Parenting problems or being in control

I find that the interesting thing about parenting is that everyone has an opinion. This came to a head for me with the comments made by the UK leader (David Cameron) regarding parenting. It came across all 'Gung Ho' even though his country is one of the signatories on the UN convention on the rights of the child. But as with anything it seems that certain things create a polarity if thought and action, and a pity that it often revolves around an unruly child.

I find that at times it's easy to react rather than respond to unruly child situations. I distinguish react and respond as "responding occurs after some thought, and react simply happens". Being human we also have our own ups and downs and this colours or changes dramatically our usual reaction. Not much difference you might say, but I counter that it's the thought that counts. At the end of a long day hearing the high pitched squeal or yelling of a child or being on a short or long haul flight with a child in discomfort is not everyone's idea of a pleasant experience. Soon the mumbling over 'poor parenting' is heard. But is it really poor parenting? I suppose it depends on which side of the scream you are on!

The article in Macleans, gives a perspective to the frustrated onlooker's view of parenting. It appears that the author prefers the 'tiger parent' approach and I'm sure that is adopted in the household! Maybe this is where Mr Cameron gets his ideas, but I wonder if it also shows a lack of tolerance. A teen little own a pre-teen has not the brain structures in place to fully understand much in terms of social intelligence. The child has little control over his (or her) amydala and will quickly "see red" and have act accordingly. It is not until much later in life that they will begin to learn to control their urges and tantrums.  So why try to reason with a child? The idea of tolerance and being put out makes me consider who is really in need of help. The parents are showing restraint and tolerance and providing a role model for the child.  In many ways it is more difficult and challenging to adopt the 'softly-softly approach' than to allow the amydala to take over. 

Well it appears that acting this way has a much wider implications than a simple right or wrong decision implies. I do believe in well-being and positive education, and consider it one of the better advances in education for a while. I was reading an article by Professor Lea Waters from Melbourne University, and in her paper I see that the overall well-being of the child is dependent upon the actions of the parent in establishing the best environment for the child. The thing is that the paper provided real evidence and it was empirical in nature. It also goes on to suggest that it will reduce stress levels on the child, and thus also on the parents. Not ground breaking in many aspects, but at times a reminder is useful in re-enforcing our beliefs. 

However, there are many other things that we must take into account before simply. So the idea of judging the parenting of others is not really a necessary or good idea, and I hope that Mr Cameron realises that old adage concerning people, glass houses and rocks.