5%). The majority of families had 1–4 family members (77.8%), including 1–2 children (76.5%). Around one in 10 families had attended higher education (11.7%), with most having completed secondary school (60.7%). Engagement in the family resilience development group was low, with only 1.2% of families having attended the group.
Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics
| Variable | Frequency, n=20 413 (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Age of head of household (years) | <25 | 1001 (4.9) |
| 25–40 | 14 106 (69.1) | |
| >40 | 5307 (26.0) | |
| Family type | Parents together | 19 898 (97.5) |
| Single parents | 515 (2.5) | |
| Family members | 1–4 | 15 872 (77.8) |
| 5–7 | 4428 (21.7) | |
| >7 | 112 (0.6) | |
| Number of children aged 0–6 years | 1–2 | 15 608 (76.5) |
| >2 | 4805 (23.5) | |
| Education | High (college or further) | 2383 (11.7) |
| Moderate (secondary school) | 12 400 (60.7) | |
| Low (primary school or lower) | 5630 (27.6) | |
| Residence | Urban | 9769 (47.9) |
| Rural | 10 644 (52.1) | |
| Engagement in resilience development group | Attending | 238 (1.2) |
| Not attending | 20 175 (98.8) |
Empowerment group engagement, function practice and economic resilience
Figure 1 shows a comparison of economic function practice between families involved in the resilience development group, and those who were not. The majority of families who attended the group showed high economic function (85.2%), compared to only 56.2% of families who did not engage with the group. Overall, more than half of the families demonstrated high economic function practices (56.2%).
Figure 2 shows a comparison of economic resilience between those with high and low economic function. A greater proportion of families with high economic function showed strong economic resilience (61.3%) compared to families with low economic function (56.2%). There was also a smaller proportion of families in the high economic function group who demonstrated low economic resilience (8.6%), compared to the low economic function group (11.2%).
Early childhood parenting practices
Parenting practices were split into three primary aspects, physical, psychological and social (Table 2). The dominant physical parenting practices were providing a balanced diet (81.4%) and immunisation (73.4%). Children being accompanied during playtime (67.3%) and being taught to pray (60.2%) were the most prevalent psychological practices. Allowing children to play with their peers (82.2%) and socialise (56.5%) were the most dominant social practices. The least practiced parenting practices included teaching a healthy lifestyle (29.7%), listening to spiritual songs or readings (32.8%), and enrolling the child in courses (10.3%).
Table 2. Child parenting practices
| Parenting aspect | Growth and development parenting practice | Frequency, n=20 413 (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Physical | Measuring child's height and weight | 13 968 (68.4) |
| Providing a balanced diet | 16 622 (81.4) | |
| Providing immunisation | 14 991 (73.4) | |
| Providing breast milk | 13 498 (66.1) | |
| Providing vitamins | 12 842 (62.9) | |
| Treating illness | 10 763 (52.7) | |
| Teaching a healthy lifestyle | 6067 (29.7) | |
| Other | 1716 (8.4) | |
| Psychological, mental, spiritual | Stimulating/triggering creativity | 8019 (39.3) |
| Accompanying children at play | 13 734 (67.3) | |
| Accompanying children with study | 10 159 (49.8) | |
| Reading to spiritual song/reading | 6692 (32.8) | |
| Being a role model | 8194 (40.1) | |
| Teaching prayer | 12 290 (60.2) | |
| Teaching to express gratitude | 8427 (41.3) | |
| Teaching to respect others | 8756 (42.9) | |
| Other | 2111 (10.3) | |
| Social | Giving opportunities to play with peers | 16 772 (82.2) |
| Enrolling in playgroup/daycare | 11 040 (54.1) | |
| Enrolling child in courses | 2095 (10.3) | |
| Enrolling child in competitions | 2636 (12.9) | |
| Inviting child to socialise with others | 11 540 (56.5) | |
| Other | 2241 (11.0) |
Factors linked to parenting practices
The majority of families from the survey were categorised as having less effective parenting practices (63.3%) (Table 3). Effective parenting was implemented mainly by families with householders who were 25–40 years old (38.0%), ‘intact’ families (36.9%), who had 1–4 family members (36.9%), had 1–2 young children (36.9%), high education (45.5%) and lived in urban areas (38.0%). Families who did not attend the family resilience development group demonstrated more effective parenting than those attending the group (36.8% vs 31.9%). In terms of economic resilience, more effective parenting was demonstrated by a greater proportion of families with strong resilience (37.8%) than with moderate (36.5%) or low (30.7%) resilience, although the levels were similar.
Table 3. Associoation of early childhood parenting practices with sociodemographic and economic characteristics
| Characteristic | Parenting pattern (%) | Unadjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) | P value | Adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effective, n=7498 | Less effective, n=12 915 | ||||||
| Age (years) | <25 | 327 (32.7) | 674 (67.3) | 0.936 (0.810–1.080) | 0.365 | 0.962 (0.829–1.115) | 0.605 |
| 25–40 | 5360 (38.0) | 8746 (62.0) | 1.183 (1.107–1.246) | <0.001 | 1.155 (1.078–1.238) | <0.001 | |
| >40 | 1811 (34.1) | 3496 (65.9) | ref | - | ref | - | |
| Family type | Intact | 7338 (36.9) | 12 561 (63.1) | 1.291 (1.069–1.559) | 0.08 | 1.265 (1.046–1.530) | 0.015 |
| Single parents | 160 (31.1) | 354 (68.9) | ref | - | 1 | - | |
| Number of family members | 1–4 | 5851 (36.9) | 10 021 (63.1) | 2.179 (1.384–3.431) | 0.001 | 1.895 (1.200–2.994) | 0.006 |
| 5–7 | 1623 (36.7) | 2805 (63.3) | 2.159 (1.367–3.409) | 0.001 | 1.928 (1.219–3.050) | 0.005 | |
| >7 | 24 (21.2) | 89 (78.8) | ref | - | ref | - | |
| Number of children aged 0–6 years | 1–2 | 5778 (37.0) | 9830 (63.1) | 1.054 (0.985–1.127) | 0.126 | - | - |
| >2 | 1720 (35.8) | 3085 (64.2) | ref | - | |||
| Education | High | 1085 (45.5) | 1298 (54.5) | 1.758 (1.594–1.939) | <0.001 | 1.690 (1.522–1.887) | <0.001 |
| Moderate | 4599 (37.1) | 7801 (62.9) | 1.241 (1.160–1.326) | <0.001 | 1.201 (1.120–1.288) | <0.001 | |
| Low | 1814 (32.2) | 3816 (67.8) | ref | - | ref | - | |
| Residence | Urban | 3713 (38.0) | 6056 (62.0) | 1.111 (1.049–1.176) | <0.001 | 1.030 (0.969–1.095) | 0.341 |
| Rural | 3785 (35.6) | 6859 (64.4) | ref | - | ref | - | |
| Attended resilience development group | Yes | 76 (31.9) | 162 (68.1) | 0.803 (0.611 – 1.056) | 0.117 | - | - |
| No | 7422 (36.8) | 12 753 (63.2) | ref | - | |||
| Economic resilience | High | 4559 (37.8) | 7496 (62.2) | 1.370 (1.237–1.517) | <0.001 | 1.200 (1.077–1.337) | 0.001 |
| Moderate | 2328 (36.5) | 4044 (63.5) | 1.297 (1.164–1.445) | <0.001 | 1.268 (1.137–1.414) | <0.001 | |
| Low | 610 (30.7) | 1375 (69.3) | ref | ref | - | ||
Table 3 shows the logistic regression model testing for associations between family characteristics, economic resilience and parenting practice. In bivariate analysis, most variables related to parenting practice, except for number of young children and attending the resilience group, and were thus entered for multivariate analysis. The variables found to significantly affect parenting practice were age, family type, number of family members, education and economic resilience.
Families with householders aged 25–40 years old were more likely to show effective parenting practices compared to those with older householders (adjusted odds ratio=1.155, P<0.001). More effective parenting practices were also seen in intact families (adjusted odds ratio=1.265, P=0.015), those with fewer family members (1–4 members: adjusted odds ratio=1.895, P=0.006; 5–7 family members: adjusted odds ratio=1.928, P=0.005), those with higher education (high: adjusted odds ratio=1.690, P<0.001; moderate: adjusted odds ratio=1.201, P<0.001) and those with greater economic resilience (high: adjusted odds ratio=1.200, P=0.001; moderate: adjusted odds ratio=1.268, P<0.001).
Discussion
This study explored the factors that influence parenting practice in Indonesia. The results highlighted that multiple factors, including economic resilience, have a significant impact on whether parents implement more effective parenting practices. Interventions for parenting practices, particularly in early childhood, are needed to improve the proportion of families who are economically resilient and implement positive parenting practices.
The Family Resilience and Empowerment Group
The number of families who attended the Family Economic Resilience And Empowerment Group was minimal, indicating that implementation in the field does not meet expectations. Several studies have reported a lack of general awareness of the group's existence, as well as parents experiencing barriers to attending the group, such as lack of time because of work or household responsibilities and travel time (Fauziah et al, 2014; Oktriyanto, 2017; Islamiyah et al, 2020). In addition, the group's activities are generally integrated with Posyandu, an initiative that provides health services for mothers and children in rural areas, and early childhood education. Services such as weighing, immunisation and the early childhood education programme are often offered alongside activities by the Family Economic Resilience And Empowerment Group.
The present study found that early childhood care practices in most families were ineffective in improving children's growth and development in terms of physical, psychological and social aspects. Therefore, education, counselling and training for families is needed. However, childcare and development counselling seem less emphasised in Posyandu outposts and early childhood education (Indrayani et al, 2023). Early childhood parenting education is essential for parents, as it can improve parenting skills. Research shows that educational programmes related to early childhood care promote parents' understanding of their children's needs (Yulianingsih et al, 2020).
The results of the present study seem to indicate that attendance at the Family Economic Resilience And Empowerment Group does not improve parenting practice, as it had no significant association with more effective parenting. The group's role is to be a forum for parents to improve their knowledge and skills related to childcare, including education, health, nutrition and protection from violence (National Population and Family Planning Agency, 2018). The present study's finding on its lack of impact on parenting differs from previous studies, where families who attended the group were found to be more likely to participate in childcare (Oktriyanto, 2017). Wahyuningsih et al (2020) found that parental participation could improve skills in monitoring a child's growth and development, allowing parents to either address a problem when it arose or seek appropriate help. Given that only a small number of families in the present study attended the group, it is still essential to encourage participation in activities to increase knowledge and nurture children's growth and development.
Factors influencing parenting practice
Parents play a vital role in influencing children's lives, and their responsibilities include creating a comfortable living environment, practicing effective parenting, role modelling behaviour and instilling values and norms (Popov and Ilesanm, 2015; Murry and Lippold, 2018). Studies have shown that parenting is influenced by parents' age, sources used for obtaining parenting information, treatment received as children, parenting practices and discipline and knowledge about parenting practices (Bornstein, 2016; Conrad-Hiebner et al, 2019).
Age
The present study found that the age group most likely to show effective parenting practices were those aged 25–40 years old. When compared to householders who were more than 40 years old, parents in the middle age group were more likely to demonstrate more effective parenting, while those who were less than 25 years old were less likely to demonstrate effective parenting compared to those aged over 40 years.
It is likely that older parents have more knowledge of parenting as they may have more experience, and thus understand how to optimise their child's growth and development by maintaining good health, preventing disease and ensuring access to healthcare (Bornstein, 2016). Compared to the older group, parents aged 25–40 years are likely to be actively socialising and building networks that increase their exposure to information (Bornstein, 2016). In addition, those in the middle age group may have had more capacity to absorb and implement new knowledge regarding parenting practices, compared to older parents. Parents with a better understanding of parenting practices will recognise concerns related to a child's growth and development earlier (Bornstein, 2016).
Family type
In the present study, family type was also shown to significantly impact parenting practices. Families who were classified as ‘intact’, meaning the parents were not divorced or separated were more likely to demonstrate more effective parenting than single-parent families. The benefits of both parents living together may relate to the ability to provide more resources and support for a child. Single-parent families typically have only one source of income and the parent must manage time between parenting, working and other activities (Buchanan and LeMoyne, 2020). This affects their ability to fulfil their child's needs, including food, education and socialisation, that support the child's growth and development (Woesmnann, 2015).
Co-parenting may be a beneficial option to ensure that a child's needs are met by their parents in cases of separation or divorce (Buchanan and LeMoyne, 2020). In Indonesia, Pujihasvuty et al (2021) reported that implementation of economic function in single-parent families is shallow. Economic functions such as saving behaviour, frugality, tenacity or hard work and determining priorities are closely related to economic conditions and single-family income (Pujihasvuty et al, 2021).
However, research has shown that single parents can provide high-quality parenting and positive outcomes for their children, creating a supportive and nurturing environment. Murry and Lippold (2018) suggested that the quality of parenting practiced by single parents is often similar to that of intact families. Single parents may also benefit from social support and resources such as parenting programmes and community services.
It is important to recognise that multiple factors can impact parenting quality, and family structure is only one among these. Although family structure is associated with parental involvement, child monitoring and warmth, which affect development and wellbeing, other factors can also be involved, such as cultural stigma, income decrease and changes in parenting practice (Murry and Lippold, 2018). Promoting positive parenting practices and providing support and resources for all parents, regardless of family structure, is likely to be a beneficial approach.
Number of family members
The present study found that families with fewer members were almost twice as likely to report more effective parenting practices than those with 7 or more family members. Studies have shown that a greater number of children can negatively impact parenting practice. Parents with larger families may have less time and attention to devote to each child, which can lead to less effective parenting. A study in Palestine found parents tended to pay more attention to their last child than other children (Harsha et al, 2020). In addition, parents from larger families may experience higher levels of stress, which can affect their ability to provide consistent care and nurturing for their children (Hong and Liu, 2021).
There may also be a financial impact to having more children; parents may struggle to provide for their children's basic needs, such as food, clothing and shelter, which can increase stress and tension in the family (Hong and Liu, 2021). One study found that the number of children in a family determined children's health status, as it affected food intake. An increase in the number of young children can strain the availability of resources and childcare practices in households (Yisak et al, 2015).
Education
Parental education also plays an essential role in child rearing. The present study found that higher education in parents was associated with more effective parenting practices. Parents who have not attended higher education are more likely to have an authoritarian parenting style (Kalil and Ryan, 2020). Children who are parented in an authoritative manner are more likely to experience problems with courage and self-confidence, and may become dissident as a result of a lack of freedom to express opinions (Miyati et al, 2021). A study by Kalil and Ryan (2020) reported that parents' behaviour strongly influences children's development, with educated parents usually behaving more positively than parents who did not receive further education.
The ‘care for children's growth and development from an early age’ framework developed by the World Health Organization et al (2018) states that one component of parenting is responsive parenting. This includes observing and responding to children's movements, sounds, attitudes and verbal requests, and being responsive in feeding. This highlights the importance of parental education, to allow them to better understand their child's needs and implement responsive parenting.
Economic resilience
The present study's results highlighted that families with greater economic resilience were more likely to practice more effective parenting practices. For the purposes of this study, it was only possible to measure economic resilience based on economic independence, as assessed using three indicators, family wealth, employment status and health insurance status, as a result of data limitations. Nevertheless, the results indicate a link between the ability to provide for a family and maintain financial security and effective parenting practices.
Family resilience recognises parents' strengths (from an economic and social perspective), the difficulties parents may face, and how to overcome these difficulties (Munawaroh et al, 2021). However, there is limited literature exploring the relationship between family resilience and parenting; studies that do exist largely focus on parental income. Parental income is essential to children's health (Apouey and Geoffard, 2014), allowing parents to provide for their children's growth and development, for example, by providing nutritious food, ensuring children are immunised and allowing access to health services. Caregivers with low income will struggle to meet children's basic needs, such as health and education (World Health Organization et al, 2018).
Effective parenting is a critical factor in child welfare. Parents who provide a nurturing, safe and supportive environment for their children positively impact their physical, emotional and social development (Sumargi and Giovanni, 2021). A family's economic stability is important as it affects interactions with children (Newland, 2015). Parents with economic difficulties may be less able to provide attention and affection to their children because of stress and conflict, disrupting their child's development (Hong and Liu, 2021). Consequently, in the context of Indonesia and parenting, it is crucial to develop strategies that focus on families who are more vulnerable to economic disruption in order to improve childcare patterns.
Limitations
This study had several limitations. First, the questions from the source survey did not distinguish between respondents based on child's age. Some of the questions, such as asking whether the child was enrolled in school or attending a course, were not relevant to parents of very young children. Second, indicators of family economic resilience were limited by the availability of data from the survey. Future research should include questions regarding childcare, child outcomes and more comprehensive indicators of family economic resilience or independence.
Conclusions
Family economic resilience is a crucial influencer of early childhood parenting. Families with financial security are more likely to demonstrate positive parenting practices to meet their child's physical, emotional and social needs. Although most families surveyed showed strong economic resilience, more than half demonstrated less effective parenting. Early childhood parenting is affected by caregivers' emotional, financial and social condition.
Encouraging easy access to education is important, as parental education greatly influences parenting. Interventions intended to promote effective parenting for child growth and development should consider the impact of family characteristics, such as parents' age, education and family type. Interventions are needed to strengthen family economic resilience and increase engagement with the family resilience group. The present study also underscores the need for interventions focusing on vulnerable families, such as single-parent families and those with less economic resilience.
Key points
- This study explored economic resilience and its influence on parenting practices of families with children aged 0–6 years in Indonesia.
- Age, family type, number of family members, education and economic resilience were found to significantly affect parenting practice.
- Family economic resilience affected childcare, as families with higher resilience tend to instill more effective parenting practices.
- The number of families participating in the Family Resilience and Economic Empowerment Group is still low, showing that the programme's implementation is far from expectations.
- Interventions are needed to promote effective parenting for optimal child growth and development, mainly in vulnerable families, such as single-parent families and families who experience economic disruption.
CPD reflective questions
- How can disadvantaged families be supported to practice optimal parenting, in line with that of more economically stable families?
- What strategies can be developed to ensure families are able to achieve high economic resilience?
- How could future studies develop more comprehensive indicators of family economic resilience with childcare outcomes?