Mythbusting through scientific research

Common thought may or may not have any scientific basis. And that is what Dr. William R. Avison and his team set out to determine. At the moment, they are in the middle of a large study of more than 1,000 families to determine the long-term effect of single parenthood on health.

“What we’re interested in is whether being a single mother has a long-term impact on the health of the mother and the children,” says Dr. Avison. The families were first contacted in 1991 and surveyed about their physical and mental health and perceptions of their children’s health. There was a follow-up study in 1993-94. Now, the team is looking at longer-term outcomes, having re-interviewed about 70 per cent of the mothers.

Part of the challenge of such a study is finding the families again. Also, there has been much change in the structure of the families – some have married, some divorced or separated.

“What’s been very intriguing is the process of relocating these families,” says Dr. Avison. “A substantial number are still in London, but many have moved and changed names. The children have gone everywhere – Japan, Europe. The hard part is arranging an interview over the phone.”

So far, the results from baseline studies are consistent with other Canadian studies, says Dr. Avison. And it’s not what most people think. Contrary to common opinion, there is only a small impact single parenthood has on the health of children. “It’s not as great an impact as from income or socio-economic factors,” he says. “Contrary to public myth these children are not at a major disadvantage. So we want to see if that is the case longer term. When we’re done, we’ll be able to say something about what longer term outcomes will be, especially mental health, though it’s been somewhat overstated about the negative mental health of the mother.”

“Single mothers do experience greater stress as the sole caregiver and income source, and we know this translates into high rates of depression and distress. Does it worsen when the children grow older?”

This kind of population health research is typically used in three ways:
1. It is shared with policy makers. This is applied to the need of family-based policies, such as family-friendly workplaces and sufficient child support.
2. It is shared with local agencies.
3. It is shared with mothers and children in the studies.

“There is an incredible stigma attached to single parenthood. There is an assumption that most are teen mothers,” he says. “There is an underlying assumption that single parenthood must be a reflection of competence, or resilience or ability. It’s not. It’s a function of the state of marriage in society today.”

Dr. Avison has years of experience on a variety of boards for children’s agencies in the city. This issue of single parenthood is always front and centre he says. “I’m also struck by my observation that a lot of single parents are doing very well.”

It’s an increasingly important issue to address because of the rising rates of divorce and separation. Also, there have been no well-designed studies in Canada he says. Although there are some American studies, the American experience does not translate to Canada.

Spurred by this need, Dr. Avison is also excited by his research. “I find it really exciting that there are striking patterns. No doubt single mothers are bombarded with more stress and strain. Part of that is being the lone parent, part income. In the face of this, they manage to protect their children from that stress and strain they are feeling. They provide solid, substantial families. Any other group in society would have others in the family suffering also. Single mothers compensate for their circumstances at the cost of their own emotions, but their children are doing well. The quality of the family environment is not based on the number of parents. It’s food for thought in political debates on values and marriage for example.”

When Dr. Avison speaks to community groups, he finds his research resonates with people when he has scientific data to show things are not as bad as they thought. “There is a lot of public myth.”

Many of these misconceptions originated in the 1940s and ‘50s when there were not as many single parents, and those that did exist were often dysfunctional. As the reasons for divorce and separation have changed, support has changed and the family environment.

“The issue I’m really interested in pursuing now is the impact of socio-economic factors. There has been a substantial increase in the number of children born outside marriage – some parents are co-habiting, others choosing not to be in relationships. We have no idea if this has an impact on children. What makes it interesting is that the United States data suggests a common-law relationship is less stable; there is more conflict, that it is not the equivalent of marriage. But we don’t really know because this data does not translate to Canada. I’d like to look at this.”

Dr. Avison is also involved in interdisciplinary research with Dr. Karen Campbell in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, looking at the consequences of social, nutritional and endocrinal factors on the mother’s second trimester, labor and until the baby’s third year. Another study with Dr. Victor Han will look at risk factors for fetal growth restriction.

For Dr. Avison, all the research speaks to a critical need to understand that socio-economic disadvantage plays a major role in the development of a child. “It’s as important as genetic vulnerabilities and exposure to other kinds of risks. People living in poverty really have their health compromised. That’s what we are trying to show, and link to the stress and strain in one’s life.”