OBJECTIVE: This report describes the Parenting Risk Scale and reviews previous approaches to the systematic assessment of parenting. Five key dimensions of parenting are described as well as the method for rating the occurrence of difficulties and concerns about parenting using a semistructured interview methodology. METHOD: The Parenting Risk Scale was developed with two cohorts of young children. One cohort consisted of 150 children at increased genetic risk for developing asthma but who were physically healthy during the initial periods of assessment of parenting. A second cohort of healthy children at no elevated risk for asthma was similarly studied. RESULTS: Reliability of the parenting ratings was found to be acceptable with appropriate training, and both concurrent and predictive validity were demonstrated to be excellent. High stability in the ratings of adequacy of parenting was documented. Specifically, ratings made during the prenatal assessment were highly significantly associated with completely independent ratings of parenting made more than 4 years after the birth of the index child (r = .42, p < .0001). The appropriateness of this method for the assessment of the quality of parenting in clinical settings is highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: The Parenting Risk Scale is a reliable and valid measure for the systemic assessment of five key dimensions of parenting.
OBJECTIVE: This report describes the Parenting Risk Scale and reviews previous approaches to the systematic assessment of parenting. Five key dimensions of parenting are described as well as the method for rating the occurrence of difficulties and concerns about parenting using a semistructured interview methodology. METHOD: The Parenting Risk Scale was developed with two cohorts of young children. One cohort consisted of 150 children at increased genetic risk for developing asthma but who were physically healthy during the initial periods of assessment of parenting. A second cohort of healthy children at no elevated risk for asthma was similarly studied. RESULTS: Reliability of the parenting ratings was found to be acceptable with appropriate training, and both concurrent and predictive validity were demonstrated to be excellent. High stability in the ratings of adequacy of parenting was documented. Specifically, ratings made during the prenatal assessment were highly significantly associated with completely independent ratings of parenting made more than 4 years after the birth of the index child (r = .42, p < .0001). The appropriateness of this method for the assessment of the quality of parenting in clinical settings is highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: The Parenting Risk Scale is a reliable and valid measure for the systemic assessment of five key dimensions of parenting.