Triangular Interactions of Unmarried African American Mothers and Fathers with their 3-Month-Old Infants

We examined the responsivity of unmarried African American fathers to bids from their 3-month-old infants during the Lausanne Trilogue Play (LTP), and the responses of mothers subsequent to father-baby exchanges. Twenty mother-father-infant triads (75% noncoresidential) with parents between the ages of 14 and 53 took part in the investigation. All fathers and the majority of mothers were African American with reported incomes at least 200% below the U.S. poverty line. All participants had previously completed a prenatal intervention study examining formation of coparenting alliances across their transitions to parenthood and were observed while playing together in videotaped LTP sessions at 3-months postpartum. We microanalyzed infants’ gaze orientation toward their fathers and the sequence of parent behaviors after babies’ bids to fathers. Father responses to bids from the infant were characterized as withdrawal, nonwithdrawal but failure to adapt behavior he had been showing prior to the baby’s bid, or affective and/or behavioral adjustment in response to the baby’s bid. Maternal reactions to the father-baby exchange were coded as either reinforcing, opposing, or neutral. Analyses revealed that fathers showed substantial evidence of intuitive parenting and matching behavior, and mothers overwhelmingly supported, rather than interfered with or disrupted, baby-father exchanges. Results are discussed in contradistinction to deceptive commonplace depictions of African American families that focus largely on deficits rather than strengths, and recommendations for family research and practice are offered.     

Temporary Migration Programmes: the Cause or Antidote of Migrant Worker Exploitation in UK Agriculture

The referendum result in Britain in 2016 and the potential loss of EU labour in the advent of a ‘hard Brexit’ has raised pressing questions for sectors that rely on EU labour, such as agriculture. Coupled with the closure of the long-standing Seasonal Agricultural Scheme in 2013, policymakers are grappling with how to satisfy on the one hand employer demands for mobility schemes, and on the other public demands for restrictive immigration policies. Labour shortages in agriculture transcend the immigration debate, raising questions for food security, the future of automation and ultimately what labour market the UK hopes to build. Temporary migration programmes have been heralded as achieving a triple win, yet they are rightly criticized for breeding bonded labour and exploitation. In lieu of a dedicated EU labour force, agricultural employers are calling for the establishment of a new seasonal scheme. In this paper, we explore whether the absence of a temporary migration programme resolves the potential exploitation of migrant workers. We argue that the absence of a temporary migration programme (TMP) is not an antidote to migrant exploitation, and that a socially just TMP which is built around migrant agency may be the most palpable solution.