Home Structure as Predictor of Adolescents’ Autonomy Development in the Assin South District, Ghana by*Anthony Edward Boakye PhD Candidate in Journal of Clinical Case Reports, Medical Images and Health Sciences

Home Structure as Predictor of Adolescents’ Autonomy Development in the Assin South District, Ghana  by Anthony Edward Boakye PhD Candidate in Journal of Clinical Case Reports, Medical Images and Health Sciences 

Abstract  :

Background:Too many rules or too forceful implementation of these rules, as well as too many consequences for not following the rules, can make adolescents feel that they are being oppressed rather than supported. This study investigates the home structure and adolescents’ autonomy development in the Assin South District, Ghana. 

Methods:A cross-sectional descriptive design was used with 400 participants which comprised parents age 30-59 and older adolescents age 15-19 years. Data were analysed using frequency distribution, Pearson’s chi-squared test of independence and binary logistic regression.

 Results:Association was found between parents knowing their child’s whereabout at p=0.034, (x²=4.493). Parents’ consistency in rules enforcement was significant at 0.001, (x²=10.753) and adolescents’ autonomy development. Measures of control was significant at p=0.019, (x²=5.493).

 Conclusion: Parents in Assin South District could be a bit liberal not overprotective over adolescents to enable them aspire for autonomy.

  Introduction:

The adolescent years can be difficult for both parents and children, while adolescents fight to develop more independence, parents struggle to set appropriate boundaries for adolescents (Fosco, Lippold & Feinberg, 2014; Mastrotheodoros et al., 2019). Despite parents need rules and regulations to guide decision-making and behaviour of adolescents, they (adolescents) also need to feel independent (Ciranka & van den Bos, 2019; Shah Szwedo & Allen, 2022). Allowing adolescents to feel that they are in control of their lives and making their own decisions while still offering them structure and guidance until their brains are fully developed is one of the most difficult balancing acts of parenting (Shah Szwedo & Allen, 2022). Too many rules or too forceful implementation of these rules, as well as too many consequences for not following the rules, can make adolescents feel that they are being oppressed rather than supported (Gupta, Madabushi & Gupta, 2023). Not enough rules or structure, or inconsistent enforcement of the rules, can create resentment and confusion for both parent and child (Hayes & Higgins, 2014). Finding a better compromise between healthy boundaries versus independent choices will allow adolescents to feel in control while also providing them with a solid foundation as their brains continue to develop (Hartley & Somerville, 2015). For adolescents to become a responsible adult, they need autonomy and connectedness, both of which grow out of close, supportive relationships with others (Beyers, Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2024; Ruiz & Yabut, 2024). As adolescents mature, they increasingly view personal matters—such as decisions about their appearance and friendships—as areas that should be under their own control (Melendro, Campos, Rodríguez-Bravo & Arroyo Resino, 2020). This desire for self-determination can make parents and other guardians feel pushed away and even increase conflict in some families, particularly during early-to mid-adolescence (Beyers, Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2024; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2023; Shah, Szwedo & Allen, 2022). Though, they still need responsive and supportive relationships with their families to navigate this time successfully. Therefore, parenting style that supports autonomy, relaxes control while maintaining values and limits and enables open communication leads to better outcomes for adolescents (Young & Tully, 2022). However, there may be long-term consequences for an individual who fails to gain autonomy at the appropriate time or gains too much autonomy too early (Davis & McQuillin, 2021). Increasing autonomy without guidance from adults is harmful to adolescents’ development while controlling or coercive measures to protect an adolescent from making risky decisions may lead an adolescent into further pursuit of autonomy and often in the opposite direction intended by well-meaning adults (Davis & McQuillin, 2021). Essentially, there are risks associated with both complete autonomy as well as excessive control. A balance between independence and support is needed and often stems from having a close, emotional relationship between the adult and teen. Autonomy-supportive parenting that respects adolescents’ feelings and preferences is related to increased well-being and less depression (Mageau et al., 2015). Conversely, controlling parenting that seeks to manage adolescent behaviour through punishment, guilt, and shaming is associated with negative outcomes (Young & Tully, 2022). Previous studies on the phenomena dwelt much on how adolescents’ sociodemographic characteristics relate to autonomy development. For instance, Sher-Censor (2015) and Graça et al. (2010) concentrated on how gender differences relate to adolescents’ autonomy and revealed contradictory findings. Whereas Sher-Censor (2015) found higher autonomy levels in girls, Graça et al. (2010) reported better results among male respondents. However, other studies found more coherent results when it comes to age. Several studies (example, Graça et al., 2010; Dutra-Thomé et al., 2019) submitted that older adolescents exhibit better levels of autonomy, as expected. The adolescents’ social context also has a strong influence on their autonomy levels (Wood et al., 2018). The families’ socioeconomic conditions (Barbosa et al., 2017) as well as the kind of work carried out in residential care to promote autonomy, have a strong impact on adolescents (Cabral, 2017). When focusing on gender differences to estimate adolescents’ autonomy, male and female show autonomous behaviours at different stages of their adolescence, however, this gender equality is not evident in all cultural contexts. Further, even, those variances are nowadays less important than they were in the past (Dutra-Thomé et al., 2019). It should also be noted that the studies conducted so far, none has its aim towards the influences of home structure  

on adolescents’ autonomy development. Therefore, to contribute to this conversation, this parent-child dyad study investigates whether home structure predicts adolescents’ autonomy development in the Assin South District, Ghana by specifically analysing: if parental attitude towards adolescents influences autonomy development among adolescents in the Assin South District, Ghana; whether parental child discipline predicts adolescents’ autonomy development in the Assin South District, Ghana; and lastly, if parental home monitoring influences adolescents’ autonomy development. The study further hypothesised that there is no statistically significant relationship between home structure and adolescents’ autonomy development.

Theoretical Framework :

The study relied much on Deci and Ryan’s 1980 Self Determination Theory [SDT] which links personality, human motivation, and optimal functioning together. This SDT has been applied in various disciplines, including education, sport, health, and the workplace, and has been used to explain the effects of different types of motivation on behaviour and well-being. The SDT of motivation is a psychological theory that expounds how human behaviour is influenced by the degree to which the behaviour is autonomous or self-determined. The theory posits that behaviour that is autonomous or self-determined is more likely to be sustained over time and to lead to greater wellbeing and personal growth than behaviour that is controlled by external factors or the individual’s perceived lack of choice (Ryan, 2009). As posited by the theory, people have three innate psychological needs (which are: autonomy, competence, and relatedness) and these must be met in order to maintain optimal motivation. Per the SDT, the level of autonomy in behaviour is influenced by the degree to which the behaviour is in line with an individual’s values, goals, and needs (Gagné & E.D.-J. of O. behaviour, undefined, 2005). However, the theory distinguishes between different types of motivation namely autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, and amotivation. As noted by the theory, autonomous motivation implies a behaviour that is in line with an individual’s values, goals, and needs and is perceived as self-determined. Controlled motivation signifies a behaviour that is performed because of external rewards or to avoid punishment. Amotivation connotes the absence of motivation. It happens when an individual does not have a reason or belief that behaviour or activity will lead to the desired outcome or goal (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Vallerand et al., 2008). The theory also suggests that when people feel autonomous and competent in their behaviour, they are more likely to experience positive outcomes such as 

personal growth, well-being, and optimal performance. Research suggests that promoting autonomy-supportive environments and behaviours can lead to better outcomes, such as improved performance and satisfaction (Sheldon et al., 2014; Teixeira et al., 2012).

 Conceptual Framework of the Study

 To be able to unearth the pathway through which home structure influences adolescents’ autonomy development, the various constructs of home structure (HS) have been summarised in Figure 1 to indicate how parental attitude, child monitoring and child discipline could give rise to adolescents’ autonomy development [AAD]. The AAD in the framework has been stratified into autonomous and not-autonomous and these in return shape the well-being of the adolescents. The framework has demonstrated the main pathways and mechanisms through which HS affect AAD.

 Methods:

Study Setting and Participants 

Assin South District in the Central Region of Ghana was chosen for the study because it contributed high percentages (19.6%,17.5%, & 18.5%) to the prevalence of adolescents’ pregnancy in the region and the country as a whole. This was attributed to teenagers between the ages of 15 and 19 years in 2015, 2016 and 2020 respectively (Ghana Health Service, 2015, 2016; Ghana News Agency, 2020; Owusu, 2021) while Awutu Senya East recorded the lowest rate of 7% pregnancies in the same region (GHS, 2016). Moreover

the Assin South district has not been spared from the global HIV and AIDS pandemic (Citi News Room, 2022; GSS, 2012). The prevalence of HIV in the district is 0.84% (Citi News Room, 2022). Hence, the statistics in the district qualify it for the study. In the district, parents age 30-59 years and adolescents age 15-19 years were enrolled in the study. In all, 400 respondents were recruited for the study. However, after checking and cleaning the data, 354 respondents’ respons

Study Design and Data Source

The study made used of cross-sectional design where descriptive survey plan was adopted. The study used separate questionnaires to collect similar data from both parents and adolescents from the field. The data collection instruments used was developed with reference to literature and the conceptual framework of the study. However, already used survey questionnaires were also reviewed and those that were found appropriate to the study were adopted into the formulation of the data collection instruments.

Sampling Procedures

The study made used of a multistage sampling procedure. The random selection of Assin South District out of the 22 metropolitan, municipals and districts assemblies within the Central Region was done at stage. Selection of settlements out of the twelve (12) settlements in the district to form a study site for the study was done in stage two with a simple random technique. Signing of number of respondents to be selected at each study site (settlement) selected took place at stage three. The final stage was where systematic random sampling method was used to select the respondents from each of the selected study location for the study. 

Sample Size Estimation

The sample size was estimated at 400 with the help of Cochran’s (1977) formula as follows: n = z² p (1─p) / d2 n = sample size Confidence level set at 95% (1.96) The p-value was set at 0.05. z = standard normal deviation set at 1.96 d = degree of accuracy desired at 0.05 p = proportion of parents aged 30-59years and adolescents aged 15-19years was 36%.

n = 1.962 *0.36 (1─0.36)/0.052 = 354.041, approximately 400 Sample size was, therefore, estimated at 400 respondents for the study. The extra 46 respondents were added to cater for refusal, and non-responses. The selection of the respondents for the study commenced on Wednesday, 15th of July, 2020 and ended on Friday, 31st of July, 2020.  

Data Quality Concerns

To ensure data acceptability for analysis, Cronbach's alpha reliability test was conducted on the HS and AAD data collected from the field, it was revealed that Cronbach’s alpha rated the data as acceptable with a reliability coefficient of α = 0.63. As noted by Griethuijsen et al. (2014), a general accepted rule is that alpha of 0.6-0.7 indicates an acceptable level of reliability and that data is useful. As part of ensuring validity of data collected from the field, steps were made to pretest the questionnaires before the actual data collection. Also, standardised data collection instruments which were used in previous HS and AAD survey (Lezin, Rolleri, Bean & Taylor, 2004) were adopted.

 Variables and Measurements

In the study, the independent variable was HS and the dependent variable was AAD. Measurement of HS and AA dwells on: rules governing; bedtime, homework, TV, alcohol/drugs, dating, clarity of rules and agreement with parent rules; child calls if late, parents know if not home, child can reach parents, parents know where child is after school and with whom, parents know child’s friends, child’s perception of parents’ knowledge of where he/she goes and whom he/she is with, parent’s presence before and after;- school, dinner, bedtime, weekends, child’s perception of parent’s strictness, how often child goes where told not to, how difficult it is to know where child goes, adult supervision of children’s parties, over-protectiveness; ― babying, controlling behaviour-blame, guilt, rejection/ withdrawal, erratic emotional behaviour, punishment, type of punishment restrict activities, slapping/hitting, arguing, name-calling; parents knowledge of child’s friends, activities and whereabouts, parents’ awareness of child’s risk behaviour, consistency in rules and discipline (Lezin et al., 2004). Lastly, autonomy construct measurement dwelt mainly on: child makes own decisions, child’s perception of parent’s non-coercive, democratic discipline, encouragement of child’s own ideas, intrusiveness, locus of control, voice in family decisions, trust, respect for child’s individuality (Lezin et al., 2004). 

Data Collection Procedure

Data collection commenced on 23rd of June, 2020 and ended on 5th of July, 2020 at the Assin South District in the Central Region of Ghana with the help of four research assistants. Two sets of interviews were conducted in each house in the field for the parent–child dyad to avoid spying and to ensure openness and truthful responses. Generally, parents were first interviewed before the child.

Data Analysis 

The data for the study was processed with SPSS version 27 after a detailed cross-examination for errors and recoding of questions that asked respondents to choose more than one option as well as the open-ended questions to ease data entry had been done. The study made used of frequency distribution (percentages) to summarise information on: demographic data, child monitoring, child discipline, and parental attitudes as well as adolescents’ autonomy. The Pearson’s chi-squared test of independence was applied to test the statistical hypothesis postulated in the study to either approve it or disapprove it. However, the binary logistic regression analysis was also conducted to identify factors that predict adolescents’ autonomy.

Ethical Consideration :

In order to ensure ethical consideration, participation was made voluntary and participants were given the choice to withdraw at any time. Oral consent was taken from both parents and adolescents age 18-19years in the field while adolescents below 18years old also assented after their parents have consented on their behalf. Since, verbal consent was what was sought, it was not documented but was witnessed by the participant’s parents or any elderly person who directly related to the participant. The reason why adolescents less than 18years assented was that in Ghana the 1992 constitution stipulates that one becomes an adult and takes decisions for him/herself after he/ she has celebrated the 18th birthday. So, without that, all decisions concerning minors are done by their parents. Anonymity and confidentiality were assured. During the fieldwork, all forms of identification including respondents’ names, addresses and telephone numbers were avoided. In addition, ethical approval (with ID number UCCIRB/ CHLS/2020/09) to conduct this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of University of Cape Coast, Ghana.

Results:
Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Participants 

Home Structure Instituting vibrant rules and punitive measures will enable adolescents make informed decisions and take responsibility for their choices. This is a significant step towards autonomy. Parents must avoid being overprotective (Shah, Szwedo & Allen, 2022). It is normal to have household rules and regulations to check for your children’s safety. Therefore, to unravel the influences of home structure on adolescents’ autonomy development, several questions were formulated on the various constructs of home structure (parental attitudes, parental child discipline and parental home monitoring) to solicit data from participants in the field to analyse the extent to which home structure exert influences on adolescents’ autonomy development. Parental Attitudes To answer the first research objective, participants were asked several questions which span through parents’ permissive attitude, forms of parents’ permissive attitude and parental disapproval of adolescents’ bad behaviour. The results are presented in Table 2. Assessment of parental permissive attitude in the home towards adolescents’ autonomy development revealed that a majority of the participants (parents [98.3%] and adolescents [88.1%]) indicated that parents do not have permissive attitude towards adolescents’ autonomy development in the home (see Table 2). On whether parents disapprove of child’s autonomy development or not revealed that all parents and 49.7% of adolescents said that parents disapprove child’s autonomy development. When parents were asked to indicate how they disapprove child’s autonomy development in the home revealed that 88.7% of the parents frown their face, restrict child’s activity and resort to name calling while 11.3% of the parents said that they deny child’s privileges (see Table 2). Among the adolescents that said parents do not have permissive attitude towards their autonomy development but rather disapprove it, 72.9% of them reported same as their parents thus parents frown their face, restrict child’s activity and resort to name calling while 27.1% of the adolescents said parents deny child’s privileges. To unmask the influences 

Conclusions:

Participants have demonstrated an in-depth knowledge about home structure. This study represents a cross-section of parent-child dyad in the Assin South District, Ghana. It sought to gain a comprehensive understanding of how home structure influences adolescents’ autonomy development in the Assin South District, Ghana. The study drew much on self-determined theory to serve as a justification and foundation to the purposes of the study. Two out of the three null hypotheses suggesting statistically significant relationships between parental child discipline as well as parental home structure and adolescents’ autonomy development were not confirmed. Association was not found between parental attitude and adolescents’ autonomy development therefore the null hypothesis was accepted. Unfortunately, none of the binary logistic regression analysis conducted could produce significant result. Parents in Assin South District could be a bit liberal not overprotective over adolescents to enable them aspire for autonomy. Acknowledgements: Sincerely, I am grateful to the respondents who sacrifice their time to take part in the study and the research assistants for their help during the data collection. 

Declaration:

Ethical Approval: Ethical approval (with ID number UCCIRB/ CHLS/2020/09) to carry out the study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of University of Cape Coast, Ghana. Consent to participate in the Study: In the field, verbal consent was sought before a participant could take part in the study. Consent to Publish: Participants were informed that the study was strictly academic and that the results would be published for the purposes of contributing to building academic literature. Competing Interests: No competing interest existed. Funding: The study was self-funded Availability of Data and Materials: The data is only available to the author hence it was a primary data.

For more information: jcrmhs