Prenatal Attachment, Parental Confidence, and Mental Health in Expecting Parents: The Role of Childhood Trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Exposure to childhood abuse or neglect may lead to negative outcomes during pregnancy in expecting parents, which may contribute to a negative experience of childbearing and have consequences for the developing fetus. This study examined the associations between exposure to childhood abuse or neglect, psychological symptoms, prenatal attachment, and perception of parental competence in expectant parents. METHODS: Individuals at low sociodemographic risk were recruited in community perinatal care settings and completed self-report assessment measures of depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, dissociation, personality disorders, perception of parental competence, and prenatal attachment. RESULTS: There were 322 participants (78% women), including 91 adults with a history of childhood abuse or neglect, Participants who were exposed to childhood abuse or neglect reported significantly higher levels of symptoms on all indices of mental health than nonexposed adults, even when controlling for sociodemographic risks. However, both groups reported similar levels of prenatal attachment and parental confidence. The impact of childhood maltreatment was similar in men and women. Structural equation modeling showed that childhood abuse or neglect leads to poor mental health and that poor mental health, but not childhood maltreatment, is associated with low parental confidence and prenatal attachment. DISCUSSION: Psychological symptoms are frequent in expectant parents who experienced maltreatment during their childhood. However, childhood abuse or neglect is not associated with their attitude regarding parenthood and the child in the absence of psychopathology. Supporting mental health may be an important target of parental programs offered during pregnancy to women and men with a history of childhood abuse or neglect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".