Is strict parenting ideal?

Sometimes.

No cause your kids will do stupid shit they didn't get to do when they were younger and wont learn from it. That doesn't mean you have to be slack with your kids. Find a middleground, anon.

As a high school teacher, yes.

I have had too many meetings with crying or angry mothers and fathers who don't know what to do with little Billy and his grades/behavior problems, but God forbid they take away the cell phone or video games. Strict parents are more likely to take steps at home to fix these problems.

>>17493590
As long as you're also warm and explain rationales behind your strictness. Otherwise, that kid will have a fucked up personality in one way or another.

Only when necessary.

It's possible you'll shit out a child who just happens to behave themselves and who looks up to you and tries to impress and please you because you yourself are a stable, successful, worthy role model to be respected and looked up to.
Though, there is a lot that has to do with genetics, and no matter how great of a parent you might be, no matter how great of a role model you may be, the kid will be a total piece of shit, in that situation, strict parenting is necessary. Though you must make sure there is clear communication with your child as to why you are being strict with them and what they must do for you to build trust with them. Give them some hope they can gain your trust with good behavior and relieve some of the strictness.

TL;DR Strict parenting may sometimes be ideal and necessary, though some children think that no matter how good or bad they are, their parent will always be strict, and if that's the case there is no point in being a good kid. Resulting in an endless cycle of exhaustively strict parenting and terrible behavior. A parent must communicate their intentions and potential with leniency as long as there is a "trade" with their child: good behavior/grades/etc for leniency and trust. And you must make good with that trade and give your children some slack if they have given you good behavior.

>>17493590
until your kids turn into adults and rebel against you by becoming a stripper/drug addict.

No best way of parenting recognized by modern psychology is called "good enough parenting". It still instill love and caring in child but also leaves much freedom and let the child grow as a person.

>>17493619
this is true.

you must give your child clear explanations. if you can't come up with clear explanations and you're playing mind games for dominance(ie not allowing your child to attend the high school football game despite decent behavior the past month), you will probably psychologically damage your child.

I have a cousin who's mom was extremely strict. Never allowing her to have a boyfriend, attend any after school events, or leave the house after school, she was forced to babysit her young siblings. She ended up dropping out of high school and moving in with her boyfriend once she turned 18.

Meanwhile my wife had ridiculous freedom as a kid. She was permitted to carry a debit card with her parents bank account, allowed to drink underage as long as she was at home, allowed to have friends and whatever after school. She is extremely frugal with her money, she hates the taste of alcohol and we rarely drink, she's college educated, etc. I have never heard of a parent allowing their kid to have a debit card with access to their bank account, when she told me that I thought that was fucking crazy, but she was able to have that privilege because they trusted her, and she had earned that trust. I'm sure every parent would love to be able to give their kid a few bucks for their little recreational activities like getting an ice cream cone if they are with their friends, or being able to get a movie ticket, but they could never have that trust with their child because most kids would go crazy with that shit.

>>17493618
Eh that doesn't work as well as you'd think.

>>17493590
Middleground. My parents were able to use my older sister as an example and I knew that I'd get consequences if I acted up. I grew up without a whole lot of problems between my parents and I. I think that you should be strict when the child deserves it. Being to strict on kids will make them rebellious and probably just shitty people because of that. Just be normal. Set boundaries. Nothing really good comes with setting ridiculous rules.

I don't think it's ideal to be strict, nor is it ideal to be super carefree

You have to strike a balance, punish them when necessary, let them have fun when necessary, you don't want them to hate you, but you also don't want them to be able to walk all over you

>>17493590
>Is strict parenting ideal?
Not in the general sense, but there are times when it is necessary. Most kids probably need it on occasion, and a few even need it more than occasionally.

>>17493590
You can't just pick a style, you should make sure what you are doing is actually making a positive impact.

My father's household was very strict, and everyone did fairly well into adulthood. He thought that would work with his kids too. When I got a spanking, it seemed more like him relieving his anger than for my benefit. I started savagely beating a smaller child at school when I couldn't cope with my own anger. This went on for a while. He never told anyone but I believe this is why he switched schools.

My adult sister refuses to speak with my father.

He knows he's made mistakes, but doesn't know any other way. So, comes the hands off approach. My young brother doesn't know how to speak to people as a result. He spends all his free time alone.

tldr: There is no do-over. Treat every kid like a custom project.

The ideal is to have a kid who dosen't require strict parenting because they have the right motivations.

>>17493590
As long as your strictness never gets in the way of your love of children, or somehow come off like you do not love your kids, then yes, it will give them discipline. That being said, if you go overboard, kids generally will end up doing dumb shit. Basically, if you love your kids more than anything, what would you do for them? You would keep them safe from things they don't yet understand, give them every opportunity to succeed, and take care of their needs.

>>17493590
If you want your kid to succeed in life then a strict life is best. Like the Asian parents stereotype. But as other anons said you need to strike a balance somewhere otherwise the kids won't take it and they will turn against everything you stood for just out of spite.

File: Lindgren_1960.jpg (202KB, 837x660px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 837x660px

>>17493590
Astrid Lindgren helped make spanking illegal in Europe but even she believed that children need structure and discipline.

Just don't be a cunt about it I guess.

>>17493590
Coherent parenting is better.
Let the kid know the rules, and the punishments.
Be strict, but fair.

>>17493618
There's a lot of wiggle room between hands off and being overly strict. If you're overly strict the kid will blow up the first moment he gets, but he also won't have any history to keep himself in check.

There's a reason women from strict and religious families are notorious for becoming the biggest sluts on college campus.

File: 16c.jpg (29KB, 216x338px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 216x338px

My brother got a lot of shit from our parents because he was acting stupid. He thought it was unfair that I was left alone even though I I didn't do anything to deserve it.

Stupid children create "strict" parents in a way. I'm always skeptic when someone says their parents were strict or unreasonable.

>>17495047
>Coherent parenting is better
Holy shit this so much. None of this constantly bursting into your son's room to scream at him for no explained reason, or spending days in a shitty mood with him but never telling him what he did wrong (because it was nothing probably). Fuck you mum.

>>17493590
I think it shows a certain lack of parenting skills, especially when the kids are old enough to understand the consequences of their actions.
If you have to be strict with a 17 year old it means that you haven't educated them well enough to know they shouldn't act in a certain way.

In my opinion, the best way to treat a child is being constant, fair, present, supportive and understanding. Things like:
> Being a good example, and respect the rules you set for them
> Be clear about what they can and cannot do
> Explain to them why they have to act in a certain way
> Praise them for behaving well, punish them (not physically) for not behaving well
> Trust them, and make sure they can trust you
> Set reasonable standards and help them to reach them

File: 6341635643.jpg (16KB, 204x205px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 204x205px

How do you find evidence-based sources on how to be a good parent? There are books about how to raise a dog. Are there also books about how to raise a human?

>>17495086
Yes, of course.
There's a whole "parenting" category for books on amazon, with almost 70k titles.

>>17495090
How much of it is bullshit, though? I want strictly evidence-based methods.

>>17495096
That's fucking retarded and you know it. Every person is different, children included. To try and apply the same logic to every child only breeds turmoil, that and when you have a book raising a kid and something goes wrong you just panic and make shit worse.

>>17495136
>Every person is different
This is fucking retarded and you know it. Do you think astronomers can't understand how stars work because "every star is different?" No, they study a lot of stars and discover a multitude of types of stars. Brown dwarfs, red giants, pulsars, etc. A good astronomer can identify the individual quirks of a single star by using the acquired knowledge from all the other stars he observed. In a similar way an educated parent should be able to recognize the quirks of her child if she had knowledge of children and parenting in general. You are just being anti-intellectual. Worse than a luddite.

>>17493590

I hated my parents for this. I was bullied in elementary where i had no friends.Went to high school where i had some friends but they didn't let me go out with them i was 16. When i hit 18 i got drivers licence. I wanted to go out with my friends 35 km distance they didn't let me go by myself. First time they let me go somewhere by car by myself was when i hit 20.

I will fucking hate both of them for this, they made me a socially retarded by not letting me go out. I'm 23 never had a GF, KV.

I'm depressed since 18.not having a gf while all my friends had multiple girls. Friends don't even bother inviting me anywhere because my answer from age 16 was my parents won't let me go out.

>>17495160
>Comparing stars to children.

So when all that logic doesn't help, and it regularly doesn't, what do you do? I'm not trying to say that books don't contain valuable information on kids. I'm saying relying solely on them, especially after having your child is doing both yourself and your child a huge injustice.

>>17493590
It is better than not giving a fuck about your kids.
Like anything, it isn't black and white.

>kids should be disciplined
But they shouldn't be hit or sent to bed without food for minor offences, or for first offences (save for serious fuck ups)

>kids should be kids
which is true, if they fall over, you let them decide if it hurts, you don't make a fuss about it, 99% of the time they will shrug it off and carry on.
At the same time, you shouldn't be overbearing, helicopter parents are an issue, kids need to learn things for themselves, sometimes ignoring them when they fall over (and obviously haven't broken anything) is best for them.

>you should make your kid partake in sports and hobbies
You should introduce kids to new hobbies and sports, let them decide and then nurture whatever they enjoy doing.
I was made to play football (soccer) every Sunday when I was a kid because my parents wanted me to be sporty, I hated football and I don't bother watching it now I'm in my late 20's.

There's a few examples, the key is to find the balance between you dictating their lives, them being "free spirits" and not letting them do stupid/dangerous things.

>>17495160
Do you think astronomy generalization is foolproof? Do you think modern pedagogy does not thoroughly investigates generalization vs individuality themes?

>>17495160
Stars dont have a consciousness. You think hitting 10 children after they do something will always yield the same results?

>>17495168
I say that being uneducated is the worst crime imaginable. If your child is acting up you will not know what to do. Maybe you'll try spanking him because you never read a book that says this is harmful to children?

>>17495173
I am saying exactly this but anon seems to think that scientists don't do this and therefore science is unreliable and that you should just improvise and or whatever your grandmother says is good parenting.

No not at all. I don't know how/why strict parents haven't gotten the memo yet.

Strict parents ---> rebellious child
Flamboyant parents ---> relaxed child

Pretty simple.

I had chill parents for the most part. Let me get what grades I desired yet strived for me not to fail. They wouldn't be like some parents who threaten or force their kids to make good grades. I envy my parents of how good of a job they did as raising me.

>>17495187
Where did I say that books are bad? I said relying on books alone is retarded.

>>17495233
I don't know what kind of weird hyperbole you're imagining then. Books are something to acquire genuine knowledge from, it's not a printed computer program for computer people to install and follow blindly. Not even even the residents of Balnibarbi are that retarded so I don't know why you assumed I was.

Find a middle ground. Punish your child if they do something wrong, and explain why the thing they did was wrong, but reward and congratulate them if they do something right (not all the time though, mediocrity shouldn't be rewarded). Be their friend but also their authority figure. They shouldn't fear coming to you for help with something, and they should look up to you. Love them and make sure they know you love them. Let them do what they want if it's harmless. If they are curious about something (like sex or alcohol) then talk to them about it.

>>17495265
Books can be used to acquire knowledge true, but that knowledge doesn't do you any favors when you do what the book says and your kid is still screaming.

Also I'm basing my argument off >>17495086

I don't care how knowledgeable you get from books, trying to raise a child based off "proven routines" or "tried and true" parenting techniques might sound great on paper, but as a father of a two year old who's been through books I can say that they give you a basic idea of what you're supposed to do, not what to do when your child refuses to bathe and corners cats that haven't been declawed.

>>17495136
I agree. My mother had tons of these books and all that resulted was she still continued to nag and restrict my freedom in the name of safety and our religion.

What ended up happening is I would read the parenting books myself and I would figure out what my mother wanted. Except I couldn't do it. Starting from middle school and into high school, I was always tired, and I needed my time to unwind and relax - as entertaining games were, I wanted to hang out with friends without having to her things pre-approved. I wanted to explore without so much supervision.

Now I'm in college, and thankfully I somehow can make friends but to this day my mother doesn't approve that I stay out late or have friends outside my religion. I don't have the heart to tell her I quit it.


Parenting can end up being weird. You don't want to end up with the child self-parenting, because then they'll be autonomous but will probably lack the right reasons for doing something/lose an important moral or empathy dimension.

I agree with the others. Explain yourself clearly. And then, listen to the reasons and signals your child gives. If you never let your child so much as go out and ride a bike through the neighborhood, and get all mad when you discover porn on his computer, think about why he ended up going on these sites. And Jesus fuck, get rid of the total obedience shtick. If your religion teaches it, ignore that aspect. It fucks up the personality.

>>17493590
And one more thing about grades, because I think my parents actually handled this aspect well, at least. The reason my parents pressured me to get good grades was because they knew I could always get good grades. They had a benchmark for this which resort with each grade change/school change - the first grades of the school year. If I did well, it proved that I could excel in that environment. I would get rewarded. But it also set a precedent. A B was not acceptable when I already proved that I could deliver straight As without trying too hard. Lower grades were a sign of either negligence or laziness, which are things that should be eliminated.

My parents were super strict in some areas, and let me do what the fuck ever in others. School was generally the biggest strictness. My mom would make me sleep in the guest bedroom and would take away all things from me (no music, tv, vidya, exercise, books) if I got a B. But they let me throw parties and get drunk with people as long as I had straight As. She also tried to take pure control of my life, wanting access to email accounts, my computer, my phone, my finances... and this is the kind of shit she tried to pull up even into my 20s.

I eventually learned that I was going to get in just as much trouble for a B as I was an F, so I just fucking gave up and started learning to lie, cheat, and steal. I have a good job and good adult life, but on my own fucking terms. Her strictness basically just taught me to hide things from people, and always have contingency plans to keep secrets from others. Probably why I can't maintain dating relationships. I'm intensely controlling of the impression I put toward others.

File: RedWall.webm (2MB, 640x428px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x428px

>>17493590
I think as a parent it is important to be strict with the enforcement of rules that you set up. However, I do not think that you are raising a kid, you are raising an adult that just hasn't grown up. You should try your best to prepare your kid for the realities of life, and being overprotective and shielding your kid from all possible harm and danger makes for weak adults with no sense of personal responsibility. I always try to explain why we have a rule in the family, and that it is okay to discuss and argue for a change of said rules with me and my wife. Some of my kids friends have a really hard time in school, and will have a lot of really bad experiences in early adulthood either because their parents shield them from everything that is hard/sad/dangerous (the participation trophy parents), or because their bad behavior is not reprimanded (uninvolved/lazy parents).

>>17495861
>"proven routines" or "tried and true"
You must be reading shitty books or the kind of book I'm looking for doesn't exist. You should have just said so if that was the case. But I have a feeling that you're just insulting my intelligence again.

In normal cases an education is able to teach you applicable skills. My brother studied to become a teacher and he is now a teacher. He never told me that his coursebooks were useless and that the trick is actually to wing it. He could not become a teacher without studying the theory.

>>17496298
Straight up the book you're looking for doesn't exist.

Like I said, the books are good for a bit of starter advice, but you won't have an "education" on children until you've gotten one through highschool, and even then if you decide to have another kid a lot of the stuff you learned the first time around might not apply because every kid is different.

>My brother studied to become a teacher and he is now a teacher. He never told me that his coursebooks were useless and that the trick is actually to wing it. He could not become a teacher without studying the theory.

If you read a book on how to ride a bike, is that book going to give you all the ins and outs of proper bike riding? Are you going to be able to read that book front to back and still not have questions? Probably not. I'm sure your brother learned how to teach, but I'm also sure those books don't cover shit like kids that are mentally ill or have problems at home that spill into their school life.

Granted I have no idea what your brother teaches, but the logic still stands.