Structural Risks and Family Adjustment in Midwestern Latine Immigrant Families: Extending the Family Stress Model

Abstract

Objectives:

We tested an extended family stress model of economic hardship (FSM; Conger et al., 2010) incorporating structural risks (discrimination, immigration, and COVID-19 experiences) and qualitative data, to better understand the impact of culturally relevant experiences on family stress processes in rural, immigrant Latine families in the U.S. Midwest.

Method:

Participants were Latine families (N = 307) with a child aged 10–15 (M_age = 12.21 years, 51.0% boys; 71.5% two parent; 93.1% of caregivers and 29% of youth born outside the United States) Mean household income was 25–30K and 65% of caregivers had less than a high school education. We tested a cross-sectional structural equation model in Mplus and analyzed qualitative interviews with a subsample of mother–youth dyads (n = 19).

Results:

COVID-19 experiences predicted economic pressure, and both COVID-19 and discrimination experiences were linked to caregiver psychological distress. Consistent with the FSM, economic pressure predicted psychological distress, which was associated with interparental relationship problems and parenting. Parenting was associated with youth global health. Unexpectedly, interparental relationship problems to parenting were not significant. The indirect association linking COVID-19 experiences to youth global health via psychological distress and parenting was significant. Qualitative data revealed five themes demonstrating how structural and economic risks contributed to distress, conflict, and maladjustment within the family system.

Conclusions:

Culturally relevant structural risks exert a negative influence on family processes in rural Latine immigrant families through contributing to economic pressures and parental distress. The additional impact of these experiences should be considered when addressing the FSM in Latine populations.

Around 51% of Latine¹ youth live in immigrant households; however, their lived experiences and the systemic cultural stressors impacting their developmental context are often not fully represented in developmental science (Stein, Cheah, et al. 2023). Cultural stress has been introduced as a framework to better understand family functioning and health disparities in immigrant families (Salas-Wright & Schwartz, 2019; Suárez-Orozco et al., 2018). Yet, conceptualizations of cultural stress on developmental processes in Latine families (and empirical support) remain somewhat limited. A well-utilized theoretical framework for understanding the impact of stressful experiences on family adjustment is the family stress model (FSM; Conger et al., 1994; Masarik & Conger, 2017). To gain a clearer picture of the FSM that is relevant for immigrant families, it is important to account for structural risks that are linked to economic pressure and caregiver distress. For the purpose of this article, we define structural risks as broader social, physical, economic, or political environments that shape or constrain adjustment and health of individuals (Brown et al., 2019). Both qualitative and quantitative work has demonstrated that factors such as long-standing social and immigration-related inequities and experiences of discrimination shape the experiences of immigrant families including socioeconomic opportunities (e.g., Lorenzo-Blanco et al., 2017; Miller & Csizmadia, 2022). Moreover, immigrant families of color were among the most vulnerable to the health and socioeconomic repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic (Boyer et al., 2023; Prime et al., 2020; Quandt et al., 2021).

The FSM is a developmental framework which outlines the detrimental impact of economic hardship on family functioning (Conger et al., 1994, 2010). The model proposes that negative financial events create economic pressure for parents (e.g. financial cutbacks and being unable to afford necessities) which increases psychological distress and in turn, disrupts family relationships through increasing interparental conflict and detrimentally impacting parenting. Last, the model posits that disrupted parenting leads to child maladjustment. The FSM has been supported in cross-sectional and longitudinal research with Black (Landers-Potts et al., 2015; Newland et al., 2013; Simons et al., 2016; Taylor et al., 2010) and Latine families (Calzada et al., 2019; Derlan et al., 2019; Martin et al., 2019; Taylor, Larsen-Rife, et al., 2012; Taylor, Widaman, et al., 2012; White et al., 2009, 2015), single mothers (Taylor et al., 2010), and in international samples (Zietz et al., 2022). We propose an extension of the FSM model that includes assessment of culturally relevant structural risks relevant to immigrant Latine families (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Conceptual Model of Family Stress Model (FSM) Incorporating Culturally Relevant Structural Stressors and Inequities

Assessing the Family Stress Model in Latine Families

The processes described in the FSM are particularly relevant for immigrant Latine families who are disproportionately impacted by poverty (Guzman et al., 2021). Researchers have assessed the FSM (or components of the FSM) quantitatively with largely Mexican-origin samples, with some studies replacing economic stress with acculturative stress (for a review see Miller & Csizmadia, 2022) or the neighborhood context (e.g., White et al., 2009, 2015). For example, Taylor, Widaman, et al. (2012) tested the full FSM in 674 Mexican-origin families and found single-parent status predicted economic pressure and internalizing problems, and internalizing symptoms impacted children’s social adjustment through involved (but not nurturant) parenting. Derlan et al. (2019) tested a complete FSM with Mexican-origin adolescent mothers and expanded the model to assess conflict between mothers and grandmothers. Family income during pregnancy predicted maladjustment at Age 5 through economic pressure at 10 months, mother’s depression at Age 2, conflict at Age 3, and parenting hassles at Age 4. Another study of 478 Mexican-origin youth (Martin et al., 2019) found economic pressure increased parents’ emotional distress and conflict, which resulted in disrupted parenting and, in turn, increases in youth’s substance use.

White and colleagues examined a partial FSM with 749 Mexican-origin families with a fifth grader in the Southwest (Safa et al., 2021; White et al., 2009, 2015). Using cross-sectional data, they found that financial hardship negatively impacted parenting through increases in parent’s depressive symptoms—although interparental conflict and child adjustment were not assessed (White et al., 2009). A follow-up longitudinal study examining cultural processes found that youth with mothers with higher acculturative language stressors in fifth grade, had lower ethnic socialization practices in seventh grade, and poorer bicultural competence in 10th grade (Safa et al., 2021). Economic pressure predicted increases in harsh parenting and in turn higher externalizing symptoms (White et al., 2015). However, neither of these studies included parent psychological distress, a key component of the processes outlined in the FSM.

Other studies informed by the FSM with Latine families included psychological distress, but not family conflict. One study linked economic stress to lower child compliant prosocial behaviors through its impact on parental depression and reduced parental warmth (Davis et al., 2020) and another linked acculturative stress with child internalizing problems through authoritarian parenting (Calzada et al., 2019). Another study found associations between familism, marital conflict, and nurturant-involved parenting and in turn youth school attachment (Taylor, Larsen-Rife, et al., 2012), but this study did not include economic hardship or psychological distress. Overall, studies with Latine families that explicitly test all the key components of the FSM are fairly limited (Masarik & Conger, 2017; Miller & Csizmadia, 2022).

Cultural and Structural Risks in Immigrant Latine Families

Although the original FSM model is highly relevant for immigrant Latine families, it does not account for important cultural experiences that are commonly experienced by immigrant Latine families. This has been remedied by researchers who have incorporated acculturative stress into the FSM to account for culturally relevant stressors but have replaced economic stress with acculturative stress when testing FSM models with Latine families (e.g., Calzada etal.,2019; Lorenzo-Blanco et al., 2017). Acculturative stress refers to distress that individuals experience because of tension between maintaining their cultural origins and adapting and adopting those of their host county (Cervantes & Bui, 2017; Schwartz et al., 2010). Acculturative stress can lead to psychological distress that disrupts family relationships and parenting as depicted in the FSM through stressful experiences such as language hassles, discrimination, family cultural conflict, and immigration stress (Bostean & Gillespie, 2018; Lorenzo-Blanco et al., 2017). For example, mother’s discrimination experiences predicted higher mother–adolescent conflict (Zhao & White, 2022) and poorer social adjustment in preschoolers (Zeiders et al., 2016) through higher levels of maternal depressive symptoms.

However, researchers have not specifically examined how structural risks and barriers contribute to both economic pressure and distress for immigrant families. Structural risks are likely to precede and contribute to economic stress and hardship (as well as psychological distress), especially for immigrant Latine families in rural, new-destination communities such as the Midwest (Stein et al., 2016). Structural barriers (e.g., immigration status and discrimination) impact both the economic opportunities of Latine populations (Limon et al., 2018; Stein et al., 2016) and the mental health of family members (e.g., Arcury et al., 2022; Lorenzo-Blanco et al., 2017). Discrimination occurs across multiple, interacting levels to maintain the status quo of oppression, and occurs through stereotyping, marginalization, unequal treatment, harmful policies, and dehumanization (Torres et al., 2022). Research has found that Latine populations describe structural and interpersonal discrimination experiences that limit their employment opportunities (e.g., being denied work because of being Latine) and access to programs, as well as barriers due to immigration status such as being undocumented or language barriers (e.g., Barbieri et al., 2023; Stein et al., 2016). These experiences have both psychological and economic ramifications.

Furthermore, subpopulations of Latine families, such as farmworkers and those who are undocumented, often experience increased structural barriers and risks. In particular, farmworker families experience similar disadvantages as immigrant families such as high poverty but also experience specific salient stressors such as hazardous work conditions, low-paying jobs, educational disruptions, migration, and instability (e.g., Arnold et al., 2023; Crain et al., 2012; Grzywacz et al., 2005; Quandt et al., 2021; Taylor & Ruiz, 2017). Relevant to the processes in the FSM, mixed-method research has found that work–family strain contributed to anxiety and depression for women immigrants, and that separation from family members was a considerable source of stress (Grzywacz et al., 2005). Low-income families are less able to shield their children from the negative ramifications of economic stress and qualitative studies have revealed that children in agricultural families often work to help support their family afford necessities such as clothing and school supplies (Arnold et al., 2023).

The COVID-19 pandemic further exacerbated these vulnerabilities by disproportionately impacting low-income families who often have insecure employment and are in lower skilled occupations (Prime et al., 2020). Latine immigrant families were particularly vulnerable to job losses, pay cuts, and food insecurity and were also at high risk for contracting COVID-19 due to being disproportionately employed in low-wage, essential worker jobs (Cabrera et al., 2022; Carlos Chavez et al., 2023). One study found that Latine families reported more pandemic-related stressors (e.g., parent stress, conflict) than other race/ethnic groups (Brown et al., 2020), and that the pandemic generated both economic strains and increasing worries about health of family members (Boyer et al., 2023).

The Present Study

Building on this prior work, we used mixed-method data to analyze an expansion of the FSM of economic hardship (Conger et al., 2010) that included the impact of multiple culturally informed structural risks on the processes outlined in the FSM with a sample of rural immigrant Latine families. Empirical tests of the full FSM have been limited and Latine populations in the Midwest are underrepresented (Miller & Csizmadia, 2022). Specifically, our conceptual model (Figure 1) replaced economic hardship with objective markers of culturally relevant structural risks (discrimination experiences, immigration experiences, and COVID-19 experiences) and proposed that these risks impact the set of relationships described in the FSM by generating distress in immigrant Latine families both directly and indirectly through increasing economic pressure.

We had the following hypotheses for the quantitative data: (1) Expanding the FSM, we expected discrimination, immigration, and COVID-19 experiences (in the past year) would both directly increase caregiver psychological distress and indirectly increase distress through economic pressure and (2) Following the FSM, we expected that psychological distress would positively relate to interparental relationship problems and disrupted parenting, which in turn would be associated with child/youth adjustment problems. Qualitative data provided in-depth perspectives from mothers and youth about the following questions: (a) How do structural and economic stressors impact parental distress? (b) How does parental strain and distress influence interparental conflicts? (c) What are the effects of parental distress and interparental conflict on parenting and child well-being? Together the quantitative and qualitative data were used to provide deeper knowledge of how structural risks disrupt family processes posited by the FSM in rural, immigrant Latine families.

Method

Participants

Data comes from the Purdue Puentes Project (multiple principal investigators Drs. Ruiz and Taylor) an ongoing mixed-method study of Latine youth ages 10–15 years (N = 307, M_age = 12.21 years, 51.0% boys) and a primary caregiver (N = 288, 88.2% mothers) in rural and agricultural families in the U.S. Midwest. After receiving institutional review board approval from Purdue University (No. 2019–590), families were recruited through community organizations and schools working with Latine populations (e.g., Migrant Education Programs [MEPs], extension offices) in Indiana. A small number of families were recruited from MEPs in Michigan. Eligible families (a) self-identified as Latino, (b) had a child aged 10–15, and (c) either participated in a MEP, worked in agriculture, or lived in a rural location. Wave 1 (W1) was collected from 2021 to 2023 and included surveys, biometrics, and executive functioning tasks. A subset of youth (n = 47, 50.0% boys) and mothers (n = 20) completed semistructured qualitative interviews in the summer of 2021.

Families were predominantly immigrants—93.1% of caregivers were born outside the United States (68.1% from Mexico, 12.8% from Guatemala, 7.6% from El Salvador, and 4% other) and 28.8% of youth were born outside the United States (39% from Guatemala, 30% from Mexico, 16% from El Salvador, and 16% other). Most caregivers (65%) did not have a high school degree (22.6% had a high school degree or received a general equivalency diploma and 12.5% had completed some college or received a college degree). The majority of caregivers (70.9%) were married or cohabiting. Mean household income was 25–30K. A third of youth (32.7%, n = 100) were recruited from or stated they participated in a MEP, a federal program for migratory students whose families work seasonally, largely in agriculture.

The present study used dyadic qualitative data from participants with both a mother and a youth participant (n = 19 dyads; youth: 58% female, M_age = 11.74 years, 63% U.S. born). Mothers were all born outside of the United States, in Mexico (68.4%), Guatemala (26.3%), and El Salvador (5.3%). Sociodemographics were comparable to the larger sample. All mothers and four youth were interviewed in Spanish.

Procedure

Data (90–120 min) were collected by trained research assistants (RAs) at MEP sites, community locations, and participant homes after obtaining participant consent and assent (available in both English and Spanish). Caregivers provided consent for themselves and their child to participate. Youth completed an assent stating they wished to participate. Following institutional review board approved protocols, RAs read aloud consents/assents explaining the study to participants, answered questions, and garnered participant signatures prior to data collection. Participants completed surveys and other tasks on an iPad in English or Spanish as preferred (91.3% of caregivers and 23.5% of youth completed surveys in Spanish). RAs read the survey to participants who requested.

Recruited youth were invited to additionally complete a one-on-one qualitative interview on a rolling basis using purposeful criterion sampling to reach data saturation (Guest et al., 2006). Mothers of interviewed youth were also invited to participate in an interview. Interviews were conducted in-person with an RA in private locations in English or Spanish (decided by participants) and audio recorded with participant permission. Interviews lasted 60 min and largely included participants from the MEP. For W1 (2021–2022) caregivers received $40 and youth received $35 for completing the survey. Interviewees received $20. Payments were increased in the second year of W1 data collection (2022–2023) due to increases in cost of living. Caregivers received $60 and youth received $50 for completing the survey. Mothers received $30 and youth received $25 for completing an interview.

RAs (bilingual and monolingual speakers) participated in a half-day training provided by the fourth author on interview protocols such as open and judgment-free interviewing techniques and use of probes to elicit greater details. After data collection, all data were de-identified to protect participant confidentiality.

Quantitative Measures

All quantitative measures were available in Spanish from published sources of the scales and measures were chosen because they have been validated with Spanish speaking populations.

Discrimination Experiences

The 10-item Discrimination subscale from the Hispanic Stress Inventory was used to assess discrimination experiences (Cervantes et al., 2016). Caregivers reported (1 = yes, 0 = no) whether events had ever happened to them (e.g., “Because I am Hispanic/Latino, I was given the lowest position at work” and “I experienced discrimination because of the color of my skin.”) Items were summed and ranged from 0 to 10 (M = 2.71, SD = 3.07).

Immigration Experiences

Five items from the Hispanic Stress Inventory (Cervantes et al., 2016, e.g., “My legal status has limited my contact with family and friends)” and four items added by the study investigators (e.g., “INS/ICE has conducted raids of businesses where my family members or friends work”) were used to assess immigration experiences. Caregivers reported whether events had ever happened to them (1 = yes, 0 = no). Items were summed and ranged from 0 to 9 (M = 3.49, SD = 2.21).

COVID-19 Experiences

COVID-19 pandemic experiences were caregiver reported (1 = yes, 0 = no) on 11 questions chosen by the study investigators from the Epidemic–Pandemic Impacts Inventory (Grasso et al., 2020) which assesses tangible impacts of pandemics (e.g., “Reduced work hours or laid off,” and “A family member or close friend died from COVID-19.” Participants reported on experiences since the pandemic began. Items were summed and ranged from 0 to 11 (M = 3.32, SD = 2.31).

Economic Pressure

Caregivers reported on financial difficulties over the past 3 months using three subscales from the Economic Hardship Scale (Conger et al., 1994). Can’t Make Ends Meet was assessed using two items, for example, “How much difficulty have you had paying your bills?” (1 = no difficulty at all to 4 = a great deal of difficulty; α = .71). Unmet Material Needs (six-items) assessed whether they had enough money to afford necessities (e.g., adequate food, housing, clothing, and medical care) on a 1 = never to 4 = always scale (α = .89). Financial Cutbacks (nine-items) asked participants to report (1 = yes or 0 = no) significant financial cutbacks, for example, “You fell far behind in paying bills” (α = .73). Subscales were correlated r = .36, p < .01 to r = .42, p < .01). A latent variable was created with the three subscales as indicators.

Psychological Distress

Psychological distress was caregiver reported using the eight-item Depression Short Form and the eight-item Anxiety Short Form from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (Pilkonis et al., 2011). Depression and anxiety were assessed over the past 7 days with a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = never to 5 = always. Scores for each scale ranged from 8 to 40 with higher scores indicating higher mental health problems. Depression included “I felt worthless” and “I felt sad” (α = .94). Anxiety included “I felt nervous” and “My worries overwhelmed me” (α = .91). A latent variable was created with anxiety and depression as indicators (scales were correlated: r = .71, p < .01).

Interparental Relationship Problems

Interparental relationship problems was measured using caregiver report of warmth and hostility of their spouse/partner using the Behavioral Affect Rating Scale (Conger, 1989). Response categories were modified from the original 7-point Likert-type scale to a 4-point Likert-type scale as in prior studies with Latine populations (Taylor, Widaman, et al., 2012). Caregivers reported on a scale from 1 = never to 4 = always on their spouse/partner’s behavior toward them in the past 3 months. Warmth included: “Act loving and affectionate toward you?” (α = .91). Moderate hostility included “Shout or yell at you because he/she was mad at you?” (α = .83). Caregivers without a spouse or partner skipped out of the questions. Scales were scored to represent low-warmth/high hostility.

Parent Expertise/Trustworthiness

Caregivers and youth reported on parent expertise and trustworthiness using the Maternal Expertise and Accessibility Scale (Guilamo-Ramos et al., 2006).² Parent expertise was assessed by three items, for example, “My mother gives me good advice/My child thinks I give good advice to him/her” (α = .73). Trustworthiness was assessed with three items for example, “I can trust my mother [My child trusts me] when we talk” (α = .69). Responses ranged from 1 = never to 4 = always. Higher scores indicated low expertise/trust. Youth and caregiver reports were combined, and a latent variable was created with two indicators (expertise and trustworthiness).

Youth Global Health

Global health was youth reported using the four general health items from the Pediatric Global Health measure from the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (Forrest et al., 2014). Youth rated their (a) health, (b) quality of life, (c) physical health, and (d) mental health on a scale of 1 = poor to 5 = excellent. Higher scores indicated better health (M = 3.48, SD = 0.86). A latent variable was created with each general health item as an indicator. Items were all significantly correlated (ranging between .45 and .67).

Covariates

Covariates included youth age (10–15), youth sex (0 = girls, 1 = boys), youth born in United States (0 = no, 1 = yes), caregiver education (1 ≤ seventh grade to 7 = graduate/professional degree), single/two parent (0 = single parent, 1 = two parent), and youth in MEP (0 = no, 1 = yes).

Qualitative Data

Structural and economic stressors impacting mother distress were coded from mother interview questions asking about family stressors (e.g., “what are the main stressors or challenges facing your family right now,” “How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted you and your family”) and worry or stress (e.g., “How is your mental health?”). The impact of parental strain on interparental conflict was coded from the mother interview question, “Describe your relationship with the father of your child in this study.” Effects of parental distress and interparental conflict on child well-being were coded from youth interview questions asking (e.g., “Tell me stories about when your family went through tough times,” “How has the COVID-19 impacted your family?”) and youth stress (e.g., what makes you feel stressed or overwhelmed”). Parenting was assessed with mother and youth questions (e.g., “Tell me about your relationship with your child,” “Describe your relationship with your parents”).

Data Analytic Strategy

We used a convergent mixed-methods design, in which the collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data occurs during a similar time frame, followed by triangulating and presenting integrated findings in the discussion stage (Creswell & Clark, 2007). Specifically, we applied a complementary approach which uses results from one method to elaborate on, illustrate, and/or enhance findings from another method and investigates both subjective and objective aspects of individuals’ experiences, identifying patterns as well as explaining why these patterns exist. A complementary approach pays attention to both individual-level and systemic-level phenomena which is especially important for centering the multifaceted experiences of minoritized populations (Watson-Singleton et al., 2023). In addition to data triangulation, which has been found to promote study trustworthiness, methodological triangulation was employed to promote study credibility, confirmation, and a deeper understanding of findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Descriptive data analyses were conducted using SPSS 29, and the proposed models were tested within a structural equation model (SEM) framework using Mplus Version 8.10 (Muthén & Muthén, 2017). Missing data across our variables ranged from 7.5% to 30.7%. Little’s missing completely at random (MCAR) test showed χ(74) = 115.307, p = .002. Although Little’s test was significant, the normed χ²(χ²/df) of 1.56 suggests that the data were likely missing at random (Bollen, 1989) and was largely related to the interparental conflict variable as 28.5% of caregivers reported not having a partner. Missing data were handled in Mplus with full information maximum likelihood.

Model fit was evaluated using χ², root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit Index (CFI), and standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR). Nonsignificant values of χ², CFI values greater than .95, RMSEA values less than .06, and SRMR values less than .08 were considered indications of good model fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Covariates were correlated with one another, regressed on our main constructs and retained in the model if they were significant or close to significance. Once the best-fitting model was achieved, we tested a serial mediation model to examine if associations between the structural stressors and youth global health were mediated by psychological distress and parenting. Bias-corrected bootstrapping methodology was employed using MPlus with 10,000 bootstrap samples. Indirect effects are calculated through empirical sampling distributions by calculating confidence intervals. If zero is not included within the intervals, statistical significance is examined, and the null hypothesis of no indirect effects is rejected (MacKinnon et al., 2004).

Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis procedures to scrutinize the data for recurring ideas which were coded and organized into themes related to the research inquiries (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Each interview was transcribed verbatim in either English or Spanish using transcription software (Otter.ai and Sonix.ai) by two RAs to ensure accuracy. Spanish transcripts were translated into English and checked for accuracy by two independent bilingual RAs. A codebook was developed based on interview guide, initial reading of transcripts, and existing literature. NVivo12 Pro was used for data organization, storage, and analysis (AlYahmady & Al Abri, 2013). Third and fourth authors independently coded the transcripts using an inductive approach following the five-step guidelines outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006) for thematic analysis: (a) getting familiar with the data, (b) generating preliminary codes, (c) looking for themes, (d) reviewing themes, and (e) defining and naming themes.

Researchers met regularly to review and discuss the findings and question objectivity and subjectivity. Meetings were held with the first author to allow them to challenge themes and pose alternative interpretations. Potential alternate interpretations were explored, and data were reviewed to ensure coding accuracy. These discussions were key to aiding study researchers in identifying and reflecting upon potential assumptions and biases. Researcher positionality includes backgrounds in social sciences and expertise in the subject matter. Further, relevant to the present study, the first author is a non-Latina immigrant and last author is a native Spanish speaker female immigrant (Manohar et al., 2017). Throughout, disagreements and discrepancies were resolved via consensus. All data are available upon request from the first author.

Results

Quantitative Results

Means, standard deviations, and correlations are shown in Table 1. Bivariate correlations were generally in the expected directions and small to medium in size based on (Cohen, 1992), with values of 0.20, 0.50, and 0.80 indicating small, medium, and large correlations, respectively. For example, consistent with the FSM, psychological distress was positively associated with interparental relationship problems and with low parent expertise/trust. Providing support for the model extension, all structural stressors were correlated with economic pressure as well as caregiver psychological distress.

Table 1.

Bivariate Correlations Among Main Variables and Covariates (N = 307)

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
1. PC discrimination experiences
2. PC COVID-19 experiences	.40**	—
3. PC immigration experiences	.38**	.38**	—
4. Family economic pressure	.21**	.35**	21**	—
5. PC psychological distress	.28**	.36**	.25**	.31**	—
6. Interparental relationship problems	.10	.15*	.17*	.12†	.31**	—
7. Low parent expertise/trust	.10†	−.14*	.08	.01	.18**	.13†	—
8. Youth global health	−.07	−.22**	−.05	−.11†	−.09	.07	−.46**	—
9. Youth age	.02	−.00	.06	−.02	.01	−.09	.15*	−.20**	—
10. Youth sex (0 = girls, 1 = boys)	.08	.04	.07	.10	.03	−.10	.03	−.22**	.01	—
11. Youth U.S. bom	.00	.12*	−.02	−.18**	−.12†	−.09	.04	−.06	.06	−.01	—
12. PC education	.15*	.05	−.04	−.18**	−.11†	.06	.00	.08	−.06	−.04	−.02	—
13. Single/two parent	.03	.09	.12†	.01	.06	.13†	.04	−.10†	−.03	−.03	.07	−.07	—
14. MEP family	.03	.03	.04	.05	.09	.11	.09	−.03	−.16**	−.05	−.22**	−.07	.01	—
M	2.72	3.49	3.32	2.43	1.91	1.72	3.31	3.48	12.22	1.51	0.71	2.64	2.89	0.33
SD	(3.07)	(2.21)	(2.31)	(0.75)	(0.82)	(0.53)	(0.51)	(0.86)	(1.58)	(0.54)	(0.45)	(1.64)	(1.78)	(0.47)

Note. Single/two parent coded so that 1 = two parent, 0 = single parent. PC = primary caregiver; MEP = Migrant Education Program.

^†p < .10.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

We next tested our conceptual model (Figure 1) following the FSM framework and incorporating predictors of culturally relevant structural risks. Our SEM (Figure 2) demonstrated good fit to the data, χ²(170, N = 306) = 223.09, p > .05; CFI = .96; SRMR = .95; and the RMSEA = .03. All structural risks were correlated with one another. COVID-19 experiences significantly (and immigration experiences marginally) predicted economic pressure. Both COVID-19 and discrimination experiences were associated with caregiver psychological distress (but not immigration experiences). Consistent with the original FSM, economic pressure was linked to caregiver psychological distress, which in turn, was positively associated with interparental relationship problems and low parent expertise/trust. Unexpectedly, the path from interparental relationship problems to parenting was not significant, although parenting was associated with youth global health. Bias-corrected bootstrapping analyses indicated one significant indirect association linking COVID-19 experiences to youth global health via parental psychological distress and low parent expertise/trust (β = −.03, SE = .014, 95% CI [−.073, −.012]).

Figure 2.

Structural Equation Model for Cultural Family Stress Model

Note. χ²(170, N = 307) = 223.09, p > .05; comparative fit index = .96; standardized root-mean-square residual = .06; and the root-mean-square error of approximation = .03. Results are standardized (standard errors in parentheses). Dashed lines represent marginal significance, dotted lines are nonsignificant paths. PC = primary caregiver; CMEM = can’t make ends meet; UN = unmet needs; FC = financial cutbacks; ANX = anxiety; DEP = depression; Lo-WAR = low-warmth; HAR = moderate hostility/harshness; EXP = expertise; TRU = trustworthiness; GH1–4 = global health items.

^† p < .10, two-tailed test. * p < .05, two-tailed test. ** p < .01, two-tailed test. *** p < .001, two-tailed test.

Caregiver education (β = .13, SE = .05, p = .01) and two-parent household (β = −.12, SE = .05, p = .02) were associated with discrimination experiences. Youth U.S. born was associated with COVID-19 experiences (β = .11, SE = .05, p = .04) and economic pressure (β =−.27, SE = .06, p ≤ .001). Youth sex (coded for boys) was associated with global health (β = .13, SE = .06, p = .03) and age was linked to low parent expertise/trust (β = .14, SE = .08, p = .03).

Qualitative Results

The qualitative findings revealed insights into how structural risks contributed to economic strain, distress, conflict, and maladjustment within the family system with five themes emerging: (1) Structural and economic pressures contribute to mother distress, (2) family separation contributes to maternal distress, (3) pressures influencing interparental conflict, (4) youth awareness of parent stressors and distress, and (5) stress impacts parenting in positive ways. Each theme is described with examples below.

Structural and Economic Pressures Contribute to Mother Distress

Low Wage Jobs That Lack Job Security and Benefits.

All mothers (n = 19, 100%) spoke of experiencing financial strains and expressed concern about not having enough money to pay bills or provide for their children. This financial vulnerability created great anxiety in mothers as one illustrated:

I think one feels pressured by the debts that one has when there is not much work … [I] thank God, [that] he gave us the opportunity to buy this house [but] at the same time [I] say: “Oh, no, there is not a lot of work and how are we going to pay for [this house]?” (Mother 78)

Another mother stated:

I got depressed because my finances [were] bad or because my health was not good—everything went hand in hand. If I did not have the economic resources to buy a medicine that was going to make me feel good, I did not buy it. But it made me feel bad, physically, and that gave me emotional problems because it frustrated me, it made me desperate. I used to say, “I am just a burden for my children, they would be better off without me.” Thoughts like that. (Mother 47)

While difficulties were faced by all mothers, single mothers who shouldered the entire responsibility for providing for their family faced significant distress when experiencing economic burdens: “[When I lost my job] I was left without a place to live … I was like, what’s going to happen now? … I got worried, I look at [my children] lying down sleeping, I looked at them quiet and I say … ‘God, help me. Put something in front of me to keep me moving forward.’” (Mother 75)

Barriers such as limited English skills and lack of documentation restricted mothers’ ability to access full-time permanent employment, obligating them to accept low-wage work that lacked job security and benefits. As described by one mother (47)

I have a hard time with the [English] language and [this] … affects my family because if I could handle the language, I would have a better job and a better income. [But because I do not] … I take whatever comes.

Moreover, seasonal workers experienced unstable work conditions that left them struggling financially during months when crops are slow. One mother explained these periods of unemployment and the challenges her family experienced:

When my husband and I have a job, it’s easy for us [to keep up], but when we don’t, sometimes we can’t pay the rent. That’s why when we work [we try to] make a little savings, so that we can keep ourselves [afloat during] the times when there is no work. [During periods of unemployment] we get stressed, thinking about where to get more money to pay the rent, the bills and buy lunch for the children, [and food for us to] eat … The wintertime [is] when we need more work, but since sometimes there is none, that’s when we worry. (Mother 34)

While participating families were not asked about their documentation status, some (n = 4) shared their vulnerability regarding being undocumented and expressed concerns about employment prospects:

If someday my husband becomes unemployed … we are worried about how [he would] look for a job [since] every company asks for papers, and if you don’t have papers, they won’t give you a job. … There will come a time when there will be no more work, so where will he go to get work again? That’s what I’m afraid [of]. (Mother 32)

In addition to economic vulnerability, parent’s inability to secure full-time permanent work also limits their access to employment-based benefits such as health insurance and paid time off which can lead parents to delay or avoid care to avoid health care costs or loss of income. One mother shared “I don’t have health insurance, where do I go? They all charge a lot of money [so] I’ve never taken my kids or myself.” (Mother 47)

Workplace Discrimination.

Additionally, some mothers (n = 3, 16%) described how limited English skills and legal status exposed them to workplace discrimination. For instance, one mother explained how English proficiency left some workers vulnerable to exploitation:

I feel that it is difficult for an immigrant here because sometimes immigrant workers are given the hardest jobs. Because we don’t know English very well, we can’t express ourselves … For example, I have seen that at work men are put to stack big boxes. Yet another [worker] isn’t [asked] because he says [to his boss that] it is very hard. That is why I am saying that we [immigrant workers] are exploited … in some places. (Mother 02)

Likewise, another mother described how being undocumented left workers unable to negotiate for better wages, but financial pressures meant they had to accept poor conditions:

In the fields [our employers say], “we are going to pay you ten dollars” and well, we cannot complain because they tell us, “You don’t have papers” or “no.” That has happened to us … we have felt a little discriminated against, but we still have to work. (Mother 56)

COVID-19 Exacerbates Economic Pressures and Distress.

Exposure to stressors and distress was heightened during the pandemic. Mothers reported income loss due to job loss, reduced hours, and hours missed due to quarantine (n = 11, 58%). They also experienced being sick or having a sick family member (n = 11, 58%). Parents faced abrupt income loss due to job loss or reduction of hours, which resulted in reductions in essential needs such as food security, as well as ability to afford medical expenses as illustrated by one mother who shared:

It was very difficult for me … they told me, “You don’t have a job anymore.” I [had worked for them for] 15 years. [I] never had a right to anything, like a 401 k. Unfortunately, those of us who work in agriculture, sometimes the seasons go very well, but [I can’t] say, I have health insurance … My family has always suffered from [lack of] health insurance. My children don’t have it nor do I. I am a resident [and] legally [my children] are citizens … we haven’t been able [to get insurance] even the times that they [had] COVID … we all got sick. (Mother 40)

In summary, immigrant parents were especially likely to be employed in low-wage employment that lacked job security, benefits, and protection against unfair treatment due to language barriers or lacking work permits. Not having formal full-time employment prevented parents from accessing work benefits such as health insurance and sick leave. Consequently, parents delayed health care for themselves or their family and these economic vulnerabilities contributed to parental distress. The COVID-19 pandemic further worsened these conditions as workers felt even more vulnerable to risk loss or reduction of employment.

Being Separated From Family Contributes to Parent Distress

Nearly half of mothers (n = 9, 47%) described the emotional toll of family separation such as being away from children due to work or being away from extended family because documentation or costs hindered travel. These separations contributed to descriptions of distress and negative emotions. For example, long working hours contributed to feelings of distress, sadness, and guilt as illustrated by this mother who commented: “I feel that sometimes I have failed as a mother because I have abandoned them a lot to work … [but] I know that when they grow up, they are going to see that it was for a reason.” (Mother 58) While parents are driven by their desire to provide for their family, the absence of a parent due to long work hours affected children as illustrated by one youth who shared feeling lonely without their parent.

It’s kinda … lonely because my mom works a lot. I don’t really get to see her. She leaves at 4pm and by the that time I’m [getting home from school]. She [doesn’t] come back [until] 5 a.m. most of the time [and] I’m sleeping [or] getting ready to go to school. (Female 61, 12-year-old)

Likewise, prolonged separation from transnational family (especially elderly parents) contributed to feelings of sadness as one mother illustrated, “You leave everything behind for a better future, right. It is difficult because our family … we miss them too. It’s not 1 or 2 years, it’s been 13 years that we haven’t seen our family.” (mother56) Another mother stated, “I haven’t seen my mother for more than 16 years … it makes me sad because my mother is already … 68 years old and she is lonely.” (Mother 02).

Moreover, mothers described conflicting feelings related to having family in the United States while also distress at not being able to travel to provide support or comfort to family who remained behind:

I feel quite sad, being separated from my other daughters. [While] happy on the one hand, because my other children … I have here, because I came here looking for their well-being, but sad at the same time because I am not by [my other] daughter’s side. My daughter went through a pretty tough [time]. … She got pregnant, [and] she lost her baby last year. Then after that, after a year of being here, I lost my mother. (Mother 04)

Thus, specific risks relating to immigration not only restrict time parents spend with their children but also hinders their ability to visit family. Both scenarios result in psychological costs for parents, which in turn, can impact their children.

Parental Distress Influences Parental Conflict

Stressful situations such as economic pressures, financial strains, poor treatment at work, and parenting obligations have the potential to create tensions between parents. Many mothers (n = 11, 58%) shared ways that stressors led to conflicts that sometimes escalated into separation. This was illustrated by one mother who discussed how stressors coupled with ongoing conflicts between her and her husband left her emotionally exhausted, and unable to tolerate the arguing especially the fighting in front of their children, she terminated the marriage:

He abandoned me … The abandonment doesn’t have to be about the man going away and you don’t see him again. Many times, there is [someone] next to you, but they are not there. They are neither physically, nor economically, nor emotionally [present]. So, I [decided] to divorce him … because I started to disrespect him, to tell him, “You are good for nothing” … Why [would I say this], because I started to take charge of the family … To go out to work hard. I made tamales, I made food to sell and I [did] all that to [have] work … I spent sleepless nights … and I would come home and instead of him saying, “let me help you,” he would [spend his time playing video games]. So, I started to disrespect him … but I realized that it wasn’t right because my children heard me. My children saw me. So, I said, You know what, we’d better get a divorce, [because] I’m not willing to continue to carry the family along with you … I will [have to] fight harder but at least I [can] say it’s because I’m alone. [But] with you … [I’m] the one who’s struggling, searching … I don’t want that, I don’t want to pull you because I feel like you are an anchor around my neck. (Mother 1047)

Beyond the impact on interparental relationships, conflicts affected the well-being of their children and disturbed parent–child relationships. This was made evident by a mother who shared witnessing changes in her child’s behaviors after the child was exposed to parental fights:

[My son] was very aggressive … I feel it was because of what he was seeing in the house. He saw his dad yelling at me … At school [he] took it out on the kids, he was aggressive with the children there. (Mother 77)

Likewise, another parent shared how parental strife caused emotional and relational damages that impacting both her and her child’s well-being as well as the quality of their relationship:

When we separated, [my daughter] cried a lot … It makes me feel emotional when … we argue … [and she says], “It was your fault, that you separated from my father” or “It was your fault that all that happened,” that does make me sad. It hurts me. (Mother 79)

Thus, parental distress can create or exacerbate interparental issues which in turn can create a stressful environment for children who are often aware of these conflicts. Being exposed to parental conflict can negatively affect the health and well-being of both the parent and their child and disrupt their parent–child relationship.

Youth Report Awareness of Family Stressors and Parental Distress

Nearly all youth (n = 17, 89%) demonstrated being acutely aware of parental distress due to economic pressures and interparental conflict, consequently affected them and impacting their parent–child relationships. For instance, one youth described their families’ economic struggles and his mother’s distress stating: “[My] mom felt bad because [we didn’t have] much stuff like food … [and our] clothes didn’t fit us.” (Male 58, 12-year-old). Likewise, another youth shared awareness of their family’s unstable situation:

[When] we left my grandmother’s house … in Guatemala … it was very difficult for my dad and my mom to find some [where] to live. So, my dad called my aunt … to ask her if we can stay at home because we had nowhere to go. (Male 34, 10-year-old)

Youth also reflected on their own emotions while demonstrating an understanding of the parent’s efforts to protect them from their families’ struggles. For example, one girl stated:

When I start talking about what happened to my parents [it makes me sad]. Like, it’s been really tough for them, but they don’t want to show their pain [to] us because they want … to be strong for us. (Female 78, 13-year-old).

Further, youth went beyond observing to expressing wanting to contribute to the household to ease their parents’ burdens:

We’ve been hoping to move out of this house and for my mother to get a better job. I’m planning, when I’m turning around 16 or 15 or something like that, I can try and get a job where my older brother is currently working because I want to start helping out too. (Nonbinary 31, 12-year-old)

In addition to awareness of their parent’s distress, youth reported observing interparental tensions, including conflicts about financial struggles: “At night [my parents] started fighting. Something about money.” (Male 29, 11-year-old). Likewise, another shared:

They [my parents] have been arguing a little bit … because my mom doesn’t really waste that much money on us, and my dad mostly wastes it. But he needs the money to fix the house because there [is] a leak in my mom’s room. (Female 79, 10-year-old)

These situations clearly impacted youth, who described how these conflicts led to instability and parental separation as illustrated by one child who reported, “My parents used to fight, but now they don’t because my dad is in Florida again. I kind of felt a little off that time.” (Female 02, 11-year-old). Another youth described feeling better after their parent’s separation.

[My parents] never had a good relationship. Police would often be involved with fights and stuff that they had. So, it was never really a good thing. Usually, I used to just think about it a lot and cry about it. But I’ve kind of gotten over it. I don’t really know. I haven’t thought about it in a while. He’s [dad] in jail right now, though … I don’t really know. We haven’t talked to him in a long time. (Nonbinary 31, 12-year-old)

Findings revealed that youth were keenly aware of their families’ stressors and economic environment and capable of understanding it.

Stress Impacts Parental Practices in Positive Ways

Mothers (n = 10, 53%) discussed how stressful experiences created opportunities for them to build and strengthen trust with their children and described strategies they used to protect their children. For instance, some parents encouraged their children to communicate through active listening as illustrated by one parent who shared, “I always talk to her, [and say, ‘if] anything happens to you talk to me.’ I always [talk to] her every afternoon when she returns from school [to make sure that] I see that everything is going well with her.” (Mother 32). Likewise, another mother discussed how she urged her daughter to feel comfortable expressing her concerns, feelings, and thoughts:

I tell her, “Mija I was not born knowing how to be a mother. I have been learning since you were born [and] until you grow up, I will continue learning how to be a mother” I tell her, “I would like you and I to communicate because it is important.” (Mother 79)

Mothers also described strategies they used to protect their children from their distress and burdens. For instance, one mother shared how she masked her emotions to create a positive environment for her child: “I always tell her that [her grandmother in Mexico] loves them … I try not to show her my sadness and always smile even though I have problems, [so] that they don’t feel what I’m going through.” (Mother 58) This was echoed by another mother who felt overwhelmed by the pandemic:

I got a little bit depressed … with COVID and the jobs and all that. I was kind of shutting down a lot. But then I said [to myself], “the children can’t see me every day crying and crying and crying and asking me what’s wrong with you?” (Mother 56)

Last, while many mothers (n = 10, 53%) did not use mental health services, some (n = 5, 26%) reported that therapy helped them navigate difficult circumstances such as the impact of parental conflict on their children, as illustrated by one mother who shared:

When his father and I were still together and sometimes he heard us arguing, he would say “Oh, I want to die” … These are things that I knew … were neither healthy nor logical for a child to think … I was worried about [my children] after my separation, [so I made sure] that they would go to therapy.

By proactively protecting their children from stressful experiences, immigrant parents attempted to ensure the well-being of their children. Moreover, mothers described attempts to foster communication and understanding with their children and mitigate the negative effects of stress on children. However, while masking emotions may create a positive environment for the child, suppression feelings may contribute to parental stress.

Discussion

To date, the FSM of economic hardship has proved a valuable model for documenting the family processes that occur in the context of economic challenges (Masarik & Conger, 2017). Our study provided an expansion of the FSM that importantly accounted for salient structural cultural risks experienced by rural Latine immigrant families that are associated with caregiver psychological distress and economic strain. By simultaneously providing qualitative analysis relevant to the FSM, we were able to contextualize and center this research to provide both common and distinct experiences of mothers and their children through rich narratives that gives voice to a population that is often marginalized. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have simultaneously used both quantitative and qualitative data to specifically examine the FSM. In general, we found strong support and replication for the FSM, as well as for important extensions that link culturally relevant risks to the family processes depicted in the model.

Linking Structural Cultural Risks to the FSM

This study examined multiple structural systems of culturally relevant risks including discrimination, COVID-19 pandemic, and immigration experiences which were all significantly correlated in the SEM model consistent with cultural stress theories (e.g., Salas-Wright & Schwartz, 2019). COVID-19 pandemic experiences were especially salient and were associated with both economic pressure and psychological distress, whereas discrimination was only associated with psychological distress. Although immigration risks were not associated with either psychological distress or economic pressure in the SEM, these associations were evidenced in mother and youths’ interviews. Mothers described how risks such as language barriers, being undocumented, and experiencing discrimination impacted the employment they were able to obtain and created significant financial burdens. This is consistent with research documenting barriers specific to Latine immigrants (e.g., Barbieri et al., 2023) and supported our hypothesis that these experiences have both economic and psychological consequences. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified these existing inequalities through work shortages, food insecurity, and creating health risks. This is consistent with other studies that demonstrated low-income immigrant families were some of the most vulnerable populations to the socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, with Latine immigrants especially likely to report food insecurity, job instability, or job loss (Cabrera et al., 2022; Carlos Chavez et al., 2023; Quandt et al., 2021).

Furthermore, discrimination, COVID-19 pandemic, and economic pressure had direct independent impacts on caregiver psychological distress (anxiety and depression). These findings demonstrate the simultaneous pressures of salient structural experiences on detrimentally impacting family adjustment and are consistent with research conducted during the pandemic that linked higher financial uncertainty in Latine essential workers to poorer mental health (Boyer et al., 2023; Carlos Chavez et al., 2023). Our qualitative data further highlighted the distress that mothers experienced in trying to find ways to provide for their children and how structural risks contributed to psychological distress. This was especially salient for single mothers who described even fewer resources and structural supports to help them cope. Mothers described intense anguish and worry about providing for their children, as well experiencing guilt or hiding their emotions in order to protect their children.

A salient theme that emerged from the qualitative data was distress due to separation from family members. Mothers described being away from their children due to long work hours or being unable to travel to see family members (due to finances or to being undocumented). Both scenarios were described as painful and contributing to their feelings of sadness and worry. Additionally, mothers experienced deep grief at not seeing family members again, especially those that lost parents. The importance of family (including extended family) for Latine families is well-documented and contributes to the impact of these separations on mental health (Stein, Salcido, et al., 2023). Our findings are consistent with literature focused on U.S. agricultural workers who are separated from family members (e.g., Grzywacz et al., 2005). Our study also shows the impact of families who have endured long-term separations from extended families and experience distress despite having created lives in the United States.

Regarding extending the FSM, our study presents a comprehensive and unique exploration of the simultaneous effects of multiple structural risks on economic pressures experienced by rural immigrant Latine families. Importantly, these findings bring together cultural stress theory and the FSM building on prior work (see Miller & Csizmadia, 2022) but account for both economic and cultural strains that impact functioning of Latine immigrant families. Overall, our mixed-method findings clearly show how structural risks contribute to economic pressure and psychological distress and brings attention to the cumulative effect of culturally relevant risks that create inequitable economic and psychological burdens for Latine immigrant parents.

Impact of Parent Psychological Distress on Family Adjustment

The FSM has shown that economic strain creates psychological problems for caregivers that then impacts family adjustment and relationships. Our study also provided support for these paths. Caregiver mental health was positively associated with both interparental conflict and low parenting expertise/trust. Low parenting expertise/trust was negatively linked with youth global health. Unexpectedly, interparental conflict was not significantly associated with parenting. Power to detect this relationship could be lower given that caregivers without a spouse or partner skipped out of these questions which is also reflected in a marginally significant bivariate correlation between the variables. Alternatively, instead of psychological distress predicting conflict (as hypothesized in the FSM), it is possible that interparental relationship conflicts predict parent psychological distress which then disrupts parenting (making psychological distress more salient). This was reflected in interviews where both mothers and youth described how economic pressures generated interparental conflict, which led to parent distress.

Narratives from youths and mothers also demonstrated the impact of parent distress on family well-being. Youths described knowledge of structural and economic stressors, the impact on family relationships, and wanting to help their families. The detrimental impact of structural risks such as long work hours and low-paying jobs were all reflected in youth’s sadness and worry about their families’ situation and in their descriptions of strained family relationships. Mothers also noted the impact of structural risks on their relationships and mental health, and how this distress impacted how they felt and behaved as parents. Importantly, mothers described not wanting their children to be burdened by their problems and described solutions and strategies they used to do so, highlighting strengths and resilience.

These findings are consistent with other work highlighting that youth in farmworker families often work because they want to help their families out (e.g., Arnold et al., 2023) and that household economic pressure and immigration are associated with poor psychological functioning in rural immigrant and especially, farmworker Latine families (Arcury et al., 2022; Crain et al., 2012). Other studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic found that Latine youth experienced poor mental health because of increased family responsibilities resulting from additional economic and health burdens of families during this time (Carlos Chavez et al., 2023; Roche et al., 2022). Our study assessed a global well-being variable for youth adjustment, but our findings suggest that the impact of lower parent expertise/trust was associated with poorer health. It is possible that increases in responsibilities and changing roles damaged youths’ perceptions of parents as trustworthy experts and this in turn led to poorer adjustment.

Overall, our results showed the snowballing impact of structural risks contributing to family maladjustment, and how parent strain and distress leads to less effective parenting and worse child outcomes. The significant mediated path from COVID-19 experiences to youth global health through caregiver psychological distress and low parent expertise/trust demonstrated the salience of the COVID-19 pandemic for rural Latine immigrant youth.

Limitations and Constraints on Generality

As with all research, our study had limitations. First, our study was cross-sectional and therefore we are unable to determine direction of effects. However, the FSM has been tested both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, and we specifically followed this tested framework in our own model. Second, our measures of structural risks only assessed whether experiences occurred and not the actual level of stress experienced. Future work should determine which risks are most salient for immigrant Latine families. Third, our study did not include a traditional measure of interparental conflict and relied on a measurement of warmth and hostility which could have impacted the findings. Fourth, participants in our qualitative data were all recruited from MEPs, and therefore, their experiences may not have been representative of the entire sample. Fifth, Latine immigrant families experience a wide range of structural risks, and while we covered three significant areas, we are likely to have not captured all aspects that have deleterious effects on both economic stress and psychological distress (e.g., White et al., 2009, 2015 have demonstrated the detrimental impact of dangerous neighborhoods). Last, we controlled for family structure, but future studies should explore how family structure impacts the relationships in the FSM (e.g., multigroup models) such as single versus two-parent households or intergenerational households.

We expect that our expanded FSM model could (and should) be tested with other populations of Latine families without modification. However, our results should also be taken in the context of our sample who were rural, low socioeconomic, immigrant Latine families in the Midwest. While this is a significant strength of our study given the underrepresentation of Latine families in nontraditional locations, it has potential repercussions for generalizability. However, a strength of our study is that our sample included a range of immigrant backgrounds (e.g., Guatemala and El Salvador) that are increasing in number in the United States. It is also important to acknowledge that the U.S. Latine population is diverse socioeconomically as well as in background of origin and in generation status. Our results may be better applied to Latine families with recent immigration histories.

Future Directions

It will be important for future research to assess the associations outlined in our study with longitudinal data to disentangle directions of effects, assess bidirectional paths, and assess if additional paths in the FSM are needed (e.g., directionality between parent mental health and interparental conflict). Researchers should also replicate this expanded model with different populations of Latine families. Replicating the qualitative data with different subpopulations of immigrant Latine families is particularly important for generating better insight about how structural risks impact different subpopulations of Latine families. We tested a traditional FSM with a general child outcome in order to focus on expanding the model to assess structural risks. However, research that focuses on FSM processes and include youth outcomes including physical health, academic adjustment, and cultural adjustment is understudied (Miller & Csizmadia, 2022). Research is especially needed that uses the FSM but adapts the variables to be culturally relevant—for example, maintaining the basis of the model but examining ethnic identity, or bicultural competence as a normative child outcome, or examining a culturally relevant parenting behavior (e.g., ethnic socialization; Safa et al., 2021).

Last, we specifically expanded the FSM to incorporate culturally relevant experiences (discrimination, immigration, and COVID-19) that contribute to economic pressure and psychological distress in Latine immigrant families; but other extensions of the model—especially assessing resilience processes that disrupt and moderate the impact of poverty and economic hardship—are critically needed. Researchers have noted that familism may be protective against the detrimental effects of economic stress (e.g., Bermudez et al., 2023; Martin et al., 2019) and neighborhood danger (White et al., 2015). However, relatively few studies have addressed resilience processes within the FSM despite recent updates to the model highlighting these paths (see Masarik & Conger, 2017; Miller & Csizmadia, 2022).

As resilience processes are dependent on availability of resources in an individual’s and family’s social ecology, future studies should continue to address structural barriers and oppressive systems that exert an inequitable and highly deleterious impact on Latine families to better understand issues related to social injustices across race, ethnicity, gender, and other marginalized social identities (Atallah et al., 2021). Given the evident cumulative impact of discrimination, immigration experiences, and the COVID-19 pandemic, it is evident that work must also be done on alleviating and altering the conditions that threaten the well-being of Latine immigrant caregivers and their families.

Public Significance Statement.

Negative life experiences such as discrimination, immigration barriers, and the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to economic strain and caregiver distress in rural immigrant Latine families, which in turn, impact family relationships, parenting behaviors, and adolescent well-being. Improving the conditions that threaten the well-being of Latine immigrant caregivers will benefit their children.