The family system, or the caregiving environment, facilitates the socialization of youth into society. This article explores the influence of parents’ civic behavior within the caregiving environment on the prosocial civic behaviors of their late adolescent and young adult children. Using secondary data from the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement National Youth Survey, this exploratory study examines behaviors among 1,000 youths ages 15 to 25 years. Parents’ voting behaviors and parent–child political communication were significant measures related to youths’ value of voting and performance of service (volunteering). The findings suggest that an altruism-rich, caregiving environment is a significant familial context to promote and sustain civic engagement among youths.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeckerG. S. (1995). The family and the state. In FebreroR. & SchwartzP. S. (Eds.), The essence of Becker (pp. 382-402). Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press. (Original work published 1988)
2.
BurnsN., & KinderD. (2000, June 2). Social trust and democratic politics [based on the 2000 NES special topic pilot study]. Paper presented to the National Election Studies Board.
3.
ErmischJ., & FrancesconiM (2001). Family matters: Impacts of family background on educational attainments. Economica, 68, 137–156.
4.
FlanaganC. A., BowesJ. M., JonssonB., CsapoB., & SheblanovaE. (1998). Ties that bind: Correlates of adolescents’ civic commitments in seven countries. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 457–475.
5.
FletcherA. C., ElderG. H., & MekosD. (2000). Parental influences on adolescent involvement in community activities. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10, 29–48.
6.
FramM.S. (2004). Research for progressive change: Bourdieu and social work. Social Service Review, 78, 553-576.
7.
KellyD. (2002a). Beyond outreach: Group mentoring opportunities to promote and sustain community service among persons of color.Washington, DC: Corporation for National & Community Service.
8.
KellyD. (2002b). The impact of organized group mentoring on college completion and quality of life satisfaction.New York: Fordham University, Graduate School of Social Service.
9.
KellyD. (2003). Organized group mentoring as a contemporary practice for building positive attachments: The impact of organized group mentoring on college completion, quality of life satisfaction & community service.Garden City, NY: Adelphi University, School of Social Work.
10.
LopezM. H. (2004). Council for Excellence in Government/Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement National Youth Survey 2004. Washington, DC: Council for Excellence in Government.
11.
MaloneN., BalujaK. F., CostanzoJ. M., & DavisC. J. (2003). The foreign-born population: 2000—Census 2000 brief.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics & Statistics Administration and U.S. Census Bureau.
12.
McDevittM., KiousisS., WuX., LoschM., & RipleyT. (2003). The civic bonding of school and family: How Kids Voting students enliven the domestic sphere. College Park, MD: Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.
13.
Morrison GutmanL., & EcclesJ. S. (1999). Financial strain, parenting behaviors and adolescents’ achievement: Testing model equivalence between African American and European American single- and two-parent families. Child Development, 70, 1464–1476.
14.
O'DonnellJ., MichalakE. A., & AmesE. B. (1997). Inner-city youths helping children: After-school programs to promote bonding and reduce risk. Social Work in Education, 19, 231–241.
15.
ParkerL. M., & FrancoM. L. (1999). Empowering youths to build community through service: Youths’ attitudes toward service and extent of their service activities. Social Work in Education, 21, 163–175.
16.
PetersH. E. (1995). An economic approach to the study of child wellbeing: Gary Becker on altruism and household production. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 587–608.
17.
ReeseL.A. and RosenfeldR.A. (2002). The Civic Culture of Local Economic Development.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
18.
RosenthalS., FeiringC., & LewisM. (1998). Political volunteering from late adolescence to young adulthood: Patterns and predictors. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 477–493.
19.
Torney-PurtaJ., AmadeoJ., & RichardsonW. K. (2003, September). Civic service and youth: A psychological perspective. Paper presented at Global Service Institute International Symposium, St. Louis, MO.
20.
Torney-PurtaJ., RichardsonW. K., & BarberC. H. (2004). Trust in government-related institutions and civic engagement among adolescents: Analysis of five countries from the IEA Civic Education Study.College Park, MD: Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.
21.
WangM. C., HaertelG. D., & WalbergH. J. (1993). Educational resilience in inner cities.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement.
22.
WattsR. J., GriffithD. M., & Abdul-AdilJ. (1999). Sociopolitical development as an antidote for oppression—Theory and action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 255–271.
23.
YatesM., & YounissJ (1998). Community service and political identity development in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 495–512.
