Early research on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) provided staggering evidence of the significant ramifications of ACEs on physical health and functioning. It brought to the forefront the importance of addressing trauma and family dysfunction to enhance public health. Over the past several decades, the study of childhood adversity has blossomed, with expanded conceptualizations and assessments of ACEs. This review brings together various biological, psychological, and sociological principles that inform our understanding of ACEs and our approach to treatment. Specifically, we document the evolution of ACEs research, focusing on the intergenerational impact of ACEs, the importance of incorporating a resilience framework when examining ACEs, and implementing interventions that address adversity across generations and at multiple levels of the social ecology. Evidence is provided to support the evolving perspective that ACEs have long-lasting effects beyond the ACE(s)-exposed individual, with significant attention to the impact of parental ACEs on child development. An intergenerational and multilevel approach to understanding and addressing ACEs offers specific areas to target in interventions and in public policy.

The parent-child relationship influences children’s mental health (e.g., posttraumatic stress symptoms, psychosocial difficulties) and adaptive outcomes (e.g., posttraumatic growth, resilience) following the death of a loved one. The current study employed a person-centered approach to identify patterns of parenting and their associations with bereaved children’s functioning. This study included 112 bereaved children, aged 8–17 ( M _age = 12.41, SD = 2.58; 52.2% female), recruited from community organizations in the MidSouth, United States. A latent profile analysis was used to identify parenting subgroups and examine differences between classes on children’s posttraumatic stress symptoms, psychosocial difficulties, posttraumatic growth, and resilience. A three-class solution best fit the data: Passive Parenting (42.86%), Negative Parenting (34.82%), and Positive Parenting (22.32%). Children in the Positive Parenting class reported fewer psychosocial difficulties than those in the Passive (Est. = −8.33, p < .001, d = 0.86) and Negative (Est. = −15.82, p < .001, d = 1.67) Parenting classes; those in the Passive Parenting class had fewer psychosocial difficulties than the Negative Parenting class (Est. = −7.49, p < .001, d = 0.79). Children in the Positive Parenting class reported higher levels of resilience compared to the Negative (Est. = 8.95, p = .015; d = 0.51) and Passive (Est. = 11.44, p < .001; d = 0.69) Parenting classes; no significant differences on posttraumatic stress symptoms or posttraumatic growth were found. Bereaved children whose parents are more involved, prioritize open communication, and use more positive reinforcement strategies report fewer difficulties and more resilience. In contrast, children’s trauma-related outcomes following a death were not influenced by parenting patterns and may be better explained by other relational factors.