scholarly journals Clinical, financial and social impacts of COVID-19 and their associations with mental health for mothers and children experiencing adversity in Australia

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0257357
Author(s):  
Hannah Bryson ◽  
Fiona Mensah ◽  
Anna Price ◽  
Lisa Gold ◽  
Shalika Bohingamu Mudiyanselage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Family Stress ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Universal Access ◽  
Geographic Location ◽  
Social Impacts ◽  
Family Resilience ◽  
Financial Hardship ◽  
Income Loss

Background Australia has maintained low rates of SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) infection, due to geographic location and strict public health restrictions. However, the financial and social impacts of these restrictions can negatively affect parents’ and children’s mental health. In an existing cohort of mothers recruited for their experience of adversity, this study examined: 1) families’ experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic and public health restrictions in terms of clinical exposure, financial hardship family stress, and family resilience (termed ‘COVID-19 impacts’); and 2) associations between COVID-19 impacts and maternal and child mental health. Methods Participants were mothers recruited during pregnancy (2013–14) across two Australian states (Victoria and Tasmania) for the ‘right@home’ trial. A COVID-19 survey was conducted from May-December 2020, when children were 5.9–7.2 years old. Mothers reported COVID-19 impacts, their own mental health (Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales short-form) and their child’s mental health (CoRonavIruS Health and Impact Survey subscale). Associations between COVID-19 impacts and mental health were examined using regression models controlling for pre-COVID-19 characteristics. Results 319/406 (79%) mothers completed the COVID-19 survey. Only one reported having had COVID-19. Rates of self-quarantine (20%), job or income loss (27%) and family stress (e.g., difficulty managing children’s at-home learning (40%)) were high. Many mothers also reported family resilience (e.g., family found good ways of coping (49%)). COVID-19 impacts associated with poorer mental health (standardised coefficients) included self-quarantine (mother: β = 0.46, child: β = 0.46), financial hardship (mother: β = 0.27, child: β = 0.37) and family stress (mother: β = 0.49, child: β = 0.74). Family resilience was associated with better mental health (mother: β = -0.40, child: β = -0.46). Conclusions The financial and social impacts of Australia’s public health restrictions have substantially affected families experiencing adversity, and their mental health. These impacts are likely to exacerbate inequities arising from adversity. To recover from COVID-19, policy investment should include income support and universal access to family health services.

scholarly journals Clinical, Financial and Social Impacts of COVID-19 and Their Associations with Mental Health for Mothers and Children Experiencing Adversity in Australia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Bryson ◽  
Fiona Mensah ◽  
Anna Price ◽  
Lisa Gold ◽  
Shalika Bohingamu Mudiyanselage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Family Stress ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Universal Access ◽  
Social Impacts ◽  
Family Resilience ◽  
Financial Hardship ◽  
Income Loss ◽  
Health Crisis

Abstract Background Australia has maintained low rates of SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) infection, due to geographic location and strict public health restrictions. However, the financial and social impacts of these restrictions can negatively affect parents’ and children’s mental health. Families who were already experiencing adversity before the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to be disproportionately affected. In an existing cohort of mothers recruited for their experience of adversity, this study examined: 1) families’ experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic and public health restrictions in terms of clinical exposure, changes to financial circumstances, financial hardship, family stress, and family resilience (termed ‘COVID-19 impacts’); and 2) associations between these COVID-19 impacts and maternal and child mental health. Methods Participants were mothers recruited during pregnancy (2013-14) across two Australian states (Victoria and Tasmania) for the ‘right@home’ trial. A COVID-19 survey was opportunistically conducted from May-December 2020, when children were 5.9–7.2 years old. Mothers reported COVID-19 impacts (drawn from the Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey (CRISIS), Australian Temperament Project, and Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey); their own mental health (Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales short-form) and their child’s mental health (CRISIS subscale). Associations between COVID-19 impacts and mental health were examined using regression models controlling for pre-COVID-19 characteristics. Results 319/406 (79%) mothers completed the COVID-19 survey. Only one reported having had COVID-19. In contrast, self-quarantine (20%), financial changes (job/income loss (27%)) and family stress (e.g., difficulty managing children’s at-home learning (40%)) were high. Many mothers also reported family resilience (e.g., family found good ways of coping (49%)). COVID-19 impacts associated with poorer mental health (all standardised coefficients) included self-quarantine (mother: β = 0.48, child: β = 0.47), financial hardship or change (mother: β = 0.27, child: β = 0.37) and family stress (mother: β = 0.49, child: β = 0.73). Family resilience was associated with better mental health (mother: β=-0.39, child: β=-0.47). Conclusions The financial and social impacts of Australia’s public health restrictions have substantially affected families experiencing adversity, and their mental health. Unless these impacts are addressed, the inequities arising from adversity are likely to be exacerbated. To recover from COVID-19, policy investment should include income support and universal access to family health services.

scholarly journals Financial Hardship and Social Assistance as Determinants of Mental Health and Food and Housing Insecurity During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Kim
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Assistance ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Anxiety Symptoms ◽  
Financial Hardship ◽  
Food Insufficiency ◽  
Income Loss ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Nationally Representative

AbstractBackgroundWhile social assistance through the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act provided expanded UI benefits during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic until July 2020, it is unclear whether social assistance was in subsequent months sufficient to meet everyday spending needs and to curb adverse sequelae of financial hardship. Among working-aged Americans with job-related income loss during the pandemic, this study explored the associations of financial hardship with mental health outcomes and food and housing insecurity after accounting for receipt of social assistance.MethodsUsing multivariable logistic regression and pooled repeated cross-sectional individual-level data on working-aged adults from nationally-representative surveys administered from September to November 2020, this study investigated the relationships between financial hardship and depressive and anxiety symptoms, food insufficiency, and, among housing renters, the likelihood of being evicted, controlling for the receipt of social assistance and other demographic and socioeconomic factors.ResultsExperiencing somewhat of a financial hardship (vs no hardship) was linked to approximately 3-4 times higher odds of depressive or anxiety symptoms and a likely eviction, and a 15 times higher odds of food insufficiency. Experiencing considerable financial hardship (vs no hardship) predicted a 6-fold higher odds of depressive or anxiety symptoms, a 24-fold higher odds of a likely eviction, and a more than 50-fold higher odds of food insufficiency (all P values <.001).ConclusionsEven after accounting for receipt of social assistance, working-aged adults experiencing financial hardship had markedly greater odds of anxiety or depressive symptoms, food insufficiency, and an anticipated housing eviction. Across outcomes, these relationships were stronger at each successively higher level of financial hardship, and more than offset any corresponding benefits from social assistance. Overall, the findings from the present study point to the urgent need for direct and sustained cash relief well in excess of current levels of social assistance, as well as the imperative of extending housing renter eviction protections among Americans.

PHUBBING BEHAVIOR AND ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP: MECHANISM OF MENTAL HEALTH AMONG MARRIED COUPLES

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-137
Author(s):  
Rabia Zonash Mir
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Romantic Relationship ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Married Couple ◽  
Married Couples ◽  
Mental Health Issue ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Arranged Marriage ◽  
Love Marriage

Does Phubbing Behavior and Romantic Relation leads to Mental Health issues among married couple? The present study intended to explore the effect of how phubbing behavior and romantic relationships are affecting mental health of married couples. For the study purpose a sample of 120 Married couples were taken between the age ranges 20-60 years of age. Partner Phubbing Rating Scale developed by Roberts and David (2015) was used to measure phubbing behavior among married couples. Romantic Partner Scale (RPS) developed by Zacchilli, Hendricks, and Hendricks, (2012) was applied to assess the romantic relationship between both partners and the third scale used was short form of Mental Health Continuum developed by Keyes (2005) in order to assess the mental health issue among married couples. Phubbing behavior positively predicted interactional activity and negatively predicts compromise, avoidance, separation, dominance and submission. Phubbing behavior negatively predicts mental health among married couples. Gender difference indicates that males are higher on romantic relationship as well as mental health as compared to females. As far as demographic variables are concerned, based on the findings of current research, it was concluded that there was no gender differences found in phubbing behavior, romantic relationship, and mental health of married couples. Phubbing behavior is significantly higher in love marriage couples in comparison with arranged marriage couples.

Exclusive Breastfeeding Moderates the Association Between Prenatal and Postpartum Depression

2021 ◽  
pp. 089033442199105
Author(s):  
Bárbara Figueiredo ◽  
Tiago Miguel Pinto ◽  
Raquel Costa
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Postpartum Depression ◽  
Exclusive Breastfeeding ◽  
Maternal Mental Health ◽  
Prenatal Depression ◽  
Depression Symptoms ◽  
Public Health Services ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Background Exclusive breastfeeding has a wide range of benefits for maternal health. However, the benefit of exclusive breastfeeding for maternal mental health needs to be further explored. Research Aim To determine the moderating role of exclusive breastfeeding at 3 months on the association between prenatal and postpartum depression. Methods This study had a prospective, longitudinal, and comparative design with two groups and three assessment waves. The sample comprised 334 participants (70 depressed and 264 non-depressed) recruited at public health services in northern Portugal. Participants completed a measure of depression symptoms between the second and the third trimester of pregnancy and between 3 and 6 months, and a measure of breastfeeding status at 3 months. Results Exclusive breastfeeding at 3 months moderated the association between prenatal and postpartum depression. Participants with prenatal depression who were exclusively breastfeeding at 3 months showed fewer symptoms of depression and lower rates of depression between 3 and 6 months postpartum, compared to participants with prenatal depression who were not exclusively breastfeeding. Participants without prenatal depression who were exclusively breastfeeding at 3 months showed similar depression symptoms and similar rates of depression between 3 and 6 months postpartum, compared to participants without prenatal depression who were not exclusively breastfeeding. Conclusion Exclusive breastfeeding has a potential protective influence on postpartum depression among women with prenatal depression. Public health policies targeting women with prenatal depression should be implemented and include practices to promote and support exclusive breastfeeding in order to enhance women’s exclusive breastfeeding and mental health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document