Abstract:Parents struggled to give their children a healthy lifestyle and the 'temptations' of daily unhealthy choices causing hassles and conflicts. Parents desired professional support from preschool, Child Health Care and a collective responsibility from society with uniform guidelines. Parents groups were mentioned as peer support.
“…A child's own preferences for more sedentary behaviours were cited as largely negative influences by parents and care providers . Parents and carers also stated that children generally had a preference for use of electronic media over more active pursuits .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parents are responsible for young children's lifestyle; they can't make their own choices, we have to make their choices …. (P) I feel that adults play a crucial role in the physical activity of children. If adults after dinner sit in front of the TV, kids would sit in front of the TV as well.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parents are responsible for young children's lifestyle; they can't make their own choices, we have to make their choices …. (P) …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(P) In order to prevent obesity in childhood, it is necessary to build inspiring playgrounds and green areas where children can play …. (P) …”
SummaryPositive activity behaviours (i.e. higher physical activity [PA]/lower sedentary behaviour [SB]) are beneficial from infancy, yet evidence suggests that young children (0‐ to 6‐year‐olds) are relatively inactive. To better understand the perceived influences on these behaviours and to aid intervention development, this paper systematically synthesizes the extensive qualitative literature regarding perceived barriers and facilitators to PA and SB in young children (0–6 years old). A search of eight electronic databases (July 2016) identified 43 papers for inclusion. Data extraction and evidence synthesis were conducted using thematic content analysis, underpinned by the socio‐ecological model (i.e. individual, interpersonal, community, organizational and policy levels). Parents, childcare providers and children perceived seven broad themes to be important for PA and SB, including the child; the home; out‐of‐home childcare; parent–childcare provider interactions; environmental factors; safety; and weather. Each theme mapped onto between one and five levels of the socio‐ecological model; barriers and facilitators at the interpersonal level (e.g. parents, care providers and family) were most frequently cited, reflecting the important (perceived) role adults/peers play in shaping young children's behaviours. We provide an overarching framework to explain PA and SB in early childhood. We also highlight where gaps in the current literature exist (e.g. from male carers; in developing countries; and barriers and facilitators in the environmental and policy domains) and where future quantitative work may focus to provide novel insights about children's activity behaviours (e.g. safety and weather).
“…A child's own preferences for more sedentary behaviours were cited as largely negative influences by parents and care providers . Parents and carers also stated that children generally had a preference for use of electronic media over more active pursuits .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parents are responsible for young children's lifestyle; they can't make their own choices, we have to make their choices …. (P) I feel that adults play a crucial role in the physical activity of children. If adults after dinner sit in front of the TV, kids would sit in front of the TV as well.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parents are responsible for young children's lifestyle; they can't make their own choices, we have to make their choices …. (P) …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(P) In order to prevent obesity in childhood, it is necessary to build inspiring playgrounds and green areas where children can play …. (P) …”
SummaryPositive activity behaviours (i.e. higher physical activity [PA]/lower sedentary behaviour [SB]) are beneficial from infancy, yet evidence suggests that young children (0‐ to 6‐year‐olds) are relatively inactive. To better understand the perceived influences on these behaviours and to aid intervention development, this paper systematically synthesizes the extensive qualitative literature regarding perceived barriers and facilitators to PA and SB in young children (0–6 years old). A search of eight electronic databases (July 2016) identified 43 papers for inclusion. Data extraction and evidence synthesis were conducted using thematic content analysis, underpinned by the socio‐ecological model (i.e. individual, interpersonal, community, organizational and policy levels). Parents, childcare providers and children perceived seven broad themes to be important for PA and SB, including the child; the home; out‐of‐home childcare; parent–childcare provider interactions; environmental factors; safety; and weather. Each theme mapped onto between one and five levels of the socio‐ecological model; barriers and facilitators at the interpersonal level (e.g. parents, care providers and family) were most frequently cited, reflecting the important (perceived) role adults/peers play in shaping young children's behaviours. We provide an overarching framework to explain PA and SB in early childhood. We also highlight where gaps in the current literature exist (e.g. from male carers; in developing countries; and barriers and facilitators in the environmental and policy domains) and where future quantitative work may focus to provide novel insights about children's activity behaviours (e.g. safety and weather).
“…Previous research indicates that parents with children living at home experience time pressure to a greater extent than others [12,13]. Previous studies have as well indicated that parents of young children perceive time pressure to be challenging to health lifestyles of their children and family [14,15] and that time pressure can have negative effects on parental mental health [16,17]. Parents’ experiences of time pressure have previously been found to be associated with lack of support, financial stress, long working hours and parenting younger children [18].…”
BackgroundThe home, the family and the parents represent a context of everyday life that is important for child health and development, with parent-child relationships highlighted as crucial for children’s mental health. Time pressure is an emerging feature of modern societies and previous studies indicates that parents with children living at home experience time pressure to a greater extent than people with no children living at home. Previous studies of children’s mental health in relation to parents’ time pressure are lacking. Hence, the purpose of this study was to examine the association between parents’ subjective time pressure and mental health problems among children in the Nordic countries as well as potential disparities between boys and girls in different age groups.Methods4592 children, aged 4-16 from Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, participating in the 2011 version of the NordChild study, were included. The Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire was used to measure children’s mental health and associations to parents’ time pressure were assessed by multiple logistic regression analysis.ResultsAmong children of parents experiencing time pressure, 18.6% had mental health problems compared to 10.1% among children of parents experiencing time pressure not or sometimes. The odds of mental health problems were higher among both boys (OR 1.80 95% CI 1.32-2.46) and girls (OR 1.95 95% CI 1.42-2.66) if their parents experienced time pressure when adjusted for financial stress. The highest prevalence of mental health problems in the case of parental time pressure was found among girls 13-16 years old (23.6%) and the lowest prevalence was found among boys 13-16 years old (10.7%).ConclusionsIn this study an association between parents’ subjective time pressure and increased mental health problems among children was found. Given that time pressure is a growing feature of modern societies, the results might contribute to an explanation as to mental health problems are common among children in the Nordic countries in spite of otherwise favourable conditions. Additional research on the linkage between parents’ experienced time pressure and children’s and adolescents’ mental health problems is needed to confirm the novel findings of this study.
Deleterious lifestyle behaviours pose a formidable threat to public health but one for which the solution – modest changes in lifestyle choices is tantalising low cost and nontoxic. Personal responsibility for lifestyle choices, once a government mantra, is increasingly being challenged as the complex relationships between sociocultural and environmental conditions and personal choice are recognised.
Individuals make frequent lifestyle choices that affect their health and it is intuitively assumed that these choices are made through free will. However, it is argued that in order for an individual to be considered fully responsible, certain preconditions must ideally be met; their actions must be informed, voluntary, uncoerced, spontaneous and deliberated. These preconditions are problematic when applied to lifestyle behaviours. They fail to acknowledge that health behaviours are influenced by many competing factors: cultural pressures, health literacy, health inequalities, mental capacity, genetic predisposition and in the case of smoking and alcohol, addiction to a substance. Understanding which risk factors are within or outside of the individual's control is necessary when discussing responsibility for health. A balanced opinion would therefore suggest that lifestyle behaviours are influenced by a complex interplay of intrapersonal and extrapersonal factors. And responsibility varies for individuals along a continuum.
Key Concepts:
Individual personal responsibility for lifestyle choices lies on a continuum between complete free will and no choice.
Individual personal responsibility for health is dependent on cultural pressures, health literacy, health inequalities, mental capacity, genetic predisposition and in the case of smoking and alcohol, addiction to a substance.
Health behaviour is determined in part by perceptions of control over performance of the behaviour which will vary from individual to individual.
Advances in our understanding of the genetic aetiology of so‐called lifestyle diseases and their associated behaviours present new challenges for determining those risk factors that are under a person's control and those that are outside of it.
Providing people with genetic risk information may induce a sense of ‘fatalism’, the belief that little can be done to reduce the risk. Fatalism may be particularly relevant to perceptions of responsibility and control now that many diseases are thought to have a genetic aetiology.
Habit and addiction introduce an additional layer of complexity when debating personal responsibility for health. The very nature of dependency suggests that the individual is unable to control their use of a substance which is usually damaging to health.
Determining the precise degree by which an individual is responsible for lifestyle‐related health outcomes is complex and problematic.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
