| . |
Children
&
Families
North Shore
| the online and print forum promoting the development of children, families and the parents who care for them |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| The Authoritative Parent By Michael F. Mascolo, Ph.D. |
© Copyright 2007-2009, North Shore Ink, All Rights Reserved
One of the most seductive traps that many of us get into involves what I like to call the easy-strict continuum. This happens when we
think of our parenting practices along the a continuum that in which “strict” or “hard” is on one side, and “easy” or “permissive” is on the
other. When we use the easy-strict continuum, we tend to think that we have only two basic poles available to us: We can be strict, we
can be easy, or we can be somewhere in the middle. The problem with the strict/easy distinction is that there really is no place on the
dimension that really works. Let’s try and see how.
Let’s start on the “strict” or “hard” end of the pole. Many parents who tend to think that they should be “strict” often think of children as
if they were in some sense born unruly or uncivilized. From this view, the job of the parent is to teach the child how to behave properly.
The child is seen as if he or she were clay that has to be molded into shape by the parent. If children are inherently unruly, they need
firm rules and clear direction. Children ought not to be allowed to make their own decisions because they simply aren’t in a position to do
so until they learn the rules of their family, culture or social group.
Now, the “easy” or “permissive” parent falls on the extreme opposite end of the dimension. Many permissive parents tend to think of
their children as having the potential for growth already within them. Many such parents often think of children as if they were “budding
flowers”. If we want a flower to grow, we nurture it; we take care of it by providing it with lots of sunshine and water. If children are
like budding flowers, the analogy goes, the main job of the parent is to provide love and care. Too much control over the child will derail
the child’s self-esteem and sense of inner determination. To be strict is to be mean; to give to our children to make them feel loved is nice.
Now, you might find yourself feeling some sympathy for one of these two ways of parenting. Or you might find yourself rejecting both of
them, and looking for something “in the middle” – the happy medium. However, the problem is that the strict/easy continuum provides
us with no guidance here. If our only options are to be strict or easy, where is the happy medium? To be kind of strict and kind of easy?
To be strict on some occasions and not on others? But which occasions? And why? Thinking in terms of strict versus easy doesn’t
provide us with answers to these questions.
What’s a parent to do? The trick is not to try to locate one’s parenting practices “in the middle” of this flawed dimension; it’s to realize
that strict strict/easy distinction makes a false distinction to begin with. We need a different way to think about the problem of parenting
than this dimension provides.
Happily, there are alternatives. In the 1960’s Diana Baumrind conducted some classic research that has stood the test of time. In her
research, Baurmind rated parents on four (not one) different dimensions. These included:
Baumrind was able to identify three basic styles of parenting. The first two include the authoritarian and permissive parenting styles.
These parenting styles are very much like the styles described above.
Parents who use an authoritarian style were rated as high on maturity demands and attempts to control their children, but low on clarity
of communication and warmth. The authoritarian parent has high expectations for the child, but neither explains the basis of these
expectations nor engages the child in a lot of warm and loving interactions. The parent who uses the permissive style was just the
opposite. The permissive parent did not try to influence the child by imposing high expectations; instead, she is clear and open in her
communication, providing warm and loving interactions.
Baumrind found that children of both authoritarian and permissive parents failed to show high degrees of what Baurmind called
“instrumental competence” – that is capacity to set forth goals and get things done (both socially and intellectually) in an effective way.
Why? Although authoritarian and permissive parents are polar opposites, they both share a common quality: Neither one provides the
kinds of support and direction that a child needs to develop ways to act effectively in the world. The authoritarian parent has high
expectations, but doesn’t help the child find ways to meet those expectations either intellectually or emotionally. The permissive parent
provides the emotional support, but does not provide the direction and motivation to help his child develop.
In contrast to both the authoritarian and permissive parenting styles, authoritative parents (not to be confused with authoritarian
parents) were rated as high on all four of the dimensions that Baumrind studied. They not only had high expectations and worked hard
to instill those expectations in their children, but they also explained the basis of those expectations while showing a high level of love,
care and nurturance.
Authoritative parents were rated as high on all four dimensions. It’s not a matter of being strict versus easy. Instead, it’s a matter of
both having rules and being loving; being firm and communicating clearly; of having high expectations and helping children to meet those
expectations.
Baumrind showed that children of authoritative parents were more “instrumentally competent” than children of either authoritarian or
permissive parents. This makes sense. Children are more likely to learn and develop if their parents provide direction, show them how
to meet expectations, explain why those expectations are important, and support their children emotionally as they attempt to meet
those expectations.
It’s not an either/or proposition. It’s not being nice versus mean. It’s about providing loving but clear direction.
It’s important to mention some qualifications. First, the styles describe here are just that – styles. Every parent uses a range of different
strategies over time! What’s important is not whether you raise your voice here or there, or “give in” by picking your battles. What’s
important is the style that parents use over long periods of time. It’s the relationship that’s important – not any one interaction.
Second, there are more parenting styles that the three main ones described above. More important, these parenting styles are not likely
to be valid outside of the Western European culture. For example, parenting in many Asian cultures differs dramatically from what you
might find in the United States. From Western eyes, it would be very easy to look at families from different cultures (Asian, Hispanic,
African, Arabic etc.) and think that one or another family is being too permissive or too authoritarian. But please be careful! People from
non-Western cultures often engage in which may appear to be permissive and/or authoritative parenting practices, but these practices
very often differ in profound ways when compared to parenting styles found in the United States.
think of our parenting practices along the a continuum that in which “strict” or “hard” is on one side, and “easy” or “permissive” is on the
other. When we use the easy-strict continuum, we tend to think that we have only two basic poles available to us: We can be strict, we
can be easy, or we can be somewhere in the middle. The problem with the strict/easy distinction is that there really is no place on the
dimension that really works. Let’s try and see how.
Let’s start on the “strict” or “hard” end of the pole. Many parents who tend to think that they should be “strict” often think of children as
if they were in some sense born unruly or uncivilized. From this view, the job of the parent is to teach the child how to behave properly.
The child is seen as if he or she were clay that has to be molded into shape by the parent. If children are inherently unruly, they need
firm rules and clear direction. Children ought not to be allowed to make their own decisions because they simply aren’t in a position to do
so until they learn the rules of their family, culture or social group.
Now, the “easy” or “permissive” parent falls on the extreme opposite end of the dimension. Many permissive parents tend to think of
their children as having the potential for growth already within them. Many such parents often think of children as if they were “budding
flowers”. If we want a flower to grow, we nurture it; we take care of it by providing it with lots of sunshine and water. If children are
like budding flowers, the analogy goes, the main job of the parent is to provide love and care. Too much control over the child will derail
the child’s self-esteem and sense of inner determination. To be strict is to be mean; to give to our children to make them feel loved is nice.
Now, you might find yourself feeling some sympathy for one of these two ways of parenting. Or you might find yourself rejecting both of
them, and looking for something “in the middle” – the happy medium. However, the problem is that the strict/easy continuum provides
us with no guidance here. If our only options are to be strict or easy, where is the happy medium? To be kind of strict and kind of easy?
To be strict on some occasions and not on others? But which occasions? And why? Thinking in terms of strict versus easy doesn’t
provide us with answers to these questions.
What’s a parent to do? The trick is not to try to locate one’s parenting practices “in the middle” of this flawed dimension; it’s to realize
that strict strict/easy distinction makes a false distinction to begin with. We need a different way to think about the problem of parenting
than this dimension provides.
Happily, there are alternatives. In the 1960’s Diana Baumrind conducted some classic research that has stood the test of time. In her
research, Baurmind rated parents on four (not one) different dimensions. These included:
- Maturity Demands: The extent to which parents had high expectations for their children;
- Control: The extent to which parents attempted to control or influence their children;
- Clarity of Communication: The clarity and extent to which parents communicated their feelings and beliefs to their children;
- Warmth and Nurturance: The degree to which parents attempted to develop affectionate emotional connections with their children.
Baumrind was able to identify three basic styles of parenting. The first two include the authoritarian and permissive parenting styles.
These parenting styles are very much like the styles described above.
Parents who use an authoritarian style were rated as high on maturity demands and attempts to control their children, but low on clarity
of communication and warmth. The authoritarian parent has high expectations for the child, but neither explains the basis of these
expectations nor engages the child in a lot of warm and loving interactions. The parent who uses the permissive style was just the
opposite. The permissive parent did not try to influence the child by imposing high expectations; instead, she is clear and open in her
communication, providing warm and loving interactions.
Baumrind found that children of both authoritarian and permissive parents failed to show high degrees of what Baurmind called
“instrumental competence” – that is capacity to set forth goals and get things done (both socially and intellectually) in an effective way.
Why? Although authoritarian and permissive parents are polar opposites, they both share a common quality: Neither one provides the
kinds of support and direction that a child needs to develop ways to act effectively in the world. The authoritarian parent has high
expectations, but doesn’t help the child find ways to meet those expectations either intellectually or emotionally. The permissive parent
provides the emotional support, but does not provide the direction and motivation to help his child develop.
In contrast to both the authoritarian and permissive parenting styles, authoritative parents (not to be confused with authoritarian
parents) were rated as high on all four of the dimensions that Baumrind studied. They not only had high expectations and worked hard
to instill those expectations in their children, but they also explained the basis of those expectations while showing a high level of love,
care and nurturance.
Authoritative parents were rated as high on all four dimensions. It’s not a matter of being strict versus easy. Instead, it’s a matter of
both having rules and being loving; being firm and communicating clearly; of having high expectations and helping children to meet those
expectations.
Baumrind showed that children of authoritative parents were more “instrumentally competent” than children of either authoritarian or
permissive parents. This makes sense. Children are more likely to learn and develop if their parents provide direction, show them how
to meet expectations, explain why those expectations are important, and support their children emotionally as they attempt to meet
those expectations.
It’s not an either/or proposition. It’s not being nice versus mean. It’s about providing loving but clear direction.
It’s important to mention some qualifications. First, the styles describe here are just that – styles. Every parent uses a range of different
strategies over time! What’s important is not whether you raise your voice here or there, or “give in” by picking your battles. What’s
important is the style that parents use over long periods of time. It’s the relationship that’s important – not any one interaction.
Second, there are more parenting styles that the three main ones described above. More important, these parenting styles are not likely
to be valid outside of the Western European culture. For example, parenting in many Asian cultures differs dramatically from what you
might find in the United States. From Western eyes, it would be very easy to look at families from different cultures (Asian, Hispanic,
African, Arabic etc.) and think that one or another family is being too permissive or too authoritarian. But please be careful! People from
non-Western cultures often engage in which may appear to be permissive and/or authoritative parenting practices, but these practices
very often differ in profound ways when compared to parenting styles found in the United States.