Parents who use harsh parenting tactics, such as physical and verbal aggression, may exacerbate the behaviors they wish to prevent, according to a study published in the journal Child Development. Children whose parents used harsh tactics had poor academic outcomes and were more likely to engage in high-risk behaviors.

Parenting Effects on Educational Attainment

The study initially enrolled 1,482 seventh graders living near Washington, D.C. Researchers followed the teens for nine years, until they were 21. The group was racially, socioeconomically, and geographically diverse. At the end of the study, 1,060 participants remained.

The students answered questions about their parents’ use of verbal and physical aggression. They also reported on their relationships with peers, sexual behavior, and habits such as balancing time with peers and time to complete homework.

Children of harsh parents were more likely to report in ninth grade that their peers were more important than following the rules. By eleventh grade, these teens engaged in more high-risk behaviors. Boys in this group were more likely to engage in juvenile delinquency such as stealing and aggression, while girls were more likely to participate in early sexual behavior.

[fat_widget_right]By 21, adults who were harshly parented as children had lower educational attainment. They were more likely to drop out of school, and they had lower grades and standardized test scores. The study’s authors suggest harsh parenting indirectly leads to lower educational attainment by encouraging children to place the highest value on peer relationships and embrace high-risk behaviors that sustain those relationships.

The study’s authors suggest improved intervention strategies for teens whose parents use harsh parenting tactics could help increase their potential educational attainment later in life.

Harsh Parenting May Be an Ineffective Strategy

Other studies have also linked harsh parenting to negative outcomes in children. One study found children who are more frequently spanked are more likely to struggle at school, be diagnosed with a mental health condition, and engage in antisocial behavior. Another study found parenting style matters most for “difficult” children. Excessively harsh parenting was most harmful to children with challenging temperaments.

Reference:

Hentges, R. F., & Wang, M. (2017). Gender differences in the developmental cascade from harsh parenting to educational attainment: An evolutionary perspective. Child Development. doi:10.1111/cdev.12719

I was recently asked for my thoughts on pageant culture and its relationship to self-esteem. First, let me say I don’t have a lot of experience with pageant culture. Much of my knowledge is based on what I’ve seen on television and in movies, and obviously some of this may be extremely exaggerated and over-the-top. Perhaps real-life pageant culture is less dramatic, cutthroat, or superficial than the scripted shows and examples the general population may be familiar with. And perhaps there are many positive aspects for both the winners and losers in pageants.

But my gut reaction is to feel skeptical about the ability of pageants to favorably impact self-esteem, and I tend to have a negative (though admittedly biased and inexperienced) view of pageant culture on the whole.

As somebody who teaches self-esteem workshops but lacks personal experience with pageants, I found the question about the relationship between pageants and self-esteem intriguing. Here, I share some of my thoughts regarding how pageants could potentially be harmful to the pursuit of healthy self-esteem. I remain curious to learn more about both the pros and cons of pageant culture and its impact on individuals, and I hope others will share their thoughts and experiences in the comments below.

[fat_widget_right]

While there are many aspects to pageants besides “beauty” (such as talent, skill, intelligence, personality, and aspiration), the focus seems to be on appearance, glitz, and glam. What is “pretty” and “in shape” has largely been defined by advertisers and the media—and by their questionable standards, the faces and bodies that tend to be the norm in pageants, whether it’s Miss America or Toddlers & Tiaras, are “ideal.” The problem with this is body image can play a huge role in self-esteem, and this intense focus on appearance can give off the impression appearance is everything.

On the contrary, appearance is only one factor among the many different qualities and traits that make us unique and beautiful. Looks are not necessarily something we have much control over. Thus, many people who may not fit the perceived ideal are susceptible to feeling inadequate, flawed, or simply not good enough.

Our society is filled with messages that tell us we should look a certain way or have a certain type of body to be accepted and desirable. The ideals portrayed in advertising and media compel us to make comparisons and fixate over whether we measure up. Pageants render the same type of pressure, along with the added elements of an actual competition and being judged.

Healthy self-esteem is about accepting yourself the way you are. It involves an ability to acknowledge you are uniquely made up of both strengths and weaknesses. It requires you to have a realistic understanding that nobody is perfect; rather, we are all diverse individuals made up of varying gifts and flaws. Healthy self-esteem includes the internalized messages “I am good” and “I am enough.”

While some pageants take into consideration other components via talent and interview categories, there is an overwhelming message that one must first and foremost be physically appealing. Participants may go to great lengths to alter or enhance their appearance. From heavy makeup, to fake eyelashes, to hair extensions, to some pretty extreme things such as plastic surgery and unhealthy dieting practices, many pageant participants engage in behaviors focused on changing themselves to become “more perfect.” The pursuit of perfection is the antithesis to healthy self-esteem.

Healthy self-esteem is about accepting yourself the way you are. It involves an ability to acknowledge you are uniquely made up of both strengths and weaknesses. It requires you to have a realistic understanding that nobody is perfect; rather, we are all diverse individuals made up of varying gifts and flaws. Healthy self-esteem includes the internalized messages “I am good” and “I am enough.”

In contrast, pageants seem to instill messages like “I should be flawless,” “I have to be thin,” and “I need to look and act a certain way to be judged favorably.” When our thought patterns include these rigid and restricting statements, we are set up to feel inadequate and ultimately terrible about ourselves. The idea we have to put so much effort into our appearance and actions to be accepted sends the message we are not good enough as is. This feeling of not being good enough or acceptable creates the foundation of insecurity and low self-esteem.

I especially worry about the effects of pageant culture and its overarching messages on young girls who may not have the resilience, maturity, or life experience to keep the competition and judging in context. If these girls are not also being taught loud and clear messages about possessing inherent worth, appreciating diversity, and understanding beauty, strength, and ability come in all shapes and sizes, they are at real risk of facing a lifetime of problems with low self-esteem, depression, and anxiety.

Perhaps children can be protected from some of the harmful messages and skewed values of pageants if their parents are countering them with healthy conversations and diverse experiences. Cynically, I’m not sure the parents who understand and strive to instill these principles are the ones interested in introducing their kids to pageant culture. But, lacking any real experience with pageant life, I may be missing some of the benefits and am open to hearing other perspectives.

Raising a teenager can be one of the most challenging tasks of parenthood. One day you are raising a sweet, respectful child who loves to be with you, and the next, you are tiptoeing around your house hoping not to wake the bear. At some point during adolescence, many parents will classify interactions with their teen as unpredictable, confrontational, and/or dismissive. It is during these years teens and their parents often feel as though they are speaking different languages. And often, both parents and teens suddenly think talking louder, in a more animated way, will somehow get their points across.

After working with adolescents and their parents for almost a decade, I have found that my initial role as therapist is interpreter. From there, I work to help them learn each other’s languages so they can go back to healthy communication and connection. I have many tools in my toolbox to help parents and teens reconnect, but one of the most profound is validation.

[fat_widget_right]

Validation is the act of acknowledging another person’s thoughts and feelings and communicating to them that those thoughts and feelings make sense and are understandable given the situation. It is important to note validating is not the same as agreeing. Validation is important because it shows you are listening, you understand, and you are approaching the person in a nonjudgmental way.

Now, let us think about validation in terms of interactions with teenagers. When it comes to interacting with their parents, they often feel judged, unheard, and criticized. These perceptions frequently lead to conflict with their parents and/or withdrawal from interactions with them. When parents take time to validate (i.e., listen without judgment), teens often feel more open to having a conversation and more responsive to information being shared by parents.

Validation is disarming and encourages dialogue. In my experience, parents just want to talk with their children. Using validation can open those lines of communication again. Teens like to talk with people whom they feel understand them. The minute they sniff judgment or criticism, they may shut down or lash out. So, leading with validation can encourage connection.

When parents take time to validate (i.e., listen without judgment), teens often feel more open to having a conversation and more responsive to information being shared by parents.

Sounds easy, right? Well, validating a teen can be difficult for parents for many reasons. First, teens can seem somewhat irrational at times, and it can be challenging to find something to validate. Second, after weeks, months, or years of built-up frustrations and disagreements, it can be difficult to want to validate. Third, I have found parents often feel stuck on the idea that by validating they are somehow saying their teen’s behavior is okay and/or they agree with what their teen is saying. However, it is important to remember validation is a form of understanding, not agreeing. By validating, you are not saying your teen is right—you are simply using a tool to help start a dialogue and prevent a potential conflict.

According to Miller, Glinski, Woodberry, Mitchell, and Indik (2002), there are six levels of validation. Jeffrey B. Jackson, PhD, LMFT, adapted these levels and five of the six are shared below.

• Listen: Be attentive and listen in a nonjudgmental way.
• Reflect: Reflect back the thoughts and feelings shared by your teen. This helps them to feel heard. It also prevents miscommunication because they can correct any information they feel you did not hear correctly. It also allows them to hear their own thoughts and feelings out loud and may prompt them to start thinking a bit differently. Example: “I hear you say you are feeling overwhelmed right now because you have a lot of responsibilities.”
• Empathize: Share your best guess about your teen’s unspoken thoughts or feelings. Share how you might feel if you were in their shoes. Example: “If my parents told me they were worried about who I was hanging out with, I might feel angry and judged. Is that how you are feeling?”
• Acknowledge reasons for behavior: Try to reflect an understanding of the reasons for their behaviors. Example: “I can see why you would feel devastated after your friend cut you off. You really valued that friendship and didn’t feel you did anything wrong.”
• Acknowledge courage: Reinforce good judgment and acknowledge personal strength. Example: “It must take a lot of courage for you to try and make the best of this situation and try not to let it get you too upset.”

Think about the last time someone validated you in one of these ways. Didn’t it make you feel good? Didn’t you feel understood? Didn’t it make it feel safe to share more? We all crave validation, teens included. In fact, validation might just be the key to better communication and a happier household.

Reference:

Adapted by Jeffrey B. Jackson, PhD, LMFT from Miller, A.L., Glinski, J., Woodberry, K.A., Mitchell, A.G., & Indik, J. (2002). Family therapy and dialectical behavior therapy with adolescents: Part I: Proposing a clinical synthesis. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 56(4), 568-584.

Preschool-age children who frequently engage with superhero culture—by watching superhero movies or dressing like superheroes—may be more likely to behave aggressively, according to a study published in the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.

In movies and comics, superheroes are often defenders of the underdog. Parents may turn to superhero culture to encourage children to stand up to bullies. According to the study, this choice may be misguided. Findings showed children who invested in superhero culture were not more likely than their peers to stand up for bullied children, but they were more likely to act aggressively in general.

Does Superhero Culture Make Children Aggressive?

Researchers interviewed 240 preschoolers and their parents. Forty-nine percent of the participating children were male, and 51% were female.

Parents answered questions about their children’s engagement with superhero culture, including how frequently they watched superhero shows and whether they identified with superheroes. Parents also provided data about their children’s behavior. Interviewers asked the children to identify 10 superheroes. The children also identified their favorite superhero and explained why they chose that character.

[fat_widget_right]Children were more likely to list superhero merchandise (26%) than interpersonal characteristics (20%) as justification for liking a particular superhero. Ten percent of children who pointed to a superhero’s characteristics highlighted their defending skills, and 20% specifically listed superhero violence. Seventy percent listed non-violent characteristics, such as a superhero’s strength or skills.

A year after the initial analysis of a child’s identification with superhero culture, researchers assessed children’s aggression based on parental reports. Children who identified with superheroes were more likely to be relationally and physically aggressive. Compared to peers who were less invested in superheroes, the children did not show more prosocial behavior such as defending children against bullies.

Understanding the Effects of Superhero Culture

The study did not directly assess why children who like superheroes tend to exhibit more aggressive behavior, and did not establish a clear causal connection. However, its authors hypothesize that the complexity of superhero narratives might partially explain the violence. Superhero stories are often complex, but preschoolers may not understand the complexities behind the violence or aggression they witness. As a result, they may latch onto violence as the dominant theme of superhero narratives.

The study’s authors do not recommend forbidding access to superheroes. They suggest instead that parents adopt a moderate approach, finding ways to focus on more positive aspects of superhero culture and encouraging children to develop a wide range of interests.

References:

1. Coyne, S. M., Stockdale, L., Linder, J. R., Nelson, D. A., Collier, K. M., & Essig, L. W. (2017). Pow! Boom! Kablam! Effects of viewing superhero programs on aggressive, prosocial, and defending behaviors in preschool children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. doi:10.1007/s10802-016-0253-6
2. Superhero culture magnifies aggressive, not defending behaviors. (2017, January 11). Retrieved from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170111131122.htm

Dear GoodTherapy.org,

My 5-year-old is a generally happy and sweet kid, but I have been noticing lately that her play can get pretty violent. She can be aggressive sometimes and say things like, “Let’s pretend to punch each other.” When we play together, she wants there to be “good guys” and “bad guys” and have them fight—and sometimes kill—each other. She builds guns and other weapons with Legos and uses them to have fights with her toys, gleefully informing me when one or another of her toys “dies.”

[fat_widget_right]

Her dad and I don’t let her watch violent shows, so I don’t know where she is getting this—from other kids at school or from watching shows at her grandparents’ house, maybe? I’m worried whatever exposure she’s getting to weapons and violence is going to be harmful. I’ve tried to talk with her about it, but I’m not sure I’m using the right words. It’s really difficult for me to hear her play-act violence without saying anything, but I don’t want her to think she’s being “bad,” because I know she isn’t. How can I talk to her about this? —Puzzled Parent

Dear Puzzled Parent,

As a therapist, I want to let you know that this experience is common, and, actually, developmentally appropriate. As a parent, however, I remember being concerned myself when my happy (sheltered) kid started playing in this way. It may be that your daughter is hearing or watching kids on the playground, or perhaps has seen shows, but often it is hard to pinpoint a specific source of inspiration. Many kids, at some point, explore themes of aggression, violence, and death through their play.

I think in all of this it can be helpful to remember the true function of play. Children play to explore their world, to experience in fantasy things they might not experience in real life, and to try things out safely. It is not unusual for kids, particularly rule-following kids, to embrace the role of “bad guy” in their play. For young children who are not often in control of their world, what greater relief and excitement is there than to play-act as the ultimate rule-breakers? Also, children are naturally curious about life and death and how everything works. Play-acting the death of their toys is one way they process safely any fears or concerns they might have or try to make a big concept feel controllable.

The glee you describe in your little girl may simply be a reflection of the joy of being in complete control of her universe. She is all-powerful. How fun is that? As long as these impulses are expressed through play and not manifesting in aggressive, hurtful behavior beyond playtime, there is likely little to be concerned about.

There’s also a somewhat innate destructive urge that can be seen in any toddler on a beach relishing their demolition of a sand castle. The glee you describe in your little girl may simply be a reflection of the joy of being in complete control of her universe. She is all-powerful. How fun is that? As long as these impulses are expressed through play and not manifesting in aggressive, hurtful behavior beyond playtime, there is likely little to be concerned about.

You are right not to want her to think she is being “bad” by engaging in this play. One helpful approach is to express curiosity. For example, you might ask her why she wants to pretend to “punch each other.” You can engage in some complicated, choreographed, slow-motion “fights” that could actually be fun and enjoyable for both of you, while talking with her about why you would never actually harm each other in real life. You can also ask her what happens to a toy when it “dies” and explore her understanding of what that means. Asking her to tell you what it means to be a “bad guy” or a “good guy” can give you some insight into her developing sense of morality—and even if she chooses to be the “bad guy” in play, that doesn’t mean she actually embraces the dark side.

It is natural as a parent to worry about all that our children will be exposed to when they are not in our care, and yet, as they get older, more and more of their time will be spent beyond the walls of our homes. We can’t prevent them from hearing and seeing things we might not like. What we can do is equip them to handle their experiences. Ongoing conversations about what we believe is important, how we believe we should treat people, and what impact our words and actions have on others around us can help our children navigate the various messages they receive.

If your child remains generally happy, sweet, loving, and able to express empathy, it is likely she is using this play in healthy, developmentally appropriate ways. It is also likely a phase that will pass. If, however, you see some concerning behaviors going beyond the scope of play, you may want to consult with a child therapist to address those concerns. Your child’s teacher can also be a great source of information about how your daughter’s behavior at school compares with what you see at home, as well putting it in context with the other 5-year-olds in her school.

Best of luck,

Erika

For those who celebrate Christmas, lying to children about the existence of Santa could harm parents’ relationships with their children, according to an essay published in The Lancet Psychiatry. In the piece, mental health researcher Kathy McKay and psychologist Christopher Boyle suggest parents may be motivated by a desire to return to their own childhoods. This means lying about Santa may not be a protective lie, and may instead erode children’s trust in their parents.

How Santa Affects Parent-Child Relationships

The two authors suggest parents may encourage children to believe in Santa as a way of reliving their own childhoods. Though this can be fun and nostalgic for parents, the lie may ultimately harm their relationship with their children.

Many parents teach their children lying is wrong, but children eventually find out Santa is not real. This can spur confusion and conflict. When children discover the lie, they may wonder what other lies their parents have told, the authors say.

[fat_widget_right]McKay and Boyle believe it is sometimes appropriate for parents to lie to protect their children. For example, rather than providing potentially upsetting details about the death of a pet, parents might conceal the death. In contrast, the authors say lying about Santa does not protect children. Because a child’s belief in Santa can make parents feel good, parents may be undermining their long-term credibility to feel a sense of magic for a few years.

Grace Malonai, PhD, LPCC, DCC, a psychologist who specializes in parenting, agrees that parental deception can undermine trust.

“Some children might gain cherished memories of St. Nick, while others might gain a sense of distrust in their parents and their world view,” Malonai said. “Highly sensitive, gifted, or other neuro-atypically developing children, such as those with autism, might be especially vulnerable to this type of parental deception.”

Parents’ Views on Santa

In 2011, the Associated Press and GFK Roper Public Affairs & Corporate Communications sponsored a survey of the general population that inquired about views on Santa. Eighty-four percent of parents said they had once believed in Santa. This supports the notion that parents nurture a belief in Santa partially because of fond memories from their childhoods.

Two-thirds of families called Santa an “important” part of Christmas. Conflicted feelings about Santa were also common, with nearly half of respondents arguing Santa detracts from the religious meaning of Christmas.

Expert Insight on Navigating the Myth of Santa

Malonai believes it is important for parents to consider family values in conjunction with their children’s sometimes differing personalities and traits.

“If you wish to uphold the idea of Father Christmas, choose your words wisely,” Maloani said. “Instead of outright lying, share stories of longstanding traditions and cultural heritage.”

Kathy Hardie-Williams, MEd, MS, NCC, LPC, LMFT, a therapist and former teacher who treats children and parents, endorses a similar approach.

“Children can enjoy Santa as a fictional character without being lied to by their parents,” Hardie-Williams said. “Just as children enjoy their favorite fairy-tale characters and even ‘meet them’ in Disneyland and in Disney World, children understand that their favorite fairy-tale character is not literal. I believe the same approach is effective when presenting the character of Santa Claus to children. Although not the intention, I believe the emotional impact of parents lying to children could be harmful. I believe it’s healthier to encourage children to enjoy the ‘magic’ of Santa Claus and Christmas by perceiving Santa as a fictional character within the context of telling a story.”

References:

1. Boyle, C., & McKay, K. (2016). A wonderful lie. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(12), 1110-1111. doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30363-7
2. Should parents lie to children about Santa? (2016, November 25). Retrieved from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/11/161125104818.htm
3. The AP-GFK Poll [PDF]. (2011, December). Associated Press–GFK Roper Public Affairs & Corporate Communications.

From the time children are born, they count on their parents to provide a sense of safety as they learn about the complex world around them. When a parent dies, it may create intense emotional upheaval for children old enough to understand what has happened. Often, children do not know what to do with those feelings. Surviving parents, guardians, and other adults have a difficult task in helping such children process their grief and move forward.

Perhaps the most important thing anyone can offer a child who has lost a parent is time. Grief does not happen on a specific timetable, and the process of grieving may look very different from one child to the next.

In addition, adults can encourage children to share their feelings safely and without judgment. It is helpful to refrain from using words such as “should” or “should not” when talking to children about a loss or trauma they experienced. Adults can also facilitate a sense of togetherness or shared struggle to ensure children do not feel alone in their grief, and encourage compassion and support among other kids or people in the child’s life.

[fat_widget_right]

The specific challenges facing children who have lost a parent include:

• Accepting the significance of the loss (it changes them forever)
• Allowing the grief process to unfold on their own terms as they work through painful feelings
• Transitioning into an environment where the parent is no longer physically present
• Maintaining a sense of connection with the lost parent while allowing themselves to live their life

Surviving parents have the unique challenge of providing support for their children as well as processing their own grief. Some parents may feel inclined to grieve in private, believing it is in the children’s best interests to shield them from displays of pain. However, it is appropriate and healthy to allow children to see adults grieving because it signals that is okay to feel the impact of the loss and to openly express their own grief. The objective is to help children understand they are loved, supported, and far from alone in the grieving process.

Often one of the biggest challenges children face when they lose a parent is to accept that they may be experiencing many different feelings. This is normal, and it’s important for children to know that. It can be confusing when they feel emotions such as anger and yet miss their parent at the same time. Children may believe it’s better not to show emotion and that if they don’t, they may be able to forget about the parent they lost or forget the pain they feel. Caring adults need to let children know that when someone they love dies, it’s important to remember them and cherish the positive memories they have.

It’s important to help children understand that the goal is not to “get over” what happened, but to move toward acceptance. They will never get over it; the loss of a parent changes a child from that point on.

It’s important to help children understand that the goal is not to “get over” what happened, but to move toward acceptance. They will never get over it; the loss of a parent changes a child from that point on.

Adults often find it difficult to know what to say to children who have lost a parent. Others may be wary of bringing up difficult feelings in children or reopening emotional wounds. As a result, the topic may be avoided altogether, creating an “elephant in the room” effect and contributing to feelings of isolation.

The primary goals for caring adults in the lives of children who have lost a parent are to encourage them to accept their feelings rather than push them away and to offer support whenever it is needed. Often during the grief process, children will move back and forth through the various stages of grief. Being available to listen whenever they’re ready to talk may be what is most comforting to them.

Ultimately, children need to know that there is no “right way” to get through the grief process. Everyone experiences it differently, and children should be encouraged not to judge themselves if the way they experience their grief is different from the way someone else does.

There have been countless articles—including some of my own—about the hazards of so-called “helicopter parenting,” the current trend of over-watchful, over-involved child rearing (also known as cosseting). By now, many people are familiar with stories of adult children who can’t leave home because they lack life skills, anxious teens whose schedules rival those of corporate CEOs, and parents who expect their toddlers to learn Mandarin and excel in five sports.

But in these times, when many of us feel alienated from our government, our neighbors, and sometimes our families, it’s worthwhile to rethink the benefits of kids being more connected to their parents. After all, parents started parenting this way for a reason. We were reacting against the free-form, unbounded childhoods we experienced, in which many of us faced daily dangers and years of floundering without oversight or steady guidance. We were the kids who came home to empty houses and wandered the neighborhood all afternoon, getting ourselves into physically and emotionally treacherous experiences. Because our parents were afraid to broach the subjects of sex, drugs, and violence, we got the information from our friends, who got all sorts of details wrong. As a result, many grew up feeling unseen, unsupported, and confused.

[fat_widget_right]

While helicoptering has its flaws—most notably how it often fails to teach kids how to think on their own and make bold decisions in the face of uncertainty—it also has many advantages, some of which have gone unheralded. Here are some of the reasons parents may choose to be very involved in their kids’ lives, and some of the benefits to both children and society.

1. These kids feel supported.

Children, from the millennial generation to the current one, typically know that their parents have their backs. They grow up with a sense of security, knowing a framework is around them. This might give them more freedom to fail and to experiment, because someone is there to provide a net. Yes, young adults these days move in with their parents more often and rely on their families for financial support more than ever before. But this also allows them time to grow without as much pressure and danger as previous generations experienced.

Research has shown recently how the brain does not fully mature until our mid- to late-20s. Knowing this, why aren’t we more accepting of the idea that a 21-year-old college graduate might still need more time to feel fully launched? The average age to get married and have children has increased over the past few decades, and many people accept the idea that it might help to be more mature before leaping into these commitments. Likewise, young adults are taking longer to enter the workforce or buy a home; although economic factors contribute to that reality, couldn’t it be argued that it’s not necessarily the worst thing to delay these moves until they’re adequately prepared?

2. These kids feel seen and known.

Alice Miller writes in The Drama of the Gifted Child how parents who are preoccupied with meeting their own needs first can create children who feel unseen. Today’s parenting, however, tends to be highly focused on the child instead of the parents’ needs. While a degree of balance would be ideal, the value of this imbalance is that children these days know they are fully understood by their families. These kids get therapy, school testing, vocational evaluations, extracurricular trainings, and more. And while they may be overscheduled and over-observed, they are also privy to a large amount of information about their temperaments, skills, and interests.

[amazon_affiliate]

The great thing about that is this generation of kids may not have as much of a struggle, or take as long, as previous generations did to know themselves. They may be able to make better partnerships and be better parents because they are not, as Miller writes, struggling to heal old wounds and blindly fighting the shadows of the past.

3. These kids have a sense of community and connectedness.

In the essay that spurred my thinking on this topic, Jennifer Trainor writes, “What if we are moving away from individualism and autonomy (with its requirements that we push away from our parents, rebel against the establishment and its institutions, like school) and entering a much more connected, inter-dependence?”

There are real benefits to doing something you’re bad at. It increases resilience, teaches how to hold onto self-esteem, and reduces perfectionism.

Trainor is asking this: Are we looking for the kind of communalism that marked American life in the beginning of the last century, when families lived with or nearby each other, neighbors helped one another, and people intrinsically trusted the government to be benevolent and generous? And does that desire to be close to others both encourage today’s parents to dote on their children and allow the children to stay close and reliant on their parents? A century ago, there was nothing wrong with, say, expecting your parents to help raise your children or provide you with a job. This gave people a sense of kinship and lineage. It sounds much more pleasant than the current overarching sense of alienation and existential loneliness.

4. These kids benefit from doing stuff they’re not good at.

Yes, our kids tend to have too many activities, leaving them without enough unstructured play time. But it also pushes them to persevere at pursuits they might not have thought of on their own, even though they may not excel at them. Thirty years ago, kids tended to gravitate toward one pastime—usually something they had an affinity for—and stuck with it. We rarely tried our hands at many different sports or arts, and as as result we were less well-rounded.

There are real benefits to doing something you’re bad at. It increases resilience, teaches how to hold onto self-esteem, and reduces perfectionism. To be the slowest runner on the soccer field week after week demands a huge amount of persistence, which years later can give kids a major leg up in the business world.

5. These kids have tried a little of everything and thus are better equipped to make good career choices.

Speaking of the business world, trying their hand at so many recreational activities may also help this generation of children to pick job fields. Compared to teens of the past, they may have a higher awareness of themselves at a young age. The parents who have driven them to music lessons, football games, and chess club meetings have instilled in these kids the knowledge that they are good at organization, perhaps, or lousy at spatial relations. These pieces of information give them a sense of what they have to offer to employers and which fields might be best avoided.

6. These kids will take care of us (and pass on the same family values).

Finally, there’s an upside to parents as well as to kids. In addition to having children who like us and want to stay in touch, we may also be creating a community with an overall sense of family connectedness. As they grow, children who were parented closely often want to remain close. Perhaps this will diminish the fears we have about an aging society, where seniors become lonely and neglected. Perhaps, just perhaps, helicoptered children may someday hover over their parents and return the favor.

There’s a lot of fear in society about the ways technology creates distance and isolation. We look at the younger generations with their heads buried in their phones and wonder if they will know how to make conversation or form connections. But we forget that, even on those phones, they are in constant communication—not only with their friends, but with us. Through this lens, helicopter parenting might be considered an antidote to the loneliness of the digital age, a way to create snug, loving bonds with our children.

References:

1. Miller, A. (1997). The Drama of the Gifted Child. New York, NY: Basic Books.
2. Trainor, J. (2016, March 7). Does Helicopter Parenting Harm Kids’ Ability to Think for Themselves? Retrieved from https://medium.com/@jstrainor/lythcott-haims-book-led-me-to-terry-castle-s-2012-essay-about-helicopter-parenting-an-essay-that-5732281d6ce1#.sferakci8

Dear GoodTherapy.org,

My oldest child is 7, and many of his friends receive an allowance from their parents for doing chores around the house. I never gave the idea of an allowance much thought, as I didn’t receive an allowance for chores as a kid and don’t personally feel it’s necessary. But seeing his peers spend money and buy things for themselves (nothing major, just small toys or candy) makes my son want the same freedom. Plus, I’m facing a shocking amount of criticism from other parents in my son’s friend circle. I had no idea this was such a contentious issue! Those parents all say that giving an allowance teaches kids the importance of earning money through hard work, as well as the value of saving money, spending it wisely, etc.

[fat_widget_right]

Of course, like any parent, I do see the merit of providing an incentive for tasks, especially when so often it’s like pulling teeth to even get them to put a dish in the sink. But I also feel strongly that chores are not the type of labor that deserves a reward, since contributing to household duties is something they will have to do their whole lives without compensation. In many ways, I feel like offering an allowance is instilling in them the idea that they’re entitled to payment for doing chores that are not above and beyond the scope of expected responsibilities.

Is there an argument for or against an allowance from a long-term mental health standpoint? Or is there a certain age when it’s better to introduce an allowance system? I know in the grand scheme of parenting the issue of an allowance, either issued or withheld, probably will not “make or break” a kid. Just curious whether you have any insights about lasting lessons a child might learn one way or the other. Thanks! —Raincheck, Please

Dear Raincheck,

This is such a great parenting question!

The first part I’d like to address is the criticism you are getting from peers. You are entitled to make parenting choices that work for you and your family that are aligned with your family’s unique values. The judgment you are feeling from the other parents is unfortunate—and ultimately their issue, not yours.

I’d also like to separate the two issues of chores and allowance. Chores are great for kids, assuming they are age-appropriate. They teach competence, life skills, and the importance of contributing to the family (something that combats entitlement and enhances gratitude). It is absolutely okay to expect your children, even as young as 3 or 4, to contribute to the household by picking up, feeding animals, setting and clearing the table, and other achievable tasks.

You are also correct that combining allowance and chores can be problematic. It shifts the focus from contributing to the family as an expectation, or social relationship, to a fee for service, or business relationship. What happens if your child feels he doesn’t need the money? Does that excuse him from feeding the dog? Combining the two also runs the risk of fostering a sense of entitlement—I’ve heard many kids, when asked to do something for their parents, ask, “What will you give me?” If they have been trained to believe task equals payment, this reaction is to be expected.

The allowance does not have to be exorbitant. It does not need to match what your child’s peers are getting. There will be plenty of times over the course of your parenting life when your children will compare their treatment to that of their peers (today, allowance—soon, phones and cars). You are under no obligation to match what their peers or peers’ parents are doing.

An allowance, however, is also pretty terrific for children. It teaches them the value of money. It gives them some independence. It allows them to contribute financially to gifts for friends or family and feel some pride and ownership. It also encourages them to learn about decision-making and delayed gratification. If they want a toy that costs $15, do they want to spend their savings on trinkets that cost $2,if they know it will delay their ultimate goal?

Allowances also encourage conversations about values. Some parents set up a system by which kids put money in spend-save-share jars. The share part is for donating to a cause of their choice. If that is something you want to encourage, there’s no better way to teach that lesson than having them involved in deciding what to give and to whom.

The allowance does not have to be exorbitant. It does not need to match what your child’s peers are getting. There will be plenty of times over the course of your parenting life when your children will compare their treatment to that of their peers (today, allowance—soon, phones and cars). You are under no obligation to match what their peers or peers’ parents are doing. However, conversations with your children about why you are making the decisions you are making will help them develop a keener understanding of your family values and priorities.

[amazon_affiliate]

I hear your struggle with incentivizing chores. Some parents choose to make chores a basic expectation (this is what we do). Failing to meet those expectations results in losses of privileges (screen time, dessert, play dates, etc.). There are also ways to encourage chores by instilling in your children a sense of pride of accomplishment. Letting my son hear me brag to friends and family about how well he did his “jobs” without prompting has accomplished far more than any sticker chart or reward system ever did.

You are right that this is not a “make-or-break” kind of parenting decision. It is, however, a tremendous opportunity to intentionally foster the skills and values you hope your children will possess as adults. If you want to read more about this topic, there’s a fantastic book by Ron Lieber called The Opposite of Spoiled. It delves into all of this and more and is incredibly informative and accessible.

Best of luck,

Erika

Parenting style can affect behavior in any child, but matters most for children with “difficult” temperaments, according to a study published in the journal Psychological Bulletin. Research suggests some portions of a child’s temperament—such as impulsivity and the tendency to experience negative emotions—might be influenced by genes. Environmental influences can act upon this nascent personality, affecting how children think and feel as adults.

The new study suggests parenting is a significant predictor of who a child will become. For children born with a tendency toward negative emotions and challenging behavior, parenting may be even more important.

How Parenting Shapes ‘Difficult’ Children’s Personalities

The study evaluated previous research on parenting style and child outcomes. Researchers analyzed data from 84 previous studies, half of which were conducted in 2010 or later.

Children identified as having a “difficult” temperament had higher levels of impulsivity and negative emotions, and lower levels of conscientiousness. Parents who practiced positive parenting provided children with more guidance and affection. They encouraged children to embrace empathy and think through their actions. Parents with a negative parenting style were more punitive and less affectionate. These parents attempted to control their children’s behavior with harsh discipline.

[fat_widget_right]The affectionate style of more positive parents produced better outcomes in their children, regardless of a child’s temperament. For children with a more difficult temperament, the effect was most pronounced, especially among children who were highly emotional. Negative parenting was more harmful to these children, while positive parenting offered significant benefits.

The study highlights how parenting style is both internalized and externalized. Positive parenting increased positive internal behaviors such as high self-esteem, as well as positive external behaviors such as community involvement. Negative parenting increased negative internal behaviors and mental health issues such as depression, as well as negative external behaviors such as aggression and substance abuse.

Understanding Parenting Style

Parents of challenging children may worry their child’s personality is hard-wired. Children who experience more negative emotions are more likely to experience mental health issues. For parents concerned about how a difficult child might think and behave in adulthood, this study points to the importance of effective parenting.

A number of studies point to the benefits of an authoritative parenting style. Authoritative parents, like the “positive” parents of this study, establish clear rules and are highly affectionate. They stand in contrast to authoritarian parents, who are controlling and unaffectionate, and permissive parents, who are affectionate but provide few boundaries.

References:

1. Baer, D. (2016, October 17). The kids most affected by parenting share a personality trait. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/10/how-parenting-affects-kids-depending-on-personality.html
2. Dewar, G., PhD. (2013, April). Authoritarian parenting: What happens to the kids? Retrieved from http://www.parentingscience.com/authoritarian-parenting.html
3. Slagt, M., Dubas, J. S., Dekovic, M., & Van Aken, M. A. (2016). Differences in sensitivity to parenting depending on child temperament: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. doi:10.1037/bul0000061

Within the past several decades, a shift has been observed in the relationship patterns of many mothers and daughters. Many seem to have abandoned the traditional hierarchy of parent and child for a relationship of equals, identifying with each other more as “best friends.” BFF (“best friends forever”) mothers embrace their daughters’ lives, sharing them and, at times, walking in their footsteps.

A close, friendly mother-daughter relationship is not in itself a cause for concern. But when the boundaries of the relationship become blurred, this can lead to confusion regarding the distinct responsibilities and obligations, of both parent and child, over what behaviors are acceptable within the context of the relationship. This confusion may, in turn, may lead to behavior unrestricted by limits, on the part of either mother or daughter.

The New Mother-Daughter Relationship

Research has attempted to explain and explore the variables contributing to these mother-daughter best friend relationships. Authors Linda Perlman Gordon and Susan Morris Shaffer describe in their book, Too Close for Comfort: Questioning the Intimacy of Today’s New Mother-Daughter Relationship, what is referred to as a generation overlap, an intersection of lives that differs from anything seen in previous generations. Mothers and daughters today may shop at the same stores, utilize the same new technology, participate in the same social media apps (and possibly have some of the same friends or followers), and listen to the same music.  [fat_widget_right]

Some believe this generation overlap, and mother-daughter relationships in general, are made easier by a youth-fixated culture. In the article “My Mom Is My BFF,” Paige Williams writes of a stay-young revolution, where women are enticed and encouraged—some might say pressured—to think, act, and look young.  With the widespread availability and broad variety of technology and resources that promise to preserve youth, many mothers may find it fairly simple to recapture their years of young adulthood. And who better to morph with than a daughter, the one who likely most closely resembles their teenage selves?

Having their worlds so closely intertwined has made friendships between mothers and daughters more common than in generations past, something that is not necessarily harmful. After all, who doesn’t want a loving and caring relationship with their mother?

But these friendships may blur the distinctions between parent and child. If mother and daughter are best friends, what happens when the mother tries to parent, to speak out as a mother rather than a friend? Where do the lines get drawn? The danger of opting for the BFF route appears to lie in its potential to minimize, as well as distort, the parent-child relationship. When mothers and daughters are “besties” first and parent and child second, the maternal role—providing direction, support, and the tools needed to become a confident, self-sufficient adult—may be in jeopardy.

Mothers, Daughters, and Dating

Mothers and daughters who enjoy a close bond may share many details about their personal lives, dating details among them.

The dating world has always offered any number of challenges, among them the various rules, cultural norms, and aspects of etiquette often applied to dating individuals, particularly women. Some of these customs differ little from those of generations past, while others may be vastly different or newly established. In many cases, mothers may guide their daughters, using experience to navigate new challenges, as they also struggle with the unspoken rules of dating in a society that may encourage and expect them to balance a semblance of youth with the maternal role.

The current age of reality TV, smartphones, and social media give the term “being connected” a deeper level of meaning, in terms of dating. These technological advances have been shown to impact the development and progression of romantic relationships, but can they also contribute to the development of mother-daughter enmeshment?

Communication patterns between dating young adults today may in some cases differ significantly from those of the previous few decades, and parental involvement in teen and young adult relationships may be both more limited and more casual. Mothers who are friends with their daughters, or who want to be, may try to avoid setting strict rules, whether out of simple trust and support or in order to maintain their daughters’ good favor.

This may lead some mothers to work to become friends with their daughters’ dating partners. Some mothers may even come to act as “surrogate girlfriends,” displaying behavior that is friendly and supportive but may eventually cross the line into impropriety, even as it undermines the significance of their duties as a parent.

Mothers who assume a ‘surrogate girlfriend’ role may:

• Text their daughter’s significant other with random conversations (that go beyond asking for confirmation of whereabouts, etc.).
• Connect with their daughter’s partner on social media platforms regularly.
• Continue communicating with their daughter’s exes after breakups.
• Devote more attention to their daughter’s dating partner than to their adult relationships (their own partner or friends).

The Effects of an Enmeshed Relationship

When the roles of a mother and daughter become entangled, this is described as an enmeshed relationship. In an enmeshed relationship, a mother provides her daughter love and attention but tends to exploit the relationship, fortifying her own needs by living through her daughter. They both grow to depend on this type of arrangement, despite its dysfunction.

Susan Forward and Donna Frazier Glynn, authors of Mothers who Can’t Love: A Healing Guide for Daughters, explained this relationship as one where mothers depend on their daughters to fulfill all their needs for companionship, entertainment and a meaningful sense of identity. They call these mothers “mothers without borders,” as they tend to lack the ability to establish healthy boundaries. [amazon_affiliate]

Enmeshed relationships can have profound effects on daughters as they journey into adulthood. As Forward and Glynn explain, a daughter may not know “where she stops and her mom begins.” This may lead to developmental setbacks in the attempts of daughters to become independent, develop a sense of identity, and express themselves individually.

Enmeshed relationships can have profound effects on daughters as they journey into adulthood. As Forward and Glynn explain, a daughter may not know “where she stops and her mom begins.” This may lead to developmental setbacks in the attempts of daughters to become independent, develop a sense of identity, and express themselves individually. A daughter may also feel uncomfortable and sometimes resentful of her mother’s over-involvement in her dating life, but because the intrusion is often packaged as motherly love, they may give in to the familiar pattern of behavior.

Mothers who have unfulfilled needs, lack a romantic partner, and/or are affected be low self-esteem may look outside themselves to fill what feels empty inside. They may, thus, be more susceptible to the creation of these entangled relationships, especially with regard to the development of a “surrogate girlfriend” role, as connecting with a daughter’s partner may serve as somewhat of a replacement for what they feel is missing or lost.

I encourage daughters and mothers to consider the following:

Daughters, you may form hundreds of friendships and share your stories and life events with countless people. However, you will only have one mother. Enjoy the closeness that comes with this bond and the many ways you can be a part of each other’s worlds. Recognize that a large step for your growth into adulthood is developing the ability to think and respond as an individual. Part of this is having experiences of your own, separate from your mother. You will know your mother-daughter relationship is healthy when you feel safe venturing away from the nest.

Mothers, when you honor and value your role as a mother and demonstrate responsibility, respect, and healthy boundaries, you send the message to your daughter that you are willing to do this tough job because she is worth it. As you model for her not only the role of a mother, but that of a responsible adult, you are at the same time fortifying her self-esteem—and your own.

Gordon and Shaffer interviewed a mother who described it best: “We share best-friend moments, but she is not my best friend, that would rob her of what we really cherish – which is that I am and remain her mother.”

References:

1. Forward, S., & Frazier, D. (2013). Mothers who can’t love: A healing guide for daughters. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
2. Gordon, L. P., & Shaffer, S. M. (2009). Too close for comfort: Questioning the intimacy of today’s new mother-daughter relationship. New York, NY: Berkley Books.
3. Lieberman, D. J., Ph.D. (2010). Setting boundaries with difficult people. Lakewood, NJ: Viter Press.
4. Williams, P. (2012, April 22). My mom is my BFF. New York. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/news/features/mother-daughter-best-friends-2012-4

A new longitudinal study strengthens previous evidence that parental sexual orientation has no notable impact on childhood development. While this is not the first investigation to find the sexual preferences of parents don’t affect children, it is the first to track childhood well-being in relation to parent sexual orientation over time.

About 65,000 adopted children in the United States have same-sex parents. This study’s results may help inform future policy decisions regarding same-sex parents.

Childhood Outcomes Not Linked to Parental Sexual Orientation

Published in the journal Developmental Psychology, the study followed 96 families with adopted school-age children as they moved through early and middle childhood. Parent combinations included a mix of heterosexual pairings and same-sex couples. The study tracked childhood behavior and adjustment along with family functioning and relationship variables.

The analysis found no significant differences between parent groups in any of the examined factors, including family characteristics and childhood outcomes. These findings are consistent with many previous studies that are similar in nature, but not longitudinal in design. According to the study, research has consistently found no differences between these parent types on several important measures, such as childhood stress levels and quality of mental health.

[fat_widget_right]It is possible that continuing academic concerns about same-sex adoptive parents are the result of an existing conflict in popular psychological theories. For example, family systems theory is in line with the observed results, as it contends family functioning is more important than family structure. In contrast, family stress theory generates predictions of differences between children of same-sex and opposite-sex couples.

Variables That Do Impact Childhood Outcomes

Several other variables were found to have a significant influence on childhood outcomes over time. Specifically, it was shown that child adjustment problems and high parental stress in earlier years can contribute to a child’s behavioral issues and problems in overall family functioning during middle school. These additional findings provide potential targets for future research.

References:

1. Farr, R. H. (2016). Does parental sexual orientation matter? A longitudinal follow-up of adoptive families with school-age children. Developmental Psychology. doi:10.1037/dev0000228
2. Farr, R. H., Forssell, S. L., & Patterson, C. J. (2010). Parenting and child development in adoptive families: Does parental sexual orientation matter? Applied Developmental Science, 14(3), 164-178. doi:10.1080/10888691.2010.500958
3. University of Kentucky. (2016, October 24). No differences noted over time for children of gay, lesbian, adoptive parents. ScienceDaily. Retrieved from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161024104229.htm