• Although most parents strive to provide a loving, gentle and supportive environment for their children, they sometimes rely on harsh parenting practices to instill discipline and rules.
• Our research shows that harsh parenting, such as hitting or shouting, may have a damaging effect on children’s behavior and emotional development. Not to mention their educational attainment.
• This is a two-way relationship: Children struggling with big emotions or having trouble behaving appropriately (as any child will during their development) may also increase the strain on their caregivers’ parenting behaviors.
• This can lead to a self-perpetuating loop in which harsh parenting practices increase children’s mental health problems, which leads to further increases in harsh parenting practices, thus further exacerbating children’s mental health difficulties.
• Policies and services for parents should emphasize the benefits of positive parenting practices over harsh parenting practices.

Harsh parenting negatively affects children’s mental health

In many parts of the world, including the United States, England, and Northern Ireland, physically punishing children is still officially permitted. This is problematic considering that several studies suggest that harsh parenting practices, such as hitting or shouting, negatively affect children’s behavioral and emotional development.

Such practices have been linked to an increased risk of mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and aggression. They have also been associated with poorer academic performance, lower self-esteem, and impaired social skills.

Using harsh parenting practices such as hitting or shouting is not only ineffective as a disciplinary tool but may harm children’s mental health.

How does children’s mental health affect parenting behavior?

While research has primarily considered the effect of parenting behavior on children’s development, effects may also occur in the opposite direction. Children who act out frequently or struggle with controlling their emotions may also place unique strains on parenting behavior. As a result, children’s mental health may negatively affect parenting.

For example, a child who has trouble controlling their emotions may throw frequent temper tantrums, which can lead to parental frustration and negative reactions, such as yelling or physical punishment. This, in turn, may lead the child to struggle with controlling their emotions even more.

Such two-way relationships have received limited attention in research. By recognizing the influence that a child’s behavior can have on parenting, interventions can be designed to target both the child’s emotional and behavioral difficulties and the parent’s reactions and coping mechanisms. Supporting parents in managing their child’s difficulties in a positive and effective way can ultimately lead to better outcomes for both the child and the family.

Photo: Monstera. Pexels.

Exploring two-way relations between parenting and children’s mental health

My colleagues and I conducted a study to explore the two-way relations between parenting behaviors and children’s mental health. We investigated whether harsh parenting tactics such as hitting and shouting show two-way relations with children’s behaviors across early to middle childhood (when children are three, five, and seven years old).

The behavioral effects we studied included two externalizing behaviors – conduct problems (e.g., throwing temper tantrums) and hyperactive/inattentive behaviors (e.g., being easily distracted). We also looked at emotional problems (e.g., symptoms of depression and anxiety).

Our study included 14,037 children (49% female, 84% White) and one of their parents (primarily mothers) who were part of the UK Millennium Cohort Study. Participants came from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds, ensuring that the study was representative of the UK population.

Evidence for two-way relations between harsh parenting and children’s mental health

Using harsh parenting techniques, such as shouting at or hitting three- to five-year-olds, led to children showing more symptoms of hyperactivity and inattention, and more emotional problems when they were five and seven. These findings are consistent with previous research showing that harsh parenting practices have a negative effect on children’s mental health.

Harsh parenting practices can increase children’s mental health problems which, in turn, lead to further increases in harsh parenting practices.

This is not a one-way relation. Parents of children who showed more conduct problems and hyperactive/inattentive behaviors and parents of children with higher levels of emotional problems were more likely to increase their harsh parenting in the subsequent year. Thus, harsh parenting may have negative effects for children through a negative self-perpetuating loop: In this way, harsh parenting practices can increase children’s mental health problems which, in turn, lead to further increases in harsh parenting practices.

Photo: Luke Pennystand. Unsplash

How can parents support children with behavioral or emotional issues?

1. Support children’s ability to meet expectations

First, our findings suggest that using harsh parenting practices such as hitting or shouting is not only ineffective as a disciplinary tool but may harm children’s mental health. Other parenting techniques should be used to support children’s healthy development, such as ignoring unwanted behaviors, setting clear expectations, and explaining why certain behaviors are unwanted. (For additional examples, see the evidence-based Incredible Years Parent Programs.)

These approaches help children understand and learn from their mistakes without damaging their self-esteem or sense of security. Using such methods can lead to a more positive and supportive relationship between parent and child.

2. Consider socioemotional difficulties

Second, our findings underline the importance of addressing parenting difficulties in families with socioemotional difficulties to help prevent the accumulation of additional issues. Children experiencing big emotions or having trouble behaving appropriately can increase the stress and challenges of parenting. Thus, we encourage parents to reflect on their parenting strategies and seek the assistance of mental health professionals to develop ways to support their children in overcoming challenging behaviors without resorting to harsh parenting tactics.

Photo: Ahmed akacha. Pexels.

What does this mean for child development policy?

Our research supports recent policy changes in Scotland and Wales, which explicitly ban the use of physical punishment as a parenting tool. We encourage policymakers in other parts of the United Kingdom, the United States, and elsewhere to implement similar policies.

Policymakers should also prioritize providing interventions and services for at-risk children and families. This could include evidence-based parenting programs, mental health support for parents and children, and other forms of family support to help promote positive child development and prevent the escalation of behavioral and emotional difficulties and negative effects.

The post The Effects of Harsh Parenting: A negative self-perpetuating loop appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Effective parenting involves being responsive to the child as well as exerting appropriate guidance.
• Achieving a balance between these two behavioral dimensions can be challenging and changes with the child’s development.

Introduction to Authoritative Parenting

One of the most important and enduring concepts in research on raising children is authoritative parenting. Coined in the late 1960s by the psychologist Diana Baumrind, this concept refers to a general style of or behavioral approach toward childrearing. The style is characterized by two fundamental features: exhibiting responsiveness and exerting control.

Although being responsive to children and providing discipline have long been recognized as key ingredients of effective parenting, prior to Baumrind’s work, the two dimensions were largely considered – and studied – separately. By combining the two areas into a single construct, she recognized that these characteristics need to occur together in parenting.

In her landmark monograph, Current Patterns of Parental Authority (1971), Baumrind provided evidence that children of authoritative parents tended to be more socially competent and have fewer behavioral problems than children of parents who used other childrearing styles.

Her conceptualization of what made mothers and fathers effective became highly influential and continues to be widely accepted worldwide as the ideal childrearing style. But as important and longstanding as the concept is, unanswered questions remain.

Photo: Kampus Production. Pexels.

What is authoritative parenting?

By definition, an authoritative parent has two behavioral dimensions. First, the adult is very responsive to their child (sometimes referred to as warmth, supportiveness, or nurturance). This responsiveness is oriented around nurturance with the goal of promoting self-regulation and encouraging self-assertion in children, and recognizing and accepting children’s individuality (Baumrind, 1991).

The second behavioral dimension is commonly labeled guidance (sometimes also called demandingness, control, or discipline) and refers to firmly enforcing rules of socialization and behavioral standards. The parent provides structure, predictability, limits, and accountability, usually through rules. The rules are appropriate to a child’s age and reflect high behavioral expectations, such as not allowing any forms of aggression.

The rules or guidelines for behavior are not arbitrary and may be informed by the child’s input: Authoritative parents engage in open, two-way communication with their children. They explain to their children, with clear reasons, why they have established the rules and expectations and consider their children’s input in the decision-making process. A hallmark of this parenting style is respecting the child as an individual.

Authoritative parents engage in open, two-way communication with their children.

However, ultimately, the parent makes the final decisions. Although not necessarily democratic, because parents maintain ultimate authority, in authoritative parenting, parents treat their children in a benevolent way by balancing these two behavioral dimensions.

From the child’s perspective, the parent is viewed as loving, open to discussion, and respectful. But the child also recognizes that their parent follows clear and firm behavioral guidelines, maintains high expectations, and sets definitions and boundaries regarding unacceptable behavior. The child also knows there will be consequences for transgressions, whether a verbal reprimand or punishment, such as taking away a favorite toy or a privilege.

Contrasting parenting styles

Perhaps the easiest way to recognize authoritative parents is to compare them with parents who use the three contrasting childrearing styles (although Baumrind identified only two of the three): authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved parenting.

An authoritarian (or autocratic) parent is just that – very controlling and demanding, and not very responsive. This type of parent expects immediate obedience and compliance, and does not provide explanations or take the child’s perspective into account.

Think of a Hollywood movie stereotype of a military drill sergeant who barks orders at his enlisted men and demands immediate, unquestioning compliance. In authoritarian parenting, reasons are not used to justify commands. This style is centered on the parent because the parent’s focus is on themselves and getting the child to obey, comply, and fit in.

In stark contrast to the authoritarian style is the permissive style (also called indulgent or non-directive), where the parent has few if any expectations of or limits on their child and in fact, allows the child free reign. Permissive parents do not expect mature behavior. They are very responsive and lenient, and they avoid conflict. The permissive style reflects an approach to childrearing that is centered on the child; the child is the boss and makes his or her own decisions. Dessert for dinner is okay with an extremely permissive parent.

In an influential chapter published in 1983, two psychologists, Eleanor Maccoby and John Martin, labeled Baumrind’s two central parenting dimensions as warmth and control to characterize different parenting styles. And they identified a fourth type of parenting: uninvolved.

The uninvolved parent (also called neglectful or detached) is not involved in parenting their child and consequently is neither warm nor controlling. Parents who are uninvolved may have a mental or physical health problem, be separated or divorced, lack interest in their child, be a workaholic, or live apart from their child.

Photo: Anastasia Shuraeva. Pexels.

Evidence for the beneficial effects of authoritative parenting

In 1966, Baumrind first described the three models of parental control. She followed that with research on preschool-aged children and their parents. Her most carefully documented study, of 146 White, middle-class preschool children and their parents in the United States (Baumrind, 1971), yielded somewhat mixed results. A close read of her research reveals that her findings are not as dramatic or clearcut as is portrayed in most textbooks.

Based on interviews with parents, questionnaires filled out by parents, and behavioral ratings of their children, she discovered that the daughters of authoritative parents (and a subsample of the boys) were more socially competent and independent, and achieved at higher levels in school, than were the children of authoritarian or permissive parents. Boys of authoritative parents were more socially responsible than sons of parents with other styles. The subtleties of Baumrind’s findings were often forgotten and the beneficial associations of authoritative parenting are overstated in most textbooks.

Prompted by these initial studies, many researchers began investigating the relation between parenting styles and children’s behavior. In virtually all cases, the studies relied on short self-report questionnaires to classify parents into a particular parenting style.

Despite taking less rigorous methodological approaches than Baumrind did in her work, the studies consistently found that authoritative parenting related positively to a variety of variables in children and adolescents. Among these variables are greater social competence, high academic performance and cognitive competence, and lower rates of emotional and behavioral problems (e.g., depression, low self-esteem, aggression) than found in children of either authoritarian or permissive parents.

Variables commonly studied in adolescents include academic performance, social psychosocial functioning, aggression, juvenile delinquency, and drug or alcohol problems. As in research with younger children, studies of puberty and adolescents have consistently found that authoritative parenting is related to better youth functioning (e.g., Lamborn et al., 1991; Steinberg et al., 1992).

Studies consistently found that authoritative parenting related positively to a variety of variables in children and adolescents.

More than 50 years after the concept of authoritative parenting first appeared, research on this style of childrearing continues. Since 2020, many studies have been published that link the style to a variety of positive characteristics. Among the findings: that authoritative parenting is related to prosocial behavior and more communication about sex-related topics; is associated with healthier diets in children; and protects against obesity, smoking and drinking, and mood disorders (e.g., depression) in children and youth.

This evidence is largely consistent both within and across cultures. For example, in the United States, authoritative parenting and academic achievement commonly co-occur, although there is some cultural variation. Similarly, despite minor regional variations, evidence from China, Russia, Pakistan, Spain, and many other countries is consistent: Authoritative parenting is associated with positive outcomes (Pinquart & Kauser, 2018).

The child’s role

One cautionary note concerns the role of the child. Researcher Catherine Lewis (1983) pointed out that Baumrind failed to account for the child’s role in eliciting parents’ behavior. She argued that competent children are more likely to bring about authoritative-type responses from their parents than are other children.

Picture a fatigued mother of a challenging child. She may need to be more controlling because her child is non-compliant. Or consider a father, tired of attempting to manage his son who has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Although he might be viewed as a permissive parent, his prior childrearing practices likely made no substantive contribution to his son’s behavior.

In cross-sectional data about parenting styles, evidence about the child’s role suggests that parenting styles change with the age of the child. When children are younger, parents tend to be more controlling, but they become more permissive as their children grow older (e.g., Dornbusch et al., 1987).

Photo: Barbara Olsen. Pexels.

Some limitations of authoritative parenting

As important and influential as the idea of an authoritative parenting style is, it can be faulted as being too simplistic. It reflects a broad brushstroke that attempts to capture the complex landscape of a parenting style.

The reality is that childrearing changes as the situation or behavioral domain (e.g., pertaining to morality, social convention, safety) merits. And the question initially raised by Lewis (1981) – whether childrearing is affected primarily by the parenting style or the child’s effect on the adult’s behavior – has not been adequately investigated.

The nature of the evidence supporting the efficacy of the authoritative approach is also limited. For ethical and practical reasons, we lack true experimental evidence to definitively determine the effects of parenting styles. Instead, researchers rely on correlational evidence and, all too often, on short self-report questionnaires to classify parents.

We also know little about the psychological mechanisms involved. Why does authoritative parenting promote optimal development (see Larzelere, Morris, & Harrist, 2013)?

A second neglected topic relates to examining the challenging social cognition processes required to balance socialization expectations with a child’s needs for nurturance. For example, authoritative parents must decide when and where to set limits, in contrast to making allowances for special circumstances (e.g., a sick child, a child acting out because of attention given to a younger sibling).

Conclusion

Developmental psychologists and parenting experts now agree that effective parents should engage in a style known as authoritative childrearing, which involves being responsive to the child but also having high socialization behavioral expectations and exerting appropriate guidance.

This consensus is based on largely consistent though correlational findings, from over half a century of studies from many countries, that these parenting qualities result in competent and well-adjusted children and youth. Although the concept has some limitations and questions remain, the basic premise is widely accepted that authoritative childrearing contains two of the key ingredients of effective parenting: responsivity and guidance.

The post Authoritative parenting: Balancing discipline with warmth and support appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• A brief, online program can help parents promote their children’s resilience following separation and divorce.
• Not all online programs for divorced and separated parents are the same. Evidence from research can help parents and practitioners identify online programs that work rather than ones that are just based on someone’s favorite approach.
• Programs that give parents simple, practical tools to strengthen parenting and reduce conflict between the parents are most likely to reduce children’s behavior problems.
• The eNew Beginnings Program provides an inexpensive but effective opportunity for court professionals and mental health practitioners to help parents promote their children’s resilience following separation and divorce.

An evidence-based online program for divorced and separated parents

Most divorced and separated parents are concerned about their children and ask themselves: “What can I do to protect my children from the problems that often follow divorce?” Although many online parenting-after-divorce programs offer advice, few are backed by solid research that show they actually work.

However, recent research provides new scientific evidence that one online parenting-after-divorce program can provide parents with the help they seek. In the first rigorous evaluation of an online program, this study showed that a brief, online parenting intervention for divorced and separated parents reduced interparental conflict and children’s behavior problems, and improved the quality of parent-child relationships and the effectiveness of parental discipline.

The online program, the eNew Beginnings Program (eNBP), was adapted by researchers Sharlene A. Wolchik and Irwin Sandler from their in-person group program for parents that reduced the mental health problems, drug and alcohol use, and risky sexual behavior of children from divorced families. The program also improved children’s self-esteem, grades, coping, and work competence. Several of the positive changes lasted up to 15 years after the program ended: When the offspring were young adults, they had lower rates of depression, substance use, and painful feelings about the divorce.

Despite the positive effects of the in-person program, few divorced parents could participate because it was expensive for agencies to offer. Moreover, parents faced practical barriers, such as travel, making time in their busy schedules, and finding child care.

Practical tools for parenting after divorce

To make the program affordable, more widely available, and easier for parents to use, Wolchik and Sandler adapted the in-person program into an online version. The eNBP is affordable, and parents can take part on their own time and in the comfort of their own homes. They need only a smartphone, computer, or tablet. The eNBP is a five-hour (20 to 30 minutes per session over 10 weeks) online program that includes all the material in the in-person version. Separate versions of the program were developed for divorced and separated fathers and for divorced and separated mothers.

The eNBP works by teaching parents practical tools to strengthen positive relationships with their children, create and use family rules that reduce the hassles often associated with discipline, and decrease the level of conflict with the other parent (i.e., the ex-partner). The program teaches these tools in a step-by-step, highly interactive way.

For example, sessions begin with a check-in when parents respond to questions about their use of the program tools and are provided with ways to address the challenges they experienced using them. This is followed by teaching a new tool using modeling videos, interactive exercises, and testimonials from prior participants.

The eNBP then prompts parents to set times to use the tool, identify barriers to using it, and select strategies to reduce these barriers. Parents receive downloadable tip sheets on how to address common challenges in using the tools, sheets to record their use of the tools, and handbooks that summarize what was covered in the session.

Photo: Tatiana Syrikova. Pexels.

Positive impacts of the online program on parents and children

The effectiveness of the eNBP was evaluated using the gold standard of program evaluation, a randomized controlled trial. One hundred thirty-one parents were randomly given access to the program or assigned to a waiting list. Parents were recruited from across the United States. Of the parents, 78% were non-Hispanic White, 8% were Hispanic, and 14% were of another race/ethnicity. Parents had various levels of education: 1% had less than GED or high school diploma, 14% a GED or high school diploma, 17% an associate degree, 29% some college or vocational training, and 39% a bachelor’s degree or higher. Annual income ranged from $10,000 to $175,000 (median = $30,001–$40,000). Parents were on average 41 years old; 60% were female. Children averaged 13 years old; 48% were female.

After completing the program, both parents and their children provided information about its effects. Parents and children reported that the program improved the quality of parent-child relationships, increased effective discipline, and reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression in the children. Both parents and children also reported reduced conflict between parents.

The program was equally effective when used by mothers and fathers. The improvements noticed by the children increase confidence in the study’s findings because the children did not take part in the program.

The improvements from the online program were as strong or stronger than those that resulted from the original in-person program, which has had remarkable effects in three randomized controlled trials. The program developers think this may be due to the high level of interactivity of the online program and the ease of using it.

The rate of program completion was also higher for the online than for the in-person program. Among the parents who completed the first session, only 16% finished the in-person version (Sandler et al., 2020), whereas 60% finished the eNBP. Parents were very satisfied with the program. Most felt that it helped them and helped their relationships with their children. And more than 80% of the parents said that family courts should recommend that divorcing or separating parents complete the eNBP.

Who can use the online divorce program?

The program is available in two formats, a 6-week program and a 10-week program. The same material is included in both formats; the 10-week program allows parents more practice and provides them with more feedback about the skills that are taught. The 6-week version is appropriate for those who are taking part in the program to fulfill a parenting class required by the court.

Family courts can use the eNBP in several ways. Family court judges, mediators, and attorneys can use the program as a tool to protect the well-being of children whose parents experience high conflict or are having difficulty developing a parenting plan.

Mental health practitioners can use the program in their work with individual clients. Parents could complete a session at home and then when meeting with the practitioner, the practitioner could address questions and help the parents solve any problems they had using the tools.

In summary, the eNBP is an effective research-based resource for fathers and mothers who want to protect their children following a divorce. It is easy to access and parents enjoy the program, as shown in these comments by parents who took part in the eNBP:

“It got me and my children closer to each other.”

“It was exactly what I needed.”

“There are several tools I used immediately that my kids are big fans of.”

Parents can directly access the program at www.divorceandparenting.com.

The post An online program for divorced parents can improve parent-child relationships, as well as children’s anxiety and symptoms of depression appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Put simply, gentle parenting  is placing a greater value on parent’s understanding and sensitivity instead of traditional punishments. The three primary components of a Gentle Parenting approach are Empathy, understanding and respect.

Read on to gain a comprehensive understanding from our author, Liza Ware.

Introduction

Gentle parenting is a parenting philosophy first made popular by Sarah Ockwell-Smith in The Gentle Parenting Book. The term is sometimes used synonymously with mindful parenting, respective parenting, and other positive parenting approaches. Although not identical, these approaches share common features—they emphasize parents’ sensitivity and understanding instead of strict discipline or harsh punishment, with the goal of helping children develop independence, confidence, self-regulation, and happiness. Gentle parenting is essentially equivalent to what developmental scientists refer to as the authoritative parenting style, an approach shown to be most ideal for healthy child development.

Gentle parenting involves a two-way partnership between parent and child, where the parent is neither too hands-off nor too controlling. Parents respond to their child’s needs and set boundaries and demands that align with the child’s developmental level. The parents encourage positive behavior – such as kindness, respect, and emotional self-regulation – by modelling it themselves.

The three primary components of the gentle parenting approach

• Empathy – Putting yourself in your child’s shoes to understand what needs or emotions are causing their behavior. For example, a tantrum might be caused by hunger, fatigue, schedule changes, transitions, or a need to spend more time with you.
• Understanding – Considering your child’s needs and behavior in the context of their developmental level, such as behavioral and emotional maturity. For example, while throwing oneself on the floor and sobbing may not be how an adult responds to frustration, it is more acceptable for young children because their abilities to regulate their emotions are limited.
• Respect – Treating your child how you would want to be treated. Parents focus on teaching and guiding, rather than dictating. They avoid commanding, criticizing, punishing, or forbidding. Instead of yelling or saying “no,” a parent might calmly suggest an alternative or explain why behavior is problematic (e.g., “When you throw sand at someone, it can hurt them and they might get upset. Can you practice throwing sand in this bucket instead?”).

By implementing these components, gentle parents aim to help their children feel validated in their thoughts and feelings, learn how to self-regulate, and develop independence and confidence in their ability to navigate daily tasks and problems.

Photo: Jupilu. Pixabay.

Gentle parents and discipline

Gentle parenting is not a discipline-free or boundaryless approach. Like authoritative parenting, gentle parenting is a middle ground between permissive parenting, where discipline is lax and the child has more control, and authoritarian parenting, where discipline is strict and the parent is in control. Control and consistency are critical components of gentle parenting, but they are coupled with empathy, understanding, and respect. This strikes a disciplinary balance that incorporates the child and fosters parent-child communication and connection.

Gentle parenting discipline (or authoritative discipline) involves setting age-appropriate boundaries with the goal of teaching children acceptable and regulated behavior. Gentle parents provide behavioral and emotional guidance while also fostering autonomy and independence. For example, they communicate the rationale for boundaries or rules at a level the child can understand, and they allow room for a reasonable amount of discussion, negotiation, and compromise. Gentle parenting does not include negative discipline, such as scolding, yelling, coercion, expressing disappointment, or any form of corporal punishment.

Does gentle parenting work?

The term gentle parenting has become a catch-all term for positive parenting approaches but its effectiveness for child development has not been directly studied. However, child development research has provided decades of evidence in favor of the authoritative parenting style as well as parenting behaviors that relate to the components of gentle parenting.

Research on parental empathy

• Parental empathy is critical for building secure attachment, which is a healthy emotional bond between parent and infant. Infants with secure attachment sense that their caregiver is available and responsive to their needs. This promotes feelings of safety and security, emotional self-regulation, and confidence and autonomy in exploring the world. Infants with insecure attachment typically face challenges in these developmental areas and demonstrate anxiety or avoidance in social interactions. Sensitive and responsive parenting helps build secure attachment, such as consistently and warmly responding to a baby’s cries and gestures. In contrast, insecure attachment is associated with inconsistent and insensitive parenting.
• One especially important component of caregiver sensitivity is mind-mindedness – behaviors that acknowledge and interpret an infant’s internal mental states. For example, during play, a mind-minded caregiver uses the child’s actions to infer their interest or boredom with a toy and might comment on their mental states (e.g., as the child reaches for a ball, the parent might say, “Oh, do you like playing with this ball?”). Thus, secure attachment depends on parental empathy for the child’s needs, thoughts, and emotions.
• Parental empathy also supports the development of social competence and prosocial behaviors. Maternal attention to toddlers’ mental states is linked to lower aggression and greater empathy. Positive impacts of parental empathy are also evident in school-aged children, helping reduce negative emotions like anger.
• Importantly, the benefits of parental empathy involve validating both positive and negative emotions. Minimizing or punishing a child’s feelings, even negative emotions likes anger, sadness, or fear, can lead to issues with social competence, difficulties coping with distress, and aggression.

Research on parents’ understanding

• Parents may find it daunting to understand child development because there is certainly a lot to know! A critical factor in the developmental timetable is brain development. As the brain develops from birth through adolescence (and even into young adulthood), children and youth become increasingly better at emotional regulation and impulse control. Especially important is the development of effortful control during the toddler and preschool years, a child’s capacity to voluntarily direct and regulate their attention and behavior, inhibiting and activating responses as needed and appropriate. For example, effortful control is evident when a child stops themselves from hitting a peer when they feel angry or pays attention to the teacher despite distracting conversation from nearby peers.
• As with most aspects of development, both “nature” and “nurture” influence brain developments leading to improvements in control and self-regulation. Biological factors, such as genetics and maturation, play a key role. Therefore, parents need to match expectations regarding behavioral and emotional regulation to their child’s developmental level. Much as one would not expect a young infant to walk or talk due to developmental immaturity, a young child (and even a teenager) should not be expected to readily manage their emotions and behaviors.
• Environmental factors also play a critical role in shaping childhood brain development. Sensitive (i.e., gentle or authoritative) parenting, and opportunities for play and educational activities that support autonomy and control (e.g., games that involve taking turns), are associated with greater advances in self-control.
• Thus, parental understanding involves both knowing what should be expected at their child’s age and what they can do to support and encourage their child’s development.

Research on parental respect

• Parental respect is at the core of authoritative parenting because it involves balancing warmth and responsiveness with discipline and demands. Children learn in a safe and supportive context where their individuality and voice are respected. Authoritative parenting has long been viewed as the gold standard of parenting styles and is associated with many positive developmental outcomes. Parenting that is either too too harsh (authoritarian) or lenient (permissive/indulgent) places children at risk for emotional and behavioral issues, such as substance use and internalizing symptoms (e.g., anxiety, withdrawal).
• One effective authoritative parenting strategy is inductive discipline, which involves explanation and discussion rather than punishment. For example, a parent might use age-appropriate language to explain to a young child why they should not hit their sibling: “Ow, that hurts your sister. Use gentle hands, please.” Inductive discipline can involve helping the child identify alternative behaviors (e.g., “When you’re mad you can squeeze your hands into a ball or stomp your feet instead of hitting your sister”) or asking them to explain the causes of their behavior (e.g., “Are you angry because she took your toy?”). Negotiation can also be included to acknowledge the child’s feelings and promote autonomous decision making (e.g., “Would it be okay if you gave your sister a turn when you’re done playing with the toy?”).
• Inductive discipline provides consistent structure and expectations, coupled with warmth and guidance, to help build self-awareness and self-control. As such, inductive discipline is associated with behavioral, social, and academic adjustment and promotes prosocial behavior, such as empathy.

Photo: Family Equality. Creative Commons.

How to practice gentle parenting

The gentle parenting components of empathy, respect, and understanding and the authoritative balance of responsiveness and demandingness (i.e., parental warmth and sensitivity coupled with a reasonable degree of control and discipline) create a foundation that can be applied to a variety of specific parenting situations. Gentle parenting focuses on acknowledging and supporting a child’s thoughts and emotions and offering them behavioral and coping tools. Gentle parents establish consistent rules and routines but are flexible and willing to compromise within reason.

Gentle parenting example

For example, imagine a child frequently asks to watch or engage with different screen media, getting upset when not allowed to do so, and the parent is questioning how much screen time to allow. A gentle parent might empathize with their child’s interest in screen media, gain a better understanding of media recommendations from experts (e.g., quantity and quality guidelines, parent monitoring and controls), and work with the child to develop a media schedule and plan that meets the child’s needs and the parent’s guidelines. This might include a plan for turning off screens when designated media time is over to promote regulated responses during this schedule transition (e.g., using a visible timer or 5-minute warning to avoid tantrums or demands for more viewing time).

The parent might also consider how to maximize screen-free time by building in family activities, encouraging outdoor time, and offering other enriching activities that help promote parent-child connection and child development. The gentle parent might periodically review and adapt the media plan as the child develops or other situations arise.

Avoiding punishment and not relying on rewards

Just as gentle parenting avoids using punishment, it also does not rely heavily on rewards. External material rewards, such as a small prize, are generally ineffective and actually reduce the likelihood of the behavior the parent means to encourage. Rewards undermine intrinsic motivation, or the child’s desire to engage in a behavior because it is inherently enjoyable or beneficial. For example, rewarding prosocial behavior like sharing makes the child less likely to perform that behavior in the future.

Using positive reinforcement

In lieu of rewards, gentle parenting naturally provides positive reinforcement through affection, warmth, connection, and gentle encouragement. Parents can also reinforce and praise in ways that help build self-confidence, self-regulation, and prosocial attitudes. In particular, process praise (e.g., “You were really working hard on that puzzle!”) is more effective than person praise (“You are so good at puzzles!”). Process praise provides specific feedback that helps children understand how to approach and persist in a task. Person praise, like material rewards, can reduce intrinsic motivation and teaches children that their self-worth depends on whether they do a “good job.”

Gentle parenting as a long-term approach

Importantly, any effective parenting approach requires patience, persistence, and flexibility. Gentle parenting is not a magic wand that will instantaneously alter child behavior. Parenting is a long game, and child development and learning require lots of repetition. Parents also evolve and adapt their parenting over time. Understanding your child as they go through different developmental stages requires continuous education. Gentle parents do not need to know everything about their child’s development at the start, but they are committed to learning and adapting with their child.

Photo: Pexels. Pixabay.

Challenges and limitations of the gentle parenting style

1. Focuses mostly on young children

One limitation of the popular literature on gentle parenting is that it focuses mostly on parenting young children (from birth to seven years) in areas of social and emotional development, with some discussion of physical development (e.g., feeding practices). However, research on authoritative parenting is extensive and demonstrates its application and benefits for school-aged children and adolescents. For example, gentle parents might have rules about household chores, curfews, peer and dating relationships, and so on, but adapt them to their child’s developmental level, discuss their rationale with the child, and consider the child’s input in establishing and modifying them.

Authoritative parenting has also been shown to benefit other areas of development, particularly cognition, learning, and academic achievement. Authoritative parents guide and scaffold learning as appropriate for their child’s age and avoid taking over or providing too much direction. In so doing, they promote independent exploration and problem solving.

2. May not apply to all children

An important question to ask of any parenting method is whether it applies to all children in all contexts. Literature on the gentle parenting approach includes minimal discussion of its effectiveness across individual or situational factors, but again, research on authoritative parenting provides insight. One child-specific factor to consider is a child’s temperament, which varies on several dimensions, such as fearfulness, emotional reactivity, and effortful control. Authoritative parenting is effective regardless of temperament, especially benefitting children with more “difficult” temperaments.

Nevertheless, the relationship between parenting and temperament is complex. It can vary depending on other factors, such as children’s gender or genetic predispositions, and can include bidirectional effects, with children’s behavior influencing parenting. For example, a child with high levels of negative emotionality (e.g., one who is easily frustrated or fearful) is more likely to elicit controlling parenting as parents try to contain or direct the child’s emotions. Consequently, adopting and maintaining a particular parenting style may unfold differently depending on child and family dynamics.

3. Can vary across socioeconomic and cultural contexts

Similarly, parenting can vary across socioeconomic and cultural contexts. Some research shows that the authoritative style is beneficial for child development across sociocultural contexts. However, authoritative parenting is somewhat of an anomaly that is found mostly in Western cultures. Authoritarian parenting is the norm in many Eastern cultures and among U.S. families of ethnic or racial minority or lower socioeconomic status. Questions about what is the “best” style must therefore consider the relevance of cultural values (e.g., respect for authority) and environmental factors (e.g., neighborhood safety).

The goals and values of the authoritative parenting style may also lead to different parenting behaviors in different sociocultural contexts. For example, imposing a strict curfew may be overly controlling (authoritarian) in one context but appropriately protective (authoritative) in another. Thus, when assessing parenting effectiveness or educating parents about gentle or authoritative parenting, it is important to consider how social contexts and culture may influence parenting style and practices.

4. Can increase pressure on the parent

Finally, a challenge for any parent is allowing mistakes and avoiding pressure to be the “perfect” parent. Some situations might naturally call for temporarily strict parenting, such as quickly pulling your toddler out of harm’s way when they are about to touch a hot flame or step onto a busy street. Explanation and discussion can be used after the event to incorporate gentle parenting. Parents may also find themselves wavering from gentle parenting in non-emergency situations, such as after a stressful day.

Instead of seeing this as faulty parenting, it can be viewed as an opportunity to reassess and adapt as needed. The parent may need to practice self-care to reduce stress, identify opportunities for co-parenting, or locate educational resources to learn more about their child’s behaviors and needs at their current age and adapt parenting as appropriate. Just as your child is developing, allow yourself the room to develop as a parent and acknowledge that parenting is a skill that can be honed over time.

Photo: Phinehas Adams. Unsplash.

Conclusion

Ample research supports the benefits of authoritative parenting and gentle parenting methods. However, parenting is complex, and a parent’s style and how they apply that style may differ depending on factors specific to the individual child or situation. Work in this area is still ongoing as researchers continue to ask new questions and acquire additional knowledge about parenting. Like the researcher who continues to uncover new information, gentle and authoritative parents are guided by a core style but continue to learn and adapt as their child develops and different situations arise along their parenting journey.

The post What is gentle parenting and is it good for children? appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

“That is not fair!” Any parent or teacher knows how early in children’s lives this notion drives human behavior, motivation, and belonging. When children feel they are treated fairly, they develop a sense of safety and predictability, and find reason to comply with rules and legitimize authorities. Parents and teachers are justice gatekeepers in children’s lives. How they handle conflict and discipline shapes children’s expectations of justice in other settings.

Most children and adolescents do not have direct contact with legal authorities, such as police or judges. However, one of the ways they build their perspectives is based on the justice they have grown to expect from closer authorities. Data from a diverse group of 680 Brazilian adolescents revealed that parents’ justice at home and their evaluations of school fairness predicted how adolescents perceived their personal access to justice and the justice of the world at large. Furthermore, adolescents’ world views of justice predicted how much they legitimized the law and avoided delinquent behaviors the following year.

It is easy to think about justice as simply getting what you deserve, but that bypasses one of the more powerful cognitions of justice – the process of justice. Procedural justice considers the respect, neutrality, voice, and fairness of the authority’s actions. A child may not agree that she should be disciplined for her dishonesty, but if the parent is respectful, explains the rules, and listens to the child, she is more likely to continue respecting her parents’ authority, despite her frustration. The point is not to be lenient, but to emerge on the other side with your child’s respect so that, even when consequences are firm, the child experiences the safety and predictability of justice.

“How parents and teachers handle conflict and discipline shapes children’s expectations of justice in other settings.”

It is vital that children experience justice and come to expect it. Harsh punishments or rules without explanation do not feel fair, and chip away at the legitimacy youth attribute to authorities at large – and that illegitimacy makes them vulnerable to future delinquency.

When you find out your child has done something wrong, do you:

• Listen to their side of the story?
• Talk to them politely?
• Explain why you are disciplining them?

Youth should be given the chance to articulate their perspective and practice civil dialogue in common daily scenarios. When children are consistently given a chance to explain their perspective and be respected by the authorities they know, they will anticipate and even demand to be given the same rights in society.

The world is not a fair place, and failing to expose injustice underprepares children at best, and leads them to blame the victims or be the victims at worst. The goal is not to have children believe the world is fair, but is to make their lives fair so they can be equipped with the courage to engage in positive civic behaviors and avoid fatalistic mindsets.

“We want to raise children to speak up and expect to be heard and understood.”

We want to raise children who are equipped for the challenges of the world. Doing so begins by providing a safe haven at home and at school, where they can learn to connect their actions to outcomes and to be outraged by, not cynical of, injustice. We want them to have good reasons to legitimize their authorities. We want to raise children to speak up and expect to be heard and understood. We must model for them the kind of justice we want them to demand from society.

The post The Justice Gatekeepers for our Children appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Research has shown that harsh physical parenting has a negative effect on children’s behavior and potential educational achievements.

Research has consistently shown that children who are physically disciplined by their parents, such as getting hit or slapped, have more externalizing problems (like aggression) and more disruptive behaviors in the classroom. Their academic performance is also lower than that of children who are not physically disciplined. Even in studies that do not focus on physical punishment, children who behave in problematic ways in the classroom tend to do less well academically, in general, than their peers.

However, this research raises the proverbial chicken-and-egg question: Does disruptive behavior in the classroom interfere with the learning process? Or do learning challenges lead children to act out? For example, when children act out in school, they are sometimes separated from other children and removed from the classroom, which may give them  fewer opportunities to learn. Under this scenario, which has been referred to as the adjustment erosion hypothesis, negative behavior comes first, followed by academic challenges. An alternative idea, called the academic incompetence hypothesis, suggests that when children have difficulties learning, they can become disruptive, perhaps out of frustration.

“We found that children who were physically  disciplined by their parents in kindergarten had more externalizing problems in first grade, slower rates of literacy learning from K-8, and ultimately, lower overall literacy skills by eighth grade.”

Many studies lack the data to determine when problems start, how children’s behavior changes over time, or even if these challenges start as a result of disciplining practices at home. To examine these questions, my colleagues and I conducted a study, focusing on children’s literacy as an important indicator of academic performance. Literacy is the foundation for acquiring knowledge, especially as children shift from learning to read to reading to learn.

We analyzed data from a large U.S. sample that tracked children from kindergarten through eighth grade. While controlling for factors that have also been associated with children’s behavior and learning, such as socioeconomic status and parents’ education, we found that children who were physically disciplined more frequently by their parents in kindergarten had more externalizing problems in first grade, slower rates of literacy learning from K-8, and ultimately, lower overall literacy skills by eighth grade when compared to children whose parents did not use physical discipline early on. Our findings  support the adjustment erosion hypothesis and show that parents’ physical discipline practices have long-lasting, cascading effects on children’s behavior and learning.

Why might physical discipline in early childhood lead to children’s problem behavior and lower literacy over time? As children transition into a new educational system, as they do when they start kindergarten, they may be particularly vulnerable to the challenges at home. We know from a number of studies that in times of stress or change, children need support. If parents are sensitive to their children’s needs, and offer a supportive and predictable caregiving environment, children feel comforted, safe, and less stressed.

They also regulate their feelings better, meaning that when a child gets distressed, as all children do, they are better at recovering from their negative feelings. However, if children are parented harshly or inconsistently, they can feel unsettled, and this adds to the stresses they are already experiencing. When some children feel heightened levels of stress, they act out. Moreover, when children are hit by their parents, it signals to them, even unintentionally, that aggression is a way to control others. So harsh discipline in the home may set up children to struggle with getting along in the classroom environment and ultimately, with learning important skills such as reading.

We also know from our research that promoting a positive environment at home should start as early as possible. Early in infancy, when children are so dependent on support, they need a safe and responsive caregiving environment. For example, when babies are very young and cry, they are signaling that something does not feel right. Caregivers need to respond by picking them up and trying to figure out what they need. Babies cannot be spoiled by caregivers responding their needs.

“Promoting a positive environment at home should start as early as possible.”

As children get older, they start to test limits and boundaries. Sometimes they engage in behaviors that could harm themselves or others. Parents can learn strategies that are more authoritative in which they set clear boundaries (e.g., telling that that “it is not okay to push your sibling”), teach them better ways to regulate their feelings (e.g., using words, not physical force), and provide comfort when children are distressed. Using more authoritarian methods such as hitting a child to “teach them the rules” may work in the short term but does not work over time.

Early parenting behaviors are important for children to help them feel safe, learn how to explore safely, and regulate their feelings so they do not resort to acting out at home or in the classroom. Promoting better ways for children to manage their behavior can also help them in the learning environment, which can set them up for success.

The post Physical punishment has a cascading effect on children’s behavioral problems and literacy appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Research shows that parents’ legitimacy increases when they set rules based on morality and safety. Constructive practices are more effective than harsh ones.

As children move into their preteen years, they increasingly differentiate between rules and obey the ones they think are legitimate. One of the most promising ways to bolster parents’ legitimacy is to treat children fairly.

Negative Impacts of Punishment

Parents often try to make their children comply with rules through punishments, but in our study, parental practices of procedural justice predicted obedience more strongly than did punishments. Procedural justice practices include allowing children to give their side of the story, explaining to them why they are being reprimanded, and talking politely.

“Research shows that parents’ legitimacy increases when they are fair judges.”

The study assessed a diverse group of 697 Brazilian 11-, 12-, and 13-year-olds once a year for three years. Disciplinary practices were classified into constructive practices (e.g., removing privileges, reprimanding verbally, grounding) and harsh practices (e.g., threatening, physically punishing , yelling). Harsh practices actually increased disobedience, possibly because they diminished perceived parental legitimacy. In other words, when parents punished their children harshly, instead of promoting obedience, it made the parents look less credible.

Parents often try to make their children comply with rules through punishments

This study also allowed children to differentiate between issues. It is well established that, as children develop, they discriminate between domains over which parents have authority and grant more legitimacy to issues of safety and morality than to issues of convention or personal preference. In the study, the children were presented with 10 common household rules and asked if it was legitimate for their parents to have that rule. The issues with the highest legitimacy across all three years were substance use and truth telling. The issues that declined the most in legitimacy were media use, curfews, homework, and dating. And the strongest predictor of individual obedience was issue-specific legitimacy. Thus, children obeyed the rules over which they thought their parents had legitimate authority.

The study also asked about parents’ global legitimacy, in other words, whether youth thought their parents had the right to make the rules and whether they trusted their parents to make the right decisions. Youth’s evaluations of global legitimacy also strongly predicted their obedience.

“One of the most promising ways to bolster parents’ legitimacy is to treat children fairly.”

Prior research has established that authorities with high levels of procedural justice are typically legitimized. In other words, if your child thinks you are a fair judge, he or she may obey you because he or she sees you as a legitimate authority figure. However, harsh disciplinary strategies may backfire for the same reasons. Instead of eliciting a healthy fear, they may unintentionally undermine parental legitimacy.

So, for your children to obey you, based on this study, you should:

• Avoid harsh discipline because it tends to backfire in the long term.
• Emphasize procedural justice (hear youth’s perspective, be polite, provide explanation).
• Stick to issues of morality and safety – it may be a losing battle to enforce other rules.

Published on 31/01/2021

Updated on 05/02/2024

The post How to make your child to obey you appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Research shows that hitting children of kindergarten age harms their literacy skills through eighth grade.

A detailed statistical analysis of data collected from over 21,000 children in the United States  sheds new light on how harsh parental physical discipline during the kindergarten years can lead to reduced literacy in the subsequent eight years. Literacy is important because reading is a foundation of learning: Children learn to read and they need to read to learn.

Children with parents who frequently use physical discipline when the children are of kindergarten age are more likely to exhibit externalizing behaviors (e.g., aggression, acting out) in first grade, and such behaviors are likely to interfere with subsequent literacy development through eighth grade. In other words, the link between harsh parenting and reduced literacy skills can be explained by the fact that children who are hit are more likely to behave disruptively at school, which impedes their learning to read.

Based on this finding, the authors make three recommendations.

• Researchers should investigate more closely how teachers respond to children who act out in class to see how this results in reduced learning on the part of the child.
• Teachers and others who support parents should inform them about the negative effects of harsh discipline on children’s socioemotional development and subsequent impairment of literacy skills. They should teach parents alternative forms of discipline, such as setting limits, providing reminders about rules, and explaining the consequences of behavior, all of which are correlated with prosocial behavior and empathy.
• Education policy makers and managers should ensure that educators target the whole child by addressing their socioemotional learning, too.

The data in this analysis were drawn from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Kindergarten class of 1998-1999 (ECLS-K). The nationally representative cohort consisted of 21,260 children from 944 kindergarten programs in the United States. Children’s externalizing and internalizing were assessed by asking teachers to rate the children. Literacy skills were directly measured by assessing the children. Parental discipline was assessed via a questionnaire that asked parents about discipline, warmth, and emotional supportiveness.

The picture from earlier research

 Research has shown a correlation between harsh parenting and reduced language comprehension, reduced vocabulary, and poorer reading in children. But how this happens has been unclear.

Harsh parenting – for example, shouting, threatening, shaming, spanking, slapping, pushing, or hitting with an object – is clearly linked to impaired social and emotional development in children. This kind of parenting is also correlated with more aggression, hostility, and disruptive behavior on the part of children.

This kind of behavior in children is also linked to less optimal academic performance. The hypothesis with the strongest evidence to explain this is the adjustment erosion hypothesis; it holds that impulsivity, hostility, and other such behaviors disrupt learning. These behaviors can even lead to children being excluded completely from the classroom or school. An alternative hypothesis – that academic incompetence comes first and leads to disruptive behavior — is not backed as strongly by evidence, especially in the early school years. However, influences in both directions do seem to exist.

This new statistical analysis confirms these associations, going further than previous research to find a correlation between harsh parenting during the kindergarten years and decreased literacy skills eight years later.

In this study, children’s externalizing symptoms in first grade completely mediated the relation between parents’ physical discipline in kindergarten and the development of literacy between kindergarten and eighth grade. In addition, children’s externalizing symptoms in first grade partially mediated the relation between parents’ physical discipline in kindergarten and children’s eighth-grade literacy levels.

The post Hitting children leads to reduced literacy skills throughout their childhood appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Scientific Evidence Is Easily Sidelined By Parental Beliefs & Displaced By Critical Anecdotes On The Internet

Near-scientific consensus that physical punishment has negative effects on children has led to interest in how to educate parents about its potential harms. Efforts to reduce parents’ use of physical punishment, often called spanking, with young children through on-line education are likely to succeed only if they directly address parents’ beliefs.

This is what we learned from an experiment we undertook to examine how parents who approve of physical punishment remain committed to spanking even after being shown scientific evidence linking the practice to many negative effects for children, including aggression and mental health issues. The study, of parents of 2- to 8-year-olds from 41 U.S. states, was published in the Journal of Family Psychology.

Discomfort Makes Parents Mistrust Science

In our study, parents were given written scientific evidence about spanking in the form of an on-line news article, which included quotes from an expert on physical punishment. They also received written opinions from lay commentators who advocated for physical punishment. Parents who approved of physical punishment rated experts as less trustworthy than lay commentators, thereby avoiding the psychological challenge and discomfort – often called cognitive dissonance — that occurs when beliefs contradict scientific evidence. They may do this by questioning the trustworthiness of the science and preferring alternative perspectives that fit their views.

“Parents do not discount all science related to parenting, just science that conflicts the views they hold.”

However, in our study, parents who approved of physical punishment were not anti-science in principle. Their distrust of science was specific to this topic. For example, parents had no trouble valuing messages from experts on a neutral topic — the importance of car seats for children — even when they had discounted the expert on physical punishment. These findings suggest that parents do not discount all science related to parenting, just science that conflicts the views they hold.

Photo: Average Joe. Creative Commons.

Findings Suggest More Workable Approaches

The Internet has become a leading source of information for parents around the world. Our study helps us understand why efforts to significantly reduce spanking by disseminating information on-line about the dangers of physically punishing children may prove difficult without directly addressing common misperceptions about physical punishment. First, the on-line world makes it very easy for users to avoid information that contradicts what they already believe. Second, it gives users competing lay and pseudo-scientific commentary that can confirm existing views in what are often referred to as echo chambers.

The good news is that parents who approve of physical punishment don’t distrust science per se — they are generally open to scientific findings, as the comparison involving child car seats showed. However, it is easy for parents to discount scientific findings when they can easily find others on-line who validate their support for practices such as physical punishment.

Paediatricians Can Be Influential

Given the challenges of on-line parent education, a more productive way to educate parents about the harms of physical punishment may be to do so through experts they already trust, such as their children’s pediatricians. Pediatricians are widely trusted by parents. In the United States and Canada, they are encouraged to offer anticipatory guidance – a type of proactive counselling on childrearing topics such as children wearing bicycle helmets and ensuring that guns are stored safely — even if parents don’t raise the issue. The risks of physical punishment should be a subject that is frequently discussed with parents, along with suggestions for disciplinary methods to use instead of physical punishment. Pediatricians say the best time to discuss this is when children are infants so parents can reflect on the options available long before their children misbehave. However, pediatricians are not always trained for the task and may need advice on how best to raise these issues and participate in these discussions.

Beliefs Underpin Parental Resistance To Science

At some level, most parents who physically punish their young children believe in the practice. Some use this kind of punishment because their parents used it on them and they believe it worked. Some see it is as a last resort, when parents feel they have no other option. They may feel they need spanking in their toolbox to drive their message home on occasion. Simply telling parents not to hit their children without providing a realistic and credible toolbox of alternatives is unlikely to win over converts. Experts may seem to be taking away parents’ last resort without offering them something they know will work in what can be a stressful situation. Also, if experts offer parents alternatives that seem too difficult or time consuming, parents may display solution aversion: When a solution is regarded as unworkable or too scary, people recoil from it and stick with what they know.

Tempting though it may be to simply rely on making scientific evidence about physical punishment widely available, to have a wider impact, we need more individualized approaches that address parents’ beliefs. Resistant parents are not intrinsically anti-science. But on the issue of spanking, they need workable options other than physical punishment. When the going gets tough, they need something they can really believe in.

The post Ending The Practice Of Spanking Young Children May Require More Individualized, Belief-Based Dialogue With Parents appeared first on Child and Family Blog.