Disciplining for the parent’s good
Both ends of the parenting styles debate can get this one wrong: disciplining for the convenience or preferences of the parent, rather than the good of the child.
Strict, authoritarian parents are accused of regimenting their children to make their own lives easier. By carefully controlling their children, they claim to bring joy to their home, instead of discord. But are they bringing joy to their children? What is their main goal?
On the other hand, gentle, attached parents can fall in love with their parenting style. They want a home where the parents always have calm, modulated voices, even when the children don’t. They can refuse to stop their children even when their children want and need stopping. Are they bringing joy to their children? What is their main goal?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
I think it would be good for every parent to consider whether or not they are “disciplining for the convenience or preferences of the parent, rather than the good of the child.”
I am an ap mom who strives to use gentle disciplne, and my voice is not always calm and modulated. I try to be real with my children, and to be respetful, and to treat them how I would want to be treated. And I fail miserably a lot of the time. I need to be clear, though, on this point — gentle moms are not saccharine sweet moms who never express their feelings.
And definitely it’s important for parents to set boundaries with their children, and to enforce those boundaries.