By Charlene Bainum
A Commentary on the Sabbath School Lesson for July 10—16, 2004
When I ask my students to compile a list of characteristics or traits they would like their children to possess, they enthusiastically respond with adjectives like "honest," "responsible," "witty," "smart," "thoughtful," and "patient." I then ask them if they themselves have these traits. Some students nod their heads and some shrug sheepishly. Invariably, someone will speak up and protest: "It’s not like our kids need an honesty gene from us. We can always teach them to be honest." I inquire how this might be done and their answers range from "pound it into them" to "by reward and example."
In the discussion that ensues, it becomes clear that, for them, teaching is equated with discipline. Ask anyone if the type of discipline one uses affects the development of certain traits and the answer is a resounding Yes. Other than anecdotal evidence, such as hearing our parent’s voices in the words that we speak to our children, is there any basis for this belief? Indeed yes, countless studies provide evidence for the power of parenting envisioned by the writer of Proverbs: "The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother" (Prov. 29:15).
The most widely supported view, put forth by Diana Baumrind, identifies four types of parental discipline styles, which lead to different types of children. According to Baumrind, the authoritarian parenting style, which is controlling, punitive, and cold, yields children who are dependent and hostile. The neglectful parenting style, which results when parents are overwhelmed with other aspects in their lives (such as work or personal crises) and are uninvolved and neglectful of their offspring, results in children who are immature, with poor self-control and susceptible to patterns of truancy and delinquency. The indulgent parenting style, which makes few demands on the child and is lax and inconsistent, results in children who might always expect to get their way and tend to be domineering, egocentric, and noncompliant. Finally, the authoritative style, with its high nurturance and firm, consistent limits provides the best outcome for an independent and responsible child.
One must be mindful of the cultural context of Proverbs lest we all run out to buy rods for correcting our children. In biblical times, slaves, wives, and children were lowly chattel to be controlled by beatings. Rather than supporting the authoritarian style with its use of physical punishment, we can interpret Proverbs 29:15 today as exhorting parents to use a consistent and caring discipline to train and nurture their children.
Many parents use the authoritative technique, yet we still find a generation of children who fail, for the most part, to exhibit responsibility. Few children independently choose to practice their musical instruments, tidy their rooms, or feed the cat. Even later, we find many college students who fail to practice honesty. I was unprepared for the finding when I surveyed my class recently and asked how many would cheat or had cheated on schoolwork. A surprising 73 percent replied in the affirmative. Unfortunately, these results mirror those found on other campuses.
A preschool teacher recounted to me recently how she had had to correct the language of a certain toddler who, after knocking over his milk, shouted obscene epithets. Several days later, the teacher overheard the mother of this child, as she rushed to her car because she was late to work, use the same language upon discovering that she had locked her keys in her car. Can we really expect a child to show self-control when we fail to exhibit impulse control in our own lives?
Mischel and Liebert (1966) demonstrated that the "do what I say, not what I do" role model is not particularly effective. When children are provided with a model who only preaches giving versus one who not only preaches giving but also gives, they were significantly more likely to give. Clear advice for us is found in Philippians 4:9, which states: "Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put into practice; and the God of peace will be with you" (NIV). Christ is our ultimate role model. As parents we need to follow his lead and teach by example when imparting to our children the values we desire them to hold.
Additionally, the portrait of human nature that we embrace will affect how we view our parental responsibilities. Steven Pinker’s (2002) carefully researched book, The Blank Slate, contends that the idea that children are born with minds that can be shaped and molded like silly putty distorts our understanding of parenting in which what we do influences what our children become. Further, Judith Rich Harris (1998) challenges modern developmental psychology and our own assumptions about parenting in her book, The Nurture Assumption, in which she argues convincingly that parents matter very little in the way children turn out. Her work, primarily on twins and adoptees, shows that although many of our adult characteristics, including intelligence and personality, depend on the genes we inherit and on our own unique childhood experiences, very little of these traits depend on our family upbringing (what behavior geneticists call the "shared environment").
Of equal importance, Harris maintains, is the influence of one’s peers. From her perspective, genes and peer influences matter more than in-home parenting style. No one is arguing that parents are not essential to a child’s physical and psychological development. Rather, a particular type of parenting (be it authoritative or permissive) may matter hardly at all for many of the traits we desire our children to manifest.
If Harris is right, the implications for us as parents are numerous. First, the idea that just any parent (controlling for socioeconomic status, neighborhood, cultural or subcultural group) could raise just any child is both liberating and threatening. We deserve less credit and less blame in the rearing of our children. We must not accept congratulations and take personal pride in our children’s successes if we understand the limits of parental influence. At the same time, we must not castigate the parents of those children who make frequent trips to the principal’s office.
Second, our biggest role in raising our children may be in selecting and paying close attention to their social environment. We can choose the neighborhood, the school, and the church in which our children are raised. We can oversee the media’s exposure to our children and help them to make critical choices when living in today’s sociocultural environment. In this way we nurture them through understanding and selecting the best socializing agents of our culture.
It is little wonder that the majority of youth problems occur during what are referred to as the "witching hours"—from the time school is out until parents come home from work. Even if the wrong peers are not socializing our children, the media, via the chat rooms, the computer games, the music and the movies, provides a social culture so potent that James Steyer has referred to it as the other parent and Ron Taffel calls it the second family.
Let us remember what the Psalmist said: "Lo, sons are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward" (Ps. 127:3). Children are indeed a gift and a blessing to which we have been entrusted by God. I believe he wants us to "train up a child in the way he should go" by modeling appropriate values, by supervising the social environment of our children, and by teaching our children to make wise choices. We are not censors of the media for we recognize our limitations and do not desire V-chip robots but young people who own their values. Rather, we teach and discuss and argue as we purvey the values of critical thinking to our children. After that, we must joyfully accept the person that develops as a bequest from Our Father.
Baumrind, D. "Rearing Competent Children." In Child Development Today and Tomorrow, ed., W. Damon. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1989.
Damon, W. Greater Expectations: Overcoming the Culture of Indulgence in our Homes and Schools. New York: Free Press Paperbacks, 1995.
Harris, J. R. The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way they Do. New York: Touchstone, 1998.
Mischel, W., and R. M. Liebert. "Effects of Discrepancies Between Observed and Imposed Reward Criteria on their Acquisition and Transmission." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 3 (1966): 45–53.
Pinker, S. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. New York: Viking, 2002.
Steyer, J. P. The Other Parent. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2002.
Taffel, R. Nurturing Good Children Now. New York: Golden Books, 1999.
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE
|
