Introduction

Recent fads in child upbringing research and broad-scale nationwide adjustments in social and economic institutions providing support for family stability have brought about a major clash between the advocates of the authoritative approach towards child-rearing and the proponents of “the liberated child” concepts. As sociologists, psychiatrists and other scholars are warning that a return to a balanced social life cannot be achieved without a reliable family base, family advisers from both parties are simultaneously striving to overcome the effects of too much permissiveness at home and to retain faith in “the liberated child” philosophy.

Definitions

Authoritativeness – a theory in child upbringing promoted by a group of scholars, which is based on harsh assertive parental authority, strict order and ample application of punishment; in extreme forms may be shifting towards familial dictatorship and authoritarianism.

Permissiveness – a theory in bringing up children that became popular through the writings of Dr. Benjamin Spock, by which a child is encouraged to behave without restriction. The theory is critical of any form of punishment and regards persuasion and discussion the main methods in raising children.

Sample Story

A lot of parents now seem to be turning on their own children. My mother tells me that when she goes to a party there is always talk of the children – but something has changed. Once the parents used to boast. Now they commiserate and exchange examples of their own sons’ and daughters’ awfulness. There was the case of the father who shot and killed his “uncontrollable” son, was tried for the crime and set free.

There was a poll in woman’s magazine in which 10,000 mothers were asked whether they would again choose to have children. Seventy per cent said they would not. Newspapers play up stories of youth gangs and violence while the public clamors for a “tighter rein”.

Sometimes the children do not even seem quite human: it’s difficult to picture the toughest, coolest ones crying, hard to believe they were ever babies. Even the children we choose as our movie and television stars are appealing, almost, for their very sinisterness. In a new movie last week a man tried to stab a 5-year-old boy to death and when he raised his knife over the boy’s throat, the audience cheered. This movie had to do with demonic possession, and the devil was personified by a child.

Arguments and Counter-arguments

1. Pro: The authoritative approach towards child-rearing is far from being a sheer fad. Historically originating from Biblical fundamentals, further reinforced in Victorian times (~ 1837-1901), it’s been theoretically developed and tested out throughout centuries.

Con: Permissiveness is by no means a mere experiment. While it is a relatively young child-rearing practice, it is an alternative fully grounded theory backed up by such classics on the subject as S. Freud (1856-1939), Dr. Spock (1903-1998) and other influential authors.

2. Pro: Strong parental authority has become a time-proof familial and societal tradition. It’s been advocated by generation of parents all over the globe for an imposing period of time. It’s been a clearly dominant method of child upbringing (~ 80 per cent of all households worldwide).

Con: The so-called Victorian values, which, above all, have been subjected to reasonable doubt, are a thing of the past. There’s no sense to adhere to primitive archaic views which are obviously incompatible with the pace and requirements of the modern advanced society.

3. Pro: The family unit is an important societal institution and needs harsh regulations and role teaching to be imposed from childhood. As proven by psychologists and pediatricians, what’s learned in one’s green years serves as the basis of the whole life.

Con: Most regulations and reservations are outdated in today’s advanced society. Modern society is based on democratic concepts and a freedom of personal choice. Imposed values are a latent form of pressure and violence, according to psychologists.

4. Pro: The authoritative approach is justified by the fact that children are psychologically immature. They need to be guided by a strong hand away from the negative and into the positive. They are prone to be spoiled by parental overindulgence. (“Too much love will kill you.” The Queen)

Con: Things should not be imposed and forced, but discussed. Children should be encouraged to develop a distinct voice of their own. Similar to any person, who possesses a freedom of will by birth, any child should be allowed to make a personal choice of what she/he thinks is beneficial for her/him.

5. Pro: Harsh authoritativeness is the best springboard for a child starting a life in the alien cruel world. In other words, it helps a child adopt an adequate reaction to strict regulations, duties and denial of rewards. It provides the optimal model of the stringent realities of the world from early childhood.

Con: In a permissive household, a kid has a greater potential for self-fulfillment. Children are extensively encouraged to be active, creative, responsive and independent, as their personal preferences, binds and aspirations are not suppressed. Consequently, they are most likely to make a success of life.

6. Pro: Overindulgence makes a child helpless and infantile. Excessive permissiveness eventually causes disappointment and degenerates into complexes and psychological trauma originating from an adopted feeling of social inadequacy.

Con: Permissiveness is psychologically less harmful than authoritativeness. In the latter case deeper mental wounds are inflicted. Any form of compelled authority inevitably regresses into authoritarianism and triggers hidden hatred, rebellion and violent outbursts.

7. Pro: Lax authority leads to irresponsibility. It further degenerates into a sense of social inadequacy, a disregard of laws and disrespect, an individual’s set of values deteriorates, which pushes one to commit criminal acts. Juvenile delinquency rates surge (~ 76 per cent of all juvenile criminals come from an authoritative family environment).

Con: Permissiveness is not tantamount to sheer negligence and indifference. A child who is reared in a permissive family environment feels content and happy and is not prone to any criminal misdemeanor.

8. Pro: Parental authority is a sign of heightened attention and involvement. When parents are permissive, they mostly have either no wish or time to spend with their children and no incentive to bring them under control. Authoritativeness is not tyranny, but reason and sense, which save a kid from the negative outer influence.

Con: Permissiveness is not negligence, it’s based on love and care. The more a child’s parents care for her/him, the more they are prone to permit. Consequently, parental lenience serves as a measure of affection towards their offspring, while authoritativeness, on the contrary, is based on fear.

9. Pro: Unruly kids could be dealt with by sole means of harsh authority and corporal punishment. This is the only beneficial way to impose an idea of parental regard, respect of authority and the notion of fair punishment. Over 80 per cent of parents admit they resort to corporal punishment as the most effective method of child treatment.

Con: Parental lenience is the best teacher. Peaceful methods like persuasion and discussion attract children to their parents, facilitate a child’s perception of the notions of respect and a positive problem-solving approach.

10. Pro: Authoritativeness zeroes in on parents’ happiness and psychological comfort. On the reverse, permissive parents turn into their children’s slaves. They feel constant fear and guilt and take excessive responsibility for their kids.

Con: Permissiveness intensifies the concept of a child’s well-being and happiness. Parents should be subservient to their offspring as they should assume the responsibility for rearing decent members of the future generation.