Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T11:12:58.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“She's just like me”: The Role of the Mentor with Vulnerable Mothers and their Infants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2015

Gaye Mitchell ,
Deborah Absler  and
Cathy Humphreys
Gaye Mitchell*
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Deborah Absler
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Cathy Humphreys
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
*
address for correspondence: Dr Gaye Mitchell, 20 Steele St., Moonee Ponds, 3039 Victoria, Australia. E-mail: gayelm@unimelb.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mentoring Mums, a community-based pilot program, exemplifies a model of volunteer home visiting to vulnerable and socially isolated new mothers and their at-risk infants. An evaluation of the program found that positive changes for both mothers and their babies had been achieved, providing the rationale for exploration of elements that made the mentoring role effective. This article undertakes this exploration through the research question: What do mothers, mentors and workers contribute to the conceptualisation of the mentor role with vulnerable mothers and their infants? The article argues that the program's effectiveness resided in a mentor role that shared primary values of befriending and neighbourliness, rather than in mentors enacting a quasi-professional role. Conceptualisation of the mentor role is based in theory and practice, seeing mentors as straddling the formal world of service intervention and the informal world of kith and kin. It presents ‘befriending’ as part of building substitute networks around very isolated new mothers. The very significant problems experienced by these vulnerable mothers made necessary parallel involvement of a professional volunteer coordinator and ongoing case management. Mentoring did not replace professional involvement, but rather was distinguished as providing something different, but much needed for vulnerable new mothers and their babies.

Keywords

mentoringhome visitingvolunteersvulnerable mothers and infantsfamily servicesearly intervention
Type
Articles
Information
Children Australia , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 33 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Absler, D., Mitchell, G., & Humphreys, C. (2011). ‘Local mums helping other local mums’: The Mentoring Mums Program Evaluation: Program Evaluation Report. Melbourne: Childrens Protection Society.Google Scholar
Armstrong, C., & Hill, M. (2001). Support services for vulnerable families with young children. Child & Family Social Work, 6 (4), 351–358.Google Scholar
Armstrong, K. A. (1981). A treatment and education program for parents and children who are at-risk of abuse and neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect, 5 (2), 167–175.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. S. R. M. K. (2009). The utility of volunteer home-visiting support to prevent maternal depression in the first year of life. Child: Care, Health & Development, 35 (6), 807–816.Google Scholar
Bornstein, M., Hahn, C. H., Suwalsky, J., & Haynes, M. (2011). Maternal and infant behavior and context: Associations with mutual emotional availability. Infant Mental Health Journal, 32 (1), 70–94.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cupples, M. E., Stewart, M. C., Percy, A., Hepper, P., Murphy, C., & Halliday, H. L. (2011). A RCT of peer-mentoring for first-time mothers in socially disadvantaged areas (The MOMENTS Study). Archives of Disease in Childhood, 96 (3), 252–258.Google Scholar
Duggan, A., Caldera, D., Rodriguez, K., Burrell, L., Rohde, C., & Crowne, S. S. (2007). Impact of a statewide home visiting program to prevent child abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31 (8), 801–827.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DuMont, K., Mitchell-Herzfeld, S., Greene, R., Lee, E., Lowenfels, A., Rodriguez, M., & Dorabawila, V. (2008). Healthy Families New York (HFNY) randomized trial: Effects on early child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32 (3), 295–315.Google Scholar
Farber, M. L. Z. (2009). Parent mentoring and child anticipatory guidance with latino and african american families. Health & Social Work, 34 (3), 179–189.Google Scholar
Frost, N. L. M. L. (2000). Home-start and the delivery of family support. Children & Society, 14 (5), 328–342.Google Scholar
Garbarino, J. (1992). Children and families in the social environment (2nd ed.). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Germain, C. B., & Bloom, M. (1999). Human behavior in the social environment: An ecological view (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gessner, B. D. (2008). The effect of Alaska's home visitation program for high-risk families on trends in abuse and neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32 (3), 317–333.Google Scholar
Heaman, M., Chalmers, K., Woodgate, R., & Brown, J. (2006). Early childhood home visiting programme: Factors contributing to success. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55 (3), 291–300.Google Scholar
Hetherington, E. M., Lerner, R. M., Perlmutter, M., &Social Science Research Council (US). (1988). Child development in life-span perspective. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Homel, R., Freiberg, K., Lamb, C., Leech, M., Carr, A., Hampshire, A., . . . Batchelor, S. (2006). The Pathways to Prevention Project: The first five years, 1999–2004. Sydney: Griffith University & Mission Australia.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed method research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14–26.Google Scholar
Letourneau, N., Stewart, M., Dennis, C. L., Hegadoren, K., Duffett-Leger, L., & Watson, B. (2011). Effect of home-based peer support on maternal-infant interactions among women with postpartum depression: A randomized, controlled trial. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 20 (5), 345–357.Google Scholar
Macionis, G., & John, L. (2010). Sociology (7th Canadian ed.). Toronto: Pearson Canada.Google Scholar
Maluccio, A. N. (1981). Promoting competence in clients: A new/old approach to social work practice. New York, London: Free Press, Collier Macmillan Publishers.Google Scholar
Manning, M., Homel, R., & Smith, C. (2012). A meta-analysis of the effects of early developmental prevention programs in at-risk populations on non-health outcomes in adolescence. Child and Youth Services Review, 32, 506–519.Google Scholar
McCain, M., Mustard, F., & Shanker, S. (2007). Early Years Study 2: Putting science into action. Toronto: Council for Early Childhood Development.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G., & Campbell, L. (2011). The social economy of excluded families. Child & Family Social Work, 16 (4), 422–433.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G., & Sheehan, J. (2003). ‘The only friend I’ve ever had’: Building relationships with excluded families. Melbourne: MacKillop Family Services.Google Scholar
Mondy, L., & Mondy, S. (2008). Newpin. Courage to change together: Helping families achieve generational change. North Parramatta, NSW Australia: UnitingCare Burnside.Google Scholar
Murphy, C. A., Cupples, M. E., Percy, A., Halliday, H. L., & Stewart, M. C. (2008). Peer-mentoring for first-time mothers from areas of socio-economic disadvantage: A qualitative study within a randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Services Research, 8, 1–11.Google Scholar
Nievar, M. A. (2010). A meta-analysis of home visiting programs: Moderators of improvements in maternal behavior. Infant Mental Health Journal, 31 (5), 499–520.Google Scholar
Olds, D. (2002). Prenatal and infancy home visiting by nurses: From randomized trials to community replication. Prevention Science, 3 (3), 153–172.Google Scholar
Olds, D. L., Robinson, J., Pettitt, L., Luckey, D. W., Holmberg, J., Ng, R. K. . . . Henderson, C. R. Jr. (2004). Effects of home visits by paraprofessionals and by nurses: Age 4 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 114 (6), 1560–1568.Google Scholar
Paris, R., & Dubus, N. (2005). Staying connected while nurturing an infant: A challenge of new motherhood. Family Relations, 54 (1), 72–83.Google Scholar
Paris, R., Gemborys, M., Kaufman, P., & Whitehill, D. (2007). Reaching Isolated new mothers: Insights from a home visiting program using paraprofessionals. Families in Society, 88 (4), 616–626.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, M. L., Dumont, K., Mitchell-Herzfeld, S. D., Walden, N. J., & Greene, R. (2010). Effects of Healthy Families New York on the promotion of maternal parenting competencies and the prevention of harsh parenting. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34 (10), 711–723.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2001). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sewell, W. H. (2005). Logics of history: Social theory and social transformation (pp. 152–174). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P., Phillips, D., &National Research Council (US), Committee on Integrating the Science of Early Childhood Development. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early child development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Sims, M. (2009). Neurobiology and child development: Challenging current interpretation and policy implications. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 34, 36–42.Google Scholar
Söderström, K. (2011). Mental preparation during pregnancy in women with substance addiction: A qualitative interview-study. Child and Family Social Work, 14 (4), 458–467.Google Scholar
Stewart, D. W., Shamdasani, P. N., & Rook, D. W. (2007). Focus groups: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Sweet, M. A., & Appelbaum, M. I. (2004). Is home visiting and effective strategy? A meta-analytic review of home visiting programs for families with young children. Child Development, 75 (5), 1435–1456.Google Scholar
Taft, A., Small, R., Heggarty, K., Lumley, J., Watson, L., & Gold, L. (2009). MOSAIC (MOther's Advocates In the Community): Protocol and sample description of a cluster randomised trial of mentor mother support to reduce intimate partner violence among pregnant or recent mothers. BMC Public Health, 9, 159.Google Scholar
Taft, A., Small, R., Heggarty, K., Watson, L., Gold, L., & Lumley, J. (2011). Mother's Advocates in the Community (MOSAIC) – non-professional mentor support to reduce intimate partner violence and depression in mothers: A cluster randomised trial in primary care. BMC Public Health, 11, 178.Google Scholar
Tierney, L. (1976). Excluded families. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
Vallotton, C. (2011). Babies open our minds to their minds: How ‘listening’ to infant signs complements and extends our knowledge of infants and their development. Infant Mental Health Journal, 32 (1), 115–133.Google Scholar
Vygotski, L. S., Rieber, R. W., & Carton, A. S. (1987). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Wadsby, M., & Arvidsson, E. (2010). Eight years after – a follow-up study of mothers with children at psychosocial risk who received early treatment: Does early intervention leave its mark? Child and Family Social Work, 15, 452–460.Google Scholar
Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Zajicek-Farber, M. L. (2010). Building practice evidence for parent mentoring home visiting in early childhood. Research on Social Work Practice, 20 (1), 46–64.Google Scholar