Grounded in anti-racist, constructivist, and community-based epistemologies, the study positioned lived experience as a source of situated knowledge (41–46). Focus group discussions (47, 48) were chosen to capture racialization as a relational and meaning-making process, enabling collective reflection on family, everyday live, and community contexts. Conducted in collaboration with Each One Teach One e. V. (EOTO)—one of Germany’s largest Black communities organizations—and the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, the study prioritized collective agency, community data governance, and the creation of safer spaces within Black community structures (41, 49). Communities partner co-developed the study design, led recruitment through trusted networks, and shared decision-making authority over data use. This participatory design recognized families as co-producers of knowledge and sought to produce findings that are scientifically rigorous and socially accountable to Black communities in Germany.

Participants were 29 self-identified Black, African, or Afro-diasporic parents (19 mothers, 10 fathers) in total raising 64 Black children, of whom 45 children aged 6–15 fit the analytic focus. This age range represents a critical developmental period when racial awareness, identity formation, and mental health vulnerability become particularly salient (13, 17, 50, 51). Recruitment followed an anti-racist and empowering approach, prioritizing informed consent, agency, and collective participation. Participants were recruited through EOTO using purposive and snowball sampling via communities’ networks, social media, and outreach platforms. Collaboration with EOTO ensured trust, cultural safety, and accessibility, enabling open discussion of racism—topics rarely addressed in institutional research contexts in Germany.

A total of six online focus groups were conducted via Zoom, each lasting approximately 90 min and comprising three to six participants. Each parent received 50 Euro compensation for participation. Groups varied in their composition with respect to parent gender, child age, and occupational background. More mothers participated than fathers, with roughly half of the groups being balanced and the other predominantly composed of mothers. Although the initial design aimed to stratify groups by children’s ages, this was not feasible because many parents had children across multiple age ranges. As a result, discussions often included references to siblings of different ages; however, the accounts referring to children aged 6–15 years were analyzed to maintain the study’s focus. The majority of participating families lived in major urban centers, including Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Frankfurt, Freiburg, Hannover, and Saarbrücken, while a few were located in mid-sized towns or rural regions. To protect confidentiality and reduce the risk of identification from combined descriptors (e.g., children’s ages, gender, residence, and parents’ professions), we report only broad residential categories: large city, medium-sized city, small town or village, or rural area. A detailed demographic overview is provided in Supplementary material 2.

Data were collected using a semi-structured focus group discussion guide with open-ended questions and follow-up prompts (47, 48) to facilitate in-depth engagement (see Supplementary material 1). The guide contained prompts exploring parents’ perceptions of racialization, children’s psychological and behavioral responses, and coping resources. Questions prompted parents to reflect on moments when children felt different because of race, skin color, or hair, and how these experiences related to their mental health and sense of self. Example prompts included:

Each parent participated in one focus group. All focus groups were moderated by the same facilitator, a Black academic and parent of Black children, to minimize power asymmetries and to support open, trust-based dialogue. Recognizing that racism is often silenced within German institutions, the research team worked closely with EOTO to co-create a safer research space. Throughout data collection and analysis, the team practiced cultural humility, understood as an ongoing commitment to reflexivity, self-critique, and the intentional addressing of power imbalances in community-based research (52). All sessions were audio-recorded with informed consent and professionally transcribed. Transcripts were anonymized, with all personal identifiers removed, and checked for accuracy. Four sessions were conducted in German and two in English. German excerpts used in the manuscript were translated into English using a meaning-oriented approach (see Supplementary material 7).

The analytic process was guided by situated knowledge and feminist standpoint epistemology, emphasizing reflexivity, transparency, and accountability to community perspectives (43, 45, 46). Research team members regularly reflected on how their social positions, including race, gender, and professional status, shaped interpretation and coding. This reflexive stance helped ensure that the analysis remained grounded in participants’ lived experiences of racialization and attentive to the power dynamics inherent in community-based research, consistent with principles of cultural humility (52).

Following an inductive thematic approach (53), transcripts were repeatedly read to identify initial concepts and contextual nuances. Two researchers jointly coded an anchor transcript to develop the initial codebook, refining it through analytic memos and discussion. Three focus groups (≈50% of the dataset) were then independently double-coded to assess interpretive alignment. Intercoder agreement was calculated using MAXQDA’s code-overlap function with a strict 85% overlap threshold and the “segments of both coders” option (54, 55). Across 27 thematic codes, mean observed agreement was 71% (Cohen’s κ = 0.69), indicating substantial agreement. Detailed results, including per-code agreement levels are provided in Supplementary material 4.

Coding discrepancies were resolved through discussion, refining code definitions and strengthening shared interpretation. Consistent with grounded-theory-informed practices, intercoder agreement is reported for transparency rather than as a validation metric; divergent coding was treated as analytically productive. Themes were then clustered into higher-order categories, resulting in five overarching thematic domains (see Supplementary materials 5, 6).

A final integrative synthesis links data-derived themes (e.g., systemic racism, internalized stress, coping) with theoretically informed models of race-critical developmental pathways (13, 17, 20). This synthesis presents a conceptual model connecting racialization processes to children’s mental health trajectories and outlines hypothesized pathways for future longitudinal and mixed-methods research.

Methodological integrity (56) was maintained by balancing fidelity to participants’ narratives with the study’s developmental and race-critical aims. The interdisciplinary research team comprised four scholars—three Black (including the lead author) and one white—trained in developmental psychology, sociology, and community-based research. Led by Black scholars with lived experience of racialization in Germany, the study’s design and interpretation were grounded in ethical engagement and accountability to community perspectives. Guided by principles of cultural humility (52) and standpoint theory (43, 45, 57), the team engaged in ongoing reflexive practice through memo writing, analytic debriefings, and positionality discussions, critically examining how racial, gendered, and institutional positions shaped interpretation. Triangulation across six focus groups, reflexive dialogue among coders, and bilingual (German/English) analysis enhanced interpretive depth, and divergent readings were resolved collaboratively, privileging meanings grounded in participants’ own words.

The study followed strict ethical protocols, emphasizing informed consent, transparency, and participant empowerment. Information sessions were held before and after focus group participation to allow questions and clarify study details. Ongoing communication channels were established to maintain participant engagement. Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of the Max Planck Institute for Human Development.

Black parents reported that the early onset of racialization began at birth, particularly in medical settings where healthcare professionals’ comments and treatment reflect racialized assumptions about skin tone and hair texture. They described disparities in access and quality of care highlighting how racism permeates the healthcare system, shaping children’s earliest experiences.

As children grew, parents observed recurring overt racism, microaggressions, and racial othering in daycares, playgrounds, and extended white family settings. These experiences prompted ongoing family discussions on racism, as parents sought to equip their children with coping strategies.

Parents described how the spatial manifestations of racism shaped their experiences in housing and public spaces, limiting opportunities through discrimination and ongoing safety concerns. Racialization influenced decisions around housing, neighborhood, and mobility. Experiencing heightened surveillance, over-policing, and restricted access further constrained their movement, with fears of racial hostility prompting avoidance of certain areas and increasing parental vigilance to protect their children.

Parents described how structural racism limited access to rural and suburban areas, forcing their families into smaller, costly urban zones. While cities offered more diversity and relative safety, they came with trade-offs like reduced space and limited access to nature. In rural areas, parents reported social isolation, racial othering, and hyper-critical neighbors, reinforcing structural barriers and deepening housing inequities.

Parents described how institutional racialization unfolded in schools and kindergartens—key sites of both structural and interpersonal racism—where their children encountered verbal insults, discriminatory treatment, and lowered academic expectations. They expressed deep concern about unequal treatment based on skin color, highlighting the constant need for vigilance and advocacy within educational settings.

They emphasized how systemic racism and family mental health are intertwined, as stressors such as economic hardship, discrimination, and time constraints affect both their mental health and that of their children. These pressures hinder parents’ ability to provide emotional support and model regulation, often leading to premature self-reliance in children, with lasting impacts on their mental health and cognitive development.

The constant anticipation and management of racialization took a toll on parental mental health, reinforcing intergenerational and cumulative stress. This emotional strain impacted parenting, as parents navigated both their own and their children’s racialized experiences.

Parents described how microaggressions, stress, and mental health are closely connected in their children’s lives. Racially marginalized children regularly face both overt racism and subtle microaggressions that shape their identity and health. These experiences create chronic stress, often forcing children to navigate racialized realities beyond their developmental capacity. Comments targeting physical traits frequently trigger emotional distress, leading to struggles with self-acceptance, social withdrawal, depression, and emotional exhaustion.

Many children internalize racialized experiences rather than openly discussing them. Some cope by suppressing their emotions and needs, making it difficult for caregivers to recognize their struggles.

Parents expressed concern about the emotional toll and long-term impact of internalized racism on their children. They observed how early exposure to racial hierarchies—especially colorism—shaped children’s self-perception, behavior, and emotional responses. Navigating racial othering, exclusion, and peer conflict often required children to assert boundaries while managing distress. Difficulties with self-expression, particularly in responding to microaggressions or voicing opinions, were common, highlighting the deep effects of internalized racism on identity and mental health.

Eurocentric beauty standards significantly influenced children’s self-worth, particularly regarding hair and skin tone. Parents observed instances where children favored lighter-skinned characters in books or avoided wearing brown clothing out of fear of appearing “too brown.”

Some parents observed that Black children, influenced by colorism, sometimes projected rejection onto peers of the same racial background, highlighting the deep impact of internalized racism.

Parents noted that identity formation is shaped by the struggle for belonging, as children navigate marginalizing societal structures. Racial othering and repeated racialized experiences often undermine their self-esteem and sense of belonging.

They emphasized the long-term risks of identity suppression, explaining that children may internalize the belief that conforming to dominant norms minimizes racialized exclusion.

Parents stressed that affirming children’s natural hair and racial identity is crucial in countering the effects of racialization. Positive reinforcement strengthens self-perception and confidence when navigating racialized interactions, such as unwanted physical contact or exclusion. This support is essential for their children’s mental health.

Parents noted that adapting to Eurocentric standards shaped how their children navigated social spaces. In response to racial hierarchies and the pressure to avoid othering, children often modified their behavior and appearance—strategically managing visibility while constraining self-expression.

Daily microaggressions reinforce the need for constant compensatory adaptation, causing some children to suppress emotions, prioritize others’ needs over their own, and avoid conflict.

Parents highlighted the mental health toll of constant adjustment to avoid negative attention, warning that compensatory adaptation could lead to identity struggles or crises, especially during adolescence.

They observed that attempts at academic overperformance was a common coping strategy among their children, who responded to societal pressures by striving for perfection and heightened compliance. To avoid racial marginalization, children often felt compelled to exceed expectations both academically and socially, aiming to minimize the risk of standing out as Black children.

To cope with racial marginalization, children often form friendships with peers who share similar racial and social backgrounds. Parents observed that these connections offer comfort, emotional security, and a sense of belonging, which support children’s responses to racialization.

As children transition into adolescence, the search for belonging becomes more deliberate. Teens actively seeking out peers who share similar racial or social experiences, forming relationships that reinforce their identities. These connections provide a sense of community and play a crucial role in supporting mental health, especially in the face of racialized experiences.

Across themes, parents described racialization as pervasive and cumulative, shaping family stress, children’s mental health, and identity from early childhood through adolescence. They also emphasized the protective potential of racial socialization and community networks. Figure 2 presents a conceptual model of hypothesized developmental pathways linking racialization and child mental health. The model integrates data-derived themes with established race-critical developmental and ecosocial frameworks (13, 14, 20, 21, 58), outlining how systemic racialization, internalized racism, and cumulative stress may interact across developmental stages to shape mental health trajectories. These pathways merit further investigation through longitudinal and mixed-methods research.