A Michigan State University study finds 1 in 5 adults consciously choose not to have children, with no significant life regret reported among older child-free individuals compared to parents. This research challenges traditional perceptions of childlessness.
Obviously the economic aspect is significant here in terms of the constraints on would be parents.
But I often wonder about how much the “modern” culture of parenting and its beliefs in a fairly full time committed always on parenting approach are worth discussing.
One critique I can imagine is that it’s part of the hyper individualism of modern western culture in which everything is pushed onto the solo responsibilities of individuals rather than emphasising the need and value of cooperative and community based approaches to getting things done.
In the case of parenting, from what I’ve seen, a cooperative approach evolves naturally out of necessity, but leverages extended family members rather than communities. In which case it makes sense that anyone without a functioning extended family just can’t reasonably have children.
Another critique is that do children really benefit from constant supervision from their parents or is this something that’s more about parents assuaging some cultural guilt around being good/bad parents?
In response to the last point, yes. There is a lot of research supporting the importance of close parental bonds.
Asking young children to “self regulate” is literally impossible; children are not developmentally ready to self regulate or “self soothe”. Classical parenting (“Boomer parenting”) of ignoring kids and letting them figure things out and/or punishing dysregulation are damaging.
Digging into the last example a bit more, punishing dysregulation looks like sending a child for time out when they lose control and hit. Children don’t want to hurt others; that behaviour is a symptom of dysregulation, and they need an adult’s help to co-regulate, identify the instigating stressors that led to dysregulation, identify what feelings they are experiencing, and practice, practice, practice, practice co-regulation strategies hundreds or thousands of times until they are able to use those strategies independently.
By sending a child for time out, parents are abandoning children when they are most in need of attachment. This teaches children to mask their dysregulation and suppress their emotions.
This is just one example, but the bottom line is that yes, there is a lot of research supporting the value and benefit to being present and attentive to children’s needs, and being mindful about parental choices. (Doesn’t mean you won’t lose your shit as a parent and fuck up all the time, but you need to repair the relationship when it happens.)
If you want the long answer, I highly recommend Dr. Becky Kennedy’s book, “The Good Inside”. Or follow her on social media for regular “bite size” highlights. Even if you aren’t interested in parenting, it’s a fantastic book for unpacking your childhood traumas.
Thanks for this!!
I’ll probably check out Dr Kennedy.
Though I do feel some skeptical push-back might be warranted, especially at the intersection of my two points.
What proportion of parents can realistically execute something like what you/Kennedy advocate? I have a suspicion that it’s probably unsustainable for many, not just because of economic constraints but personal and psychological ones too. Without knowing anything about Kennedy’s work, I’d wonder how much their bias is that they’re the kind of person that becomes a psychologist with an interest in parenting and how much this bias gives them a blind spot about what many simply aren’t capable of or interested in.
In relation to my first point, I’d then begin to wonder how much Kennedy’s approach has problems in the way that it leans into the individual responsibilities of parents (which would also suit what looks like, from a quick Google, an approach involving selling books and having a social media presence … just saying) rather than any wider social and cultural factors worthy of consideration or change. Of course, perhaps Kennedy does address such points.
Which leads to the broader point about what parenting really is what it should be at a social and cultural scale. While I personally buy into what you describe here (and had already done so before I posted in this thread), I would fear that an emphasis on parents being solely responsible for the emotional development and well being of their children is a sure way to consign many children to poor emotional development no matter how clear and accessible the content/materials are for parents simply because of idiosyncrasies in the makeup of parents and the psychological “resonance” they have with their children.
Not just cultural guilt but fear of consequences. If you’re likely to get the authorities called on you for letting your kid go to the park down the street alone, or even play in your own front yard alone, it’s not really fair to say parents are choosing to be overly supervising