Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Trute, B.
Right arrow Articles by Hiebert-Murphy, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Trute, B.
Right arrow Articles by Hiebert-Murphy, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Pediatric Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2002, pp. 271-280
© 2002 Society of Pediatric Psychology

Family Adjustment to Childhood Developmental Disability: A Measure of Parent Appraisal of Family Impacts

Barry Trute, PhD1 and Diane Hiebert-Murphy, PhD2

1 McGill University, 2 University of Manitoba

All correspondence should be sent to Barry Trute, School of Social Work, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2A7. E-mail: btrute{at}po-box.mcgill.ca .

Objective: To develop the Family Impact of Childhood Disability Scale (FICD) to assess subjective interpretation or "primary appraisal" of parents regarding the impact of a child with developmental disabilities on the family.

Method: A random sample of 87 families was assessed while children with developmental disabilities were in the preschool years. After 7 years had elapsed, 64 of these families were interviewed again when the children were in the preteen years. A set of standardized self-report measures provided mother and father views of child, parent, and family functioning.

Results: The FICD demonstrated adequate internal consistency, with some evidence of discriminant and predictive validity. The FICD total score, based on the discrepancy between positive and negative subscale scores, was found to be a significant predictor of future parenting stress of mothers and of fathers, even when controlling for other important explanatory variables such as marital adjustment and level of disability in a child.

Conclusions: The 15-item FICD offers a brief assessment of both positive and negative parent appraisals, with a total discrepancy score that predicts long-term parenting stress.

Key words: developmental disability; parent stress; cognitive appraisal; measurement.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Focus Autism Other Dev DisablHome page
G. King, D. Baxter, P. Rosenbaum, L. Zwaigenbaum, and A. Bates
Belief Systems of Families of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders or Down Syndrome
Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, March 1, 2009; 24(1): 50 - 64.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Pediatr PsycholHome page
M. A. Alderfer, B. H. Fiese, J. I. Gold, J. J. Cutuli, G. N. Holmbeck, L. Goldbeck, C. T. Chambers, M. Abad, D. Spetter, and J. Patterson
Evidence-based Assessment in Pediatric Psychology: Family Measures
J. Pediatr. Psychol., October 1, 2008; 33(9): 1046 - 1061.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Pediatr PsycholHome page
S. E. Waisbren, M. Rones, C. Y. Read, D. Marsden, and H. L. Levy
Brief Report: Predictors of Parenting Stress Among Parents of Children With Biochemical Genetic Disorders
J. Pediatr. Psychol., October 1, 2004; 29(7): 565 - 570.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Pediatr PsycholHome page
J. E. Farmer, W. E. Marien, M. J. Clark, A. Sherman, and T. J. Selva
Primary Care Supports for Children with Chronic Health Conditions: Identifying and Predicting Unmet Family Needs
J. Pediatr. Psychol., July 1, 2004; 29(5): 355 - 367.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.