4.14.1 Findings from previous research
The few differences which have been found between ‘only’ children and children with siblings are concentrated in academic areas, where ‘only’ children have the
advantage and attain higher levels of education (Poston & Falbo, 1990; Gee, 1992; Falbo & Poston, 1993). They have been found to score significantly better than other groups on achievement motivation and personal adjustment (Polit & Falbo, 1987). Chinese research has found that ‘only’ children were more egocentric, whereas sibling children possessed qualities of persistence, co-operation and peer prestige (Shulan et al, 1986). Children from larger families have the advantage of growing up developing a wider range of relationships with siblings, which can make establishing friendships and relationships outside the family easier (Winnicott, 1964).
4.14.2 Experiences of ‘only’ children
There were six ‘only’ children in the sample: Eleanor (G10/2); Anthony (B11/12); Ben (B12/21); Caleb (B13/6); Nasreen (G14/5) and Harry (B14/13). Their circumstances and abilities varied widely. For example, Nasreen was gifted, intellectually and musically, while Caleb had learning disabilities. (Caleb had a younger cousin, a girl aged 8, living with him). These children had the potential disadvantage of not having siblings with whom they could share issues associated with having a parent in prison. This seems to be have been outweighed by having the focused and undiluted
Caleb, seemed to have benefitted from their parent/carer’s focused commitment and support. Eleanor expressed some doubts about her father’s commitment to
maintaining contact with her mother. Nonetheless, as a single parent he was committed to looking after her, and he had additional support from his sister and father. Nasreen also had consistent support from her father, looking after her, and also from her paternal aunt and grandmother, and she remained in close contact with her mother in prison. Harry had been deeply upset when his father was imprisoned. His mother, in spite of her disabilities, gave him her full attention and ensured access to specialist mental health support; and his father in prison was equally committed to supporting his son. ‘Only’ children when visiting their parent in prison had their full and undivided attention which did not have to be shared with siblings.
4.14.3 Experiences of siblings
Siblings could be a source of support, there to talk to when needed and sharing the experience of parental imprisonment. Becky (G12/9) could talk to her older sisters when she needed to. Jack and Kirsty (Case 7) both said in their interviews that they were close to older same sex siblings. Natalie and Declan (Case 4) looked out for each other when they were interviewed together, and had an older brother available as well. Oliver and Jamie (Case 17), with only a year separating them, had shared the experience of their father’s imprisonment. Being part of a large family seemed to have given Sameera and Abida (Case 20) some protection and support. Ethan’s (Case 14) older sisters had been his substitute carers since his mother’s
imprisonment.
Having younger sisters had given Gareth (Case 16) added responsibility. His
grandparents had had to contrive opportunities for him to spend time with his mother on prison visits when his younger sisters monopolised her attention. Becky’s (Case
9) enthusiasm for visiting her father diminished as her much younger brothers took up most of his attention; and Ethan, with two younger sisters, may have had less of his mother’s attention than he needed. Amelia (Case 8), aged only 7, was conscious of how much visiting his father had upset her older brother. Grant (Amelia’s brother), Mark (Case 11), and Kyle (Case 18), all damaged by their parent’s imprisonment, were more oblivious of their siblings’ feelings.
4.14.4 Relationship between children’s age and their vulnerability
From a slightly different perspective, a review of family structure indicates that children of prisoners in this sample seemed more vulnerable between the ages of 7 and 13. Children at different points within this age band appeared equally likely to be vulnerable. In four families, children participating had much younger siblings who seemed less vulnerable, and less affected by having a parent in prison. Becky (G12/9) had younger brothers aged 4 and 5, and according to their mother they were cheerfully unperturbed about their father’s imprisonment and enjoyed their time visiting him in prison. Ethan’s (B9/14) two younger sisters aged 5 and 6, appeared lively and happy children, seemingly not too much affected by their mother being in prison, and happy to be looked after by their three adult sisters. Jamie (B10) and Oliver (B11) had two siblings aged 1 and 2, and although one of them had fairly serious health problems, they were too young to be much aware of their father being in prison (although all the children visited him). Mark (B13/11) had a younger brother aged 4 who seemed much less troubled than Mark by his father being in prison and enthusiastic about opportunities for visiting him. Gareth’s (B11/16) situation was slightly different. One of his younger twin sisters, aged 8, was probably the most perturbed of the three children in the family, probably as a result of witnessing their father assaulting their mother.
Out of the four 14 year olds in the sample, the three girls (Natalie, Nasreen and Abida) were all resilient; Harry was much more vulnerable, but starting to recover. Of the three older children, Samantha and Matthew were mature, while Joe had been very troubled, but thought he was now more grown-up.
There are some indications that older siblings of children interviewed had been less severely impacted by parental imprisonment. Declan and Natalie (Case 4) had an older brother aged 16 (not interviewed) who they said was now focusing on his education and career plans. Jack and Kirsty (Case 7) and Daniel (Case 10) both had older, adult siblings sufficiently mature to be able to handle their parent’s
imprisonment (step/father for Case 7). Mark (B13/11) had an older sister aged 16, more adult, completing her GCSEs and planning further training. Kyle (B11/18) had an older (half) brother (16) and (half) sister (14); and although neither of them had prospered at school, they seemed less traumatised by Kyle’s mother’s imprisonment than he was. According to Piers’ mother (case 15) his older brothers, one of them in prison, missed her a lot, although Piers seemed particularly distraught.
Becky’s (Case 9) situation was again rather different. As the middle child in her family (the fourth out of six children), Becky derived much security from her close relationship with her mother. Her older brother aged 17, and her 19 year old sister now at University, were both reportedly much more angry with their father than Becky, and her older brother’s progress and behaviour at school had been a cause for
concern: as young adults they sounded much less tolerant of their father’s criminal behaviour than their younger sister.
4.14.5 Themes emerging relating to Family Structure
In summary, only children benefited from being the exclusive focus of parental attention, and also from the full time attention of grandparents and other close
relatives. Although some children from larger families had less focused support from parents/carers than they needed, other children derived valuable support from older siblings. Children aged between 7 and 13 were the most vulnerable group; older children were protected by their enhanced maturity; participants’ older (teenage) siblings were mostly less severely impacted by parental imprisonment. Some much younger siblings of children in the study seemed less affected by their parent’s imprisonment.