The study, published in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders by Catalina Sau Man Ng and Victor C. W. Chan of The Education University of Hong Kong together with Olivier Marchal of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, recruited 92 Chinese parents in Hong Kong, including 42 parents of children with a formal autism diagnosis and 50 parents of typically developing children. The two groups were well matched on key sociodemographic variables, with no statistically significant differences, which strengthens the comparison. Most participants were mothers, 83.5 percent, aged between 24 and 62, married, and raising more than one child. Parents of autistic children were recruited through private learning enrichment centres, while parents of typically developing children came through kindergartens and mainstream primary schools.

The technical machinery of the study rested on three standardized instruments. Parenting stress was measured with the 18-item Parental Stress Scale, which captures both the rewarding and the punishing sides of the parenting role and showed good internal consistency in this sample with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83. Coping was assessed with the 28-item Brief COPE, grouped into problem-focused strategies such as active coping, planning and instrumental support, emotion-focused strategies such as acceptance, positive reframing and religion, and dysfunctional strategies such as venting, denial, self-blame and behavioral disengagement. Psychological well-being was measured with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales, the DASS-42, which rates symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress over the past week and showed excellent internal consistency here, with alphas above 0.94 for every subscale.

The headline numbers are stark. Parents of children with autism scored significantly higher on parenting stress than the comparison group, with a mean difference whose 95 percent confidence interval ranged from about 10.8 down to 4.9 points, and p less than 0.001. They also scored significantly higher on all three DASS-42 dimensions, stress, anxiety and depression, each with p less than 0.001. And in a finding that complicates simple narratives, they reported significantly greater use of all three coping categories, problem-focused, emotion-focused and dysfunctional, compared with parents of typically developing children. They were not coping less. They were coping more, on every front, and still drowning.

Correlational analyses revealed the psychological fault lines. Higher parenting stress was significantly and positively associated with dysfunctional coping, with a correlation coefficient of 0.373, and with stress, anxiety and depression on the DASS-42, with coefficients of 0.539, 0.465 and 0.424 respectively. Both emotion-focused and dysfunctional coping tracked with psychological distress. Problem-focused coping, by contrast, was not significantly associated with any of the DASS-42 subscales, meaning that even proactive, practical efforts to manage caregiving demands did not translate into measurable relief from depression, anxiety or stress in this cross-sectional snapshot.

Then come the subgroup findings, the ones the researchers themselves describe as unexpected. Elevated parenting stress among parents of autistic children was consistent across all education levels, from secondary schooling through polytechnic and pre-university qualifications to Bachelor’s degrees and above. Among the most educated parents, the autism group scored significantly higher on all DASS-42 subscales, though their coping strategies did not differ from the comparison group. The pattern repeated at the extremes of household income. In the highest bracket, at or above HK$40,000 per month, parents of autistic children reported significantly higher parenting stress and elevated scores on stress, anxiety and depression. In the lowest bracket examined, HK$10,000 to HK$19,999, they showed significantly higher parenting stress along with elevated stress and depression. Only in the middle income range, HK$20,000 to HK$39,999, did the autism group report significantly greater use of both problem-focused and emotion-focused coping, and even there their DASS-42 stress scores were higher.

Why would education and money fail as buffers? The researchers point to the cultural architecture of Chinese parenting. The concept of guan, parental control, places responsibility for a child’s behavior squarely on the parent, so a child’s tantrums, self-injury or aggression are internalized not just as caregiving strain but as personal failure. The concept of mian zi, face, frames an autism diagnosis as a loss of face for the family, exposing parents to stigma from peers, colleagues and extended kin. Previous qualitative work by the same team documented how Chinese parents experience this affiliate stigma, and how it channels them toward emotion-focused strategies such as acceptance or withdrawal while discouraging disclosure or help-seeking. A meta-analysis cited in the paper found that 70 percent of mothers of children with autism experienced clinically significant parenting stress, and evidence from Singapore, Oman and Greece points the same direction.

The theoretical spine of the study is Lazarus and Folkman’s stress and coping model from 1984, which distinguishes problem-focused coping, aimed at altering the stressor itself, from emotion-focused coping, aimed at regulating the emotional response. Prior evidence on which strategies parents of autistic children actually use has been mixed. Some studies highlight adaptive approaches such as cognitive reframing and social support, others emphasize avoidance and disengagement, and still others find both coexisting. The Hong Kong data add a distinctive twist, showing that Chinese parents deploy the full coping repertoire simultaneously, with proactive problem-solving coexisting alongside persistent emotional strain and maladaptive habits. The authors suggest that more educated parents may have heightened awareness of their child’s developmental challenges, leading to greater emotional investment, higher expectations and deeper internalization of responsibility, while affluent parents may face intensified social comparison within their communities.

The implications reach beyond Hong Kong. Autism prevalence is rising in the city, and the authors argue that support systems must prioritize the psychological well-being and caregiving needs of parents rather than relying on socioeconomic indicators to decide who deserves help. Practitioners, they suggest, should deliver accessible interventions that strengthen adaptive coping across all education and income levels, integrating practical stress-management skills with culturally informed psychoeducation that acknowledges stigma, community judgment and concerns about family reputation. Because parental well-being exerts a ripple effect on child development and family dynamics, untreated parental distress risks compounding the very behavioral challenges that generate it in the first place.

The study carries caveats that temper its reach. The sample was small, at 92 participants, and subgroup analyses, particularly in the lowest income bracket, were constrained by limited statistical power. Recruiting autism parents from private enrichment centres may have skewed the sample toward higher socioeconomic families, and the cross-sectional design rules out causal claims about whether stress drives coping choices or the reverse. Self-report measures invite response bias, and the instruments used non-uniform reference windows, with the DASS-42 asking about the past week while the Parental Stress Scale and Brief COPE specify none. The authors call for larger, longitudinal and mixed-methods studies to trace how stress, coping and well-being evolve over time. Still, the core message stands with unusual clarity. In one of the world’s most affluent cities, among parents of every educational stripe, raising an autistic child in a culture that ties parental worth to a child’s behavior and a family’s face to a diagnosis exacts a psychological price that no income bracket has yet managed to pay down.

Subject of Research: Parenting stress, coping and psychological well-being among Chinese parents of children with autism in Hong Kong

Article Title: Parenting Stress, Coping and Well-Being Among Chinese Parents of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Article References: Ng, C. S. M., Marchal, O., & Chan, V. C. W. (2026). Parenting Stress, Coping and Well-Being Among Chinese Parents of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-026-07577-w

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s10803-026-07577-w

Keywords: parenting stress, autism spectrum disorder, coping strategies, psychological well-being, Hong Kong, Chinese parents, affiliate stigma, mental health, Parenting, Stress, Coping, Well-Being