Parents Are Not Always Right

In some areas of the Philippines where I grew up, young men and women were much more sophisticated and conservative values were practiced by cost individuals. Unlike teenagers who grew up in the United States, the ones in the Philippines were more laid-back and reserved. Despite the fact that I grew up in a place where traditional and conventional values were practiced, influences in society such as the media, still played a role in growing up. Therefore, teenagers did not always stay true to the advice of their parents.

Parenting is an intricate subject. Some guardians believe that being a strict parent to their children will allow them to stay on the right path and grow up as responsible adults. However, strict parenting also back-fire which can result in their children wanting to rebel and go against their parent’s orders. The advice that my parents gave me of not having a boyfriend until finishing school is an example of this type of parenting. Thankfully, my parents and I still had a close relationship after I disobeyed them that one time.

They still trusted me since I always gave them a reason to. Unfortunately, I have witnessed dreadful outcomes in my group of friends when their parents strongly applied this rule to their children. In addition, their parents became too overprotective and would intrude in their child’s privacy which resulted In their child feeling suffocated and feeling the need to go against their parents orders since their parents acted as If they could not be trusted.

After witnessing a friend went through this experience, I learned that If you raise a child to respect certain values and they are aware that you trust them, It can do miracles. This can also benefit their relationship with their children In the future knowing that there was always a strong trust factor between hem. Once trust Is gained, a child will become open and comfortable with their guardians. There Is a thin line between being a good parent and an overbearing one who actually hurts a child’s well-being.

Being young Is about making mistakes and learning from them with the help of supportive people In the lives, such as their parents. Parents Are Not Always Right By В»locale’s intrude in their child’s privacy which resulted in their child feeling suffocated and feeling the need to go against their parents orders since their parents acted as if earned that if you raise a child to respect certain values and they are aware that you trust them, it can do miracles.

This can also benefit their relationship with their children in the future knowing that there was always a strong trust factor between them. Once trust is gained, a child will become open and comfortable with their guardians. There is a thin line between being a good parent and an overbearing one who actually hurts a child’s well-being.

Read more

Juvenile Crime and Parenting Education

“Will Teaching Parents how to Parent decrease Juvenile Crime” What Is the Best Evidence Based Program that can be Implemented and Successful In Reducing Juvenile Crime By Vanessa Figures Capable University Dry. Linda Samuels Table of Contents I. Abstract II. Problem Statement Ill. Introduction ‘V. Conclusion V. Annotated Bibliography A. Juvenile Crimes and statistics B. Support for parental education & Importance of parents In reducing Juvenile crime. C. Opposition to parental importance in reducing juvenile crime D. Theories VI. References Abstract There are 70. Lion juveniles in the united States, of those 1. 7 million juveniles committed crimes in 2010, Many theories and evidence based research exist that support and oppose the importance parents play in a juvenile’s life. There are many factors in determining behavior and its causation and no “one” solution will stop juvenile crime. One common theme is found in research studies on Juvenile crime, and Its prevention, and that Is educating parents on parenting can reduce Juvenile crime. What theories work and Is their concrete evidence wealth research to support the parental interventions?

Problem Statement: Juvenile Crime and parenting education: Will teaching parents how to parent decrease Juvenile crime? What parenting method works best In nurturing and providing the needs of the Juvenile, and what evidence based theoretical program exists that can intervene? Introduction In the United States there are 70. 5 million Juveniles under the age of 18, of those in the past year 1. 7 million have been involved with the “Juvenile Justice System”. In the last one hundred years the Juvenile system has used an offender based approach to along Walt Juvenile crime. Away as our closely NAS change Ana ten clientele understanding of behavior has improved there is a great need to find evidence based answers (Hinting, Sims, Adam & West, 2007). The Justice system has changed over to an offense based approach that seeks to find solutions, but the offense is the end result of choice and behavior. The Juvenile offender needs to be the focus, many research studies site that lack of parental education is part of the problem, so it goes without saying that part of the solution should be parental education (Hinting, Sims, Adam & West, 2007).

There are psychological, physical and biological factors in determining the best prevention method in Juvenile crime. The younger the offender the more likely they will continue in a life of crime. Palermo, (2006), sites parental monitoring, consistency, and ability as factors in determining the risk of Juvenile delinquency. Criminal behavior does not Just start one day, anti-social behavior is nurtured by environmental, biological, sociological, and parenthetical factors.

The Juvenile Justice system uses many evidence based methods, one such method is the use of “Risk Assessment”. Is their validity in the use of risk assessments in determining the carcinogenic factor and the propensity to re-offend? Does parenting lay a factor in Juvenile offenders and their likelihood of re-offending? Many factors are studied and supported, however there are unreliable statistics within the research field. However; one common theme appears to play a formative foundational role in Juvenile carcinogenic behavior.

That is the role of the parent and the lack of consistent, nurturing, structure, and monitoring parenting abilities (Webster, MacDonald, & Simpson, 2006). In a study completed by Monsoon, (2004), findings showed that the need for parental education in character building is not only necessary, but imperative. The study does not stop with the parents, but also shows that Juveniles also need strength based character training. The objective of this training is to strengthen the characters of the parent and Juvenile by teaching hope, kindness, social intelligence, self-control, and perspective.

The study purports that strengthening these positive character traits in Juveniles and their parents will not only provide a strong foundation, but also buffer the negative effects of tension, and trauma, thus preventing extenuating disorders that can introduce itself due to the negative actions of others in the Juvenile’s life. Character strengths are here defined as a family of positive traits reflected in thoughts, feelings, and behaviors” (Monsoon, 2004). When parents are not educated they are left with parents whose parenting skills are skewed, inconsistent, and/or non-existent.

The importance of communication and education between the Juveniles and parents cannot be stressed enough. Further when a Juvenile’s behavior causes stress in parents then the outcome is a behavioral circle where the Juvenile acts out, causing the parents behavior toward the Juvenile to become negative and this continues over and over again. These factors all play a role in the carcinogenic factor of Juvenile delinquency (Stewart, Simons, Conger, & Carmella, 2004). There are many research studies that put the inability of a parent to parent as a major role in the determination of Juvenile delinquency. Never, Culled, & Agene, (2006) article contends that “bad parenting” is a carcinogenic factor in causes for delinquent juveniles. Many who have researched this topic have agreed on this fact, but what constitutes a “Dad parent’ Research snows Tanat many Doctors go Into ten explanation; two main theories are focused on in this study; low self-control and preferential association and social learning and their competing accounts of why bad parenting matters. Juveniles will follow the social norms they are around; there is a kind of conforming even when their life at home may be far different from that of their social crowd.

Juveniles that have low self-control will ultimately seek out anti- social structures and will either lead or follow those structures. Unfortunately most of the time Juveniles are followers that are looking for acceptance and support. When those needs are not received at home Juveniles will look for it elsewhere, The robber with this is many social settings that offer this support are gangs, adult criminals and anti-social peers (Never, Culled, & Agene, 2006). There is empirical evidence to show that there is a strong link between parental mismanagement and Juvenile delinquency.

This study believes that parental education is a necessary support system that will reap great rewards not only to families but their communities as well. The Justice system believes that using court sanctions will deter Juveniles from crime and recidivism. However this has an affect not only on the Juvenile, but the parent as well. This study suggests that the Justice yester look to build the Juveniles strengths and their families and this will eventually reduce Juvenile crime in our nation (Never, Culled, & Agene, 2006).

Not all research agrees that parents are the foundational source necessary to decrease juvenile crime. In a study completed by Barry, Brick, & Grandma, (2008) does not support, that parenting is the cause of delinquent behavior. There has been much research into parenting skills, ability, positive, negative etc. , but there have been few research studies completed on understanding the internal and external emotional behavioral functioning of Juveniles extensively enough. In this study, they attempt to show that even if a child grows up under inadequate parents this does not preclude that they will become delinquent.

The study sites the need for multiple research studies on psychological and behavioral factors, not Just outside factors (Barry, Brick, & Grandma, 2008). Theory should be testable, coherent, economical, generalized, and be able to explain findings. These characteristics serve as a primary function of theory and that is to generate new ideas and new discoveries. There are a few evidence based theories being implemented within the Juvenile justice system (Higgins, 2005). Two theories that are being successfully implemented are Dry.

William Classer’s “Choice Theory’ and Dry. James Alexander “Functionalist Theory’. These theories have been use for the last 6 years successfully in motivating behavioral changes in parenting and Juvenile behaviors (Adler, 2008). This theory believes that all behavior comes from within, that the choices we make start with our needs at that time. “Choice Theory’ has five needs that are intrinsic and the root cause of the observed behavior. These are to survive, belong and be loved by others, have power and importance, freedom and independence, and to eave fun.

These desires within generate behavior and desires. Juveniles that are socially broken and have not been taught self control, limits and social norms are more inclined towards crime. The theory works on the social structure of the Juvenile and their families and facilitates their own ability to see where the problems are and work towards strengthening the weak areas (Burdens, 2010). Brand, Lane, I runner, I-Alan, & Sense , (u/) completed a pilot program to research Intervention Tanat sought to improve parental communication and social peer choice.

The study was lull in the end, but there were positive changes within the control group in better communication and spending time with their parents. The Juveniles also felt closer to their parents and had more trust in them overall. The researchers sited that level of program intensity, implementation issues, and other problems inherent in doing this type of research are provided as possible explanations for the lack of differences. In another similar study completed by Prone, Sullivan, Pratt, & Maryanne, (2004) observed more positive outcomes from their study.

The site that many studies have en completed, but they fall short in their ability to truly represent a national sample of youth and levels of delinquency. “The Self Control Theory’ has been widely accepted, this study sought to show that “Self Control Theory’ in and of itself is not a predictor of Juvenile delinquency. Rather many factors such as parenting ability are just as predictive and supported. Conclusion In order to find and implement strong evidence based program in educating parents on parenting, much research and interviewing has been completed.

There are hundreds of articles that substantiate that parenting ability is one of the nutritional factors in predicting Juvenile crime in the United States. There are few articles that challenge the findings of these research studies. One such study stated that there have been few research studies completed on understanding the internal and external emotional behavioral functioning of Juveniles extensively enough. That without such studies it would be wrong to strongly state that parenting is a major factor in Juvenile crime (Barry, Brick, & Grandma, 2008).

Dry. James Alexander founded “Functionality Therapy’ this therapy works on the premise that when a Juvenile is put into a program for an extended time and take from their implies that change occurs. The problem is that when the Juvenile comes home he/ she comes back into the same environment they left. This causes chaos and confusion within the Juvenile, “Functionality Therapy’ seeks to help the family see their strengths and work on those strengths together with the Juvenile (.

This program was started in 1972 and is now used nationwide in the United States and abroad. “Functional Family Therapy’ (FT), has provided significant and long-term reductions in youth re-offending and violent behavior, effectiveness in reducing sibling entry into high-risk behaviors, Low drop-out and high completion rates, and Positive impacts on family conflict, family communication, parenting, and youth problem behavior. “One of Fat’s hallmarks is its ability to fit an array of service delivery settings where at-risk adolescents are served.

The robustness of the model has resulted in numerous adaptations of the traditional FT model; as a case management practice for Juvenile Probation and Parole Officers (OFF), as a comprehensive Child Welfare intervention (FT OCW), and as part of a continuum of evidence-based programs within Juvenile Justice” (Brand, Turner, Fain, & Shall, 2007). The continuing research into this program and its ability to fit into the immunity will be implemented in the coming weeks in order to ensure that the program will indeed help to reduce Juvenile crime and recidivism in the “Juvenile Justice system”. O Tar ten research does support TN e Y I Model an successfully within the system. Annotated Bibliography l. Juvenile Crimes and statistics TTY to work Hinting, J. , Sims, P. , Adams, M. , & West, C. (2007). Juvenile Justice a system divided. Retrieved from Capable University library on 1/23/11 from. Http:// www. Supplications. Com A. The “Juvenile Justice System” is divided in deciding which type philosophy to follow. The offense-based approach compared to the offender-based approach on which the Juvenile Justice system was founded.

Where do the family and community fit into this philosophy? Palermo, G. (2006). Editorial: Juvenile crime: A renewed suggestion for prevention. Retrieved from Capable University library on 1/25/11 from. Http://I]o. Seepage. Com/content/ 46/6/627 B. There are psychological, physical and biological factors in determining the best prevention method in Juvenile crime. Atone time the ages between 18-35 were well known as the ages that most crimes are committed. Today the offenders are such younger, the younger the offender the more likely they will continue in a life of crime.

Parental monitoring, consistency, and ability are also a factor in determining the risk of Juvenile delinquency. Webster, C. , MacDonald, R. , & Simpson, M. (2006). Predicting criminality? Risk factors, neighborhood influence and distance. Retrieved from Capable University on 01122/11 from. Http://www. Supplications. Com C. What is the validity of risk assessments in determining the carcinogenic factor and re-offending? Does parenting play a factor in Juvenile offenders and their likelihood of re-offending?

Many factors are studied and supported, however there are unreliable statistics within the research field and this article shows how this affects the role of parent and Juvenile delinquency. II. Support for parental education & importance of parents in reducing Juvenile crime. Monsoon, P. (2004). Character strengths and positive youth development. Retrieved from Capable University library on 01/21/11 from. Http://www. Supplications. Com A. This article supports both parental and Juvenile education; the goal is to strengthen the characters of both by teaching hope, kindness, social intelligence, self-control, and perspective.

The objective purports that strengthening these positive character traits in Juveniles and their parents will not only provide a strong foundation, but also buffer the negative effects of tension, and trauma, thus preventing extenuating Lassoers Tanat can Introduce Itself Owe to ten negative actions of others in the Juvenile’s life. “Character strengths are here defined as a family of positive traits reflected in thoughts, feelings, and behaviors”. Stewart, E. , Simons, R. , Conger, R. , & Carmella, L. (2004). Legal sanctions beyond the international relationship between delinquency and parenting practices.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Retrieved from Capable University Library on 01/21/11 from. Http://www. Supplications. Com B. The article shows parents whose parenting skills are skewed, inconsistent, and/ or non-existent produce delinquent Juveniles. The article goes on to state the importance of communication between the Juveniles and parents. When a Juvenile’s behavior causes stress in parents then the outcome is a behavioral circle where the juvenile acts out, causing the parents behavior toward the Juvenile to become negative and this continues over and over again. Maneuver. , Culled, F. Agene, R. (2006).

Why is “bad” parenting carcinogenic? Implications from rival theories. Retrieved from Capable University library on 01/20/11 from. Http://yam. Seepage. Com/content/4/113 C. The research for this article contends that “bad parenting” is a carcinogenic factor in causes for delinquent Juveniles. Many who have researched this topic have agreed on this fact, but what constitutes a “bad parent”? This research shows that many factors go into the explanation, two main theories are focused on in this article; low self-control and differential association and social learning and their competing accounts of why bad parenting matters.

Read more

Observation Performed at Atascadero Lake Park

This paper will include observations of interactions between other children that appeared to be in his respective age group as well as children of the opposite sex and In some cases younger and older. Through the use of Piglet’s theory of child development and other resources I will compare the child’s development as compared to other children In his age range, as well as ascertaining and conveying the parenting style that I observed during this time.

Observation of a 3 Year Old Boy Upon arriving at the Decorator Lake Park I positioned myself at a bench close to the play area. This area Included many of the usual types of equipment that one old expect to see at a park that Is frequented by young children. Clearly most of the play equipment was of modern construction and design and It being a beautiful sunny day, the park was full of children of various ages and stages of development.

The child I observed primarily was a male approximately three to four years of age and was very active during the time he was at play. He appeared to be at a normal state of development upon my initial observation and this point was only confirmed as I continued to watch Children between the ages of three and four typically walk more rhythmically and re able to easily go from a walk to a run, they Jump and are more able to throw and catch object much more effectively, essentially there gross motor skills advance (Beer).

Children in this age range also exhibit improvement with their fine motor skills that allow them to use zippers and eating utensils much more effectively (Beer). The young boy I was observing displayed an excellent ability to climb and run, his balance and depth perception seemed to be very appropriate for this age range. There were many other children of various different ages and sexes at the park as well as the child that I was observing. He seemed especially adept at interacting with many of the other children.

Although there were many different toys and pieces of equipment to play on I also observed several of the children pretending that they were on a ship at sea or performing in the circus, according to Pigged this is part of the operational stage which represents a stage of development that usually occurs Detente ten ages AT two Ana seven (Plague, EYE). One AT ten most villous attributes of this stage is the extraordinary increase in representational, or symbolic, activity (Pigged, 1951). Pigged felt that make believe play was an excellent way for hillier to strengthen newly acquired representational schemes (1951).

The child that I was observing seemed to have excellent manual dexterity, he was able to swing from bar to bar on the Jungle gym with ease. He was able to climb up and down the various ladders and chain ropes, crawl through the many openings of the mock tree house that had been provided by the designers of this particular park. One of the longest periods of time he spent on one task was during his time in the sand box. He focused a great deal on building what appeared to be a pyramid or some sort of castle.

The focus the he exhibited on the end result, I found to be remarkable, however once he had made the decision that it met his expectations he made it a point to not only destroy what he had been painstakingly working on for the better part of forty minutes he also smoothed over the area that he had been working, almost seeming to be concerned that there was no visible evidence remaining. There was a great deal of interaction between the young man and his peers he seemed to have no issue with the sex of the other child, however I did observe at one point that he was holding the hand of a girl who appeared to be around the same GE as he.

He appeared to be attempting to persuade her to Join him on the swings. She however was not interested in that particular activity. She actually looked as if she wanted to leave the sandy area of the playground and move onto the grass which would have involved navigating a small step up. When the girl attempted to step up she tripped, causing the boy made a valiant attempt to stop her from falling, to no avail. He was however successful in aiding her to stand back up and helped to bush of the sand. I will say from that point forward the girl was not as eager to hold his and as she clearly felt that was what had caused her to fall.

After observing this boy for some time it became clear that he was there with two other children. One a male that was younger than he and the other a female that looked to be approximately four to five years old. In addition after hearing some discussion I was able to ascertain that these children were there with the boys mother and grandmother. Although I did not witness any direct disciplinary steps taken by either of the adult authority figures it was clear that both of the adults were very engaged in what the children were doing.

However they allowed the children to lay on the various types of equipment and really only became involved with specific instructions if it seemed that any of the children were considering leaving the immediate play area. I really felt that the adults were allowing the children to explore and engage in whatever activity they so choose provided it was not an activity that could potential cause harm. In this particular case on this particular day the parental figure was clearly exhibiting the authoritative method of child rearing.

According to Beer the authoritative child rearing style is the most successful approach that involves high acceptance and involvement, which includes adaptive control techniques and appropriate autonomy granting (up. 260-261). Although I had only a few opportunities to hear conversations between the adult figure and the child I was serving It was clear Tanat communication was Tree Tooling In ten sense Tanat when the boy expressed what he wanted to do the parent was very responsive to the idea.

The youngest of the three children in this group began to have some sort of issue with being unable to navigate the low hanging swing bridge. Subsequently he began to cry which then turned into a fully fledged protest. The boy that I was observing immediately came to his younger peer’s assistance. He was able to hold onto the younger child allowing him to make it across and back. This show of empathy which becomes an important part of proboscis and altruistic behavior, according to Beer empathy becomes more common in early childhood and typically preschoolers rely more on words to communicate empathic feelings. (p. 60). In this particular case it was clear that the older boy was in fact talking the younger child through the necessary steps in order to successfully traverse this bridge. This boy seemed especially adept with social interaction and seemed able to move room situation to situation with ease and was comfortable engaging with children of different sexes, ages and points in development. In some instances he seemed to almost make a point to become involved with all of the groups of children. Additionally he appeared to make a point to try to include some other children that were more focused on solitary activities.

This I found to be almost deliberate, it seemed that not only was he concerned that a few of the children were playing alone, he persisted in his invitation to Join the other children even when the “lone wolf” expressed no or very little desire to participate in any group activity. Comparing the child that I was observing to several of the other children that appeared to be in his approximate age range his development seemed to be at least comparable and in some cases further along that the others.

With regards to his ability to communicate with the others as well as his ability to move from group to group with a great deal of ease he exhibited an excellent ability to vacillate between appropriate energy levels and vocal volume that would be appropriate to the circumstances to which he was about to enter. This displayed to me that the child was experienced with many different types of play or social situations and was able to differentiate each situation without disrupting the other children’s focus.

This was in clear contrast to several of the other children of the same approximate age that clearly felt it was necessary to make a grand entrance. The amount of time that I spent observing this child’s adeptness to navigate through a fairly complicated social playing field displayed how impressive this ability truly was. During the final thirty minutes of my time at the park I really tried to focus on pavement and physical acuity. The boy tended to focus much of his attention on the “Jungle gym “equipment.

This particular apparatus offered many types of activities, slides, rope swings, monkey bars, which this particular child seemed especially skilled in, also various ladders of different shapes and moving in multiple directions. I can assure you this was not the park toys of my younger days. The equipment at this park seemed well designed offering the children many different opportunities to discover any hidden acrobatic skills that they may be harboring.

All in all this observation made it clear that this young child, this boy of three or four years old, was agile and energetic, had clearly been exposed to many types of social solutions, Ana parents Tanat succeeded to ten autonomy tattle style Ana was developing both physically and cognitively at an appropriate level. In my opinion in many cases he was a bit advanced compared to other children that I observed during my time at Decorator Lake Park. The one thing that impressed me the most was his ability to socialize, to communicate and yet seem to really enjoy his time at the park.

Read more

Parenting the Father

What are the qualities that show you must be loving, considerate, and responsible, you have to pay attention to your child’s need. Unfortunately John Purcell from “The Father” by Hugh Garner shows none of these qualities. Mr. Purcell is neglective, shameless and proud. One trait that clearly shows John is an unsatisfactory father is that he is neglective. This trait describes Mr. Purcell very accurately. An example of how John is neglective is when he had a meeting with the principal at Johnny’s school, regarding his grades.

John had agreed to keep Johnny back a grade just so the meeting would end sooner “When the teacher had suggested keeping the boy in the same grade for a second year, he had acquiesced willingly, wanting only to get away from the place. ” page 43. Another example of Johns neglect is how he does not even know what position his own son played or which team he played for “He realized that he didn’t even know what position his own son played, or even the name of the team. ” page 46.

Lastly when Johnny was talking about his friends and their fathers, John had no clue who he was talking about because he pays no attention to his children what so ever, nor does he play a role in either of his children’s lives “He didn’t know on boy or girl who came to the house from another. ” page 48. These are three of many examples that show Mr. Purcell is a neglective father. In addition to be neglective John Purcell is also shameless. In almost every event throughout Johnny’s life that involved both father and son, John would always bring shame upon Johnny and himself.

In the story on page 1 it says “… a strange shame and embarrassment coloured every event that brought them into contact. ” A second example that shows how John is shameless is when he was talking to the curate and scout master about the entry fee for the Boy Scout Meeting “Three Dollars! Why I could’ve taken Jonny to a burlesque show for less than that. ” He felt no shame at all after making the remark. The final example I have that shows Mr. Purcell is shameless is when he was outside the church drinking with a man he had just known for less than an hour or so. They had three good drinks apiece before Murdoch said, ‘Maybe we’d better go back inside. If we don’t get in there soon that kid of mine will tell his mother for sure. ’” This shows John felt no shame because even though he was with his son at a very important meeting, with the Johnny’s friends and their parents there, he was outside drinking paying no regard towards the circumstances. Also if it wasn’t for Charley Murdoch suggesting that they should go back inside, John would’ve just sat outside drinking the whole night. If you don’t call a man like that shameless then I wouldn’t know what you’d call him.

Read more

Issues in Multi Cultural Education

To date, only a handful of studies have empirically investigated the relationship between school locations and their constituencies. The students that are living in the low income areas of Richmond are more diverse than the ones that are living in the counties that surround the city. For instance, Houghton High School located in one of the low income areas of Richmond County has a Ninety Two Percent minority rate among there attending students.

Fifty Six percent of the student population at Houghton High is economically disadvantaged. Over half of the students that attend this high school receives free lunch. In 2013 while hosting the third annual white house science fair President Obama spoke on how one of his main focuses as president has been how to create an all-hands-on- deck approach to the STEM curriculum. This curriculum includes science, technology, engineering, and math.

He also mentions how “We need to make this a priority to train an army of new teachers in these subject areas, and to make sure that all of us as a country are lifting up these subjects for the respect that they deserve.”  Right outside the Richmond County school district still located in Richmond State is Henries County. Located about 20 Minutes away from Houghton High is Deep Run High School which is part of the Henries County public school district.. Deep Run High School in contrast to Houghton High has a twenty percent minority rate.

The Majority of the students that attend Deep Run High School are white. Only about two percent of the students who attend this school participate in the free lunch program.  These students also rank eighty nine percent in proficiency in math. The annual per pupil expenditure in Henries County Public Schools is 9,650 per pupil in 2013. The annual per pupil expenditure in Richmond County Public Schools is 11,218.

This proves that it the inequities do not lie in the shortage of money being provided by the local and federal funds. Individuals from families that are still together completed, on average, more years of school and are also more likely to graduate from high school, attend college, and complete college compared to students raised in blended or ingle-parent families. Their parents have more involvement in their school activities and have higher expectations for them. The answer then to closing the gap on students’ performance in school has to start with a program to inspire low income families to stay together and build a strong support system for one another to be successful. The Strengthening Families Program (SSP) is a nationally and internationally recognized parenting and family strengthening program for high-risk and regular families. This program teaches parents and students with broken home valuable skills that can increase their chances for success.

It also has been shown to reduce problem behaviors, delinquency, and alcohol and drug abuse in children and to improve social competencies and school performance. Past research reported that teenage males from minority groups often engage more in high-risk behaviors at school such as weapon possession, gang involvement, and fighting than any other group. The Strengthening families program’s take home DVD had ten thirty minute sessions for parents and students to watch together.

These DVD’s can be viewed at the discretion of the family preferably once a week. The Strengthening Families Program is an excellent tool to use to help aid in situations where families are in low income single parent or poverty stricken situations. Grappling with the issues of equity and excellence has become ever more complex solutions seem more and more remote as the divides between socioeconomic groups become greater and greater, and ethnic diversity of the student population continues to present ever-increasing stress on the educational system..

Because of inequalities students that attend school in Henries, Chester field and surrounding counties are receiving a higher level of education than the students that attend school in certain parts of Richmond. Whether or not they are income based, minority based, or Just lack of good parenting. The fact still remains that there is a dish connect between students that are being raised in such a close proximity. How can people on one side of the tracks sit around and watch students on the other side of the tracts do so poorly in school? This problem is deeply rooted in the community as well as in the individual family unit.

Through the implementation of people that care and some programs that could aid in recovery one day we will all be able to stand hand and hand and succeed as a whole.

Read more

Parenting Styles and Culture

Given the diverse cultures that can shape parenting behavior, some basic assumptions regarding the links between parenting styles and developmental outcomes may not be universal. Much research has been conducted on the different parenting styles across cultures. There are also many myths about which parenting style is the best or the most beneficial to the social development of children. Reviewing past literature on this subject matter reveals that the authoritarian parenting style produced more overt aggression and many more social interaction difficulties among young children.

Recent research point to the theory that the best parenting style is dictated by the culture in which it is practiced. A study by Whaley (2000) states that although a positive correlation between the use of physical discipline (i. e. , pking) and disruptive disorders in children is found in studies of European American families, research on African American families has found a negative association or none at all. Moreover, a review of the literature indicates that the positive association between pking and child behavior problems is bidirectional for White families, whereas it is the product of reverse causation (i. . , negative child behaviors result in pking) in Black families. The implications of these sociocultural differences for parent training programs and the family study of disruptive behaviors are discussed. This study establishes that the positive correlation between the use of physical discipline and disruptive disorders in children found in research on European American families does not appear to be generalizable to African American families. Black parents’ use of pking is more a consequence than a cause of problem behaviors in children.

Moreover, parents in the African American community, especially in low-income urban areas, may use authoritarian methods in attempts to protect their children from noxious social environments. Awareness of sociocultural differences in the relationship between parenting practices and developmental outcomes would put Black parents’ behavior in proper perspective, as well as encourage interventions and policies that address community-level problems to ensure healthy child development in high-risk environments.

On the one hand, these controlling methods of parenting may be effective in reducing undesirable or high-risk behaviors of Black children and adolescents. On the other hand, they may place African American children at risk for other problems, such as academic failure and child abuse. Thus an appreciation of sociocultural differences in parenting styles and related outcomes should not lead to unconditional acceptance of punitive behaviors because of their cultural significance. Alternative strategies that are culturally compatible, such as response cost, may be useful if the motivation is child oriented and not parent oriented.

Sensitivity to differences in parenting styles across cultures simply means that the functional significance of pking should be explored, and the ecological context in which families live should be taken into consideration in theory, research, and practice devoted to understanding environmental influences on child development. Research conducted by Hart and colleagues (1998) shows that maternal and paternal parenting styles and marital interactions are linked to childhood aggressive behavior.

This study included an ethnic Russian sample of 207 families of nursery-school-age children. Results corroborated and extended findings from Western samples. Maternal and paternal coercion, lack of responsiveness, and psychological control (for mothers only) were significantly correlated with children’s overt aggression with peers. Less responsiveness (for mothers and fathers) and maternal coercion positively correlated with relational aggression. Some of these associations differed for boys versus girls.

Marital conflict was also linked to more overt and relational aggression for boys. When entered into the same statistical model, more marital conflict (for boys only), more maternal coercion, and less paternal responsiveness were found to be the most important contributors to overt and relational aggression in younger Russian children. Similar to Western findings, the results of this research supports the idea that the absence of positive parenting is as important in the development of childhood behavior problems directed toward peers as is the presence of negative parenting.

In terms of the development of aggression, lack of Russian paternal responsiveness and more maternal coercion remained significant contributors to overt and relational aggression, regardless of which other parenting style or marital hostility variables that they were pitted against in the regressions. Although this supports prior work concerning relationships between maternal coercion and aggression, it highlights the importance of paternal responsiveness that involves positive, playful, and engaging interactions in children’s social development.

It is interesting that only maternal (and not paternal) psychological control was found to significantly correlate with Russian preschoolers’ overt aggression. However, when pitted against the effects of other predictors in the regression model, its contribution was reduced to a marginal trend. Although these findings appear to suggest that psychological control may not be as powerfully related to aggressive outcomes in young Russian children, firm conclusions should be reserved for future researchers using a variety of methodological approaches.

A study conducted by Chen and colleagues (2000) included a sample of children, initially 12 years old, in the People’s Republic of China who participated in a 2-year longitudinal study. Data on parental warmth, control, and indulgence were collected from children’s self-reports. Information concerning social, academic, and psychological adjustment was obtained from multiple sources. The results indicated that parenting styles might be a function of child gender and change with age.

Regression analyses revealed that parenting styles of fathers and mothers predicted different outcomes. Whereas maternal warmth had significant contributions to the prediction of emotional adjustment, paternal warmth significantly predicted later social and school achievement. It was also found that paternal, but not maternal, indulgence significantly predicted children’s adjustment difficulties. The contributions of the parenting variables might be moderated by the child’s initial conditions.

Since the implementation of the one-child-per-family policy, maintaining the balance between expressing love and affection and imposing requirements and limits on the child has been a significant challenge to Chinese parents. Many parents in China are concerned about whether their child is indulged or spoiled because they may give too much attention and privilege to the child. Does parental indulgence predict children’s problems? An examination of this issue would not only help us understand the meaning and significance of the parenting dimension, but would also have practical implications for childrearing in China.

The results of this study indicated that paternal indulgence had significant and negative contributions to the prediction of later leadership, social competence, and academic achievement. Furthermore, paternal indulgence significantly and positively predicted later aggressive-disruptive behaviors. Thus, children who had indulgent fathers tended to be less competent and more maladjusted in both social and academic areas than other children. Maternal indulgence, in general, was not significantly associated with children’s adjustment outcomes.

Two possible explanations may be offered. First, because parental indulgence is likely to result in a lack of social assertiveness and poor skills in self-control and self-regulation, which are important for social interactions and school performance, the effect of indulgence may be more salient on social and school adjustment than on psychological well-being. Fathers may focus mainly on children’s social functioning and school achievement, whereas mothers may be more sensitive to the children’s emotional adjustment.

The review of literature on the different parenting styles and child development in different cultures support the current theory which states there is no particular parenting that is best over all others. There are, however, parenting styles that are more suitable to different cultures. Furthermore, it is becoming more clear and evident that not only culture determines which parenting style is best for children. Many other factors, such as social and economic circumstances play a significant role in this matter as well. References Chen X. , Li D. , Liu M. (2000).

Parental warmth, control and indulgence and their relations to adjustment in Chinese children: a longitudinal study. Journal of Family Psychology 14(3) pp. 401-419 Hart C. , McNeilly-Choque M. K. , Nelson D. A. , Olsen S. F. , Robinson C. C. (1998). Overt and relational aggression in Russian nursery-school-age children: parental style and marital linkages. Developmental Psychology 34(4) pp. 687-697 Whaley A. L. (2000). Sociocultural differences in the developmental consequences of the use of physical discipline during childhood for African-Americans. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 6(1) pp. 5-12

Read more

History of Childhood

The history of childhood is a subject of controversy. Since serious historical investigation began into this area in the late 1960s, historians have increasingly divided into two contrasting camps of opinion, those advocating “continuity” in child rearing practices, and those emphasising “change”. As there is little evidence of what childhood was really like in the past, it is incredibly difficult for historians to reconstruct the life of a child, much more the  “experience” of being a child. In so many ways, the history of childhood is a history that slips through our fingers.

Few Parents have left written records of how they reared their children, and fewer still children have left us their story. It is largely because of this lack of evidence, and because the evidence that does remain – advice literature, journals and letters, are so open to differing interpretations, that historians have divided over major issues such as whether children were loved and wanted in the past, the way parents viewed their children, and the treatment they received. The first major works into the history of childhood were those of Philippe Aries and Lloyd De Mause, Centuries of Childhood, and The History of Childhood respectfully.

Both historians took a “progressive” approach to history, and concluded that the treatment of children by their parents and society have improved considerably throughout the centuries. Both paint a very negative image of childhood, and family life in the past. Lloyd De Mause went as far as saying that;  “The history of childhood is a nightmare from which we have only recently begun to awaken. ” (1)  believing that; “The further back in history one goes, the lower the level of child care, and the more likely children are to be killed, abandoned, beaten, terrorized, and sexually abused”. 2)  Aries concluded that there was no concept of childhood as a state  different to adulthood in these centuries, and therefore, even if parents did feel affection for their offspring, they did not fully understand how to respond to the emotional needs of their children. This argument gained further weight with the mammoth work of Lawrence Stone on the history of the family and family relationships in the early modern period, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500-1800. Stone too focused on the “evolution” of the amily through these three centuries, arguing that the family changed from being of an “open lineage” structure in which family relationships were formal and repressed, to the “domesticated nuclear family”, which resulted in “affective individualism”. In the early 1980’s, Linda Pollock in her influential, yet highly controversial work, Forgotten Children : Parent – child Relations 1500-1900, harshly criticised all the arguments made by Aries, de Mause and Stone. From her intensive study of over four hundred diaries and journals, she argued that childhood experiences were not as grim as they suggest it was.

She strongly denies that there were any fundamental changes in the way parents viewed or reared their children in this period;  “The texts reveal no significant change in the quality of parental care given to, or the amount of affection felt for infants for the period 1500-1900”. (3)  Pollock’s work has received support from Rosemary O’Day and Mary Abbot, who both deny that childhood “evolved” considerably in this period. In recent years, it is this approach that is beginning to predominate, but Pollock et al are not without their critics.

Therefore, as there are two so very different approaches to the history of childhood in the early modern period, attempting to determine just how methods of child rearing did change in the past is fraught with difficulty. In order to determine how something has changed, it is necessary to determine what it changed from, and there is no consensus of opinion as to how parents reared their children in this period. However, it is perhaps important to emphasise that it is not so much the structure of childhood that is difficult to assess, in the sense of describing what the children actually did, but the attitudes and values of the parents.

It is difficult to determine whether these changed, if they did how they changed, and why they changed, and the outcome of these changes. Between 1500 and 1700, the actual structure of childhood changed little. In this pre-industrial age, England was largely agricultural. Amongst the poor, children were put to work at early ages on the farm, sowing seeds, chasing birds, and other rather unstrenuous activities. If they could not be made useful on the family’s own farm, then they would be put to work elsewhere.

This was a characteristic of both the town and the country, although in the towns, children were put to work a year to eighteen months earlier. This applied to both sexes, although boys were more likely to be put to work earlier, and girls to stay home a little longer to help their mother. Children who could be spared from the farm, or whose wages would not be missed, were often put to school, to receive a form of elementary education which would help them acquire the necessary literacy and arithmetic they would need in life.

Most of these children, especially the girls, remained in school only for a short period, and would then be expected to work to help their family financially. Some children never attended school, but were taught by their mothers at home. Amongst the wealthier social groups, boys, and to a lesser extent girls, would be provided with a more rigid and higher standard education from the age of six or seven upwards. This could take the form of private tuition, a school education, or education in someone else’s house.

It has been argued by Stone, Aries and De Mause, that there was a growing awareness of childhood as a state different to adult hood in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. According to them, society was beginning to appreciate that children were not miniature adults, but were at a substantially lower level of maturity, and so had distinct needs from adults – protection, love and nurturing. Society was now becoming more aware of the importance of parental socialisation, that it was socialisation that largely determined the kind of adult a child would eventually become. Lawrence Stone and J. H.

Plumb believe the emergence of this new characteristic can be traced in the artistic development of the period. Stone argues that in the middle ages, children were invariably portrayed as miniature adults in paintings, without any childish characteristics. However, into the sixteenth century, images of children began to acquire a distinct identity, and childish appearance. Plumb argues that from the late seventeenth century onwards, children can be seen playing, sketching and amusing themselves in portraits, which he suggests shows there was a definite concept of childhood emerging in this period.

He also argues that the increasing availability of toys and literature especially aimed for children, shows a greater understanding and appreciation of childhood. It is certainly possible that children were seen in a different light in this period, considering the influence of the Renaissance and the Reformation on ideologies(an explanation that Stone touches upon and will be discussed in more detail later), but the evidence employed by both Stone and Plumb needs to be used with supreme caution. Art and literature may reflect to a certain degree the alues and attitudes of a given society, but they are also limited by the technological understandings of the age. It could be argued that the change in the portrayal of children was due entirely to the Renaissance influence on physical realism in portraits, and the development of superior artistic skills as a consequence. Also, as artists became more familiar with painting the human form, they may have been more comfortable in exploring other forms of presentation, moving away from the stiffness of some early portraits, to the more naturalistic settings of the eighteenth century.

Similarly, the commercial availability of toys and children’s literature may have been the product of a growing materialistic and technological world, not an indication of a greater awareness of childhood. Just because toys were not commercially available in the past does not mean that the need for children to play was not appreciated. Parents may have manually made toys for their children. Indeed, Linda Pollock argues that imaginative play was common through out this period.

The literary development could likewise be due to the growing influence of the printing press which opened up new avenues for literature. There is no conclusive evidence that there was an increase in the “concept of childhood” in this period. Linda Pollock, and Rosemary O’Day, strongly deny that there was, arguing that parents had always been”aware that childhood was different in kind from adulthood. ”  (4) Stone et al have argued that once society became aware that childhood was a distinct state from adulthood, this effected the relationship between parents and children.

They argue that now parents were aware of the needs of children, they were more equipped to respond to them, and give their children the care and protection they so desperately needed. Both Ralph Houlbrooke and Lawrence Stone argue that during the course of the seventeenth centuries, families became more openly affectionate. They see the decline in observances such as the “blessing” as evidence of a more loving family relationship. The “blessing” was considered to be important in what it symbolised about the inferiority of children to adults.

Children were expected to seek their parent’s blessing every morning and night. Even in adulthood, children were expected to ask for this blessing every so often. There were also other customs to remind children of the respect, duty and obedience they owed their parents. Boys for example, were expected to take off their hats in their parent’s presence, and allegedly girls were expected to kneel before their mother. The Countess of Falkland for example, knelt before her mother even in adulthood, and even though she had obtained a higher social status than her mother through marriage.

Ralph Houlbrooke argues that in the seventeenth century such practises were declining. The “blessing” he says was replaced with a “goodnight kiss”, and the other customs relaxed. He believes that the increased intimacy in letters between parents and children in the seventeenth century are firm evidence of a growing affection and intimacy. He claims that parents were now using phrases such as “my dear child” or “my darling”, instead of the colder ones of “child” or “son, daughter”. However, again this evidence needs to be treated with caution.

In this period, society was becoming increasingly literate, especially amongst the wealthier social groups, and a greater depth of education may have meant that individuals were now able to express themselves easier. It must also be remembered that the English language itself was going through a transition at this time, greatly benefitting from the Renaissance emphasis on the vernacular. Lawrence Stone sees the decline in the customs of swaddling and wet-nursing from the late seventeenth century and particularly into the eighteenth, as a further indication of a growing affection.

However, again, this depends on interpretation. It was not for any abusive or oppressive reason that parents swaddled their children, but because they genuinely believed that it was for the child’s benefit, in that it prevented the child’s limbs from growing crooked and deformed. Arguably the decline of this practice was due to an increased scientific understanding of the human body, rather than an increase in parental affection towards children. Also there is no solid evidence that wet-nursing declined in the seventeenth century.

Indeed, for much of the eighteenth century, wet-nursing continued amongst the nobility and gentry. Admittedly it was increasingly the subject of attack, as puritans in particular believed that all mothers should breast feed their own children, but that this practise continued in aristocratic circles (it had never really been a custom amongst the poor) well into the nineteenth century, it cannot be used to illustrate a growing affection between mothers and children. Lawrence Stone argues that one of the reasons why parents and children were emotionally distant in the early part of this period, was ecause of the high infant mortality rate. He argues that parents were reluctant to invest love and care in their children, because of the pain losing them would cause. However, Linda Pollock identifies a flaw in his thesis. She argues that if this was the case, then one would expect the indifference towards children to have prevailed as long as the death rate. Stone puts forward that parents were becoming closer to their children in the late seventeenth century, where for some pars of the country such as Devon, more children were dying in this period than had done in the sixteenth century.

Pollock argues that contrary to reducing parental emotional investment, the high death rate only served to heighten their anxiety in times of illness, and increase their level of care. However, Lawrence Stone does not believe that all the consequences of a growing awareness of childhood as a distinct state from adulthood, had a positive effect on the relationship between parents and children. He suggests that with the awareness that behaviour depended on discipline, parents took their duty as disciplinarians more seriously.

He claims that whipping and flogging now became common place in an attempt to instil morality in their children. He also attributes this development to the Protestant Reformation. He argues that Protestantism emphasised the notion of Original sin, and contrary to Catholicism, did not advocated that the salvation of children could be obtained by baptism. Protestants argued that faith alone determined salvation, and therefore, for a child to be saved, faith was essential. This led to a decline in the importance of baptism, and increasingly parents delayed the ceremony, for days, weeks, or even months.

There was now added pressure on parents to ensure that their children fully comprehended the basics of Christianity, especially their own sinfulness, and need for repentance and salvation. This possibly increased the importance of the mother as teacher, and arguably created the potential for a greater intimacy between mother and child as they spent more quality time together. However, Sather argues that following the Reformation, the relationship between parents and children became characterised by  harshness and cruelty, as physical punishment became the norm, especially amongst Puritans. He who spareth the rod hateth his son” was universally repeated. Undoubtedly this theoretically sets the scene for a darkening of childhood experience. However, although the Reformation may have encouraged a harsher disciplinary role of the parents, as always, it is necessary to bear in mind that theory does not always convert into practise successfully. It is certainly possible that puritans treated their children harshly in this period, tyring to get them to conform to their notions of godliness, but it must be remembered that for most of this period puritans were a minority, and a rather unpopular one at that.

It was they who predominantly wrote the “conduct-books”, advising parents on how to rear their children, and although some historians such as Stone have taken their contents as evidence of a harsh attitude towards children, it is necessary to remember that  conduct books state how things ought to be, not how they are. Admittedly there were parents who did physically punish their children. John Aubrey, a contemporary of the seventeenth century, stated that harsh physical correction was rife, and that “the child perfectly hated the sight of his parents as the slave his torturer”, but this is highly debatable.

It is likely that if children were abused in this period, the abuse was more likely to be inflicted by the children’s employers who abused their powerful positions. There are numerous accounts of young boys and girls having been physically abused by their masters. However, it is significant that many parents on discovering this abuse, issued a suit against the guilty person, suggesting that such treatment was far from socially acceptable. Parents wanted their children corrected, and arguably would not have opposed to a physical chastisement if essential, but did not want, or approve, of excessive correction.

That physical punishment existed, cannot be taken as evidence of increased parental harshness towards children. It is clear from several journals that parents who did feel the need to physically punish their children, were often deeply troubled by the incident, and if possible, preferred not to inflict physical pain on their child. Also, there is little evidence for Stone’s theory that parents saw their children as innately evil, and thus needed excessive disciplining.

Indeed, considering that writers such as Thomas Gataker had to continuously press the point that it was “an idle concept” to suppose that “religion and godlinesse is not for children”, suggests that most parents did not accept the belief, even if it was widespread amongst puritans. In all likelihood, most parents took the view of John Locke, that children were morally neutral, and that it was up to them by both love and appropriate correction, to bring out the good in their nature. Another change which it has been argued came about partly because of the Reformation, was the “educational revolution” of the sixteenth century.

Certainly as Protestantism was the religion of the “word” both printed and preached, a higher degree of literacy was needed to read the Scriptures, and intellectual training in order for the people to comprehend doctrinal issues. Also, following the Dissolution of the monasteries and chantries, the educational provision made by these institutions ceased. Thus, if children were to be educated, schools had to be refounded, which is largely what happened in the reign of Edward the Sixth. This movement was also due to the Renaissance, which increased the value of education, especially amongst the gentry.

With the Renaissance came ideals of gentility, advocated by Castiglione and Thomas Elyot. Education was seen as a prime requisite of gentility, for not only did it cultivate the mind, but it distinguished gentle persons above the poor, and justified their privileged positions. Not surprisingly then, with such a high regard being attached to education, rich parents, who perhaps were not entirely literate themselves at the beginning of this period, increasingly ensured that their sons had a decent education.

Therefore, towards the end of the sixteenth, and especially into the seventeenth century, it became common for the wealthy to send their sons to the new grammar schools. If they were particularly wealthy, they would employ a tutor steeped in classical knowledge to educate their sons. That parents sent there children away from home at early ages has been taken as evidence of their indifference, but in all likelihood, when parents sent their children away, they believed it was in the best interests of the child. Ilana Ben-Amos argues that parents would only part with their children when it was absolutely essential.

In the  early seventeenth century for example, it was only after James Fretwell, who was then only four years old, came home weeping because he could not manage the distance between Sandal and Yorkshire every day, that his father out of concern for his welfare put him to lodge with a widow in Sandal. Even then, the child came home on Saturdays. It can also be seen that attitudes towards female education amongst the wealthy also changed in this period. In the Renaissance years, it is arguable that the education of women was encouraged. Thomas More himself said that “I do not see why learning ay not equally agree with both sexes”, and the period produced a number of learned women; Mary and Elizabeth Tudor, Lady Jane Grey, and even Mary Stuart. Antonia Fraser argues that during Elizabeth’s reign, there was a silent pressure on wealthy men to have their daughters educated. If they were to attend court without having some knowledge of Latin and the Classics, they would compare unfavourably with the intellect and knowledge of the Queen, and would thus not create a favourable impression on the men they were expected to “secure”.

Also, with there being a female monarch who was renowned as a scholar, it would be rather unmet to press the point that such a sphere was a man’s preserve. However, with the Queen’s death in 1603, and the accession of a man, such opinions were able to surface, and there was an increasing desire to exclude females from learning Latin and the classics. This was given impetus by the attitude of the sovereign himself. When King James was presented with a learned woman, he rather sarcastically remarked, “but can shee spin ? “.

This gave no incentive for the great families of England to subject their daughters to an expensive classical education, which many believed they had not the intellectual capacity to understand, and anyway would serve them no useful purpose in life. As the seventeenth century wore on, the difference in the educational expectations of the sexes became more marked. Girls were virtually excluded from grammar schools, and the notion of the “accomplished woman”, which was to play such a prominent part in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, gained a whole new lease of life.

Parents were now encouraged to have their daughters educated in those subjects deemed suitable for girls – sewing, knitting, music, and French. Over the course of the seventeenth century, schools for girls flourished, and were dedicated to educating girls in these increasingly regarded female traits. Stone argues that the end of the seventeenth century saw a more humane treatment of children being adopted, but arguably this was not the case for aristocratic girls. Physical deportment was becoming increasingly important.

The corset, which had long been in existence, now became regarded as essential, and the eighteenth century saw the development of other techniques to help create the perfect figure, such as stocks and backboards. Stone argues that one of the signs of a growing affection between parents and children, was the decline of parental control of their children’s marriages, but if this was the case with boys, the marriage of girls was still often tightly controlled. In concluding then, it can be seen that trying to determine to what extent there were important changes in the way that children were reared in this period, is fraught with difficulty.

The conclusion drawn, depends to a large degree on the approach adopted. Those historians such as Linda Pollock who advocate “continuity”, would argue that there were no fundamental changes in the way that parents treated and reared their children in this  who advocate “change”, would argue that there were important changes in these years. They would argue that there was a growing intimacy and affection between parents and children, a growing concern for the latter’s welfare, and although the Reformation initially introduced a period of increased severity, the general trend was the improvement of the treatment of children.

Certainly there were changes. There was an increased importance placed on education; the increasing segregation of male and female spheres within education; children were maintained at school longer; apprenticeships were lasting longer; there was an increase in the importance of early religious instruction; child baptism lost it’s immediate  significance; swaddling becoming less widely used, and into the eighteenth century there was a decline in the practice of wet nursing.

However, these changes are largely external changes. They tell us little about the way the “experience” of child rearing changed, if it did, during this period. Arguably, the more fundamental aspects of child-rearing, such as whether or not there was an emergence of a “concept of childhood” in this period, whether there was a growing intimacy between parents and children, and whether or not parental discipline became more severe, can only be speculated upon.

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp