Benefits of strict parenting
The authoritative parenting style: An evidence-based guide
© 2010 – 2017 Gwen Dewar, Ph.D., all rights reserved
What is authoritative parenting?
The authoritative parenting style is an approach to child-rearing that combines warmth, sensitivity, and the setting of limits. Parents use positive reinforcement and reasoning to guide children. They avoid resorting to threats or punishments.
This approach is common in educated, middle class families, and linked with superior child outcomes throughout the world.
Kids raised by authoritative parents are more likely to become independent, self-reliant, socially accepted, academically successful, and well-behaved. They are also less likely to report depression and anxiety, and less likely to engage in antisocial behavior like delinquency and drug use.
And research suggests that having at least one authoritative parent can make a big difference (Fletcher et al 1999).
But what exactly sets the authoritative parenting style apart? How is it different from authoritarian parenting? How do experts decide if you’re an authoritative parent, or practicing some other parenting style? And why, exactly, do researchers think authoritativeness breeds success?
Here is an overview.
The authoritative parenting style: The original definition
The authoritative parenting style was first defined by Diane Baumrind, who proposed a new system for classifying parents. Her idea was to focus on the way parents attempted to control their kids (Baumrind 1966).
She recognized three major approaches to parental control:
- Permissive parents are reluctant to impose rules and standards, preferring to let their kids regulate themselves.
- Authoritarian parents demand a sort of blind obedience from their children.
- Authoritative parents take a different, more moderate approach that emphasizes setting high standards, being nurturing and responsive, and showing respect for children as independent, rational beings. The authoritative parent expects maturity and cooperation, and offers children lots of emotional support.
So what’s the main difference between authoritative parenting from permissive parenting?
Limit-setting.
Like permissive parents, authoritative parents are responsive, nurturing, and involved. But unlike permissive parents, authoritative parents don’t let their kids get away with bad behavior. Authoritative parents take a firm stand, expecting their kids to behave responsibly.
And what’s the difference between authoritative and authoritarian parenting?
It’s all about the exercise of power. Think of the authoritarian parent as a drill sergeant. Do it now, or else! The drill sergeant tries to get his way through threats and coercion.
By contrast, the authoritative parent aims to inspire cooperation by fostering positive feelings, and teaching kids the reasons for the rules.
Authoritative parents communicate lots of warmth to their kids. They avoid using harsh or arbitrary punishments. They are less likely to shame their kids, or attempt to control kids by withdrawing love.
And when their children make mistakes or misbehave, they talk with them about it.
They listen to their children’s concerns, and take them into account. They help kids figure out what went wrong, and explain the consequences of good and bad behavior.
So while they have similar-looking names, there is a big difference between authoritative and authoritarian parenting.
Authoritative parents aren’t just trying to enforce compliance. They recognize and encourage a child’s sense of autonomy. They want kids to develop self-discipline, maturity, and a respect for others. And they approach these goals by offering concrete advice and emotional support.
Summed up, some researchers have described it this way: Authoritative parents are highly demanding (like authoritarian parents), but they are also very responsive to their children’s needs (Maccoby and Martin 1983).
That’s the classic definition of the authoritative parenting style, and, using this definition, researchers have identified the authoritative parents throughout the world.
But not every authoritative parent runs his or her family the same way.
There is some important variation, particularly when it comes to how much of a “vote” children get during family decision-making.
It’s one thing to read a definition, and another to put it into practice. How can you tell if you are acting like an authoritative parent?
When researchers want to identify an individual’s parenting style, they often use a kind of rubric or questionnaire. For example, they may present a parent with a series of statements, and ask the parent to rate his or her agreement on a four-point scale (1= “almost never true”, 4 = “almost always true”).
Authoritative parents tend to agree with statements like these:
- I take my child’s wishes and feelings into consideration before I ask her to do something
- I encourage my child to talk about his feelings
- I try to help when my child is scared or upset
- I provide my child with reasons for the expectations I have for her
- I respect my child’s opinion and encourage him or her to express them…even if they are different from my own
And parents are judged to be less authoritative if they agree with these statements:
- I let my child get away with leaving chores unfinished
- I bribe my child to get him to comply with my wishes
- I explode in anger toward my child
- I punish my child by withdrawing affection
So this is a good guide to follow.
But authoritative parents are also good psychologists and problem-solvers. How do they talk with their kids? What tactics do they use to reason with children? How do they address their children’s emotional issues?
For help, see these evidence-based tips for implementing positive parenting practices.
But there isn’t any one, universally-accepted litmus test.
For example, the statements above might make it seem that you have to run your family like a mini-democracy in order to be authoritative. But that isn’t the case.
Or maybe you think that authoritative parenting sounds very strict. You might regard the statement about letting kids “get away with leaving chores unfinished” as evidence that authoritative parents must respond to every infraction by imposing a punishment.
Again, that’s not necessarily true.
As we’ll see below, the classic definition of authoritative parenting allows for variation in these areas. And different researchers have used different screening tools to decide who’s “authoritative.
”
For instance, researchers in Spain have reported that adolescents from permissive families are as well-behaved and academically successful as are teens from authoritative homes. The results contradict studies that link permissive parenting with inferior child outcomes. Could cultural differences account for the mixed results? Are some studies just wrong?
Maybe. But as I’ve argued elsewhere, it seems likely that the disagreement reflects differences in the wording of the questionnaires used to identify a parent’s style.
Alfonso Osario and his colleagues recently tested this idea, and found support for it. Once Spanish adolescents were evaluated with the same questionnaire used in the United States, authoritative care-giving was linked with the best child outcomes (Osario et al 2016).
Does authoritative parenting look the same in every family?
Not necessarily. For example, when researchers surveyed parents in four different countries — China, the United States, Russia, and Australia– they found an interesting pattern.
In the U.S. and Australia, authoritative parents were very likely to emphasize certain democratic practices, like taking a child’s preferences into account when making family plans, or encouraging a child to express his or her own opinions (Robinson et al 1997).
But in China and Russia, authoritative parents didn’t take their children’s preferences into account when making family plans. And most authoritative parents from China didn’t encourage kids to voice their own opinions — not if those opinions were in conflict with a parent’s views (Robinson et al 1996).
What, then, did authoritative parents have in common across all four countries?
One of the biggest common denominators concerned discipline.
Authoritative parents everywhere made it a point to reason with their children (Robinson et al 1997). When their children misbehaved, they talked with them, and explained the reasons for the rules. Let’s take a closer look.
How do authoritative parents discipline their kids?
It’s called “inductive discipline,” and there is evidence that it helps kids become more empathic, helpful, conscientious, and kind to others (Krevans and Gibbs 1996; Knafo and Plomin 2006).
It may also help prevent children from developing aggressive or defiant behavior problems (Choe et al 2013; Arsenio and Ramos-Marcuse 2014).
And inductive discipline may promote the development of morality (Patrick and Gibbs 2016).
But what is it, really? Inductive discipline is about teaching your child to think — constructively and non-selfishly — about how their behavior affects others.
The idea is that instead of trying to enforce good behavior through threats and punishments, you provide kids with the internal tools to regulate themselves:
Shaping behavior through reasoning.
For a very young child, this might mean simply explaining why she can’t touch something. That’s not for you! It’s too hot! It could burn you! But for older kids, it means talking with them — not at them — about the reasons for our policies and rules.
Emotion coaching.
What should your child do when he feels angry? Or sad? Or scared? Inductive discipline depends on your child’s ability to cope with strong emotions, so one facet of inductive discipline is being a good “emotion coach.
” Read tips about that here.
Emphasizing empathy and concern for others.
Inductive discipline focuses on the consequences of a child’s behavior for others. What happens when you shove your brother? How does it make him feel?
The goal of inductive discipline is to nurture a child’s intrinsic motivation to cooperate and behave with kindness (Xiao et al 2018; Xiao 2016).
Studies show that even very young children feel empathy, and want to be helpful. So we can help kids develop moral reasoning skills by talking with them about how our behavior impacts others. For more information, see these tips for fostering empathy in children.
Why do kids from authoritative families turn out so well?
Each component of the authoritative parenting style seems to have its own benefits.
As noted above, inductive discipline—explaining the reasons for rules—has been linked with more advanced moral reasoning skills (Krevans and Gibb 1996; Kerr et al 2004).
In addition, research suggests the following points.
1. Warm, responsive parenting promotes secure attachments, and protects kids from developing internalizing problems.
2. The children of authoritative parents are less likely than the children of authoritarian parents to engage in drug and alcohol use, juvenile delinquency, or other antisocial behavior (e.g., Lamborn et al 1991; Steinberg et al 1992; Querido et al 2002; Benchaya et al 2011; Luyckx et al 2011).
3. Talking with kids about thoughts and feelings may strengthen attachment relationships and make kids into better “mind readers.”
4. Parents who avoid reprimanding kids for intellectual mistakes (e.g., “I’m disappointed in you”) may have kids who are more resilient problem-solvers and better learners (Kamins and Dweck 1999; Schmittmann et al 2006; van Duijvenvoorde et al 2008).
5. Encouraging independence in kids is linked with more self-reliance, better problem solving, and improved emotional health (e.
g., Turkel and Tezer 2008; Rothrauff et al 2009; Lamborn et al 1991; Pratt et al 1988; Kamins and Dweck 1999; Luyckx et al 2011).
6. An authoritative approach to discipline may help prevent aggression and reduce peer problems in preschoolers (e.g., Choe et al 2013; Yamagata 2013).
7. Kids with warm, responsive parents are more likely to be helpful, kind, and popular.
The last point is illustrated by research conducted in the Netherlands. In this study, school kids were observed at home as they worked with their parents on a couple of puzzle tasks. Then researchers
- recorded how often parents uttered their disapproval or tried to take over the task,
- rated how often parents showed warmth, made suggestions, used induction (“What would happen if we tried this?”), or demanded mature behavior from their kids, and
- asked teachers and peers to rate each child’s social behavior.
The results are compelling.
Parents who behaved more authoritatively during the puzzle task had kids who were rated as more prosocial—helpful and kind—by their teachers and peers. The kids with authoritative parents were also more popular (Dekovic and Janssens 1992).
There is even evidence that kids from authoritative homes are more attuned with their parents and less influenced by their peers.
In a study of American students, undergraduates were presented with a series of moral problems and asked how they would solve them. Students from authoritative families were more likely than others to say that their parents–not their peers–would influence their decisions (Bednar and Fisher 2003).
But there are other factors, too.
It’s likely that the benefits of authoritative child-rearing are maximized when the whole community is organized along authoritative principles. For instance, when the school climate is authoritative, kids from authoritative families may find it easier to fit in (Pellerin 2004).
In addition, some studies have reported ethnic differences–that for African-American and Chinese-Americans, there is sometimes little or no difference in academic performance between kids from authoritarian and authoritative homes.
Why? Researchers have posed several different explanations, which you can read about in this article that contrasts the effects of authoritarian parenting with the effects of authoritative parenting.
Nevertheless, there is remarkable agreement across studies. From Argentina to China, from the United States to Pakistan, the authoritative parenting style is consistently associated with superior outcomes (Steinberg 2001).
As researcher Laurence Steinberg has stated, “I know of no study that indicates that adolescents fare better when they are reared with some other parenting style” (Steinberg 2001).
As of 2017, that still seems to be the case. In a recent analysis of 428 published studies, researchers compared child outcomes throughout the world.
For every region of the globe, they found that the authoritative parenting style was associated with at least one positive child outcome (Pinquart and Kauser 2017). By contrast, authoritarian parenting was linked with at least one negative child outcome (Pinquart and Kauser 2017). The authors conclude that the authoritative approach is worth recommending everywhere.
Looking for practical advice? See my evidence-based positive parenting techniques, as well as these tips for acting as your child’s “emotion coach.”
If you’re interested in reading more about how researchers identify parenting styles, check out this Parenting Science overview, which includes a discussion of Diane Baumrind’s original model.
For more information about the difference between authoritarianism and the authoritative parenting style, see my article, “Authoritarian parenting: What happens to the kids?”
And for help drawing the line between permissiveness and authoritative parenting, see this Parenting Science article about the permissive parenting style.
Interested in the research supporting responsive, sensitive parenting? See my article about the health benefits, as well as my overview of the science of attachment parenting.
In addition, read more about the importance of treating children as independent, thinking beings, and the possibility of friendship between parents and children.
References
Arsenio W and Ramos-Marcuse F. 2014. Children’s moral emotions, narratives, and aggression: relations with maternal discipline and support. J Genet Psychol. 175(5-6):528-46.
Baumrind D. 1966. Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37(4), 887-907.
Baumrind D. 1991. The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence 11(1): 56-95.
Bednar DE and Fisher TD. 2003. Peer referencing in adolescent decision making as a function of perceived parenting style. Adolescence. 38(152):607-21.
Benchaya MC, Bisch NK, Moreira TC, Ferigolo M, and Barros HM.
2011. Non-authoritative parents and impact on drug use: the perception of adolescent children. J Pediatr (Rio J). 87(3):238-44
Chao R. 2001. Extending research on the consequences of parenting style for Chinese Americans and European Americans. Child Development 72: 1832-1843.
Choe DE, Olson SL, and Sameroff AJ. 2013. The interplay of externalizing problems and physical and inductive discipline during childhood. Dev Psychol. 49(11):2029-39.
Dekovic M and Janssens JM. 1992. Parents’ child: Rearing style and child’s sociometric status.” Developmental Psychology 28(5): 925-932.
Fletcher A, Steinberg L, and Sellers E. 1999. Adolescents’ well-being as a function of perceived inter-parent inconsistency. Journal of Marriage and the Family 61: 300-310.
Patrick RB and Gibbs JC. 2016. Maternal Acceptance: Its Contribution to Children’s Favorable Perceptions of Discipline and Moral Identity. J Genet Psychol. 177(3):73-84.
Kamins M and Dweck C. 1999.
Person versus process praise and criticism:Implications for contingent self-worth and coping. Developmental Psychology 30(3): 835-847.
Kerr DC, Lopez NL, Olson SL, and Sameroff AJ. 2004. Parental Discipline and Externalizing Behavior Problems in Early Childhood: The Roles of Moral Regulation and Child Gender. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 32(4):369-83.
Knafo A and Plomin R. 2008. Prosocial behavior from early to middle childhood: genetic and environmental influences on stability and change. Developmental psychology 42(5):771-86.
Krevans J and Gibbs JC. 1996. Parents’ use of inductive discipline: relations to children’s empathy and prosocial behavior. Child Development, 67: 3263-77.
Lamborn SD, Mants NS, Steinberg L, and Dornbusch SM. 1991. Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development 62: 1049-1065.
Luyckx K, Tildesley EA, Soenens B, Andrews JA, Hampson SE, Peterson M, and Duriez B.
2011. Parenting and trajectories of children’s maladaptive behaviors: a 12-year prospective community study. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 40(3):468-78.
Maccoby EE and Martin JA. 1983. Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (ed) and E. M. Hetherington (vol. ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1-101). New York: Wiley.
Osorio A and González-Cámara M. 2016. Testing the alleged superiority of the indulgent parenting style among Spanish adolescents. Psicothema. 28(4):414-420.
Pellerin LA. 2005. Applying Baumrind’s parenting typology to high schools: Toward a middle-range theory of authoritative socialization. Social Science Research 34: 283-303.
Pinquart M and Kauser R. 2017. Do the Associations of Parenting Styles With Behavior Problems and Academic Achievement Vary by Culture? Results From a Meta-Analysis. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol.
2017 Apr 10. doi: 10.1037/cdp0000149. [Epub ahead of print]
Pratt MW, Kerig P, Cowan PA, and Cowan CP. 1988. Mothers and fathers teaching 3-year-olds: Authoritative parenting and adult scaffolding of young children’s learning. Developmental Psychology. Vol 24(6): 832-839.
Querido JG, Warner TD, and Eyberg SM. 2002. Parenting Styles and Child Behavior in African American Families of Preschool Children Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 31(2): 272 – 277.
Robinson CC, Mandleco BL, Olsen SF and Hart CH. 1995. Authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting practices: Development of a new measure for parents of preschool-age children. Psychological Report77: 819-830.
Robinson CC, Hart CH, Mandleco BL, and Olsen SF. 1996. Psychometric support for a new measure of authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting practices: Cross cultural connections. Paper presented in Symposium: New measures of parental child-rearing practices developed in different cultural contexts, XIVth Biennial International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development Conference, Quebec City, Canada, August 12-16, 1996.
Rothrauff TC, Cooney TM, and An JS. 2009. Remembered parenting styles and adjustment in middle and late adulthood. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 64(1):137-46.
Steinberg L. 2001. We know some things: Parent-adolescent relationshgips in retrospect and prospect. Journal of research on adolescence 11(1): 1-19.
Türkel YD and Tezer E. 2008. Parenting styles and learned resourcefulness of Turkish adolescents. Adolescence. 43(169):143-52.
Xiao SX. 2016. Inductive Discipline and Children’s Prosocial Behavior: the Role of Parental Emotion Regulation Strategies. Dissertations ALL. Paper 507.
Xiao SX, Spinrad TL, Carter DB. 2018. Parental emotion regulation and preschoolers’ prosocial behavior: The mediating roles of parental warmth and inductive discipline. J Genet Psychol. 9:1-10
Yamagata S, Takahashi Y, Ozaki K, Fujisawa KK, Nonaka K, and Ando J. 2013. Bidirectional influences between maternal parenting and children’s peer problems: a longitudinal monozygotic twin difference study.
Dev Sci. 16(2):249-59.
This article is based on research published through July 2017. Content last modified 7/17.
image of mother talking to girl near bicycle by Dishant_S / istock
image of father and son / istock
Strict Parenting: Benefits and Risks
Strict parenting can have some benefits, but research suggests the long-term risks outweigh the benefits.
Parenting is one of the most challenging jobs. The most constructive parenting styles often don’t come naturally, making it even more work to be a great parent.
You have to navigate setting expectations for your child, consequences, and other responsibilities to foster their growth into a well-rounded adult. Some parents may be overly lenient in achieving this goal, while others focus on control and unquestioning obedience.
Do strict parents achieve better results for their kids? While the research shows strict or authoritarian parenting can be good in some ways, it often has negative effects.
Strict parents have a bad reputation. But rigid rules and high expectations often come from a good place. Strict parents usually impose tough rules and guidelines on their children because they want what is best for them. But this doesn’t always produce the outcomes they want.
A person’s culture may also dictate strict parenting. For example, older research suggests that those from collectivist cultures, such as Malaysia, tend to subscribe to authoritarian parenting styles.
The 4 types of parenting styles
There are generally four types of parenting styles.
Authoritarian style
Authoritarian-type parents are generally strict and inflexible. They impose a particular set of inflexible rules on their child and expect the child to obey without questioning their rules or expectations.
For example, a parent may assign specific chores, and there is no room for negotiation regarding what the chores are or when they’re required to be completed.
If you operate from this parenting style, you likely have high expectations of your children.
Children are often punished for making mistakes. Parents of this style are less nurturing and can come off as cold.
Authoritative style
Authoritative parents are nurturing but also discipline their children. They use appropriate consequences to support their children, not punish them. They explain why they set the rules that they do.
Children with authoritative parents have input and communication about their parents’ expectations. Authoritative parent-child relationships are frequently close, with healthy and warm communication.
According to numerous research studies, authoritative parenting is the parenting style with the most benefits. It finds a balance between children’s discipline and autonomy.
Permissive style
Permissive parents have low levels of expectations from their children. They rarely use disciplinary measures or have rules. Instead, they tend to be nurturing but often let children figure things out for themselves.
Permissive parents have open communication with their children.
Parents that operate from this parenting style often adopt a friendship-type relationship with their children rather than take on a parent role.
Uninvolved style
In this style, parents give their children complete freedom to do what they want. As a result, parents often meet their children’s basic needs and nothing more.
Parents that operate from an uninvolved style are generally viewed as cold and unaffectionate. These types of parents do not implement disciplinary tactics with their children, nor do they have a lot of communication with their children.
There are some benefits to having strict parents, which we define as parents who live by the authoritarian parenting style.
Well-behaved children
Children that grow up with authoritarian parents are often well-behaved. This is because strict parents set clear expectations of a child’s behavior, and children know what’s expected of them.
Behaving well is driven by fear. Children understand if they don’t live up to expectations, there will be consequences.
This benefit may be most helpful during a child’s younger years, as following strict rules can help keep them safer during various activities.
Goal-driven children
Children raised with authoritarian parents often have high expectations of themselves. These high expectations can help them reach their goals.
For example, research on college students in China found that authoritarian parenting style and high personal expectations were positively associated. In contrast, the same research study found that authoritarian parenting was positively associated with concern for one’s mistakes.
Science has found several negative effects of strict parenting.
Lower academic achievement
In Western cultures, authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved parenting styles have been negatively associated with performance in school. This is in contrast to authoritative parenting, which has been associated with higher levels of academic achievement.
Lower life satisfaction
Pure authoritarian parenting styles may impact a person’s level of life satisfaction.
For example, research that explored the association between life satisfaction and parenting style found that parents who used only authoritarian styles had a substantial negative effect on children’s life satisfaction in all 10 countries included in the study.
Increased anxiety and depression
Researchers have found links between authoritarian parenting and negative mental health outcomes in various countries, including childhood anxiety and depression.
Difficulty making decisions
According to a 2006 study of parents in Asian cultures, children with strict parents also have lower self-esteem.
They depend on others to build their confidence, which is less innate since they constantly look to their parents for approval. Their low self-esteem leads to difficulty making decisions.
Low self-esteem might be connected to strict parenting’s tendency to raise kids with less empathy and social acceptance by peers, according to a 2020 study.
Higher levels of conflict intensity
Children raised with several harsh rules tend to rebel.
For example, research examining conflict among adolescents and parents in China found that adolescents reported higher levels of conflict intensity when their parents used an authoritarian or uninvolved parenting style.
There are a few benefits to strict parenting, such as having your children behave in public or setting high expectations for themselves in achieving their goals. However, the long-term effects of authoritarian parenting tend to negatively affect children’s self-esteem, academic achievement, and overall life satisfaction.
Authoritative parenting, which finds a balance between having rules and supporting them if they don’t meet them, appears to have the best outcomes.
Parenting is a tough job, but having open communication with your children and allowing them room to make mistakes may be the best option for raising a happy and successful child.
Pros and cons of strict parenting - karpachoff.com
What do Mozart and Beethoven have in common, except that they were both great composers? In the context of the topic of this article, the answer is not difficult to guess - they both grew up in strict, authoritarian families.
Admiring the genius of these people, we can conclude that their parents did the right thing, literally forcing their sons to actively engage in music from an early age. So parental perseverance led young talents to success.
Why is the authoritarian style of upbringing perceived by modern society as something negative, outdated and ineffective? Let's figure it out.
Also read: What can not be said to the child
Features of authoritarian education
If you decide to educate children in severity, we advise you to study the signs of authoritarian education in detail: 9000 9000
They have the right to the last word in any conflict, their opinion is usually decisive. 
The only reasonable, in their opinion, reason for failure is laziness and lack of diligence in studies. Pros and cons
To understand how authoritarian parenting affects children, we suggest you evaluate its advantages and disadvantages. Keep in mind that some educational measures can have long-term consequences, that is, bring results not immediately, but after many years.
"+"
Academic success.
Children of strict parents always or almost always demonstrate significant academic achievement.
The child is simply not given the opportunity to do something other than study, presenting it as the only and uncontested option for self-realization and achieving goals.
And even if at first the children rebel, try to find time for relaxation, friends and gadgets, over time they are gradually drawn into active learning. Subject to vigilant parental control, of course.
This is interesting: statistics from the International Program for Student Assessment (PISA ) show that the most outstanding results are among children from China and other Asian countries, as well as among US citizens of Asian descent. The fact is that in Asia, the traditional parenting style is authoritarian. In Chinese families, education is considered a child's priority activity, and parents put forward strict requirements for its results.
Self-confidence.
Paradoxically, it is precisely strict parents who bring up self-confident people.
After all, if a child is not broken by strict orders and total control at home, then he will perceive all the difficulties and restrictions of an independent life more steadfastly. Such school instills the ability not to give in to life's difficulties and literally gnaw out the desired result with your teeth.
Self-monitoring.
Suppressing one's desires is the first thing children of strict parents learn. They are great at falling asleep when you don't feel like sleeping at all. Easily refuse to hang out with friends. They do what is expected of them, not what they really want. A high degree of self-control will be useful to them in adulthood - in work and raising their own children.
Liability.
Children of strict parents are able to take care of themselves, can cook meals, take care of clothes, manage pocket money and keep order in the room. They learned all this thanks to the exactingness of adults. Authoritarian parents set feasible tasks for their children and control their implementation.
This helps to develop responsibility for one's own actions and their results. In adult life, such a skill will help to avoid many mistakes, make the right and informed decisions, and be a reliable and reasonable person.
"—"
Tendency to depression.
Children growing up in an atmosphere of total control, excessive demands and pressure from their parents are more susceptible to the development of mental disorders. Laura Markham, a clinical psychologist from the United States, in her book Peaceful Parents and Happy Children, writes that the excessive severity of a mother or father causes a feeling of loneliness in a child - he will have to stand alone against the onslaught of adults. Such children have a feeling of insecurity in their own importance, in the fact that their parents love him. He does not feel affection for them, does not feel like a member of the family.
Rebellion.
In order not to displease the parents, the child tries to behave in the way that is required of him, suppressing his true impulses and desires.
However, at times the motivation to be a good boy weakens, and even the fear of punishment cannot stop them. Then comes the period of rebellion. It can be both mild and have minor consequences, and protracted, large-scale. For example, in the form of leaving home, ending any contact with relatives, early marriage / pregnancy, addiction to alcohol or drugs.
Closeness and conservatism.
Living in constant restrictions, the child gets used to the fact that nothing depends on him, adults decide everything. He loses the breadth of thinking, sees only imposed paths, involuntarily refusing the opportunity to live differently from how his parents lived. Such a person has an emotional detachment, since he simply does not have the experience of expressing his feelings, sharing them with others.
Aggressiveness.
There are two types of aggressive behavior - physical and psychological. The first is expressed in the physical impact on others - blows, pushes, slaps, etc.
The second is moral violence in the form of reproaches, ridicule, caustic comments, etc. Adherents of strict education often use methods of aggressive influence in order to achieve complete obedience from children. Is it any wonder that years later they demonstrate excellent mastery of their parents' instruments.
Alienation.
As adults, children of authoritarian parents rarely communicate with their families. While they are small, such a model of relations seems to them without alternative. But as soon as their life experience shows that it happens differently, the discontent growing inside will inevitably spill out - the communication of adult children with authoritarian parents either stops altogether, or is of a formal nature. There is no question of any spiritual intimacy, although relatives can sincerely love each other, but in their own, specific sense.
Distorted views of the world.
A child brought up in strictness is callous to the emotions of others, has a low level of empathy, in his arsenal - tools to influence others based on fear, pressure, aggression.
He does not know how to build friendly, loving, trusting relationships. Demands obedience to its rules, and in case of refusal is in sincere confusion.
*****
Having chosen an authoritarian model of upbringing, it is worth soberly assessing its advantages and disadvantages. Stick to the rule of the golden mean, don't go too far with strictness and restrictions. Use softer methods of influence, encourage the child for achievements, express your love. And remember that it's never too late to change your approach to parenting if the intermediate results are not what you expected.
Rate the article on a 5-point scale
Like this article? Share in social networks
Pros and cons of strict upbringing
Parents who do not want to bring up their children
in strict rules are worthy of blame.
(Petrony Arbitr)
Each parent has his own approach to the issue of raising children. Strict upbringing is not bad, it makes children independent and disciplined, but if such upbringing becomes authoritarian, then there can be no talk of any independence. The authoritarian method of education generates complexes and nervousness in children. Very strict and domineering parents, exercising vigilant control over every act of the child and controlling his behavior, suppress his will. Authoritarian parents make very high demands on their children, turning a blind eye to live communication and emotional response.
Children come into this world with an open heart and a living soul. They are curious, eager to learn everything and get to know everything. And very often they stumble upon situations that teach them one of the principles of survival in the modern world. Each child comes into this world with his own temperament, a certain set of inclinations and abilities, therefore, each needs his own approach.
You can’t make the same demands on all children, all the more, suppress them with your authority.
For several years now I have been watching a family I know who has three children. Mom, T.V., is a real dictator, demanding unquestioning obedience to his will. Dad practically does not take part in raising children due to his workload, agreeing with his wife's methods. All three: a boy and two girls, different. Each of them has its own characteristics and genetic capabilities. All three are very capable and even gifted, due to the fact that their parents are intellectuals with higher education. The family has a strict daily routine, early rise and early departure, lunch and dinner by the hour. Children have a certain range of duties, failure to fulfill at least one of them entails severe punishment, sometimes even in the form of a belt. The rules in the family are roughly as follows:
- Get up - make your bed!
- Wash your hands before eating!
- When I eat, I am deaf and dumb!
– You must finish your meal!
- Ate - wash the dishes!
- Put your clothes in the closet!
– In everything you need to obey adults!
– It is not good to deceive!
– Don't watch TV too close and too long!
– You can sit at the computer for one hour a day!
– You can't go out after nine o'clock in the evening!
– You have to study well!
– You can't wear makeup to school!
- Don't make noise, disturb your neighbors!
- As long as you live in my house, fulfill my requirements!
– By your act you dishonor the family!
– You will be punished for violating the regime!
In fact, there is nothing wrong with these rules, on the contrary, there are many pluses.
Children grow up organized, disciplined and neat, if not treated without fanaticism. But the fact of the matter is that in this family any excess is punishable, and the mother does not leave space for the creativity and imagination of the children, criticizing any failure or oversight. There is no need to talk about any support, approval and praise at all.
The eldest son Roma, as is typical for the first-born, was very diligent from childhood, trying to please his parents in everything, grew up as a non-conflict child, made progress in his studies. A calm, balanced boy obeyed his mother in everything, being afraid to take at least one wrong step to the side. The fear generated by her diktat kept him from taking the initiative all the time. At one fine moment, Romka, with the makings of a strong character and sanity, wanted to break the chain of restrictions invented by his mother, and he learned to deceive. First close people, and then everyone else. As a result, I lost confidence in people.
The boy grew up kind, disciplined, punctual and accurate, but insecure, cunning and distrustful. Having a huge potential, he could not realize himself in life, assigning himself the role of an ordinary engineer.
Marina, two years younger than her brother, was born with a mobile mentality, a pronounced choleric. Lively, cheerful, sociable, emotional, she could not bear the pressure from her mother and began to actively resist. The protest was expressed in the refusal to comply with the imposed rules, violation of the regime, the manifestation of laziness and rude treatment of the mother. Stubbornness - the child's first application for independence and the requirement to recognize his personality. This is a natural, natural reaction, characteristic of most children. But this application was also accepted by T.V. with hostility, led to the strengthening of the strict regime, the suppression of protest by violent methods. This approach contributes to the formation of self-doubt, low self-esteem, and nervousness in the child.
The life of mother and daughter turned into an endless conflict that continues to this day. Her daughter's creative energy also suffered, but Marina grew up, though insecure, but a strong, purposeful person, a fighter for justice, with the ability to stand up for herself and others, with an active life position and a desire for constant self-development.
The youngest daughter Nadenka was born a quiet, calm, smart little girl. She also did not like her mother's regime, but there was already one strong warrior for the rights of children in the family. Where could the melancholic Nadia compete with her older sister. Usually children with a weak nervous system, impressionable, excitable, do not remain indifferent to the strict requirements of their parents, but they also cannot fulfill them. Maybe that's why Nadenka became so uninitiative and inert, being under constant pressure of constant severity and watching her sister's unsuccessful attempts to improve the situation. Not wanting to receive reciprocal cruelty all the time, the youngest daughter chose to remain in the shadows.
As a result, she withdrew into herself, not allowing emotions to come out. In the family, she automatically became a favorite child, because such children are convenient for parents. But no one has ever thought about it and asked what it is like for her, good or bad, what she wants and what she is so afraid of. And she was afraid of a lot of things and wept on the sly, blaming herself for her own helplessness. Nadia grew up quiet, modest, insecure, again, flexible, trouble-free, accurate and responsive to people, but she completely forgot about herself.
In this situation, the mother applied the same method of upbringing to all the children, and the result was different, but deplorable results. Undoubtedly, there are also positive aspects: all children are well-mannered, decent, organized, neat, responsive, kind, sensitive. But constant bans, censures, spankings make it difficult to comprehend what is actually good and what is bad. Therefore, all three children are constantly confused in life, doubting the right choice, they are led by one common feature - insecurity.
Since mother never particularly praised or encouraged, children are afraid to take a rash step. Fear of the future - that's what else unites them, as well as the lack of independence, because without my mother's consent, not a single business began. The emotional development of children also suffered. But none of the children put up with the strict attitude of their mother, each of them, due to their individual characteristics, found their way out of the situation, someone hides behind a lie, someone endlessly enters into conflict, and someone closes in on himself. At the same time, all three experience mental suffering and remorse, because you can’t lie, even to yourself. Hence the high risk of developing anxiety disorders and panic attacks.
Authoritarian upbringing also impedes the development of activity in children, so Roma, Marina and Nadenka remain ordinary employees.
But there is always a way out! Children who have received an authoritarian upbringing work on themselves, eradicating complexes from childhood.
