“The Talk” and Parenting While Black in America: Centering Race, Resistance, and Refuge

Abstract

“The Talk” refers to a specific type of racial socialization message that many Black parents have with their children about how to safely conduct themselves when interacting with police officers and other individuals in positions of power. With the recent increased exposure of racialized violence against Black people at the hands of police and vigilantes in the United States, many parents of young Black children now feel especially compelled to initiate these conversations to equip their children with the necessary knowledge to protect themselves when interacting with police officers. Black parents bear the unjust burden of striking a balance between alerting their children of possible harm while also not villainizing every member of law enforcement their child may encounter. This qualitative study examines “the Talk” occurring between 45 Black American parents and their young school-age children via observational methods. Findings of this study help to illuminate this critically important experience that characterizes Black familial processes and particularly the plight of parents socializing Black children. Implications for parent education and clinical interventions are also provided.

“…in order to survive, (B)lack people have paradoxically had to witness their own murder and defilement and then pass along the epic tale of violation.”—Elizabeth Alexander (Alexander, 1994), American poet and essayist

In recent years, there has been a wave of increased exposure to racialized violence against Black people in the United States (US) at the hands of police officers and vigilantes (Bonilla & Rosa, 2015; Cooper & Fullilove, 2016). Black Americans are reportedly more distrusting of members of law enforcement, perceive higher levels of racial bias, and are more prone to report negative encounters characterized by discrimination and injustice (Brunson, 2007; Brunson & Weitzer, 2009; Stewart et al., 2009). The murders of unarmed Black people like Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, Rayshard Brooks, and many others have garnered national and international attention and helped to galvanize masses of people fighting racial injustice and demanding police reform. Fatal police encounters have not only led to the demise of adult women and men but Black Americans have also collectively witnessed the murders of young Black children such as Trayvon Martin (age 17, Sanford, FL), Michael Brown (age 18, Ferguson, MO), Tamir Rice (age 12, Cleveland, OH), and Laquan McDonald (age 17, Chicago, IL) in recent years. These instances of grave loss justifiably motivate Black parents to educate their children about how to protect themselves when facing racialized encounters with police and others in positions of power and authority (Thomas & Blackmon, 2015).

Conversations about race, societal perceptions, and measures that youth should employ to safeguard themselves from harm are referred to as racial socialization (RS) in family and psychological sciences (Lesane-Brown, 2006; Stevenson, 1994). More specifically, however, Black parents engage their children in what is informally known as “the Talk” in Black American culture to discuss race and race relations. “The Talk” involves discussions about “racial profiling and diffusing negative perceptions and stereotypes to avoid being hurt or killed by police during routine activities, such as driving or walking down the street” (Whitaker & Snell, 2016, p. 304). We assert that “the Talk” is a form of racial socialization discourse that many Black parents unfortunately feel compelled to participate in despite the discomfort that often accompanies it.

While the research dedicated to explicating the complexities of racial socialization in Black families is extensive, observational studies examining racial socialization discourse as it occurs in a spontaneous and realistic manner are significantly sparse. Using a thematic analysis qualitative approach (Boyatzis, 1998; Braun & Clarke, 2006), the present study examines “the Talk” as it occurred between 45 Black American parents/caregivers and their young, school-age children (ages 10 and 11). These dyadic interactions were video-recorded and analyzed at both semantic and latent levels and under-girded by Critical Race Theory (CRT) (Crenshaw et al., 1995; Delgado & Stefancic, 2000) and García Coll and colleagues’ (1996) integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children.

Racial Socialization in Black Families

Racial socialization researchers have identified four distinct dimensions of messages typically transmitted from parents to children. These dimensions include cultural socialization, preparation for bias, promotion of mistrust, and egalitarianism/silence about race (Hughes et al., 2006). Cultural socialization messages seek to cultivate a sense of ethnic pride in children that is rooted in their ethnic group. When parents engage in preparation for bias, they are essentially encouraging children to develop an awareness of racial discrimination and discussing strategies to effectively manage potential biased experiences. Promotion of mistrust refers to messages that emphasize the significance of caution and suspicion when interacting with members of other racial groups (Hughes & Chen, 1997). Last, egalitarianism or silence about race is a message that motivates children to recognize their own individual characteristics and to be dismissive of the notion of racial differences. This dimension of racial socialization encourages youth to adopt an attitude of colorblindness (Hughes et al., 2006). Although “the Talk” includes elements of preparation for bias and promotion of mistrust as each is described above, it does not fit neatly into either of these RS dimensions and encompasses much more than what they entail. When Black parents engage in “the Talk” with children, they are seeking to address a very specific potential encounter whereas other dimensions of racial socialization often provide children with general guidance and education about race and race dynamics. Moreover, “the Talk” often provides youth with practical strategies about what they should do, should not do, should say, and/or should not say when interacting with a member of law enforcement (Whitaker & Snell, 2016)—essentially, “the Talk” centers safety and survival in a way that other socialization conversations often do not. This type of step-by-step guidance is atypical of common racial socialization conversations and this is likely because of what parents believe to be at stake if they fail to effectively transmit these pertinent messages.

Black Americans and Racialized Policing

According to Edwards et al. (2019), use of force by police is a leading cause of death for young men of color in the US. Black men, in particular, are about 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police over the course of their life than White men and Black women are about 1.4 times more likely to be killed by police than their White counterparts. Across all demographics, Black men and boys are the most likely to be killed by a member of law enforcement with predictions suggesting that 1 in 1000 Black men will die at the hands of police over the course of life (Edwards et al., 2019). Young Black men in the US experience violence by police as a chronic stressor with traumatizing effects as they experience both direct and vicarious practices that are unlawful at best and life-threatening at worst (Smith-Lee & Robinson, 2019). Public health experts and social scientists now recognize contact with police as a key consideration when examining health disparities and acknowledge that it is a cause of early mortality in communities of color (Bor et al., 2018; Bui et al., 2018; Geller et al., 2014; Sewell, 2017).

It is not uncommon for many Black Americans to inform others in their community or social networks about situations where they encountered biased and discriminatory officers. This is an especially normal occurrence in disadvantaged Black neighborhoods where disparaging and aggressive policing practices are rampant (Weitzer, 2000). These vicarious experiences of police bias many Black Americans are exposed to add to the accumulated instances of discriminatory events that affect them as a collective and fuel negative perceptions about members of law enforcement (Brunson, 2007). Some clinicians have argued that the unjust violence perpetrated by police officers on the basis of racism, implicit bias, and prejudice should be recognized as a form of interpersonal trauma. Officers using aggressive tactics to maintain power and control in their interactions with people often demonstrate actions that are dehumanizing, objectifying, and that stereotype women, men, girls, and boys of color (Bryant-Davis et al., 2017).

Black Youth and Police Encounters

Black youth are no exception when it comes to experiencing racialized encounters with police. A street participatory action research (Street PAR) study conducted by Payne and colleagues (2017) involved researchers partnering with 15 residents living in a socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhood to document Black youth and young adults’ negative experiences with police. Participants in the study ranged from 18–35 years of age, and data that were collected included 520 surveys, 24 individual interviews, four dual interviews, three group interviews, and five field observations. Within the study sample, younger Black men between the ages of 18–21 reported having the most negative contact with police. Police contact, however, decreased significantly for both males and females in older cohorts. Additionally, males were slightly more likely to have repeated interactions with police in their neighborhoods. The qualitative analyses of the data identified two pertinent themes: (1) negative contact (i.e., police harassment, police brutality, and poor police responsiveness) and (2) low motivation for working with police. Youth and young adults reported feeling utter anger and resentment toward their local law enforcement which had been driven by acts of police-perpetuated violence and the recent murder of a local resident by a member of law enforcement. Tense relationships between police and community members have the potential to further widen the gap that exists between the groups and serves to maintain division and brew negativity in local contexts.

Following the death of unarmed Black teenager, Michael Brown on August 9, 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri, Threlfall (2018) interviewed 18 Black parents and their adolescent children who lived in nearby communities in the St. Louis area. Threlfall (2018) sought to explore what racial socialization messages parents and adolescents would report being transmitted in their families following Brown’s murder and subsequent events in Ferguson. Four sub-themes were identified in the data, including (1) teaching the context, (2) fear for sons, (3) we are not the same, and (4) rise above. The study revealed that for these families who were in close proximity to civil unrest as a result of racialized violence, racial socialization served as a protective factor for youth in these communities. Parents reported engaging in conversations with their children about what it meant to be a member of their ethnic or racial group within the contexts of their local communities. Young Black boys in particular received messages reminding them of their value in a society that often promotes disparaging narratives about Black males (Threlfall, 2018).

Theoretical Frameworks

Although many scholars of RS have incorporated elements of critical race theories in their research, the majority have not fully integrated relevant issues of power or racialized systems of inequality into their examinations of RS and Black American families (Burton et al., 2010). Critical Race Theory originated in US legal studies (Delgado & Stefancic, 2000), but several family and social scientists have adapted the original work of legal scholars and applied the principles of CRT to their scholarship (e.g., Bonilla-Silva, 2006; Few-Demo, 2014). Critical Race Theory includes the following tenets: (1) highlights race as a key social organizing construct of societal systems, including families; (2) elucidates the fact that racism is unavoidable and weaved into the fabric of society constituting a normal experience for people of color; (3) acknowledges that all members of racialized social systems automatically help to perpetuate them through learned social behaviors and practices; and (4) recognizes that racial and ethnic identities are not static but are social constructions that carry real and tangible implications for people’s lives (Burton et al., 2010; Delgado & Stefancic, 2000). Using the principles of CRT to undergird examinations of RS processes adds critical sociohistorical nuance to our understanding of how and why these processes are enacted, at times not enacted, and to varying degrees of intentionality within Black American families. In essence, CRT explicitly identifies US law and legal systems as fundamentally crucial to upholding the socially constructed hierarchies of race that are embedded in our culture (Delgado & Stefancic, 2000).

Also relevant to our understanding of RS in Black American families is the integrative model introduced by García Coll and colleagues (1996) that situated the lived experiences of ethnic minoritized youth and their families in a sociocultural context. In part, the integrative model sought to extend the ecological systems perspective presented by Bronfenbrenner (1977, 1979) by highlighting the effects of oppression, racism, discrimination, and prejudice on the lives of developing ethnic minoritized youth and their families. According to this model, Black families and youth, as well as other minoritized families, live within promoting and inhibiting environments where they are directly impacted by racism and discrimination through various social interactions. As a result of families’ interactions with these environments, they develop adaptive cultures, which involve processes like RS, to aid them in meeting the contextual demands placed on them (Boykin & Toms, 1985; Ogbu, 1981).

Coupling the integrative model with CRT to examine “the Talk” in Black families provides us with a necessary lens to examine this critical conversation. The approaches employed by parents are shaped by broader sociocultural influences and the systemic racism that permeates every aspect of US society. “The Talk” is merely one of the complex adaptive strategies identified by García Coll et al. (1996) that many Black parents use to help protect their children from discrimination and forces of oppression. Moreover, “the Talk” appears to be rooted in the belief that racism is both pervasive and unavoidable for Black people and children, therefore, have to be equipped with the necessary knowledge to successfully traverse society.

The Present Study

The extant literature examining the effects of racialized violence by police has consistently focused primarily on the experiences of Black boys. Harris and Amutah-Onukagha (2019), for example, conducted a qualitative study exclusively with the mothers of Black boys and men to explore the different strategies they used to prepare their sons for potential police interactions. The study relied upon retrospective accounts of six mothers in which the average age of a participant’s son was 20 years. This study revealed salient information related to this topic of police and Black parenting strategies; however, capturing spontaneous RS processes as they occur has the potential to provide a wealth of information that is critical to this area of research. Additionally, while previous studies suggest that Black boys are disproportionately impacted by aggressive policing, we must not overlook the experiences of young Black girls and how they are also negatively affected by the racial bias and prejudice demonstrated by certain members of law enforcement. The parents of both Black boys and girls are tasked with the unfair responsibility of educating their children about how to navigate an oppressive and often threatening society and our scholarship dedicated to this topic reflects that.

The purpose of this current study is to explore the process of RS in Black American families with school-age children using observational dyadic data. The study is guided by the following overarching research question:

1. How do Black parents/caregivers navigate “the Talk” with their young school-age children?

The findings of this study build upon prior RS research but also seek to advance this body of literature by examining the unfolding of “the Talk” as it occurred in real time. The current study helps to elucidate this complex process via the Racial Socialization Observational Task (RSOT) (Smith-Bynum et al., 2016) and focuses on a relatively younger sample of participants than what is commonly studied.

Method

Data for this study were collected via the RSOT (Smith-Bynum et al., 2016) from the Dallas Project on Education Pathways study, formerly known as the Dallas Preschool Readiness Project study. This longitudinal study initially focused primarily on self-regulation in a sample of Black American and Latinx families from low-income communities in the Dallas, Texas metro-politan area. The RSOT was originally developed to be analyzed quantitatively with a rating system to characterize conversations about racial discrimination between Black American parents and their adolescent children (Smith-Bynum et al., 2016). However, we adapted it to be used with Black and Latinx families with younger school-age children for the present study. The RSOT involves dyads listening to an audio recording describing three distinct fictitious vignettes about discriminatory events (i.e., interactions with police, a school counselor, and a store clerk) and asking the dyad to have a conversation about what the child would do if faced with that situation. This secondary analysis only focuses on data from the subgroup of Black families from the larger study sample who participated in the RSOT and discussions of the police vignette.

Participants

The RSOT data for the current study were collected from a subgroup of Black families randomly selected from the Dallas Project on Education Pathways study. A total of 46 Black American dyads participated in the task. One family was not included in the analyses due to the parent being ill during the assessment and the dyad not being able to fully complete the task. The average age of the children was 10.9 years (SD = .28, range 10.4–11.5), and they were all enrolled in the fifth grade. Characteristics of these families are displayed in Table 1.

Table 1.

Characteristics of Study Sample (N = 45).

	N (%)	M (SD)
Parent/caregiver sex
Female	42 (93.3)
Male	3 (6.7)
Parent/caregiver age		37.5 (9.3)
Parent/caregiver relation to child
Mother	39 (86.7)
Father	3 (6.7)
Grandmother	3 (6.7)
Parent/caregiver education level
9–12 years, no diploma	6 (13.3)
High school/GED	14 (31.1)
Some college	17 (37.8)
College degree	6 (13.3)
Post-graduate	1 (2.2)
Child sex
Female	22 (48.9)
Male	23 (51.1)
Child age		10.9 (.3)
Family income
<50% Federal poverty level	4 (8.9)
50–99% Federal poverty level	26 (57.8)
100–149% Federal poverty level	12 (26.6)
150%+ Federal poverty level	3 (6.7)

Procedure

Data collection.

Two research assistants visited the home of each of the dyads to complete the RSOT. The primary research assistant who delivered the assessment identifies as a Black American woman and has been a member of the research team since its inception. Through her involvement with the study for numerous years, she has established a strong rapport with the Black families in particular, serving as a key recruiter and primary person of contact for participants. Therefore, although this research assistant was being accompanied by different team members at each of the family visits, we feel confident that her level of rapport with each family served as a buffer against potential feelings of unfamiliarity.

Dyads were read the following instructions by the research assistant in preparation for the task:

The activity we are going to do next is a short conversation that will be video recorded. Video recording is one way we can get an idea of how different families communicate about different issues. Remember, everything we’re doing today is confidential. Only trained research staff will see the recording unless you have provided written permission for it to be seen by others. We’ll explain what we would like for you to do during the conversation. This activity will take approximately 15 minutes.

I am going to play a recording of a short story about a youth dealing with a situation. Listen to the story and imagine that you are the youth in the story. You should talk with each other about ways to deal with the problem in the story as if it happened to you and your family. There are no right or wrong answers for dealing with the problem. I will signal you when to start your discussion. I am going to wait in the next room while you have your conversation and I will return when 5 minutes are up.

After reading the instructions and determining the family had no questions, the research assistant proceeded with playing a brief audio recording (approximately 30–45 seconds) describing an ambiguously racist event. The families were asked to face the camera and speak clearly for the audio and video recording. An example of the text of the audio recording the families listened to is as follows:

Marcus is an African American boy who loves playing outside with his two friends. After school, they plan to go to their homes for a snack and then meet near Marcus’ house. As Marcus waits for his friends, he notices a police car parked down the street. The officer drives up to him, gets out of his car, and walks toward Marcus. The officer says, “What are you doing standing out here? I’ve heard from people around here that all you kids do is hang out in the street.” Marcus has never talked with the police before. How would you handle the situation if you were Marcus?

Black research assistants and associates created the audio recordings. Additionally, the child’s gender in each of the scenarios was matched to the gender of the child participating in the task. Families who alerted research assistants within 5 minutes were informed they still had time remaining and were asked to continue discussing as best as they could. However, if a family refused to continue after being asked once, they were not asked again. The dyads listened to a total of three audio recordings describing an ambiguously racist event and were asked to discuss for 5 minutes after listening to each scenario. After the third scenario, the RSOT was complete.

Data analysis.

Boyatzis (1998) described thematic analysis as a process of encoding raw forms of qualitative information and is considered to be a foundational analytic strategy in qualitative research that can be applied to most, if not all, qualitative methods (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The process of encoding requires that researchers recognize related patterns or themes in their data which can be observed at the manifest level (i.e., directly identifiable in the data) and the latent level (i.e., underlying a certain phenomenon). Thematic analysis allows researchers to examine both levels of their data concurrently (Boyatzis, 1998). In other words, researchers can seek to identify the explicit patterns or themes that are apparent in the data, but they can also look beyond what has been explicitly stated by a study participant to understand underlying meanings and assumptions (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Analyzing the data in this current study at both the manifest (also referred to as the semantic level) and latent levels has allowed us to analyze from an interpretive lens and theorize about what is being seen in the data through these dyadic interactions.

Typically, code development in thematic analysis is informed by one of three methods: (a) theory driven; (b) prior data or prior research driven; or (c) inductively or data driven (Boyatzis, 1998). These different forms of code development rest on a continuum that reflect various degrees of reliance on existing theories to guide data analysis to researchers choosing to stick closely to their raw data and fully embracing an exploratory approach. Because of the novelty of the type of research that we have conducted in this study, we chose to employ a hybrid of all three methods in this study (Boyatzis, 1998). The analyses were guided by theory, prior research, and the raw data that were collected.

The first author transcribed verbatim each of the conversations that occurred between members of the dyads, provided each study participant with a pseudonym, and imported transcriptions into ATLAS.ti version 8.4.4, a qualitative data analysis software program. In order to establish trustworthiness, a true immersion into the data took place over a 15-month period. During this period, data were being analyzed as it were being collected which allowed for the documentation of reflective and theoretical notes. Peer de-briefing with detailed documentation of discussions also aided in the development of relevant codes and ultimately primary themes. These criteria for establishing trustworthiness as outlined by Nowell and colleagues (2017) in addition to conducting semi-structured interviews with the research assistants who administered the observational tasks enhanced the overall rigor of the study. Following the six-phase approach for completing a thematic analysis as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006), a total of 83 initial codes were developed. An essential aspect of initial coding is coding for as many potential patterns as possible and retaining as much richness for the quotes as possible to avoid losing necessary context and meaning (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The initial 83 codes were separated into two overarching categories: parent/caregiver responses and child responses. Because analyses for this study focused solely on parental responses, the child responses were excluded from the analyses. Twenty-six child codes detailing their reactions to “the Talk” were discarded leaving 57 codes for the parents/caregivers to be collated. From those 57 initial codes, six primary themes and four sub-themes were developed. Twelve of the initial parent codes were labeled as miscellaneous because they failed to fit into any of the larger themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The complete list of the six primary themes and their corresponding initial codes for the parent responses are listed in Table 2.

Table 2.

Coding Map of Themes/Sub-Themes and Initial Codes for Parent Responses.

Themes & sub-themes	Initial codes
1. Directives that address safety
	Always comply Always yes sir/yes ma’am/be respectful Answer the questions Don’t be rude Be careful with your words Don’t run Fear of physical harm Just get back home Keep your hands visible Provide an explanation Remain calm Share your personal information Encouraging calm/non-threatening behaviors
2. Desire to be involved
2.1 Unintentional endangerment
	Call an adult “I will take the necessary steps” “Come and get me” Hypothetical PCG response Police should not engage minors Seeking understanding of officer actions Desire to be involved
3. Attending to the child’s thoughts and emotions	“How does that make you feel?” Defending child’s actions Providing emotional support Questioning child perspectives on police
4. Acknowledging climate of racial violence	Trayvon Martin Vicarious witnessing of racial violence Stereotypes about Black children Eliciting child’s thoughts about racism Acknowledgment of racism Suspicion of racism Stereotypes about Black children Larger discourse
5. Resistance
5.1 Officer accountability
5.2 Critical consciousness-raising
	Criticism of officer actions Seeking out higher authority Encouraging child to develop ideas Protect and serve Encouraging child to take action Expressing anger over police behaviors Power and authority of police
6. “Not all cops are bad”
6.1 Attempts to lessen child fears
	If you’re not doing anything wrong, you don’t have anything to worry about Dispelling racial inequality Justifiable actions Promoting trust in police Rejecting possibility of racist behaviors Rationalizing officer actions

Researcher Positionality

Instead of attempting to deny or suppress certain beliefs, assumptions, or values, qualitative researchers readily acknowledge these truths and the ways they may influence their research (Ortlipp, 2008). The first author of this article, and also the primary analyst of the study, identifies as a Black woman who was socialized in the southern region of the US. Her racial identity is also a central aspect of her identity which has fueled a heightened awareness around issues related to racism, White supremacy, and historical oppression against Black people. Her multiple intersecting identities (both marginalized and privileged) and lived experiences undoubtedly influenced the meaning-making process in which she engaged during the process of analysis as she reflected on her own experiences of racial socialization. Additionally, her clinical experiences with Black families as a marriage and family therapist aided in shaping her understanding of multifaceted familial interactions that are affected by broader sociocultural contexts.

The second and third authors, who were involved in the conceptualization of the article but not directly involved in data analysis, are both White women social scientists and developmentalists who have an extensive history in studying parent–child relational dynamics in ethnic minoritized populations. To our knowledge, collaboratively, they have led the only longitudinal study of racial socialization involving Black and Latinx families which have spanned from early childhood into middle school. Their study of historically marginalized groups in the Southern region of the US and how both proximal and distal contexts affect family relationships provided a wealth of theoretical knowledge that was key in formulating this study.

Results

Using the hybrid approach in thematic analysis and focusing on both the manifest and latent levels of the data, six primary themes and four sub-themes were developed that describe how Black parents and caregivers navigate “the Talk” with their school-age children. The six primary themes include the following: (a) directives that address safety, (b) desire to be involved, (c) attending to the child’s thoughts and emotions, (d) acknowledging a climate of racial violence, (e) resistance, and (f) “Not all cops are bad.” The four sub-themes include unintentional endangerment, officer accountability, critical consciousness-raising, and attempts to lessen child fears. Consistent with other qualitative research studies (e.g., Kerrison et al., 2018), we provide readers with some guidance on the frequency of participant responses where few refers to less than 10 participants, many indicates approximately between 11 and 20 participants, and most is indicative of the majority of the sample or greater than 51% of participants.

Directives That Address Safety

When engaging in “the Talk,” most parents in the study emphasized the importance of their child employing key strategies to help ensure their physical safety when interacting with police. Specific messages transmitted included encouraging children to keep their hands visible at all times, to remain calm and not be rude, to answer all of the officer’s questions, to be willing to share personal information if necessary, and several other very practical strategies. For these parents, it was apparent that ensuring their child’s safety took precedence over any other messaging they could have attempted to convey. For example, when Skyy began to engage with her young daughter Tierra about how to best handle this hypothetical situation, Tierra described how she would question the officer’s remarks and inform him that she was not like the “other kids” that had been accused of playing in the street. Even before Tierra could fully complete her statement, however, Skyy interjected by saying, “See, but in real life the police won’t believe that, especially when it’s coming from you. A little African American little girl, he wouldn’t believe that.” In response to her mother’s comments, Tierra looked utterly shocked and confused. Skyy proceeded to state:

And don’t put your hands in your pockets, don’t run, you stand there, and you tell them my mom and dad is in the house if you would like to talk to them… I don’t appreciate how the police come at us, you know, based off the color of our skin, but that’s the world we live in today… that’s the world we live in. So you would have to try and be as respectful as you can, don’t run away, don’t put your hand in your pocket… Being who you are, you don’t run because that would make you look guilty and that will give them cause…feel like it would give them reason to shoot you.

Although seemingly blunt, the sentiments shared by Skyy were common across most parents in the study. There seemed to be a moment in this exchange in which Skyy could have embraced the opportunity to hone in on her daughter’s comments that seemed to evince agency and self-empowerment. However, Skyy made the decision to redirect her child’s attention to issues of safety and protection against potential harm at the hands of police.

Relatedly, in an exchange between Claudia and her daughter, Kaylee, the issue of physical harm was directly highlighted with the child when discussing how she should maneuver during this police encounter. The conversation unfolded as follows:

Claudia: (R)emain calm and be like, “okay”. Because I rather for you to be with me and upset than with him and (pause)…

Kaylee: Get hurt…

Claudia: And they gotta justify…yeah, why you sitting up in here laying in the hospital and stuff.

Kaylee: That ever happened to you before?

Claudia: Nah… no incidents with me.

In an instant, the conversation shifted from the dyad discussing different strategies to employ when speaking with an officer to Claudia introducing the possibility of her child being placed in a hospital to treat bodily injuries as a result of an escalated police interaction. Furthermore, Claudia did not have to provide any additional context for Kaylee to understand the message she was trying to make clear. Despite this sort of messaging that requires parents to address painfully sensitive topics, most parents appeared to approach the topic of harm in a very matter of fact manner with an unfortunate understanding of what was at stake if they elected to mince words.

Desire to Be Involved

Another very common reaction displayed by most parents during “the Talk” was an extremely adamant urging for children to involve their parents when being approached and/or questioned by police. Parents also encouraged children to seek out the assistance of other trusting adults if they were not available themselves. Even when some parents instructed their children to first provide an explanation about their behaviors to the officer, the conversation ultimately ended with the child being told to always seek them out and to be wary of speaking to police by themselves. During the conversation between Jessica and her son Ron, the child referenced discussions about police interactions he and his mom previously had. Ron stated his mom had always taught him that when police walk up to him, he should allow an adult to communicate with them instead of trying to speak himself. Jessica responded with the following statement:

That is correct and the police officer should want to talk to an adult anyway versus talking to a child. So, that should be their thing, their thing should be, “Where is your mother? Can you take us to your mother?”. That’s what I feel. I don’t feel like the police officer should sit there and question a child without an adult present, ever. I think that’s against the law.

Parents recognized the vulnerable nature of their young children and the seriousness of demonstrating appropriate behaviors when interacting with police. Their eagerness to insert themselves in these interactions indicated both a willingness and an assumed responsibility to advocate on behalf of their young children. Furthermore, urging children to involve them when confronted by officers provided parents with the opportunity to expound upon how they would take further actions to address the concerning behaviors perpetrated by police toward their child.

For instance, when Shirley approached this conversation with her son Jay, she expressed shock when her child did not immediately say he would seek her out for assistance, although he eventually replied that he would notify her after being prompted. Their conversation took place as follows:

Shirley: Because he’s the law you’re supposed to be scared of him?

Jay: No.

Shirley: Well what you supposed to be since he’s the law? You supposed to respect him but not be scared of him. So, the police made you feel some type of way. What would you do? Would you come get me?

Jay: Yes, so he can tell you what I haven’t been doing.

Shirley: Don’t you know technically a minor is not supposed to speak to the police? You supposed to get your mom because the police cannot question a minor or make any suggestions, unless you was doing something wrong. Now if you were doing something wrong, then yeah, but if you felt like you wasn’t doing anything wrong, then no, I would tell him, “Can I call my mom?”. Because it makes me feel like you’re African American, you’ll always be a target. So, if they see an African American outside playing, they gone automatically assume you’re a bad kid. Understand?

Jay: Yes, ma’am.

For most parents in our sample, “the Talk” encompassed equipping children with appropriate strategies to manage their behaviors and protect themselves during police interactions while also guaranteeing that children understood that this is an encounter they should not, and for most would not, face alone. However, for some other parents, there was such strong emphasis placed on seeking them out that they failed to actually provide detailed directives about what the child should do practically in order to arrive at a place in the police interaction that would allow them to safely remove themselves to even be able to alert their parents. This parental behavior was identified as a sub-theme in the data for desire to be involved and refers to unintentional endangerment. An example of this occurrence between Tara and her daughter Brittany is listed below:

Tara: You wouldn’t talk to him or would you talk to him, even though you don’t know the officer?

Brittany: I wouldn’t talk to him because I don’t know him.

Tara: You don’t know him. So, whenever an officer ride up on you like that, what should you really do, first action, first thought?

Brittany: Run.

Tara: Run.

Brittany: And tell your parent.

Tara: Run and tell your parents.

A few moments later in the brief conversation, Tara reiterates her instruction to run from police a third time.

Brittany: He would’ve tried to follow me and tried to stop me and say, “Little girl, come here right now.”

Tara: If he would’ve said little girl come here right now, you would have to run, run really, really fast and really hard, right?

Brittany: Mmm humph (nodding yes).

Tara: I don’t like police officers like that either.

While these specific types of messages were not as prevalent as the major themes presented in the data, there was still a relatively small group of parents who provided their children with instruction that could potentially escalate a police interaction and elicit a response from an officer that would result in the exact opposite of what parents seemed to desire for their children. It is evident that this specific type of messaging was rooted in fear and concern for their child’s safety. What is questionable, however, is a young child’s ability to appropriately understand this type of directive and execute it in a way that would not arouse unnecessary suspicion.

Attending to the Child’s Thoughts and Emotions

Aside from providing practical strategies to help protect youth from harm and to safely remove themselves from police encounters, many parents in the study also made attempts to attend to their child’s thoughts and emotions about interactions with members of law enforcement. They demonstrated probing questions which appeared to encourage their children to share the feelings they were experiencing as they wrestled with challenging conversations centered around racism, prejudice, and police bias. A conversation between Mary and her granddaughter Liz provides an example of this theme.

Mary: So, after the officer said that ummm…when you ask him why he said people, why do you think he came to you? Out of all the kids?

Liz: Cuz I’m Black.

Mary: Because you’re Black. How would that make you feel because you Black? He said that all y’all do is hang in the street?

Liz: Maybe because my friends are White.

Mary: It could be because your friends are White. That’s true too.

Liz: Because I’m Black and most of my friends are White.

Mary: You think that’s why he asked why you were hanging out in the streets, because you’re Black and they White?

Liz: Yes.

In this instance, Liz seemed to be hypothesizing about why the officer would have approached her to begin with and believed it was in some way related to her race and the race of her friends. Several parents in the sample noticed their children struggling to understand why an incident like the one detailed in the vignette scenario could occur in the first place. Many of these parents embraced this confusion and approached it as an opportunity to help their child think critically about the situation and to generate their own thoughts, even if some children felt challenged in doing so. The conversation between Terese and her son James helps to illustrate this theme.

Terese: So, if you were just imagining that you’re in that situation, how do you think you would feel?

James: (makes an utterance indicating he does not know).

Terese: So, Ima tell you this, once again, as I teach you, well, let me ask you this. Do you feel like he did something wrong?

James: (pauses) Yes?

Terese: And what do you think he said wrong in that, in that conversation? What was wrong? What was wrong about it?

This approach employed by many parents in the sample illustrated their concern and curiosity for how their child was making sense of the scenario and experiencing “the Talk” in general. Parents displayed an understanding that their child’s meaning-making process could have future implications for how they would interact with police as well as their overall perspectives about these officers that most people rely on for safety and protection. Attending to what children were thinking and feeling during this process also exemplified that many parents remained cognizant of where their children were developmentally and the potential difficulties they may have been experiencing while trying to process such a complex phenomenon.

Acknowledging a Climate of Racial Violence

Despite attending to their child’s thoughts and feelings while engaging in “the Talk,” many parents did not falter in their conversations and readily acknowledged the recent waves of racial violence perpetrated by police against Black adults and children in the US National discourses of concentrated biased policing in disadvantaged Black communities and the stereotyping of Black youth as criminals proved to be relevant factors that influenced “the Talk” in meaningful ways. While engaging in conversation with her daughter Nicole, Priscilla provided an example of how broader contextual factors can influence the nature of these conversations.

Priscilla: So, this is what I’m gone say to the police when I go up there to the…

Nicole: Police department.

Priscilla: Police department and look for the police that addressed you. First of all, if there was no crime, there was no reason to pull my baby to the side and talk to her the way that you talked to her. That’s the reason we still have the animosity between the police and the community, because of happenings like this.

Conversely, however, there were also a few parents in the sample who openly acknowledged larger discourses about race and racial violence in society but who actively made a decision to provide their children with a counter narrative. For example, one of the few fathers who participated in these interactions of the study acknowledged his awareness of increased stories of people’s negative interactions with police but elected to share a different perspective. A portion of Dylan’s conversation with Paul is included below:

Paul: I’ve never talked to the police before.

Dylan: So, this is a good one. How would you handle the situation?

Paul: Uhhh, I would tell him what I’m doing. I’m waiting on my friends, ummm… I would tell him I’m waiting on my friends and if I need to move, I’ll move.

Dylan: Yeah, I mean, I would want you to first to always comply with law enforcement. I don’t really care about the bad stories people have said and heard about, you know… My experiences with police officers in my life is if you’re open and you’re upfront and you don’t give them any reason to feel that you’re being dishonest, then nine times out of ten, there is no situation… It’s when people are kind of displaying attitude for no reason, “Well why you questioning me? I’m not doing anything wrong.” That kind of raises suspicion.

Dylan expressed strong conviction in his response and appeared adamant about encouraging Paul to not allow the current climate of racialized violence to taint his view of all members of law enforcement. While many parents in the sample illustrated in some fashion that broader contextual factors do in fact influence how they facilitate “the Talk,” it was apparent that parents interpreted the current climate of racialized violence in distinct and crucial ways.

Resistance

Another prominent theme present in the data was parents’ eagerness to educate their children on how to resist and take action against police officers who abuse their authority and misuse the power inherent to their positions. In these instances, many parents very enthusiastically described to their young children ways to disrupt the status quo and take a stand for what they believed to be just. There were two sub-themes for resistance in the data, which included officer accountability and critical consciousness-raising. Officer account-ability refers to parents/caregivers emphasizing the significance of using their voices to identify the officer’s actions as biased and potentially racially motivated and to hold them accountable for their actions. Additionally, through critical consciousness-raising, parents appeared to be attempting to convey to their children that they did not have to suffer in silence, but that there were practical ways to take action to fight injustice. A portion of “the Talk” between Shinna and her daughter Lauren helped to demonstrate the richness of this theme.

Shinna: So, I think if that happened to you and the police officer followed you home…

Lauren: What would you do?

Shinna: What would I do? I would tell you to come inside. I would talk to the police officer and I would say that you have no right to speak to a child that way and that if you felt that way that you should come speak to their parents. You have no right to judge any child because you did not see her doing anything wrong. She was waiting on her friends. How are they supposed to feel protected by you if you’re already accusing them? So that just means that as soon as you see them you see trouble. When really you should see the innocence of children and give them the benefit of the doubt and know that they’re not up to trouble, that they’re trying to be kids and play outside together… So, that’s how I think I would handle that. So, once I was done telling him that, then how do you think me and you would have discussed that?

Lauren: I would be like, I would’ve said like, (laughter), “Why’d you do that?” (laughter). “Why’d you go so far?”

Shinna: Me? Why did I go so far? Because we have to understand this, we all have rights and just because he’s a police officer, it doesn’t make his rights greater than ours. He knows the law and he knows that that’s basically harassment and he knows that he’s not speaking to a child in the right way. He knows right from wrong, so you have to stand up for yourself. That’s not being disorderly, standing up for yourself. I’m not cursing him out, I’m not disrespecting him, I’m not breaking the law, right?

Lauren: Right.

Initially, Lauren was clearly taken aback by how strong-willed and determined Shinna presented in an effort to resist unjust behaviors from the police and to take measures to hold him accountable. However, with more elaboration from her mother, Lauren appeared to begin to gain some level of understanding about why her mother responded so forcefully. Later in their exchange, Lauren even offered her own suggestion of what could be done to hold the officer accountable and stated that they could report him to someone who had higher authority. Through Shinna’s actions, she also engaged in some aspects of critical consciousness-raising with Lauren. Shinna aided in enhancing Lauren’s level of consciousness by helping her to first recognize the oppressive nature of the officer’s actions and then to realize the power that they held in their ability to make their concerns known. For many parents in the sample, incorporating messages of resistance was an essential component of “the Talk.”

“Not All Cops Are Bad”

Managing conversations about racism, implicit bias, societal perceptions, prejudice, and other marginalizing experiences with young impressionable children was a demanding feat for many parents and caregivers. Many of the parents in the study made serious attempts at striking a balance between equipping their child with the necessary knowledge to be able to protect themselves while also being careful as to not villainize every member of law enforcement their child might encounter. The last prevalent major theme present in the data highlighted this point. Many parents sought to make sure their child was aware that they should not anticipate every police interaction to be marked by racist and discriminatory behaviors. A related, but not as prominent, sub-theme in the data was attempts to lessen child fears. In these instances, parents seemed to subtly put forth efforts to curb any fears or anxieties they perceived their child to be experiencing related to this potential police encounter. The conversation between Arleen and Anthony provided a useful example of this occurring in a dyadic exchange.

Arleen: Do you like the policemen though?

Anthony: Mmm humph. They protect our city.

Arleen: That’s good. Always keep that mind frame. Even though there are songs talking about F the police.

Anthony: (begins singing).

Arleen: Yeah, just keep the mind frame that they’re here to serve and protect. There’s bad policemen but there’s good policemen. But there’s bad people and there’s good people. It’s the world that we just live in.

In a similar conversation, Laura and James shared the following:

Laura: You shouldn’t be afraid to go to them, you know? Who you gone go to, you know, in a situation if you need help from them? I think that going to the police officer if you need something, every situation is different. Don’t ever be afraid to go to them for anything cuz that’s what they here for, to help you when you need it, to keep the world safe. But yeah, how you feel about police officers?

James: I think some of them are good, some of them are bad because like, the good ones, they’ll help you from being hurt or attacked from somebody.

Laura: Yeah and then they umm, they just doing they job. But yeah, if you’re not doing anything wrong you don’t have anything to worry about, right?

James: Yes.

In both dyadic conversations, parents attempted to punctuate the notion that not all members of law enforcement are part of a homogeneous group but that there are those who genuinely care about the wellbeing of people regardless of race. While there are undoubtedly officers who misuse their power and authority, there are exceptions, and those officers should be acknowledged as well. Furthermore, there were instances in the data when parents appeared to highlight the diversity of officers out of concern for their child’s fears and worries. Parents were faced with the conundrum of equipping their child with the necessary skills to protect themselves during police encounters while simultaneously providing them with some sense of realistic hope about the positive intentions of some officers.

Discussion

The overall focus of this study was to explicate the unique aspects of “the Talk” that occurs in many Black American families and to examine the approaches that a sample of parents employed to help them navigate such a sensitive yet necessary topic with their young school-age children. The integrative model presented by García Coll et al. (1996) emphasized the importance of contextual demands and broader systemic forces, such as racism and discrimination, that influence the development of minoritized youth. Specifically, within Black American culture, there are elusive, yet well established, practices that many adhere to in order to protect themselves and their loved ones from the ills and injuries of racial trauma. A critical but understudied practice that often occurs in Black families is “The Talk” in which parents and other influential adults educate children about ways to safely conduct themselves when interacting with members of law enforcement or others in positions of power and authority (Whitaker & Snell, 2016). We assert that “the Talk” is a form of racial socialization that is deserving of more attention in the psychological sciences. Critical Race Theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2000) posits that racism and discrimination are weaved into the fabric of society and that the US legal system plays a vital role in upholding the socially constructed hierarchies of race that exist. This study sought to expand the literature by explicitly identifying “the Talk” as a form of RS necessitated by current contextual demands in society and to amplify the experiences of Black parents who engage in these vitally important conversations in an effort to protect their children.

This study’s findings unmasked an unfortunate truth about the lived realities of Black youth and their families in a nation where individuals are witnessing increasing rates of racialized violence against Black people of all ages at the hands of police (Edwards et al., 2019). Current RS research has focused extensively on the frequencies of transmitted messages between parents and children and the associations between RS and various developmental outcomes. Studies have focused drastically less on the actual process of these conversations and the emotional experiences of parents. This study revealed that at the core of this multifaceted phenomenon of “the Talk” are conflicting tensions that leave parents with an array of mixed emotions connected to their experiences of trying to rear healthy children in a society that often deems them insignificant and requiring restraint. The results suggest that most parents of the young children in this study faced confusing and troubling dilemmas when attempting to provide them with directions about how to conduct themselves when interacting with police. To appropriately capture the emotional experiences of parents engaging in “the Talk,” we summarized the internal conflict that parents seemed to experience by developing two central questions synthesized as the following.

1. How do I equip my child with necessary tools so that they maintain their safety when interacting with police who have undesirable intentions while also teaching them how to resist and stand up in opposition to oppression?

2. How do I educate my child about the realities of a racially oppressive society while also trying to instill in them a sense of hope and optimism about their future?

For many parents, discovering how to simultaneously and effectively promote two seemingly conflicting messages appeared to result in feelings of frustration, discomfort, anger, confusion, sadness, and the like and herein lies the true crux of this experience for Black parents. Also, worth noting is the young age of children in this study. Children at this age are just now beginning to enter a phase of developing their own unique identities and still look to their parents and other influential adults to aid them in their meaning-making processes (Sokol, 2009). Parents of young children who are grappling to understand such complex and disheartening realities are burdened with creating clarity and providing sound instruction for their young impressionable children.

Many parents feel compelled to educate their children about appropriate and safe ways to navigate society but also fear that providing them with too much information may have deleterious effects. Burt and colleagues (2012) in their examination of the effects of RS on the criminogenic effects of discrimination found that preparation for bias actually served as a protective factor against negative behavioral responses when it occurred within the context of supportive parenting and was coupled with cultural socialization. The research on the effects of preparation for bias on various outcomes for Black youth has been mixed with some researchers finding that it can be associated with various internalizing and externalizing behaviors (e.g., Brega & Coleman, 1999; Stevenson et al., 1997). However, the consensus among family and developmental science scholars is that RS is a beneficial practice for youth and families and cultural socialization has been most consistently associated with positive developmental outcomes (Hughes et al., 2006; Reynolds & Gonzales-Backen, 2017).

Inherent in engaging in “the Talk” is RS messaging related to preparation for bias. In these instances, parents are essentially informing their children to be cautious when interacting with law enforcement and to be cognizant of potential negative perceptions and bias. Preparation for bias was a highly salient aspect of “the Talk” in our study sample. We assert that the appropriate solution is not to refrain from having honest conversations with developing youth about the potential for actual threat and violence but to deliver these messages in ways that are developmentally appropriate such that youth simultaneously experience the warmth and support of their parents as they receive them. In other words, the conflicting tension many parents experience as they attempt to engage in this practice may be mitigated with understanding that delivering seemingly conflicting messages can be effectively done with sound preparation and clear intentionality.

Developing Racial Socialization Competency

In their exposition of the healing potential of RS practices in families of color who experience racial injury, Anderson and Stevenson (2019) defined racial socialization competency as the degree to which families are “skilled and confidently prepared to engage in racial socialization communication” (p. 68). Extant RS literature has focused almost exclusively on frequencies of racialized messages and their associations with various developmental outcomes in youth of color but has failed to assess parents’ skills and competence in delivering these messages. Essential to understanding racial socialization competency is recognizing the distinction between legacy and literacy approaches to racial socialization (Anderson & Stevenson, 2019). When parents operate from a legacy approach, they primarily focus on beliefs and messages that are rooted in ideological and historical contexts (Stevenson, 2014). An example would be, “As a young Black girl attending this private school, you will need to study three times as hard as your White classmates just to be considered half as smart as them.” Conversely, a literacy approach to racial socialization emphasizes an ability to appropriately interpret a racialized encounter, reappraise or rewrite the marginalizing narrative being transmitted, and to respond with healthy decision-making (Anderson & Stevenson, 2019; Stevenson, 2014). An example of this approach would be, “I know it can be hurtful to hear such negative comments about your abilities, but remember they made those statements in an effort to make themselves feel more powerful and they do not reveal any truths about you, our family, or our culture. Let’s talk about some ways we can work to reject the negativity that they are putting out there.”

The key differences between the legacy and literacy approaches to racial socialization are evident with the literacy approach focusing on the acquisition of necessary skills to actively oppose the racist, oppressive, and prejudicial experiences that so many Black youth are subjected to. Anderson and Stevenson (2019) asserted that transitioning from a legacy approach to a literacy approach for parents of color is a necessary shift in order to foster optimal development in youth of color and to protect them from the detriments of racial stress. Focusing on enhancing the skills of Black parents as they work to demonstrate responsiveness to the unique needs of their children must become an essential component in RS research and the development of practical and effective interventions with Black families.

Implications

In accordance with the integrative model (García Coll et al., 1996), families in this study were deeply impacted by the societal demands of this era. In order to accurately conceptualize unique familial processes such as “the Talk,” the experiences of families must be situated within a broader sociocultural context. The views that individuals develop about law enforcement are not only influenced by their direct experiences and vicarious events, but these incidents of injustice are also framed and associated with broader experiences of racism and oppression (Rengifo & Fratello, 2015; Rengifo & Pater, 2017). The influence of broader contextual factors was evident in parents’ navigation of “the Talk” as they referenced recent killings of Black youth in their individual communities or discussed racialized violence that they witnessed through the media. Family practitioners working with Black families in clinical settings should be mindful to consider the contexts in which they live, such as exposure to racial violence and other contextual factors, as they seek to address various emotional or mental health needs.

Several scholars engaged in RS research have begun to explore the clinical implications of these approaches with Black families (Anderson et al., 2018; Brown et al., 2013; Reynolds & Gonzales-Backen, 2017). Anderson and colleagues (2018) introduced a five-session intervention known as Engaging, Managing, and Bonding through Race (EMBRace) that can be used by families to work through stress associated with racial trauma and/or injury. RS can also be a useful strategy to be implemented into parent training programs for Black parents and caregivers when additional support and education are needed to address pertinent issues within the family system (Coard et al., 2004). Augmenting the racial socialization competency of Black parents via parent education programs and curriculum may prove to have a tremendously positive effect on their abilities to better support and educate their children.

Hardy (2013) posited that, “Racial oppression is a traumatic form of interpersonal violence which can lacerate the spirit, scar the soul, and puncture the psyche” (p. 25). Acknowledging the traumatic effects of racism and oppression on Black people in the US should be an integral part of the work that any practitioner working with Black families in a clinical context commits to. Like all ethnic or racial groups, Black Americans are an incredibly heterogeneous group, so this is not to say that every Black family will be impacted by racism in the same way. However, at minimum, an acknowledgment of historical and sociocultural influences on the part of helping professionals must be the standard when working with Black families, specifically in clinical and practice settings. Practitioners must be intentional to foster spaces that welcome dialogues about race where both parents and children feel supported in their personal efforts to resist racial oppression and heal from racial stress and trauma. It is essential that parents feel equipped which can have an effect on their wellbeing and the wellbeing of their children.

Limitations

Like all empirical research, this study is not without some limitations that should be explicitly acknowledged. Because the data for this study were approached from a secondary analysis perspective and the authors were not physically present for the collection of data, there are undoubtedly contextual elements that we were not privy to that could have affected our interpretation of the data. Although consultation with a portion of the research assistants who participated in data collection took place prior to the analyses in an effort to gain more information about the experience of interacting with families, gaps in our knowledge and understanding still remain.

Additionally, social desirability bias (Hart-Johnson, 2017) could have potentially influenced the data. The likelihood of desirability bias also increases when conducting research on socially stigmatized populations of people. Researchers should be cognizant that data collection may not reveal the most honest and explicit disclosures (Hart-Johnson, 2017). Another factor worth highlighting is that not all research assistants who participated in data collection in the primary study were ethnically matched with the families. This also could have affected families’ willingness to disclose personal thoughts and feelings related to racism and oppression to research assistants who were White and of ethnicities other than Black. One key factor that could have ameliorated this, however, was the presence of the primary research assistant and her extensive history with each family and a strong sense of rapport with them.

Summary and Conclusion

The emphasis placed on providing children with specific directives to ensure their safety when encountering police is necessary but can also be emotionally burdensome for Black parents. RS researchers and the current literature have not sufficiently highlighted the emotional experiences of Black parents and caregivers who engage in these processes of teaching race to their children (Smith-Bynum et al., 2016), also known as racial socialization stress (Anderson & Stevenson, 2019). Several parents exhibited intense emotional reactions while engaging in “the Talk” with their child. The next phase of RS research should adopt a more applied focus, seek ways to build on the unique strengths that Black parents possess, and explore strategies to help enhance their racial socialization competency. It is a fallacy to assume that all parents equally possess the appropriate skills to educate their children on the racial dynamics of society. Although most parents might understand the severity of engaging in “the Talk”, this does not suggest that they all have the same level of comfort in approaching this highly sensitive topic, which can provoke or increase stress. It should also be noted that enhancing the skills parents employ with their children is not synonymous with increasing the undue burden that Black parents already bear in an unjust and racist society. What we are not suggesting is a shallow promotion of resilience to combat the ills of racism while the true threat of bigotry and hatred is left unconfronted (Anderson, 2019) . What we are recommending is that scholars committed to this line of research begin to think more critically and consciously about the experiences of Black parents and their children and acknowledge the nuanced complexities tied to RS strategies to better support families in their efforts to thrive. It requires that scholar-activists committed to ideals of social justice and resistance commit to leveraging our privilege to oppose systematic racism through our research and practice (Anderson, 2019). We can hold true to two ideals—simultaneously continue to disrupt systems of oppression while also working to support those parents who are in need of additional skills and education who may be struggling with navigating difficult conversations. Doing so ultimately protects the youth who are most vulnerable to racial threat and injury and ultimately strengthens Black families and communities who continue to persevere daily in the face of persecution.