Translate this page into:
Maternal History of Adverse Childhood Experiences and Subsequent Infant Paternal Involvement
*Corresponding author: Amina P. Alio, PhD, Center for Community Health and Prevention, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States. Tel: 585-275-0482 amina_alio@urmc.rochester.edu
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Liu L, Thevenet-Morrison K, Viazie P, Crean HF, Seplaki CL, Dozier A, et al. Maternal history of adverse childhood experiences and subsequent infant paternity acknowledgment. Int J Transl Med Res Public Health. 2024;8:e005. doi: 10.25259/IJTMRPH_4_2024
Abstract
Background and Objective
Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with unfavorable pregnancy outcomes. Fathers’ involvement during pregnancy positively impacts maternal behaviors and birth outcomes. Lack of voluntary paternity acknowledgment (PA) at birth implies potential limited paternal involvement. This study explores the association between mothers with a history of ACEs and PA status for their infants.
Methods
Using secondary data from the Monroe County Mothers and Babies Health Survey and logistic regression modeling, we assessed the odds of court-mandated paternity affidavit (CM-PA) associated with maternal ACEs. Univariate analyses were conducted first, with additional variables included subsequently.
Results
Of the 1,556 mothers with legal paternity established for their infants, 279 (18%) had a CM-PA for their infants, and 1,277 (82%) had a PA established voluntarily (vPA). Mothers of infants with CM-PA were more likely to be Black or Hispanic, had lower income and education, had higher substance use and traumatic stress, and had lower social support. A one-point increase in maternal ACE total score was associated with 14% higher odds of CM-PA (OR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03–1.27). Maternal experience of household dysfunction was linked to 83% higher odds of CM-PA (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.23–2.71) while living with a problem drinker or drug user during childhood was associated with 70% higher odds of CM-PA (OR = 1.70; 95% CI, 1.09–2.65).
Conclusion and Implications for Translation
This study suggests a potential link between maternal ACEs and CM-PA, implying possible lower father involvement for the infants whose mothers experienced adverse events in childhood. To address this, future research is warranted to confirm this association and explore interventions like prenatal ACE screening in pregnancy, providing psychological support and resources for mothers to promote infant paternal involvement.
Keywords
Paternity Acknowledgment
Court-Mandated Paternity Affidavit
Voluntary Paternity Acknowledgment
Maternal ACEs
Suboptimal Paternity
Household Dysfunction
Substance Use
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Adverse childhood experiences (ACE) are traumatic events occurring before age 18 (0–17 years), reflecting different types of abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction.[1] In the United States, 61% of adults reported experiencing at least one ACE, with females more affected than males.[2] Exposure to ACEs correlates with various health risks, including depression, alcoholism, stroke, diabetes, and asthma.[2] Mothers experiencing ACEs are linked to increased risks of adverse birth outcomes such as low birth weight and preterm birth, contributing to infant health disparities.[3,4]
A father’s support during pregnancy can positively impact maternal behavior and child outcomes, such as improved prenatal care and decreased infant mortality.[5–8] The Father’s involvement is measured through co-parenting and relationship with the mother, financial and emotional investment, quality of time spent, and expressed willingness to rear children, using self-reports, spouse/other reports, and interviews.[9] In research, marriage or paternity acknowledgment (PA) has been used as proxies for paternal involvement. In the absence of direct data on paternal involvement, being married or establishing acknowledgment of paternity at birth generally suggests the presence of a partner and paternal involvement during the perinatal period.
Legal paternity (legal establishment of the identity of a child’s father) is the determination of the related rights and obligations of the father to the child. In the United States, it’s routine for children of married parents, while unmarried mothers can establish it voluntarily at birth through subsequent parental confirmation or as mandated by the court when requested by either parent. Legal paternity ensures children receive benefits from their fathers, such as health insurance and inheritance. The absence of paternal information on birth records or no PA often indicates nonmarital births and limited paternal engagement.
Studies found that fathers of infants with paternity legally acknowledged at birth tend to be more involved in their children’s lives and are more likely to support their children financially than fathers who establish paternity later or not at all.[10,11] Acknowledging paternity at birth lowered infant mortality, preterm birth, and low birth weight risk, particularly for unmarried women with higher ACEs.[12] Voluntary legal establishment of paternity is associated with longer exclusive breastfeeding duration, potentially decreasing maternal risk of breast and ovarian cancer, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and infant risk of infections and adulthood obesity.[13,14] Missing paternity was also strongly related to involvement with the child protection system, such as investigations or the termination of parental rights.[15] Paternity status at birth may also be linked to early maltreatment outcomes, with variations by maternal race and ethnicity.[16]
Maternal ACEs have been shown to biologically alter stress responses, potentially due to long-term changes in hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis functioning, leading to heightened sensitivity to stress and negative cues.[17] This, in turn, may influence maternal behavior and the dynamics within relationships, possibly influencing paternal engagement. This biological alteration, coupled with the psychological challenges such as trust and trauma, which ACEs often precipitate, may compound difficulties in creating stable relationships vital for paternity establishment.[18] Together, these biological and psychosocial effects of ACEs intricately weave into the fabric of maternal behavior, potentially influencing the acknowledgment of paternity.
Objectives of the Study
The Monroe County Mothers and Babies Health Survey (MBHS) is a comprehensive research initiative aimed at assessing the health and well-being of expectant mothers and infants in Monroe County, New York, USA. Extensive data collection and analysis provide valuable insights into maternal and infant health outcomes in the region.[19] Utilizing the substantial availability of prenatal data and maternal history of ACEs within this cohort as well as paternity status at birth, we conducted an exploratory investigation to examine the potential association between maternal history of ACEs and the establishment of legal paternity for infants. It’s important to note that this study was exploratory.
METHODS
Study Subjects
Our study utilizes the MBHS database (N = 1,879), encompassing data from single-birth mothers in Monroe County, NY, surveyed to understand health outcomes and care access from 2015 to 2017. Surveys, consisting of 200 questions, offered in English and Spanish, were completed either electronically via REDCap or by mail. The response rate averaged 80 monthly over the 24-month data collection period, with balanced participation across income levels. The completeness of electronic records was checked and documented. Paper-based responses were processed through double-data entry. Survey data were linked with birth certificates and census tract data. For this study, the subjects included in the main analyses were mothers who reported their information (e.g., demographics, pregnancy intention, health behavior during pregnancy) as well as their baby’s father’s information (i.e., father age and father education) (1,556 [83%] of 1,879).
Study Variables
Exposure Variable: Mother’s Adverse Childhood Events
In our study, we utilized a ten-question ACEs scale. For details of the 10 ACE questions, please see notes for Table 1. The ACE was first coded as a total ACE score (continuous) and regressed against the outcome of legal PA. Furthermore, we coded ACEs as three binary variables (yes/no) for each domain (abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction) and collectively regressed them with the outcome. Finally, we coded each of the ten ACEs questions as binary variables (yes, experienced this adverse event/no, did not experience this adverse event) and similarly regressed them collectively against the outcome.
Characteristics | Descriptions | CM-PA N(%)/Mean (SD) (N = 279) | vPA N(%)/Mean (SD) (N = 1,277) |
---|---|---|---|
Maternal | |||
Age | Age <25 yr. | 74 (26.5) | 41 (3.2) |
Age 25–<35 yr. | 166 (59.5) | 905 (70.9) | |
Age >35 yr. | 39 (14) | 331 (25.9) | |
Education | High school or less | 108 (38.7) | 97 (7.6) |
Some college or above | 171 (61.3) | 1,180 (92.4) | |
Race | Black | 66 (23.7) | 34 (2.7) |
Other | 30 (10.8) | 111 (8.7) | |
White | 183 (65.6) | 1,132 (88.6) | |
Ethnicity | Hispanic | 41 (14.7) | 53 (4.2) |
NOT Hispanic | 238 (85.3) | 1,224 (95.8) | |
Income | Low | 216 (77.4) | 200 (15.7) |
non-Low | 63 (22.6) | 1,077 (84.3) | |
Priority zip | No | 157 (56.3) | 1,103 (86.4) |
Yes | 122 (43.7) | 174 (13.6) | |
US born | Yes | 269 (96.4) | 1,151 (90.1) |
No | 10 (3.6) | 126 (9.9) | |
Resilience score | Low | 106 (38) | 382 (29.9) |
Medium | 89 (31.9) | 495 (38.8) | |
High | 84 (30.1) | 400 (31.3) | |
Prior parity | No prior pregnancy | 134 (48) | 546 (42.8) |
Prior pregnancy | 145 (52) | 731 (57.2) | |
Tried to pregnant | No | 165 (59.1) | 253 (19.8) |
Yes | 114 (40.9) | 1,024 (80.2) | |
Pregnancy stress | 0 (Lowest) | 87 (31.2) | 729 (57.1) |
1 | 92 (33) | 410 (32.1) | |
2 | 67 (24) | 110 (8.6) | |
3 | 26 (9.3) | 24 (1.9) | |
4 (Highest) | 7 (2.5) | 4 (0.3) | |
Infant sex | Female | 139 (49.8) | 631 (49.4) |
Male | 140 (50.2) | 646 (50.6) | |
Social support | 0 (Lowest) | 15 (5.4) | 15 (1.2) |
1 | 72 (25.8) | 94 (7.4) | |
2 | 48 (17.2) | 87 (6.8) | |
3 | 59 (21.1) | 272 (21.3) | |
4 (Highest) | 85 (30.5) | 809 (63.4) | |
Tobacco use | No | 209 (74.9) | 1231 (96.4) |
Yes | 70 (25.1) | 46 (3.6) | |
Alcohol use | Yes (not in pregnancy) | 205 (73.5) | 1043 (81.7) |
Yes (in pregnancy) | 21 (7.5) | 130 (10.2) | |
Never | 53 (19) | 104 (8.1) | |
Marijuana use | Ever | 156 (55.9) | 489 (38.3) |
Never | 123 (44.1) | 788 (61.7) | |
ACE | Yes | 188 (67.4) | 501 (39.2) |
No | 91 (32.6) | 776 (60.8) | |
ACE domain abuse | Yes | 82 (29.4) | 137 (10.7) |
No | 197 (70.6) | 1,140 (89.3) | |
ACE domain neglect | Yes | 57 (20.4) | 75 (5.9) |
No | 222 (79.6) | 1,202 (94.1) | |
ACE domain household dysfunction | Yes | 180 (64.5) | 459 (35.9) |
No | 99 (35.5) | 818 (64.1) | |
ACE item 1 | No | 218 (78.1) | 1,182 (92.6) |
Yes | 61 (21.9) | 95 (7.4) | |
ACE item 2 | No | 249 (89.2) | 1,244 (97.4) |
Yes | 30 (10.8) | 33 (2.6) | |
ACE item 3 | No | 234 (83.9) | 1,217 (95.3) |
Yes | 45 (16.1) | 60 (4.7) | |
ACE item 4 | No | 227 (81.4) | 1,203 (94.2) |
Yes | 52 (18.6) | 74 (5.8) | |
ACE item 5 | No | 227 (81.4) | 1,203 (94.2) |
Yes | 52 (18.6) | 74 (5.8) | |
ACE item 6 | No | 146 (52.3) | 993 (77.8) |
Yes | 133 (47.7) | 284 (22.2) | |
ACE item 7 | No | 254 (91) | 1,241 (97.2) |
Yes | 25 (9) | 36 (2.8) | |
ACE item 8 | No | 196 (70.3) | 1,119 (87.6) |
Yes | 83 (29.7) | 158 (12.4) | |
ACE item 9 | No | 215 (77.1) | 1,084 (84.9) |
Yes | 64 (22.9) | 193 (15.1) | |
ACE item 10 | No | 248 (88.9) | 1,248 (97.7) |
Yes | 31 (11.1) | 29 (2.3) | |
ACE domain abuse score | Continuous | 0.29 (0.46) | 0.11 (0.31) |
ACE domain neglect score | Continuous | 0.20 (0.40) | 0.06 (0.24) |
ACE domain household dysfunction score | Continuous | 0.65 (0.48) | 0.36 (0.48) |
ACE total scores | Continuous | 1.92 (2.06) | 0.77 (1.33) |
Paternal | |||
Father age | Age <25 yr. | 47 (16.8) | 17 (1.3) |
Age 25–<35 yr. | 154 (55.2) | 778 (60.9) | |
Age>35 yr. | 78 (28) | 482 (37.7) | |
Father education | High school or less | 155 (55.6) | 178 (13.9) |
Some college or above | 124 (44.4) | 1,099 (86.1) |
Outcome Variable: Infant’s Paternity Acknowledgment
We initially categorized PA status into three groups: voluntarily legal paternity acknowledgment (vPA, N = 1,425), court-mandated paternity affidavit (CM-PA, N = 339), and the group with no legal paternity established (No-PA, N = 115). Given the lack of father-related variables within the No-PA group, it was excluded from the main analysis. That is, subjects with missing values in the father-related variables were consciously omitted. This decision was based on the consideration that imputation was not suitable for this context, because the missingness is not random and the pattern of the father-related variables is unknown. Therefore, in the main analysis, PA was treated as a binary variable (vPA vs. CM-PA).
In sensitivity analyses, we incorporated the No-PA group into the analysis, classifying paternity acknowledgment as vPA versus suboptimal paternity status (suboptimal PS), where “suboptimal PS” combined both the No-PA and CM-PA. This combination was supported by the observation that No-PA and CM-PA groups exhibited greater similarity in terms of demographics and socioeconomic status to each other than to the vPA group [Table 2].
Maternal Characteristics | Descriptions | No PA N(%)/Mean(SD) (N = 88) | CM-PA N(%)/Mean(SD) (N = 289) | vPA N(%)/Mean(SD) (N = 1,288) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Maternal | ||||
Age | Age <25 yr. | 26 (29.5) | 75 (26) | 42 (3.3) |
Age 25–<35 yr. | 48 (54.5) | 172 (59.5) | 910 (70.7) | |
Age >35 yr. | 14 (15.9) | 42 (14.5) | 336 (26.1) | |
Education | High school or less | 57 (64.8) | 110 (38.1) | 99 (7.7) |
Some college or above | 31 (35.2) | 179 (61.9) | 1,189 (92.3) | |
Race | Black | 39 (44.3) | 69 (23.9) | 35 (2.7) |
Other | 18 (20.5) | 31 (10.7) | 114 (8.9) | |
White | 31 (35.2) | 189 (65.4) | 1,139 (88.4) | |
Ethnicity | Hispanic | 17 (19.3) | 42 (14.5) | 54 (4.2) |
NOT Hispanic | 71 (80.7) | 247 (85.5) | 1,234 (95.8) | |
Income | Low | 79 (89.8) | 226 (78.2) | 202 (15.7) |
non-Low | 9 (10.2) | 63 (21.8) | 1,086 (84.3) | |
Priority zip | No | 28 (31.8) | 161 (55.7) | 1,111 (86.3) |
Yes | 60 (68.2) | 128 (44.3) | 177 (13.7) | |
US born | Yes | 86 (97.7) | 279 (96.5) | 1,158 (89.9) |
No | 2 (2.3) | 10 (3.5) | 130 (10.1) | |
Resilience score | Low | 35 (39.8) | 107 (37) | 389 (30.2) |
Medium | 21 (23.9) | 96 (33.2) | 497 (38.6) | |
High | 32 (36.4) | 86 (29.8) | 402 (31.2) | |
Prior parity | No prior pregnancy | 30 (34.1) | 136 (47.1) | 550 (42.7) |
Prior pregnancy | 58 (65.9) | 153 (52.9) | 738 (57.3) | |
Tried to pregnant | No | 57 (64.8) | 170 (58.8) | 255 (19.8) |
Yes | 31 (35.2) | 119 (41.2) | 1,033 (80.2) | |
Pregnancy stress | 0 (Lowest) | 22 (25) | 89 (30.8) | 736 (57.1) |
1 | 31 (35.2) | 96 (33.2) | 414 (32.1) | |
2 | 16 (18.2) | 68 (23.5) | 110 (8.5) | |
3 | 14 (15.9) | 28 (9.7) | 24 (1.9) | |
4 (Highest) | 5 (5.7) | 8 (2.8) | 4 (0.3) | |
Infant sex | Female | 48 (54.5) | 146 (50.5) | 639 (49.6) |
Male | 40 (45.5) | 143 (49.5) | 649 (50.4) | |
Social support | 0 (Lowest) | 6 (6.8) | 15 (5.2) | 15 (1.2) |
1 | 32 (36.4) | 75 (26) | 96 (7.5) | |
2 | 11 (12.5) | 49 (17) | 88 (6.8) | |
3 | 24 (27.3) | 60 (20.8) | 275 (21.4) | |
4 (Highest) | 15 (17) | 90 (31.1) | 814 (63.2) | |
Tobacco use | No | 64 (72.7) | 216 (74.7) | 1,242 (96.4) |
Yes | 24 (27.3) | 73 (25.3) | 46 (3.6) | |
Alcohol use | Yes (not in pregnancy) | 57 (64.8) | 215 (74.4) | 1,051 (81.6) |
Yes (in pregnancy) | 5 (5.7) | 21 (7.3) | 130 (10.1) | |
Never | 26 (29.5) | 53 (18.3) | 107 (8.3) | |
Marijuana use | Ever | 35 (39.8) | 163 (56.4) | 491 (38.1) |
Never | 53 (60.2) | 126 (43.6) | 797 (61.9) | |
ACE | Yes | 57 (64.8) | 198 (68.5) | 505 (39.2) |
No | 31 (35.2) | 91 (31.5) | 783 (60.8) | |
ACE domain abuse | Yes | 33 (37.5) | 86 (29.8) | 138 (10.7) |
No | 55 (62.5) | 203 (70.2) | 1,150 (89.3) | |
ACE domain neglect | Yes | 30 (34.1) | 61 (21.1) | 76 (5.9) |
No | 58 (65.9) | 228 (78.9) | 1,212 (94.1) | |
ACE domain household dysfunction | Yes | 52 (59.1) | 187 (64.7) | 462 (35.9) |
No | 36 (40.9) | 102 (35.3) | 826 (64.1) | |
ACE item 1 | No | 64 (72.7) | 226 (78.2) | 1,193 (92.6) |
Yes | 24 (27.3) | 63 (21.8) | 95 (7.4) | |
ACE item 2 | No | 72 (81.8) | 258 (89.3) | 1,254 (97.4) |
Yes | 16 (18.2) | 31 (10.7) | 34 (2.6) | |
ACE item 3 | No | 66 (75) | 243 (84.1) | 1,228 (95.3) |
Yes | 22 (25) | 46 (15.9) | 60 (4.7) | |
ACE item 4 | No | 60 (68.2) | 233 (80.6) | 1,213 (94.2) |
Yes | 28 (31.8) | 56 (19.4) | 75 (5.8) | |
ACE item 5 | No | 60 (68.2) | 233 (80.6) | 1,213 (94.2) |
Yes | 28 (31.8) | 56 (19.4) | 75 (5.8) | |
ACE item 6 | No | 50 (56.8) | 149 (51.6) | 1,001 (77.7) |
Yes | 38 (43.2) | 140 (48.4) | 287 (22.3) | |
ACE item 7 | No | 80 (90.9) | 263 (91) | 1,252 (97.2) |
Yes | 8 (9.1) | 26 (9) | 36 (2.8) | |
ACE item 8 | No | 68 (77.3) | 204 (70.6) | 1,130 (87.7) |
Yes | 20 (22.7) | 85 (29.4) | 158 (12.3) | |
ACE item 9 | No | 66 (75) | 222 (76.8) | 1,095 (85) |
Yes | 22 (25) | 67 (23.2) | 193 (15) | |
ACE item 10 | No | 74 (84.1) | 258 (89.3) | 1,259 (97.7) |
Yes | 14 (15.9) | 31 (10.7) | 29 (2.3) | |
ACE domain abuse score | Continuous | 0.38 (0.49) | 0.3 (0.46) | 0.11 (0.31) |
ACE domain neglect score | Continuous | 0.34 (0.48) | 0.21 (0.41) | 0.06 (0.24) |
ACE domain household dysfunction score | Continuous | 0.59 (0.49) | 0.65 (0.48) | 0.36 (0.48) |
ACE total scores | Continuous | 2.27 (2.64) | 1.93 (2.03) | 0.76 (1.33) |
Paternal | ||||
Father age | Age<25 yr. | 0 (0) | 47 (16.3) | 18 (1.4) |
Age 25–<35 yr. | 0 (0) | 159 (55) | 781 (60.6) | |
Age>35 yr. | 0 (0) | 83 (28.7) | 489 (38) | |
missing# | 88 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
Father education | High school or less | 0 (0) | 155 (53.6) | 178 (13.8) |
Some college or above | 0 (0) | 124 (42.9) | 1,099 (85.3) | |
missing# | 88 (100) | 10 (3.5) | 11 (0.9) |
Other Variables
Multiple other variables, comprising both categorical and continuous measures, were incorporated into the model due to their common presence of demographics or social-behavioral factors or their established associations with the paternity acknowledgment outcome in the existing literature. For example, paternity acknowledgment is less likely to be established among couples no longer married or no longer living together, parents of lower educational or economic status, mothers of younger age, are of African American or Hispanic communities, mothers with less than adequate prenatal care, and when the infant sex at birth is female or when the infant is not a first-born baby.[10,16,20]
Categorical variables included the mother’s age, education, race, ethnicity, income, residence in a high-poverty zip code, born in the US, pre/during pregnancy tobacco use, marijuana use, alcohol use, intention to be pregnant, resilience level, number of parity, infant sex, father’s age, and father’s education. Low-income status was determined through Medicaid-funded childbirth or participation in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). The resilience score, derived from 15 survey questions in the MBHS study, utilized a four-point scale (“Strongly Disagree,” “Disagree,” “Agree,” “Strongly Agree”) for responses to statements such as “I usually manage one way or another” and “I feel I can handle many things at a time.” Scores, ranging from 0 to 60, were then categorized into low (N = 488, mean = 42.6), medium (N = 584, mean = 48.2), and high (N = 484, mean = 55.8) resilience groups using tertiles.
Continuous variables included social support and pregnancy stress. Social support was quantified by summing responses to questions about the presence of close friends or family members who could provide financial assistance, share possessions, exchange services, or engage in conversations at any time. The variable was represented on a scale ranging from 0 to 4 and was treated as a continuous variable in the analyses. Pregnancy stress, a continuous variable with five levels ranging from 0 to 4, was derived as the sum score of emotional, partner-related, financial, and traumatic stress.
Statistical Analysis
Descriptive statistics for maternal and paternal characteristics were reported as frequencies and percentages (N [%]) for categorical variables and mean value and standard deviation (Mean [SD]) for continuous variables. The association between ACEs and the risk of CM-PA was assessed using logistic regressions because the outcome is dichotomous. In the main analysis, PA was treated as a binary variable (vPA vs. CM-PA), excluding the No-PA group. In the sensitivity analysis, the No-PA group was included and combined with the CM-PA group, leading to the classification of PA into the binary comparison of vPA versus suboptimal PS (suboptimal PS = No-PA + CM-PA). This approach implies that in the main analysis, the father’s age and education variables were included, whereas in the sensitivity analysis, these variables were omitted due to missing data. This omission was necessary to prevent the exclusion of No-PA individuals who had missing data for these variables, as subjects with any missing value(s) were excluded from the analysis. For each ACE encoding method, which included a continuous total ACE score, three binary domains, and ten binary itemized questions, the analyses proceeded as follows: an initial unadjusted examination of the association between ACE and PA status was conducted, followed by a subsequent adjusted analysis controlling for covariates selected in a backward stepwise manner. A significance threshold of p < 0.1 was employed to determine the retention of variables in the model during each backward step. All analyses were performed with the statistical software SAS (9.4, SAS Institute, Cary, NC).
Ethical Approval
The Monroe County MBHS was designated as surveillance and quality improvement by the University of Rochester Institutional Research Subject Review Board (RSRB). Therefore, IRB oversight was not required for data collection. However, approval was obtained from the University RSRB for these secondary data analyses.
RESULTS
Sociodemographic Characteristics
Among the 1,879 mothers in the cohort, 1,556 qualified for the main analysis due to complete data on maternal and paternal variables. Among these, 279 (17.9%) had a CM-PA, while 1,277 (82%) had vPA for their infants. Mothers with CM-PA were more likely to be Black, Hispanic, have lower income, education, and younger age at pregnancy. They had higher rates of smoking, marijuana use, urban residence, unplanned pregnancies, elevated stress levels, and lower social support [Table 1].
Maternal History of ACEs and Infants’ Paternity Status at Birth
Variables that were consistently retained by backward selection included maternal race, income, birthplace, parity, pregnancy intention, stress, tobacco and marijuana use, social support, and paternal education. After adjustment, a one-point increase in maternal ACE total score was associated with 14% higher odds of CM-PA (OR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03–1.27). Maternal experience of household dysfunction was linked to 83% higher odds of CM-PA (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.23–2.71) while living with a problem drinker or drug user during childhood was associated with 70% higher odds of CM-PA (OR = 1.70; 95% CI, 1.09–2.65) [Table 3].
Variables | Odds Ratio | 95% Confidence Limits | |
---|---|---|---|
Model 1 Unadjusted risk of CM-PA with continuous ACE score | |||
ACE score (continuous) | 1.47 | 1.36 | 1.58 |
Model 2 Adjusted risk of CM-PA with continuous ACE score, adjusting for backward-selected covariables | |||
ACE score (continuous) | 1.14 | 1.03 | 1.27 |
Race Black versus White | 3.50 | 1.92 | 6.40 |
Race Other versus White | 0.86 | 0.44 | 1.70 |
Income Low versus non-low | 10.64 | 7.04 | 16.09 |
US Born Yes versus No | 5.60 | 2.43 | 12.90 |
Parity No prior pregnancy versus Prior pregnancy | 3.22 | 2.17 | 4.79 |
Intention to become pregnant No versus Yes | 3.00 | 2.08 | 4.33 |
Pregnancy stress (continuous) | 1.29 | 1.06 | 1.57 |
Tobacco use Yes versus No | 1.80 | 1.23 | 2.62 |
Marijuana use Ever versus Never | 0.71 | 0.60 | 0.83 |
Social support (continuous) | 2.04 | 1.37 | 3.02 |
Father education High school or less versus Some college or above | 1.14 | 1.03 | 1.27 |
Model 3 Unadjusted risk of CM-PA with binary domains of ACE (with all three domains together included in the model) | |||
Any abuse Yes versus No | 1.72 | 1.17 | 2.53 |
Any neglect Yes versus No | 2.04 | 1.30 | 3.19 |
Any household dysfunction Yes versus No | 2.49 | 1.86 | 3.34 |
Model 4 Adjusted risk of CM-PA with binary domains of ACE, adjusting for backward-selected covariables (with all three domains together included in the model) | |||
Any abuse Yes versus No | 1.00 | 0.58 | 1.71 |
Any neglect Yes versus No | 0.91 | 0.49 | 1.69 |
Any household dysfunction Yes versus No | 1.83 | 1.23 | 2.71 |
Race Black versus White | 3.54 | 1.94 | 6.46 |
Race Other versus White | 0.90 | 0.46 | 1.77 |
Income Low versus non-low | 10.62 | 7.00 | 16.13 |
US Born Yes versus No | 5.12 | 2.23 | 11.77 |
Parity No prior pregnancy versus Prior pregnancy | 3.04 | 2.04 | 4.53 |
Intention to become pregnant No versus Yes | 2.88 | 1.99 | 4.17 |
Pregnancy stress (continuous) | 1.29 | 1.06 | 1.58 |
Tobacco use Yes versus No | 1.65 | 0.96 | 2.85 |
Marijuana use Ever versus Never | 1.68 | 1.15 | 2.47 |
Social support (continuous) | 0.72 | 0.61 | 0.85 |
Father education High school or less versus Some college or above | 1.93 | 1.30 | 2.87 |
Model 5 Adjusted risk of CM-PA with individual ACE questions, adjusting for backward-selected covariables (WITHOUT forcing any individual ACE question in the model*) | |||
Lived with problem drinker/alcoholic or used street drugs Yes versus No | 1.70 | 1.09 | 2.65 |
Race Black versus White | 3.43 | 1.88 | 6.26 |
Race Other versus White | 0.88 | 0.45 | 1.72 |
Income Low versus non-low | 11.13 | 7.36 | 16.85 |
US Born Yes versus No | 5.49 | 2.42 | 12.45 |
Parity No prior pregnancy versus Prior pregnancy | 3.03 | 2.04 | 4.50 |
Intention to become pregnant No versus Yes | 2.92 | 2.02 | 4.22 |
Pregnancy stress (continuous) | 1.29 | 1.06 | 1.57 |
Tobacco use Yes versus No | 1.59 | 0.93 | 2.73 |
Marijuana use Ever versus Never | 1.78 | 1.22 | 2.60 |
Social support (continuous) | 0.71 | 0.60 | 0.83 |
Father education High school or less versus Some college or above | 1.92 | 1.29 | 2.86 |
In the sensitivity analysis, 1,665 mothers with complete maternal data were included, representing a larger sample than in the main analysis. This increase, by n = 109, was due to the exclusion of the father’s age and education variables, allowing more subjects to meet the complete data criteria. The decision to combine CM-PA with No-PA rather than with vPA was guided by the observed similarities between the CM-PA and No-PA groups, including maternal age, income, pregnancy stress, social support, tobacco use, ACE experience, and ACE total score [Table 2].
We found that compared to mothers of infants with vPA, mothers of suboptimal PS infants were more likely to be Black, Hispanic, have lower income and education, and be younger at pregnancy. They were also more likely to have a history of smoking and marijuana use, urban residence, unplanned pregnancies, higher stress levels, and lower social support [Table 4]. Variables consistently retained through backward selection encompassed the mother’s race, education, income, birthplace, resilience, parity, pregnancy intention, stress, tobacco and marijuana use, and social support. After adjusting for these factors, a one-point increase in maternal ACE total score was associated with 13% higher odds of suboptimal PS (OR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02–1.25). Mothers who experienced household dysfunction had 83% higher odds of suboptimal PS (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.26–2.65), and those with parents separated or divorced had 57% higher odds of suboptimal PS (OR = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.10–2.24) [Table 5].
Characteristics | Descriptions | No-PA/CM-PA N(%)/Mean(SD) (N = 377) | vPA N(%)/Mean (SD) (N = 1,288) |
---|---|---|---|
Maternal | |||
Age | Age <25 yr. | 101 (26.8) | 42 (3.3) |
Age 25–<35 yr. | 220 (58.4) | 910 (70.7) | |
Age >35 yr. | 56 (14.9) | 336 (26.1) | |
Education | High school or less | 167 (44.3) | 99 (7.7) |
Some college or above | 210 (55.7) | 1,189 (92.3) | |
Race | Black | 108 (28.6) | 35 (2.7) |
Other | 49 (13) | 114 (8.9) | |
White | 220 (58.4) | 1,139 (88.4) | |
Ethnicity | Hispanic | 59 (15.6) | 54 (4.2) |
NOT Hispanic | 318 (84.4) | 1,234 (95.8) | |
Income | Low | 305 (80.9) | 202 (15.7) |
non-Low | 72 (19.1) | 1,086 (84.3) | |
Priority zip | No | 189 (50.1) | 1,111 (86.3) |
Yes | 188 (49.9) | 177 (13.7) | |
US Born | Yes | 365 (96.8) | 1,158 (89.9) |
No | 12 (3.2) | 130 (10.1) | |
Resilience score | Low | 142 (37.7) | 389 (30.2) |
Medium | 117 (31) | 497 (38.6) | |
High | 118 (31.3) | 402 (31.2) | |
Prior parity | No prior pregnancy | 166 (44) | 550 (42.7) |
Prior pregnancy | 211 (56) | 738 (57.3) | |
Tried to pregnant | No | 227 (60.2) | 255 (19.8) |
Yes | 150 (39.8) | 1,033 (80.2) | |
Pregnancy stress | 0 (Lowest) | 111 (29.4) | 736 (57.1) |
1 | 127 (33.7) | 414 (32.1) | |
2 | 84 (22.3) | 110 (8.5) | |
3 | 42 (11.1) | 24 (1.9) | |
4 (Highest) | 13 (3.4) | 4 (0.3) | |
Infant sex | Female | 194 (51.5) | 639 (49.6) |
Male | 183 (48.5) | 649 (50.4) | |
Social support | 0 (Lowest) | 21 (5.6) | 15 (1.2) |
1 | 107 (28.4) | 96 (7.5) | |
2 | 60 (15.9) | 88 (6.8) | |
3 | 84 (22.3) | 275 (21.4) | |
4 (Highest) | 105 (27.9) | 814 (63.2) | |
Tobacco use | No | 280 (74.3) | 1,242 (96.4) |
Yes | 97 (25.7) | 46 (3.6) | |
Alcohol use | Yes (not in pregnancy) | 272 (72.1) | 1,051 (81.6) |
Yes (in pregnancy) | 26 (6.9) | 130 (10.1) | |
Never | 79 (21) | 107 (8.3) | |
Marijuana use | Ever | 198 (52.5) | 491 (38.1) |
Never | 179 (47.5) | 797 (61.9) | |
ACE | Yes | 255 (67.6) | 505 (39.2) |
No | 122 (32.4) | 783 (60.8) | |
ACE domain abuse | Yes | 119 (31.6) | 138 (10.7) |
No | 258 (68.4) | 1150 (89.3) | |
ACE domain neglect | Yes | 91 (24.1) | 76 (5.9) |
No | 286 (75.9) | 1,212 (94.1) | |
ACE domain household dysfunction | Yes | 239 (63.4) | 462 (35.9) |
No | 138 (36.6) | 826 (64.1) | |
ACE item 1 | No | 290 (76.9) | 1,193 (92.6) |
Yes | 87 (23.1) | 95 (7.4) | |
ACE item 2 | No | 330 (87.5) | 1,254 (97.4) |
Yes | 47 (12.5) | 34 (2.6) | |
ACE item 3 | No | 309 (82) | 1,228 (95.3) |
Yes | 68 (18) | 60 (4.7) | |
ACE item 4 | No | 293 (77.7) | 1,213 (94.2) |
Yes | 84 (22.3) | 75 (5.8) | |
ACE item 5 | No | 293 (77.7) | 1,213 (94.2) |
Yes | 84 (22.3) | 75 (5.8) | |
ACE item 6 | No | 199 (52.8) | 1,001 (77.7) |
Yes | 178 (47.2) | 287 (22.3) | |
ACE item 7 | No | 343 (91) | 1,252 (97.2) |
Yes | 34 (9) | 36 (2.8) | |
ACE item 8 | No | 272 (72.1) | 1,130 (87.7) |
Yes | 105 (27.9) | 158 (12.3) | |
ACE item 9 | No | 288 (76.4) | 1,095 (85) |
Yes | 89 (23.6) | 193 (15) | |
ACE item 10 | No | 332 (88.1) | 1,259 (97.7) |
Yes | 45 (11.9) | 29 (2.3) | |
ACE domain abuse score | Continuous | 0.32 (0.47) | 0.11 (0.31) |
ACE domain neglect score | Continuous | 0.24 (0.43) | 0.06 (0.24) |
ACE domain household dysfunction score | Continuous | 0.63 (0.48) | 0.36 (0.48) |
ACE total scores | Continuous | 2.01 (2.19) | 0.76 (1.33) |
Paternal | |||
Father age | Age <25 yr. | 47 (12.5) | 18 (1.4) |
Age 25–<35 yr. | 159 (42.2) | 781 (60.6) | |
Age >35 yr. | 83 (22) | 489 (38) | |
missing# | 98 (26) | 11 (0.9) | |
Father education | High school or less | 155 (41.1) | 178 (13.8) |
Some college or above | 124 (32.9) | 1,099 (85.3) | |
missing# | 88 (23.3) | 0 (0) |
Variables | Odds Ratio | 95% Confidence Limits | |
---|---|---|---|
Model 1 Unadjusted risk of No-PA/CM-PA with continuous ACE score | |||
ACE score (continuous) | 1.49 | 1.39 | 1.59 |
Model 2 Adjusted risk of No-PA/CM-PA with continuous ACE score, adjusting for backward-selected covariables | |||
ACE score (continuous) | 1.13 | 1.02 | 1.25 |
Education High school or less versus Some college or above | 1.52 | 0.96 | 2.41 |
Race Black versus White | 3.70 | 2.03 | 6.75 |
Race Other versus White | 1.00 | 0.54 | 1.86 |
Income Low versus non-low | 11.49 | 7.73 | 17.10 |
US Born Yes versus No | 7.13 | 3.27 | 15.56 |
Resilience Low versus High | 0.69 | 0.45 | 1.06 |
Resilience Med versus High | 0.61 | 0.40 | 0.93 |
Residence in high poverty Zip Code Yes versus No | 1.45 | 0.96 | 2.18 |
Parity No prior pregnancy versus Prior pregnancy | 2.88 | 1.98 | 4.17 |
Intention to become pregnant No versus Yes | 2.98 | 2.10 | 4.21 |
Pregnancy stress (continuous) | 1.28 | 1.06 | 1.55 |
Tobacco use Yes versus No | 1.70 | 1.01 | 2.87 |
Marijuana use Ever versus Never | 1.59 | 1.11 | 2.26 |
Social support (continuous) | 0.73 | 0.63 | 0.86 |
Model 3 Unadjusted risk of No-PA/CM-PA with binary domains of ACE (with all three domains together included in the model) | |||
Any abuse Yes versus No | 1.75 | 1.24 | 2.49 |
Any neglect Yes versus No | 2.64 | 1.78 | 3.92 |
Any household dysfunction Yes versus No | 2.25 | 1.73 | 2.91 |
Model 4 Adjusted risk of No-PA/CM-PA with binary domains of ACE, adjusting for backward-selected covariables (with all three domains together included in the model) | |||
Any abuse Yes versus No | 0.92 | 0.55 | 1.52 |
Any neglect Yes versus No | 1.04 | 0.58 | 1.86 |
Any household dysfunction Yes versus No | 1.83 | 1.26 | 2.65 |
Education High school or less versus Some college or above | 1.51 | 0.96 | 2.38 |
Race Black versus White | 3.79 | 2.08 | 6.88 |
Race Other versus White | 1.02 | 0.55 | 1.90 |
Income Low versus non-low | 11.63 | 7.81 | 17.33 |
US Born Yes versus No | 6.63 | 3.03 | 14.54 |
Resilience Low versus High | 0.69 | 0.45 | 1.06 |
Resilience Med versus High | 0.61 | 0.40 | 0.94 |
Residence in high poverty Zip Code Yes versus No | 1.45 | 0.97 | 2.19 |
Parity No prior pregnancy versus Prior pregnancy | 2.81 | 1.94 | 4.08 |
Intention to become pregnant No versus Yes | 2.94 | 2.07 | 4.16 |
Pregnancy stress (continuous) | 1.30 | 1.07 | 1.57 |
Tobacco use Yes versus No | 1.79 | 1.06 | 3.01 |
Marijuana use Ever versus Never | 1.55 | 1.08 | 2.21 |
Social support (continuous) | 0.73 | 0.63 | 0.86 |
Model 5 Adjusted risk of No-PA/CM-PA with individual ACE questions, adjusting for backward-selected covariables (WITHOUT forcing any individual ACE question in the model*) | |||
Your parents were separated or divorced Yes versus No | 1.57 | 1.10 | 2.24 |
Education High school or less versus Some college or above | 1.50 | 0.95 | 2.37 |
Race Black versus White | 3.61 | 1.99 | 6.57 |
Race Other versus White | 1.00 | 0.54 | 1.87 |
Income Low versus non-low | 11.39 | 7.65 | 16.96 |
US Born Yes versus No | 7.17 | 3.29 | 15.66 |
Resilience Low versus High | 0.72 | 0.47 | 1.09 |
Resilience Med versus High | 0.61 | 0.40 | 0.93 |
Residence in high poverty Zip Code Yes versus No | 1.48 | 0.98 | 2.22 |
Parity No prior pregnancy versus Prior pregnancy | 2.77 | 1.91 | 4.00 |
Intention to become pregnant No versus Yes | 2.89 | 2.04 | 4.10 |
Pregnancy stress (continuous) | 1.33 | 1.11 | 1.59 |
Tobacco use Yes versus No | 1.77 | 1.06 | 2.98 |
Marijuana use Ever versus Never | 1.58 | 1.11 | 2.26 |
Social support (continuous) | 0.73 | 0.62 | 0.85 |
DISCUSSION
In this study of over 1,500 mothers, we found that those with a history of adverse events in childhood have higher odds of increased odds of lacking voluntary paternity acknowledgment (i.e., CM-PA or suboptimal PS), independent of multiple maternal and paternal demographics and social-clinical factors. Our results are consistent with prior research, indicating a connection between maternal ACEs and adverse perinatal outcomes. For example, Mersky and Lee (2019) reported that a higher cumulative ACE score was significantly associated with an elevated risk of pregnancy loss, preterm birth, and low birth weight.[4] Similarly, Smith et al. (2016) suggested that having ACEs was associated with offspring’s birth weight loss as well as a shorter gestational age.[21] Furthermore, Ukah et al. (2016) and Alio et al. (2021) researched the association between ACEs and breastfeeding outcomes and found that ACEs were associated with a higher risk of the baby not being exclusively breastfed for up to six months.[13,22] Our findings align with previous studies indicating that Black individuals, low-income mothers, and fathers with lower education are less likely to establish paternity without court involvement.[10,11,20]
The mechanisms for the association of maternal history of ACEs and involuntary PA for their infants may be explained, theoretically in part, from biopsychological perspectives. Maternal ACEs experiences could influence the functionality of the HPA axis. This axis plays a critical role in stress response and regulation. When altered, it can lead to increased stress sensitivity and a maladaptive response to negative stimuli. Such physiological changes can subsequently affect maternal behaviors and relationship dynamics, potentially leading to less engagement from partners, which could manifest as decreased paternal involvement in caregiving and supportive roles.[23] Yet, given the cross-sectional and exploratory nature of the study, it is important to exercise caution when considering these potential explanations, as they warrant further investigation within an academic framework.
Among all ACE domains, the household dysfunction domain (particularly “lived with someone who is a problem drinker” or “one used the street drug”) placed mothers’ infants at greater risk of having court-mandated paternity establishment. A mechanism that explains this, in part, may be that children of parents who use or abuse substances are at increased risk of experiencing poor cognitive, social, and emotional development as well as a higher risk of depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues.[24] These mental and developmental difficulties are a challenge to maintaining healthy intimate relationships.[25,26]
We suggest that ACEs may exert transgenerational effects in addition to direct impact on the immediate offspring. For instance, when a mother experiences ACEs, her infant may face suboptimal PS (CM-PA or No-PA), akin to a “parents were separated or divorced” scenario, falling under household dysfunction. This creates a cycle involving ACEs, suboptimal PS, possible household dysfunction, and ACEs again, perpetuating across generations without intervention.
Limitations and Strengths of the Study
This study is limited by its reliance on existing secondary data, missing broader measures of paternal characteristics and involvement. Future research should include both parents’ perspectives to fully capture paternal engagement. Another limitation is the recall bias from the retrospective survey, despite efforts to minimize this through standardized surveys. Caution is advised when extending findings beyond a sample of majority white, educated individuals. Finally, despite adjusting for known confounders, there could still be unaccounted variables affecting the results.
Nevertheless, this study has several strengths. First, we have a large sample size (N = 1,556) that allowed for the detection of a small effect with decent power. Second, the results of our study were robust across sensitivity analyses, which consistently confirmed that ACEs were associated with a higher risk of no paternity establishment and/or court-mandated paternity establishment. Third, we adjusted for a comprehensive set of covariates that were associated with paternity establishment, which helped tease out the confounding effects as much as possible. Fourth, we utilized a secondary dataset to explore the relationship between maternal ACE and offspring’s paternity acknowledgment status at birth in a cost-efficient and time-saving manner, laying the foundation for subsequent confirmatory research. Fifth, to our knowledge, this is among the few studies that examine the association between maternal ACEs and infants’ paternity establishment, helping to fill a knowledge gap.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR TRANSLATION
Our exploration of the ACE-paternity acknowledgment association highlighted the potential adverse effect of maternal ACEs on their infants’ paternity establishment, especially based on maternal childhood exposure to household dysfunction. Future confirmatory studies are warranted to validate our results. Future studies should incorporate comprehensive assessments of paternal involvement while meticulously controlling for father-related factors to examine the association between maternal ACE and the engagement of the infants’ fathers. Such an association would emphasize the need for targeted support mechanisms for the engagement of fathers to help mitigate the long-lasting effects of maternal childhood adversity. Actionable interventions could include initiating ACE screenings during pregnancy, delivering specialized psychological support to at-risk mothers, enhancing relationship counseling during the perinatal period, and forming networks for linkage to community resources.
Key Messages
-
Mothers of infants with CM-PA were more likely to be Black or Hispanic, had lower income and education, had higher substance use and traumatic stress, and had lower social support.
-
An elevated maternal ACE score was associated with higher odds of infants experiencing CM-PA.
-
Infants of mothers who experienced family dysfunction were more likely to have CM-PA.
-
Infants of mothers who lived with a problem drinker or drug user during childhood were more likely to have court-enforced paternity affidavits.
Acknowledgments
Our thanks to the survey respondents and the staff of the Monroe County Department of Health for their assistance with the survey implementation.
COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS
Conflicts of Interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.
Financial Disclosure
The authors have no financial disclosures.
Funding/Support
This study was funded by the Community Partnership for Breastfeeding Promotion and Support, National Institutes of Health RO1-HD055191. Linxi Liu is a recipient of a postdoctoral fellowship through an NIH training grant (grant # T32 CA186873 to Jian-Min Yuan).
Ethics Approval
Approval was obtained from the University of Rochester Research Subjects Review Board for these secondary data analyses, RSRB number 00000056, dated 09/22/2023.
Declaration of Patient Consent
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent.
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology for Manuscript Preparation
The authors confirm that there was no use of AI-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.
Disclaimer
None.
References
- Childhood abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction and the risk of illicit drug use: The adverse childhood experiences study. Pediatrics. 2003;111(3):564-72.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) [Internet]. 2021[cited 2023 Jul 19]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/aces/index.html
- Child sexual abuse victimization and later sequelae during pregnancy and childbirth. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse. 1992;1(1):103-12.
- [Google Scholar]
- Adverse childhood experiences and poor birth outcomes in a diverse, low-income sample. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19(1):387.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Father Involvement, Maternal Health Behavior and Infant Health. Fragile Families Research Brief. 2001;5
- [Google Scholar]
- The effects of father involvement during pregnancy on receipt of prenatal care and maternal smoking. Matern Child Health J. 2007;11(6):595-602.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Paternal support and preterm birth, and the moderation of effects of chronic stress: A study in Los Angeles County mothers. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2010;13(4):327-38.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Assessing the impact of paternal involvement on racial/ethnic disparities in infant mortality rates. J Community Health. 2011;36(1):63-8.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Father involvement, child health and maternal health behavior. Children and Youth Services Review. 2001;23(4–5):403-25.
- [Google Scholar]
- Paternity acknowledgment in 2 million birth records from Michigan. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e70042.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Paternity establishment: Variables associated with failed implementation. Primary Care Update for Ob/Gyns. 2003;10(5):258-60.
- [Google Scholar]
- Maternal adverse childhood experiences, paternal involvement, and infant health. J Pediatr. 2021;236:157-163.e1.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Association of voluntary legal paternity and breastfeeding duration and exclusivity in a sample of mothers in NewYork State, United States. Int J Transl Med Res Public Health. 2021;5(2):284-97.
- [Google Scholar]
- Breastfeeding: Why It Matters; [Accessed November 11, 2023]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/about-breastfeeding/why-it-matters.html
- Cumulative rates of child protection involvement and terminations of parental rights in a California birth cohort, 1999–2017. Am J Public Health. 2021;111(6):1157-63.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Paternity establishment at birth and early maltreatment: Risk and protective effects by maternal race and ethnicity. Child Abuse Negl. 2019;95:104069.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Child maltreatment and the developing HPA axis. Horm Behav. 2006;50(4):632-9.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- How Childhood Trauma Affects Us as Adults – Healing the Heart. 2023 [cited 2024 Apr 3]. Available from: https://www.mentalhealthcenter.org/how-childhood-trauma-affects-adult-relationships/#google_vignette
- Adapting the pregnancy risk assessment monitoring survey to enhance locally available data: Methods. Matern Child Health J. 2014;18(5):1196-204.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Establishment of legal paternity for children of unmarried American women: Trade-offs in male commitment to paternal investment. Hum Nat. 2017;28(2):168-200.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Early childhood adversity and pregnancy outcomes. Matern Child Health J. 2016;20(4):790-8.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- The impact of a history of adverse childhood experiences on breastfeeding initiation and exclusivity: Findings from a national population health survey. Breastfeed Med. 2016;11(10):544-50.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Father presence matters: A review of the literature. Toward and ecological framework of fathering and child outcomes. Philadelphia, PA: National Center on Fathers and Families; 1996.
- Children living with parents who have a substance use disorder 2017 Aug 24. In: The CBHSQ Report. Rockville (MD): Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (US); 2013.
- [Google Scholar]
- Emotional contagion. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 1993;2(3):96-100.
- [Google Scholar]
- Anxiety disorders and intimate relationships: A study of daily processes in couples. J Abnorm Psychol. 2010;119(1):163-73.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]