Parenting Styles Reflect Parental Discipline - Coursework Example

Parenting Styles Reflect Parental Discipline Disciplining children is a usual challenge for most parents. Since children are not born with “how to raise” manuals, parents usually have no choice but to figure out things for themselves with regards to rearing their offspring. Often, when children become difficult to control, parents resort to corporal punishment which is defined by Strauss (2001) as “the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child pain, but not injury, for the purposes of correction or control of the child’s behavior” (p. 4). However, several other disciplinary strategies are now available to parents, as corporal punishment has been a debatable form of discipline. Strategies such as using time-out, logical consequences, withdrawal of privileges, and merely talking heart to heart with a child have been found effective by many parents and teachers. Still, such disciplinary strategies that parents use stem from their own parenting styles. Baumrind (1991) has come up with four parenting styles based on the degree of the parent’s demandingness and responsiveness. Parental demandingness refers to the extent of control parents have over their children while parental responsiveness refers to the acceptance, warmth or supportiveness they provide their children. Parenting styles are derived from various combinations of these factors. These are the indulgent/permissive/nondirective; the authoritarian; authoritative and uninvolved styles. Each parenting style is characterized by various naturally occurring patterns of behaviors, values and practices of parents which may have been influenced by their own child-rearing in their childhood, their deliberate choices the influence of others and a host of other factors. Baumrind’s framework identifies a distinct balance of responsiveness and demandingness for each parenting style (Darling, 1999). Theoretical Framework The way a child is raised and disciplined creates a huge impact on his development and personality. Parents have different styles in child-rearing and yield various results in their children. Diana Baumrind (1991) explains four parenting styles common to most homes. Authoritarian parenting is characterized by parental control and demands but low on acceptance and responsiveness. Parents expect their word to be the law to be obeyed by their children and if it is questioned, coercive techniques such as threats and/or corporal punishment are carried out. This type of parenting results in children growing up in fear, with low self-esteem and higher levels of depression. They manifest anxiety about social comparison, wondering if other children are raised the same way. This style of parenting leaves adverse effects on children that they bring with them to adulthood. On the other hand, Permissive or indulgent parenting lets the children have their way. It is low on parental demands and high on responsiveness. Children get to make their own rules and decisions and usually get their own way. Although children develop high self-esteem, they also develop low self-control and self-reliance since their needs and grants are immediately gratified by their parents, hence they are likely to grow up as spoiled. Uninvolved parenting is neglectful parenting. The parent is disengaged, low in both demandingness and responsiveness and is emotionally distant from the child. Because the child lacks supervision, he may resort to delinquent behaviors such as substance abuse or misbehavior in school. He would find it difficult to trust or rely on people because they might also neglect him. The best parenting style that has a good balance of demandingness and responsiveness is the Authoritative style. Parents give clear expectations to their children but allow their children to be assertive of their rights. They raise their children to be democratic, socially responsible and self-regulating (Baumrind, 1991). Parents and children form stronger bonds and children grow up fewer behavior problems, better academic achievement, higher self-confidence and more prosocial behaviors than other children who were raised differently. Application of Theory to Practice Corporal punishment falls under the authoritarian parenting style. Those who implement it may quote the bible verse: “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.” (Proverbs 13:24). Authoritarian parents may interpret this proverb literally, especially the first part mentioning “rod”, or an instrument used to inflict the pain of discipline. Thus, these parents may carry out such discipline strategy as endorsed by God. Usually, when spanked, the child immediately stops the inappropriate behavior with the parent’s intention that the spanking will deter any future misbehavior. Parents usually think that children associate the negative behavior with spanking, and to avoid the consequence, they will likewise avoid the negative behavior. This belief stems from behavioral theories authored by the great behaviorists – Skinner, Watson, Pavlov, etc. Although normally employed as a discipline strategy, spanking is used with varying frequency depending on child attributes (ex. age, sex, temperament), parental characteristics (ex. age, education, ethnicity, psychological well-being, religious conservatism), and contextual factors (ex., poverty, social support) (Day et al., 1998; Ellison, Bartkowski, & Segal, 1996; Gils-Sims et al., 1995; Rohner, Kean, & Cournoyer, 1991). However, more and more studies are proving that corporal punishment brings more negative effects on children than positive ones. Strauss (1994) notes that as children grow older and bigger, spanking becomes less effective and implant in children the idea that they only need to behave if their parents are around or will know about their misbehavior. He suggests that corporal punishment leaves children growing up to be depressed or violent and parents do not realize this because the effects only manifest themselves in the long run. Block (2007), a pediatrician, suggests instead of resorting to corporate punishment as a discipline method, to just speak to the child in a firm but gentle voice, with emotions kept under control. He advocates this form of discipline because it is more purposeful to both the parent and child, and does not involve physical harm and power struggles. He is referring to an authoritative parenting technique. This includes setting clear standards for what to expect, expressing much love and affection, explaining things to a child well and recognizing good behavior instead of always watching out for negative ones (Strauss, 1994). The other two parenting styles, Permissive and Uninvolved have no clear disciplinary strategies as it lets the child be. This also creates adverse effects on children because the parents do not provide any guidance on how children should behave appropriately. Permissive and indulgent parents are only after the children’s happiness, and not the consequences of the children’s behaviors. At least with these parents, they express their love and affection to their children although it may reach a level that disregards the children’s need for correction of negative attitudes and behaviors. The children still know they have reliable adults to turn to in case they encounter problems. With uninvolved parents, they do not seem to care for their children and just allow them to behave as they wish. The children are not rewarded with positive attention nor punished with negative attention. Hence the children grow up relying only on themselves or look elsewhere for role models. They grow up vulnerable to harm and negative influences since they do not have a strong moral foundation. Strauss (1994) concludes that parental styles which are high in demandingness result in children performing moderately well in school, does not get into problem behaviors but manifest poor social skills, lower self-esteem and higher levels of depression. On the other hand, parenting styles which are high in responsiveness result in children who have tendencies to be involved in problem behaviors and may perform less in school, but have better social skills and lower levels of depression. Generally, children’s level of social competence and psychosocial functioning may be attributed to parental responsiveness while children’s instrumental competence and behavioral control may be attributed to parental demandingness. Critical Thinking Baumrind’s Parental Styles framework identified the impact of parenting styles on children’s development of their personalities, strengths and weaknesses, however, it did not emphasize the reasons behind why parents employ such styles. A possible reason may be their own experiences in the way they themselves were raised and disciplined by their parents. Their parents served as their own role models in parenting, hence, they regard their own children the same way. However, many other factors may lead parents to adopt a certain parenting style. For example, rates of endorsement of physical discipline among Americans have declined over the past 40 years, but they continue to exceed 50% (Straus, 1999; Straus & Mathur, 1996), with rates being higher among African Americans than European Americans (e.g., Deater-Deckard et al., 2003; Mosby et al., 1999). So there may be cultural factors involved in the differences in parenting. Another factor may be the parent’s stress level and current circumstances that may affect her emotional state with regards to parenting. Within the same cultural group of African American mothers, a study by McLoyd et al. (2007) sorted out endorsers and non-endorsers of corporate punishment as a form of disciplinary strategy. Results of the study revealed that majority of African American mothers endorsed physical discipline as a preferred response to child misbehavior but 2 out of 5 of the mothers in the sample did not agree that physical discipline is the best strategy to handle their children’s misbehavior. The mothers’ state of distress also affected their use of physical discipline. Feelings of general maternal stress were more strongly associated with an increase in the incidence of physical discipline among the mothers who did not endorse it than among mothers who did endorse it. The authors conclude that high levels of anger and frustration may provoke non-endorsing mothers to violate their philosophy regarding the use of physical discipline and may even be harsher and less controlled than the physical discipline that endorsing mothers employ. This is consistent with Straus’ (1994) contention that most episodes of physical abuse began as a disciplinary action by a parent to a misbehaving child, but escalated due to high emotionality and stress levels. Hence, parents should not only be clear with the parenting style they adopt but be consistent with monitoring their own personal attitudes and intentions at the moment when they instill discipline in their children. Conclusion This paper discussed Baumrind’s theoretical framework on Parental Styles and applied it to its effect on disciplining children. It identified that the controversial corporal punishment practiced by some parents fall under the Authoritarian parenting style. Authoritative parenting style was endorsed to be the best parenting style as it effectively balances off parental control with parental expressions of love and affection. Baumrind’s framework would be very useful in parent education. Disseminating information about best practices in parenting will make a strong impact on the positive growth and development of children, thereby producing well-rounded, self-disciplined future citizens of the world who exude high self-esteem and good values, and who will be authoritative parents as well. Creating full circles of good parenting now will result in a better world tomorrow. References Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal Of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95. Block, R.W. ( 2007) Parental Discipline of Young Children, Southern Medical Journal, Volume 100, No. 5, May, 2007 Darling, N. (1999) Parenting Style and Its Correlates. ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education, Champaign IL. Day, R. D., Peterson, G. W., & McCracken, C. (1998). Predicting spanking of younger and older children by mothers and fathers. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 79–94. Deater-Deckard, K., Lansford, J. E., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (2003). The development of attitudes about physical punishment: An 8-year longitudinal study. Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 351–360. Ellison, C., Bartkowski, J., & Segal, M. (1996). Do conservative Protestant parents spank more often? Further evidence from the National Survey of Families and Households. Social ScienceQuarterly, 77, 663–673. Gils-Sims, J., Straus, M., & Sugarman, D. (1995). Child, maternal, and family characteristics associated with spanking. Family Relations, 44, 170–176. .McLoyd, V.C., Kaplan, R., Hardaway, C.R. and Wood, D. (2007), “Does Endorsement of Physical Discipline Matter? Assessing Moderating Influences on the Maternal and Child Psychological Correlates of Physical Discipline in African American Families” Journal of Family Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 2, 165–175 Mosby, L., Rawls, A., Meehan, A., Mays, E., & Pettinari, C. (1999). Troubles in interracial talk about discipline: An examination of African American child rearing narratives. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 30, 489–521. Rohner, R. P., Kean, K. J., & Cournoyer, D. E. (1991). Effects of corporal punishment, perceived caretaker warmth, and cultural beliefs on the psychological adjustment of children in St. Kitts, West Indies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 681–693. Strauss , M. A. (1994) Beating the Devil Out of Them: Corporal Punishment in American Families. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/ Lexington. Straus, M. (1999). The benefits of avoiding corporal punishment:New and more definitive evidence. Unpublished manuscript, University of New Hampshire—Durham. Straus, M. A., & Mathur, A. K. (1996). Social change and change in approval of corporal punishment by parents from 1968 to 1994. In D. Frehsee, W. Horn, & K. D. Bussmann (Eds.), Family violence against children: A challenge for society (pp. 91–105).New York: Walter deGruyter. Straus, M. A. (2001). Beating the devil out of them: Physical punishment in American families (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ:Transaction Publishers. Read More