This article integrates studies from the project “Educational Practices, parental emotional indicators, behavior problems in children and family variables”, duly approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sciences Department of the Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (CAAE: 69962617.9.0000.5398, Opinion nº. 2.289.391).

Table 1 shows the comparison data of the educational practices of mothers from nuclear (G1) and non-nuclear (G2) families. G1 mothers used more positive practices and less negative ones than G2 mothers; however, there was no statistically significant difference. For the categories of Positive Practices, no significant difference between the groups was found for Positive Monitoring, only for Moral Behavior (p = 0.04), with higher averages for G1. With regard to Negative Practices, a significant difference was observed for the practice of Physical Abuse (p = 0.03), indicating that mothers of G2 used it more.

The classification of the mothers’ parenting styles as risk or non-risk style indicated that the majority (67.7%) of the total sample was classified as Risky Parenting Style. The intragroup analysis also indicated a prevalence of risk for the two groups, G1 (61.3%) and G2 (74.1%). There was no significant difference for the presence or absence of risk considering the family configuration, as observed in the Chi-Square test [X2 (1); 1.181, p > 0.05].

Table 2 shows the association between the frequency of clinical/non-clinical condition for stress, anxiety and depression and family condition. It was observed that G2 had a significantly higher frequency of clinical indicators for stress than G1. Of the four mental health indicators, stress and trait anxiety were the most frequent for the total sample.

The correlation analyses between education parenting practices and maternal emotional health, considering the total sample, are presented in Table 3. For the total sample, it was observed that the highest scores of stress, trait anxiety and depression correlated with high scores of Inconsistent Punishment and Relaxed Discipline. Higher scores for stress and depression also correlated with higher scores for Negligence and Physical Abuse practices.

Intragroup analyses indicated a correlation between education parenting practices and emotional health for G1, indicating that mothers with higher levels of stress had higher scores for Physical Abuse and lower scores for Positive Monitoring. Also, higher depression scores correlated with higher scores for Physical Abuse. For G2, it was observed that higher stress scores correlated with higher scores for Inconsistent Punishment, Relaxed Discipline and Negligence. As for Trait-Anxiety, higher scores correlated with higher scores for Relaxed Discipline and Moral Behavior. As for depression indicators, higher scores correlated with higher scores for Moral Behavior, Relaxed Discipline and Neglect.

Sociodemographic data were correlated with emotional health indicators and the scores for parenting practices were observed, considering the total sample and the groups, as shown in Table 4. For the total sample, the larger number of children was correlated with higher indicators for Stress, Trait-Anxiety and Depression, and mothers with lower socioeconomic levels showed more indicators for Stress and Trait-Anxiety. As for parenting practices, mothers with more schooling showed more Moral Behavior and Inconsistent Punishment and less Relaxed Discipline. Mothers of lower socioeconomic status showed more Relaxed Discipline. The older G1 mothers had lower levels for State-Anxiety and higher scores for Moral Behavior. In relation to G2, mothers with a greater number of children had higher scores for Stress, Trait-Anxiety and Depression. For this group, the lower the socioeconomic level, the higher the Stress and Trait-Anxiety indicators, the lower the Depression indicators and the scores for Relaxed Discipline.

The analysis of the participants’ educational practices indicated significant differences for Moral Behavior, with higher averages for G1, and also in relation to Physical Abuse, with higher averages for G2. The greater use of positive practices associated with Moral Behavior by mothers of nuclear families was also indicated by Smith et al. (2015), being more frequent in families with mothers with higher education and higher income. For the mothers in this study, education was similar, but the income of G1 was significantly higher. As for negative practices, the Physical Abuse practices considered in this study are, by definition, consistent with the description in the literature regarding the aspect of physical and emotional abuse (Butchart et al., 2006).

It is worth mentioning the fact that the sample studied revealed the prevalence of these practices, albeit at a low frequency, on the part of mothers from non-nuclear families, who may be more vulnerable to situations of domestic violence because they are responsible alone for maintaining the home properly and children education (Hildebrand et al., 2010). Considering the impacts of the prevalence of negative parenting practices on child development, as pointed out by Basso et al. (2019) and Hildebrand et al. (2010) identification with families is relevant for planning and implementing interventions (Altafim et al., 2016).

It was observed that the mothers of G2 had more negative practices than those of G1. However, considering the set of positive and negative practices that define the Parenting Style, most of the participants in this study (74.2%), regardless of the group, were characterized as having a risky parenting style. The data corroborate the findings of Nogueira et al. (2013) who found that mothers of babies from nuclear families had more frequent negative practices.

The exercise of the maternal role requires mothers to have a repertoire of diversified educational skills for monitoring their children’s activities, establishing rules and limits in an affectionate relationship. Therefore, interventions that help parents in the education of their children using, as a priority, positive practices are promising (Altafim et al., 2016).

Regarding emotional health, the G2 mothers showed higher rates for the clinical indicators of anxiety (trait and state) and depression, with significant differences for stress. The data corroborated the findings in the literature that unmarried mothers are more likely to have emotional changes (Darghouth et al., 2015; Kadir & Bifulco, 2011; Senicato et al., 2018). Even with the law of shared custody, after separation, women are still primarily responsible for educational tasks, which can explain the higher averages of the indicators of anxiety, stress and depression, as was also shown in the study by Martins et al. (2019).

The positive correlation between educational practices of Moral Behavior and depression indicates that mothers of non-nuclear families use this practice more, which involves parental behavior of observation about limits, rules and social skills for the child’s coexistence in the collective world. Possibly, the G2 mothers use these behaviors more because they are the main responsible adult and because they spend more time with their child. However, they were also more ill, with higher indicators of depression. The data corroborate the findings of Correia and Borloti (2011) in relation to the burden experienced by separated mothers and the lack of a support network.

The negative correlations between Positive Monitoring and Stress indicated that, for the general sample and for the G1 mothers, the greater the stress, the lower the occurrence of Positive Monitoring, corroborating the data indicated by Faro et al. (2019). However, in relation to Trait-Anxiety, the correlation was positive for G2, indicating that more anxious mothers had more Positive Monitoring. This indicates that, in this study, mothers from non-nuclear families had more indicators of anxiety and depression, correlated with the high occurrence of Positive Practices (Moral Behavior and Positive Monitoring). However, even if they can perform their educational practice well, they require care in relation to emotional health, confirming the findings of Senicato et al. (2018) regarding the socio-emotional vulnerability of widowed and separated mothers.

In relation to Negative Practices, for the total sample, all were correlated with higher indicators of Stress and Depression. Regarding Trait Anxiety, there was a positive correlation for Inconsistent Punishment and Relaxed Discipline, but not for Neglect and Physical Abuse. Thus, for the total sample, we can consider that the highest indicators of emotional health were associated with a greater occurrence of negative practices. From the intragroup analyses, it was noticed that, for the G1 mothers, the correlations were positive, indicating a higher occurrence of Physical Abuse for mothers with higher indicators of stress and depression. For G2, high levels of stress correlated with higher rates of Inconsistent Punishment, Relaxed Discipline and Neglect. There was also a correlation between Relaxed Discipline and higher rates of Trait-Anxiety and Depression and between Neglect and Depression. The results of the intragroup analysis allowed us to identify a greater number of correlations for G2 between emotional indicators and negative practices, confirming a greater vulnerability of emotional health in this group (Correia & Borloti, 2011) and indicating greater psychological distress for women after separation (Darghouth et al., 2015). However, being solely responsible for their children, even though they use negative practices, they also use positive practices, which can be a protective factor for children’s development.

For the total sample, the correlations indicated that mothers with more education had higher scores for Moral Behavior, Inconsistent Punishment and Relaxed Discipline. Older mothers had higher averages for Moral Behavior and the lower economic level indicated higher scores for Relaxed Discipline. The findings of Smith et al. (2015) are in this line; they indicated that positive practices are correlated with higher education and income. The data suggest that lower income establishes a correlation with negative practice, found in this study for Relaxed Discipline. Mothers with higher age and education tend to maintain more positive practices, which would also be correlated with Moral Behavior. For G2, it was found that older mothers had higher averages for Moral Behavior, and mothers in this group with a lower socioeconomic level exhibited more occurrences of Relaxed Discipline. The issue of lower income and education of separated mothers has been pointed out in the literature as factors that demand attention both due to socio-emotional vulnerability (Correia & Berloti, 2011) and the impacts on child development (Basso et al., 2019; Hildebrand et al., 2010; Weber, 2017). Senicato et al. (2018) also pointed to low education, the marital status of separation as vulnerability factors for common mental disorders and, therefore, would increase the chance of children’s behavior problems. However, a gap remains regarding the impacts of the separation of mothers with higher income and higher education. Issues associated with marriages that are maintained due to economic status or even outsourcing of child care, violence in the dispute over assets and other factors are data that remain hidden, causing the risk of inferring that when there is income, everything is settled.

Also regarding the total sample, the greater number of children indicated higher Stress, Trait-Anxiety and Depression means and the lower economic level was correlated with higher indicators for Stress and Trait-Anxiety. The lower the socioeconomic status, the more these clinical indicators are present. The data corroborate Bolsoni-Silva and Loureiro’s (2019) notes on the relationship between maternal depression and family income as factors associated with lower use of positive practices by mothers.

Younger G1 mothers exhibited more indicators of State-Anxiety; this was a correlation that was also pointed out in the study by Alves et al. (2018). Among the underlying hypotheses, it is possible that punctual, potentially anxious-mongering circumstances in life, such as the educational demands of children, lead to the emergence of anxiety symptoms, since they require maternal behavioral repertoires for their resolution. It will be important to further studies about the relationship between maternal age and indicators of State Anxiety, considering the negative effects on child development, especially due to possible maternal intrusiveness, as pointed out by Fraga et al. (2008).

Multiparity is also an important variable, as for G2, mothers with more children had more indicators of Stress, Trait-Anxiety and Depression, with stress and anxiety also being associated with lower socioeconomic levels. Possibly, the greater number of children ends up demanding more repertoire and management from mothers to meet the educational and affection demands. When performing this alone, it may be that mothers from non-nuclear families are overloaded in this role. The literature also points out that the greater number of children in the family is associated with less individual attention to children and less positive parenting (Schmidt et al., 2018).

The findings observed in the total sample indicated that mothers of schoolchildren need help regarding educational practices and that participation in programs that specifically address these issues could, in the short term, result in a better quality of life for families and better development of children. Mothers from non-nuclear families had more emotional indicators correlated with negative practices, even though they also had positive practices. In this connection, they present themselves as an eligible group for intervention in the field of parental educational practices and maternal health. Interventions should be designed to guide positive childhood practices and promote maternal and child’s health.

Among the limitations of this study is the small number of participants, which makes it difficult to generalize the data. Specific characteristics of mothers from a small town and, for G1, the high socioeconomic level, may constitute biases that could influence the generalization of data. Future studies, with populations from other regions and more diversified socioeconomic levels between groups, may contribute to deepening the understanding of these issues. The instrument used to assess the socioeconomic level in this study may not have been the most appropriate either, as it primarily evaluated consumer items. More reliable instruments may generate more reliable results.

Conclusion

Considering the socioeconomic difference between G1 and G2, the present sample indicated a higher occurrence of non-nuclear families in low-income families. Other studies ought to be conducted in order to answer how the separations between families of higher socioeconomic level occur and the impacts associated with educational practice, processes of parental alienation, physical and psychological violence due to judicial demands for legal partition, financial and affective responsibility with the child.