Helicopter parenting vs. Tiger Mom vs. .... Suzuki Mom???

[Bluegoat]

I don't think it's really fair to say that these designations are all about what other parents do that is different from you.

 

There is always an element of that in every individual situation and our own situations influence our thinking. 

 

But there are, I think, real trends and differences in attitude to childrearing. 

 

Someone told me that somewhere (NL, maybe) helicopter parenting is nammed after the sweeper in curling games, who sweeps ahead of the rock so it slides down the ice without impediment.  That is how I think of it.  I'd also say that the intent is to refer to someone who does this beyond the point where it is really of benefit to the child and may actually be detrimental.

[shawthorne44]

Is there a name for that person?    That is one of my unofficial job functions.  I deal with the meetings, conference calls, emails, planning, prioritizing, so that another person can keep his head down and do nothing but work on stuff using my priority list.  

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I don't think it's really fair to say that these designations are all about what other parents do that is different from you.

 

There is always an element of that in every individual situation and our own situations influence our thinking. 

 

But there are, I think, real trends and differences in attitude to childrearing. 

 

Someone told me that somewhere (NL, maybe) helicopter parenting is nammed after the sweeper in curling games, who sweeps ahead of the rock so it slides down the ice without impediment.  That is how I think of it.  I'd also say that the intent is to refer to someone who does this beyond the point where it is really of benefit to the child and may actually be detrimental.

 

That may have been the original intent, but it's not the way I usually see it used.  It is often used as a judgmental put-down -- an us vs them sort of mentality. It's frequently aimed toward families that have a healthy, happy dynamic that is just different in one way or another from the person or persons doing the labeling. In many cases, nothing detrimental is actually going on -- just something different. 

[vonfirmath]

As for school music - I found this interesting.  When I was a kid, I started violin at school in late 4th grade.  The teacher told me to practice at home for 15 minutes a day.  My parents would occasionally ask me if I did it, but that was all from their side.  (They didn't read notes and that was long before the internet.)  If I didn't come back to school the next week being able to play more and better, the teacher would scold me.  Come high school, the violin was out, so they suggested the French horn.  They told me to go teach myself how to play my brother's trumpet, and come back when I could play songs.  A week or two later, I returned and they rented me a French horn for $1 and said go teach yourself how to play it.  Band class was for playing together with the other 50 instruments, not for teaching individuals how to play.  Of course you practiced at home, or you made a fool of yourself and got an F in band.

 

Fast forward 40 years.  My kids started band in 4th grade.  They had 1 instrument practice and 1 band practice per week at school.  Their teacher did not ask them to practice at home.  At first I did ask them to do so, assuming the teacher must have expected it, but nope.  So this year in 5th grade, I told them that surely they will be required to practice at home.  Nope.  About 6 weeks into the school year, the teacher started offering extra credit for home practice, to make up for missed classes at school.  There is no requirement to practice at home, though it is recommended.  I'm surprised.

 

As for recorder, my kids practiced theirs at home in order to pass the tests at school.  Like any test, I guess you don't need to practice if you are a fast enough learner.  I can't remember if I ever practiced recorder at home or not.

 

I did learn how to play the clarinet in school band -- in junior high. (6th grade)

 

Yes, in high school they were not teaching the kid how to play a instrument. But VERY few kids could have done what you did -- self teach on an instrument without an outside tutor in less than 2 weeks to playing in the band.

 

In junior high, we were expected to bring in parent signed off practice logs and were graded on the amount of practicing done, not just on how much better we played.

[Bluegoat]

That may have been the original intent, but it's not the way I usually see it used.  It is often used as a judgmental put-down -- an us vs them sort of mentality. It's frequently aimed toward families that have a healthy, happy dynamic that is just different in one way or another from the person or persons doing the labeling. In many cases, nothing detrimental is actually going on -- just something different. 

 

That's true of a lot of lables, though, people apply them in ways others think are wrong.  I think it is probably rare that a elicopter parent really thinks that is what is going on, they think they are being helpful/reasonable. 

[Bluegoat]

Yep. Most families will hang out in the middle - some freedoms, some restrictions - some will be way up one end or the other. But really, most of us are just trying to do our job with the tools, the kids and the challenges we have, and giving each other some grace would go a long, long way.

 

I refuse to buy into the pitting of mothers against each other. Yes, the extremes concern me. But I assume they come about for a reason which isn't 'I hate my child and want to destroy their future'. 

 

None of us are experts, not even the so-called experts. Each relationship is unique, and while societal trends may exist, and swing the centre one way or another for a time, labelling and judging each other is never a great response.

 

I think it is only partly about extremes, it is also about trends.  What does it mean that suddenly university profs are getting parents calling about their kids on a regular basis?  Or that it is so common in some classes for parents to do the kids projects?  These social changes can be significant.  And sometimes that can edge a whole population toward extremes, so they come to seem like the middle.

[SKL]

Speaking of too much parental help:

 

My kids' school doesn't let kids do certain projects at home.  The assumption is that if the projects go home, the parents will help too much.  Unfortunately, that disadvantages slower but hard-working kids who can't finish during class time.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

That's true of a lot of lables, though, people apply them in ways others think are wrong.  I think it is probably rare that a elicopter parent really thinks that is what is going on, they think they are being helpful/reasonable. 

 

Which, I suppose, is one reason I try to avoid labels. They don't seem to be overly helpful, especially if there isn't agreement about what they mean. 

 

I'm also not sure how applying a label to individual parents or even groups of parents will help to correct a concerning social trend. The parents are often reacting to some societal issue that is much, much bigger than they are. Labeling parents doesn't begin to get to the root of the problem. It hurts and undermines. It doesn't solve anything. 

[IsabelC]

But hasn't labelling always had a function in terms of social cohesion? You have group norms, and when somebody doesn't sufficiently conform, the group labels them to apply a social sanction to the deviant individual while bolstering the normative behavior and maintaining status quo.  I wonder whether the practice could be more maladaptive these days partly because there really isn't the traditional split between normal vs alternative anymore? Or were there always numerous different approaches, only now we are much more aware of them? 

Edited November 23, 2016 by IsabelC

[IsabelC]

 Bingo.

 

Although, let's not pretend these are labels we give parents.

 

These stereotypes are often highly gendered - how often do we hear about 'tiger dads' or 'helicopter dads' ?

 

It's just another way to critique mothers. 

Absolutely.  Just like we don't hear about The Daddy Wars, or men who 'juggle' their career with their parenting.  Because dads only come in three flavors: uninvolved, involved but less so than the mother, and "Wow, you're soooo lucky!" (AKA your children's father actually does his fair share of parenting and/or household duties).

[Arcadia]

These stereotypes are often highly gendered - how often do we hear about 'tiger dads' or 'helicopter dads' ?

 

It's just another way to critique mothers.

Before Amy Chua's book, many Asian (regardless of nationality) dads are also called hothouse parents or teased/chided as Kumon parents from when I was a kid. It is not only the Asian moms that get called hothouse parents. The tiger mom term started after her book.

 

I haven't heard or seen anyone label someone as helicopter mom or dad in real life. I see that term only in articles posted on Facebook by friends who post all kinds of parenting articles anyway.

[Arcadia]

Another "label" that showed up on articles shared on my Facebook feed was "Snowplow mom".

 

Boston Globe

https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2013/11/09/parents-overly-involved-college-students-lives/mfYvA5R9IhRpJytEbFpxUP/story.html

Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-braner/soccer-mom-helicopter-mom-or-snow-plow-mom_b_5206924.html

Today Parents

http://www.todaysparent.com/blogs/on-our-minds/snowplow-parenting-the-latest-controversial-technique/

[Tohru]

Meh, it's all relative...

 

Basically, the definition of Tiger Mom is 'anybody who pushes their child more than I push mine (and possibly I'm feeling jealous of how well her kids do)'. 

Helicopter parenting equals 'watching over the kid to a greater degree than I do (and maybe I feel inferior, and offence is the best form of defence)'.

 

Suzuki is just an approach to teaching / learning music. It can be done Tiger Mom style (a la Amy Chua) or not so much; while parental involvement is required, the pushing can be very gentle.

 

 

 

:hurray: :iagree: :hurray: :iagree: :hurray:

[shawthorne44]

That's true of a lot of lables, though, people apply them in ways others think are wrong.  I think it is probably rare that a elicopter parent really thinks that is what is going on, they think they are being helpful/reasonable. 

 

I know some that are proud of the label.  

[Bluegoat]

It's tricky to talk about a phenomena though without some kind of description or word to refer to it, and a widely recognized one is generally the most useful.  That's the point of language , isn't it?  If I want to discuss, say, what I think is a trend to authoritarian parenting among a certain group, is that invalid because I use the lable "authoritarian"?  Would it be better if I listed the qualities of authoritarian parenting each time I want to refer to it, even within a discussion?  If I define it for my own purposes can someone else not use the same term to talk about the same thing, even in a response to me? 

 

I think that would be almost an impossible way to talk or write.

 

I think the wider discussion of helicopter parenting and free range parenting as had some positive effects - people seem more aware that they may need to be a little proactive in giving kids access to free time and independence.  I've actually been seeing kids out and about a bit more, in parks and bike riding, over the past year or so.  So I'm not inclined to think its just some way to criticize other people for the sake of it.

[Bluegoat]

I know some that are proud of the label.  

 

Yes, a few, though I think that tends to be in the sprit of embracing what others feel to be a negative label. 

[Tohru]

Labels are a polite way to insult someone.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, my thoughts are that in the past, rather than labeling, we used words such as: "strict", "controlling", "lenient", "babying", "too permissive", "negligent".

 

Now we use labels to mean several of those words at once. So I hear "helicopter" as saying: the parent is controlling, babying & negligent.

A tiger parent is too strict, controlling and negligent.

Free-range is too lenient, too permissive and negligent.

 

However we can't/don't use those direct adjectives anymore.  And no one wants to say the real thing they're insinuating: "that parenting is negligent."

 

 

ETA: "adjective: negligent: failing to take proper care in doing something or

failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances"

Edited November 24, 2016 by Tohru

[maize]

Our best friends are a dutch/german couple, and their kids are(/were boohoo - they moved back to the NL) our kids' best friends. The cultural differences were so striking as an American, and even as an American who was raised as free range as it got. Knowing them certainly changed our parenting styles because I saw how creative and independent their children were. We Americans claim to value creativity yet squash it at every turn by scheduling every single minute of our kids' lives. Now, of course, I saw a Dutch parent who is probably an extreme in many ways (not many Dutch families have 4 kids and a SAH mom), but I've rarely seen such creative and smart kids - not because of parent coaching but because of freedom.

 

Their parents practiced piano with them, though. But didn't require homework. Actually, one kid wanted to get perfect grades and his parents let him just copy the answers out of the back of his math book so as not to waste his time. But when he took standardized tests, despite being in 5th grade in a school that goes to 8th, he got the top grade for the entire school.

 

Emily

Sounds to me like you are describing a family with very high natural intelligence.

 

Parenting may or may not have much impact on that. People used to ask my mom what she did to make her kids so smart; while there were things our family did differently from many, I'm convinced genes were the biggest influence on our universally high standardized test scores.

 

Nature and nurture always interact of course.

Edited November 24, 2016 by maize

[maize]

With regard to what a Suzuki parent is, if you want to generalize it beyond it's application to the Suzuki music method I would say it is a parent who works closely with a child, especially a young child, scaffolding, modeling, and supporting that child in gaining skills they could not attain without outside help. Suzuki designed a music instruction program that could be used with very young children; it is a rare three year old who can remember everything a teacher demonstrates during a lesson and practice on their own at home. A child that age needs a teacher or mentor at every practice session--hence Suzuki's method of teaching the mother so she can be the at-home mentor for the child. This method is most applicable to the early years, few parents who did not already play the instrument keep up with their child's progression over the years, though many will stay involved to provide reminders and scaffolding (esentially, providing he child with the benefit of adult executive function skills) for many years.

[luuknam]

In junior high, we were expected to bring in parent signed off practice logs and were graded on the amount of practicing done, not just on how much better we played.

 

Seriously? I hated timing my kid's reading in K-2nd grade - I'd refuse to micromanage junior high homework.

Edited November 24, 2016 by luuknam

[Renai]

Seriously? I hated timing my kid's reading in K-2nd grade - I'd refuse to micromanage junior high homework.

 

I hear you. If I had put my K'er in school this year (would have done if I still worked at the same school), I would have either counted the time I read to her, or lied. (I'm such a rebel ps teacher, aren't I?) We're not underachievers or anything, but 5 minutes is her limit. Five, long, excruciating, minutes.

[IsabelC]

With regard to what a Suzuki parent is, if you want to generalize it beyond it's application to the Suzuki music method I would say it is a parent who works closely with a child, especially a young child, scaffolding, modeling, and supporting that child in gaining skills they could not attain without outside help. Suzuki designed a music instruction program that could be used with very young children; it is a rare three year old who can remember everything a teacher demonstrates during a lesson and practice on their own at home. A child that age needs a teacher or mentor at every practice session--hence Suzuki's method of teaching the mother so she can be the at-home mentor for the child. This method is most applicable to the early years, few parents who did not already play the instrument keep up with their child's progression over the years, though many will stay involved to provide reminders and scaffolding (esentially, providing he child with the benefit of adult executive function skills) for many years.

That's interesting to me because I don't, and never did, have any of my kids in a Suzuki program, and yet I'm pretty 'Suzuki' in my approach to music. We use the CDs of their music to do 'listening practice' as a key part of their learning. I am closely involved with the kids' practice sessions. Because violin is an instrument I never learned as a child, I bought my own violin and started learning so that I can better support my violin student kid. I'm also quite passionate about the idea that music should be for everybody, that all children can be taught music (as opposed to only those who have been arbitrarily identified as 'talented'), and that music should be a central part of everybody's education. So I'm probably as 'Suzuki' as one can be without taking Suzuki classes LOL

[luuknam]

I hear you. If I had put my K'er in school this year (would have done if I still worked at the same school), I would have either counted the time I read to her, or lied. (I'm such a rebel ps teacher, aren't I?) We're not underachievers or anything, but 5 minutes is her limit. Five, long, excruciating, minutes.

 

With my oldest it was more that he'd read for a bit, then need to go to the bathroom, or do w/e else, and it'd be a pain to actually keep track of actual minutes read without actually sitting there with a stop watch making sure he was on task. His grand total would be fine, but I was supposed to give credits in 15 min increments or something, so if he read for 25 min two days in a row, that'd be 2 credits, not 3. Or w/e kind of nonsense. I also really don't like handing my kid another book when he's read for 28 min because he really needs those 2 more minutes to get to 30.  It made reading very not fun. I know I'm too literal, but I can't do much about that, other than tell the teacher to stuff it.

[SarahW]

With regard to what a Suzuki parent is, if you want to generalize it beyond it's application to the Suzuki music method I would say it is a parent who works closely with a child, especially a young child, scaffolding, modeling, and supporting that child in gaining skills they could not attain without outside help. Suzuki designed a music instruction program that could be used with very young children; it is a rare three year old who can remember everything a teacher demonstrates during a lesson and practice on their own at home. A child that age needs a teacher or mentor at every practice session--hence Suzuki's method of teaching the mother so she can be the at-home mentor for the child. This method is most applicable to the early years, few parents who did not already play the instrument keep up with their child's progression over the years, though many will stay involved to provide reminders and scaffolding (esentially, providing he child with the benefit of adult executive function skills) for many years.

 

 

On another thread, someone mentioned that they put their kid in an outsourced Spanish class, but were using a different Spanish program for themselves to learn Spanish. And Isabel bought a violin to learn violin with her child. I toyed with the idea of picking up a recorder so I can play along with my son (perhaps an alto or tenor, so he can move onto it when he grows and his hands get big). This seems to be pretty normal behavior for those of us on this board, but in the wider world I don't think it's "normal" for parents to do this. Does this make us "better" parents? No, I wouldn't say that. We're just different. 

 

I was reading a homeschooling book where the author discusses that she ran across research which stated that homeschoolers get statistically fewer perfect SAT/ACT scores. She was curious and contacted the researcher about why he thought this was the case, and the researcher put the blame on homeschool moms being "helicopter parents." This surprised me, because though I'm not familiar with every homeschooling method (because I have not met every homeschooling family), as far as I know, the historical over-arching method of homeschooling, especially homeschooling high schoolers, is NOT something which I would characterize as "helicopter parenting." If that researcher thinks helicopter parenting is why homeschoolers don't get perfect SAT scores, I suspect he doesn't really understand homeschooling. Or maybe I just don't understand what helicopter parenting is? Anyway, the author used this researcher's comment as proof of the validity of her method of "give the reading kid the books, and let them have at it all on their own" (which she apparently thinks is a new idea in homeschooling????).

 

I think there's a lot of middle ground between whatever this researcher thinks homeschooling helicopter parenting is and the "hand them a stack of books" (though the author did add in the idea of also handing over a schedule and doing spot checks). I'm just trying to understand the difference, and how to explain it in sound-bite FB fashion.

[maize]

I think that one big factor in what is the most appropriate way of parenting a particular child is going to be that child's natural executive function ability. A child with very good executive function can, even at a young age, direct their own behavior to meet both personal goals and outside expectations. The parent of such a child needs do little more than provide opportunities and minimal support. 

 

A child with extremely poor executive function (such as one with ADHD) will flounder without significant scaffolding and support. Leaving them to their own devices is not going to cause their executive function abilities to increase.

 

Most children will fall somewhere in between these two extremes.

 

There are of course additional factors that will contribute to how much and what types of support a child needs. A child who struggles with anxiety will need different types of support than an impulsively fearless child. I think the best a parent can do is to view their child as an individual and attempt to meet that specific child's needs for both freedom and support. In other words, there is not ideal formula and we're all going to have to muddle along as best we can. And we can neither take true credit for our children's successes nor blame for their failures.

[Arcadia]

I was reading a homeschooling book where the author discusses that she ran across research which stated that homeschoolers get statistically fewer perfect SAT/ACT scores. She was curious and contacted the researcher about why he thought this was the case, and the researcher put the blame on homeschool moms being "helicopter parents." .

My kids took the SAT and ACT with kids from public and private schools since everyone gets to pick their test centers. I do see many school kids retaking SAT and SAT subject tests to aim for the 1600 (SAT) or 800 (SAT subject). Kids are aiming for MIT, Stanford, UCB, Caltech as a reach and having SAT has six test dates a year, three subject tests maximum at each sitting.

 

My oldest has a near perfect ACT score and he would need to take the ACT with writing before he apply for state universities. If he gets a near perfect again, I won't bother with him retaking for a perfect composite score of 36.

 

I would have thought helicopter moms would have read college confidential threads on SAT, AP and ACT test preparation and gotten the favored test prep books as well as a tutor for their child. Similar to tiger moms but with the aim of making test prep a more comfortable process. Unless the researcher is saying that helicopter moms are afraid of their child being upset with "imperfect" scores that they do not ask/tell/push their child to aim for it (just guessing).

 

As for getting a recorder, Dmmetler would be able to recommend suitable ones for you and your child. My elementary convent school had everyone in harmonica for 1st (6 by Jan) and recorder for 2nd, band starts in 3rd. It really depends on your child how he would take to you learning with him. My two boys feel very differently about parents learning alongside for very different reasons to other kids.

[Guest]

In the wider world, we are seeing the parents encourage their children to be mini-mes. The parent who played the harp will encourage the child to play the harp etc. They wont be playing alongside until high school, when the child is proficient enough for community opportunities that they participate in. They will not sit in with the youth orchestra even if invited, if they arent music teachers, as they want the child to benefit from the coaching with distraction from the parental presence and to buil relationships of their own.

[...................]

 

 

In our area We are absolutely surrounded by Tiger Moms and Tiger Dads. We moved just a little bit south and it's definitely better. But where we were, right by the biggest tech companies, it was insane.

 

Tiger Parents: (and this is common stuff we saw EVERY day...)

Live through their kids

Worry about their kids future 24/7

Literally stand up their 12 year old kids naked and help them dress for (swimming, dance, ballet, etc)

Scream a lot

Manipulate a lot

Keep their kids "busy" 24/7

Think "free play" is pretty much a waste of time beyond the age of 2 (not joking)

Compare their kids to others/the ideal 24/7

overprotect or underprotect (aka some Tiger Parents go with their kids literally into the bathroom at age 10, don't allow any "dangrous sports" including even the normal kids sports such as baseball, or soccer, and come over the house during every play date and stay there, or attend every birthday party. Other underprotective Tiger Parents will do weird things like stand outside the pool to hold towels for their 10 year old kids, put on their 10 year olds goggles, but then force their kids to attend two week overnight piano or instrument camps as early as age 8.....)

Math club is non negotiable for the entire family, as is any other thing they deem to be "worthy"

Some Tiger Parents will stand and scream at their child during every sporting event or swim meet, stand at the end of the lane screaming during even a swim-a-thon while their kid is doing laps, ....

parents at our old church had one of thier daughters on Adderall, so that she could "focus better"- she never "needed it" till her sophomore year of high school (maybe bcause she took the maximum number of AP classes and had two internships....she graduated with 12 AP classes)....her mom said, "I am really sad that my girls didn't have a childhood since 7th grade. I wonder if I made the right decision with their school (a very high pressure private school). But at least she's going to UCLA." For real she said that.

 

It's not a made up thing for the Tiger Mom book. It's very real and very damaging. A lot of the kids we know were very lonely, and very dysfunctional. We know

 

I guess there are different ways of parenting. I think parents need to walk a fine line and kids need to be taught responsibility and to be self directed.

 

I recommend the book THe Dolphin Way. It is written by an Indian woman who witnessed the damage done by Tiger Parents over a 20 year period and her recommendation (proven successful with her own kids and all her patients) about how to teach children to find their own way and be successful without ruining your relationship with them or damaging them with the high pressure of a Tiger Parent

Edited November 27, 2016 by Calming Tea

[...................]

And no, since I live in the Hot House, I can tell you it is NOT a fake label for "anyone that is pushier than I am"
 

There is a range of normal parenting, some are a little more pushy, some a little less pushy, some that are more strict and less strict, soem that differ their parenting based on the child (as I do) trust me...you know a true Tiger Parent from a million miles away !!!

[Bluegoat]

 

We are absolutely surrounded by Tiger Moms and Tiger Dads.  We moved just a little bit south and it's definitely better.  But where we were, right by the biggest tech companies, it was insane.  

 

Tiger Parents: (and this is common stuff we saw EVERY day...)

Live through their kids

Worry about their kids future 24/7

Literally stand up their 12 year old kids naked and help them dress for (swimming, dance, ballet, etc)

Scream a lot

Manipulate a lot

Keep their kids "busy" 24/7

Think "free play" is pretty much a waste of time beyond the age of 2 (not joking)

Compare their kids to others/the ideal 24/7

overprotect or underprotect (aka some Tiger Parents go with their kids literally into the bathroom at age 10, don't allow any "dangrous sports" including even the normal kids sports such as baseball, or soccer, and come over the house during every play date and stay there, or attend every birthday party.  Other underprotective Tiger Parents will do weird things like stand outside the pool to hold towels for their 10 year old kids, put on their 10 year olds goggles, but then force their kids to attend two week overnight piano or instrument camps as early as age 8.....)

Math club is non negotiable for the entire family, as is any other thing they deem to be "worthy"

Some Tiger Parents will stand and scream at their child during every sporting event or swim meet, stand at the end of the lane screaming during even a swim-a-thon while their kid is doing laps, ....

parents at our old church had one of thier daughters on Adderall, so that she could "focus better"- she never "needed it" till her sophomore year of high school (maybe bcause she took the maximum number of AP classes and had two internships....she graduated with 12 AP classes)....her mom said, "I am really sad that my girls didn't have a childhood since 7th grade. I wonder if I made the right decision with their school (a very high pressure private school).  But at least she's going to UCLA." For real she said that.

 

It's not a made up thing for the Tiger Mom book. It's very real and very damaging.  A lot of the kids we know were very lonely, and very dysfunctional.  We know 

 

I guess there are different ways of parenting.  I think parents need to walk a fine line and kids need to be taught responsibility and to be self directed. 

 

I recommend the book THe Dolphin Way.  It is written by an Indian woman who witnessed the damage done by Tiger Parents over a 20 year period and her recommendation (proven successful with her own kids and all her patients) about how to teach children to find their own way and be successful without ruining your relationship with them or damaging them with the high pressure of a Tiger Parent

 

They sound a bit like hockey parents, here.

 

When the parents are getting into brawls over the game, you know there is something weird going on in that parenting culture.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Bluegoat

[Renai]

They sound a bit like hockey parents, here.

 

When the parents are getting into brawls over the game, you know there is something weird going on in that parenting culture.

 

Bluegoat, you might want to delete the first line of the quote.

 

ETA: to clarify - you may want to delete the first line of Calming Tea's quote in your post.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Renai

[...................]

It's both /and - it's like most things in life - a Cycle

 

A dear friend of mine (now 50 years old) was raised by an Asian Tiger Parent. It is very prevalent among Korean, Chinese and Japanese parents here. And goes back at least 90 years that we know of.

 

They sometimes affect the non Asian Americans around them ...obviously the culture around you will affect you.

 

But usually it's the parent and the culture the parent grew up in. And usually it is generational.

 

And obviously it's a spectrum like so many things as well.

 

But think overall yes parents are overprotective AND overinvolved in unhealthy ways...not just Tiger Parents. I myself am

Guilty of some over protection which I have to actively work against. Life is scary and hard and control is an easy coping mechanism.

[MotherGoose]

I wonder if we are all tiger and helicopter on some things and not others. For example: my kids, at 7 -and 10, were playing outside barefoot when it was about 50 degrees out. Their feet were literally red with cold. A friend came by with her kid, correctly dressed for weather and said, very nicely (no ill will towards her at all!)your daughters feet are making me cold! I agreed with her, and suggested to my kids that perhaps they might consider putting on shoes. Her child is always correctly dressed for weather, mine are not, because i figure they are old enough to figure this out for themselves. I do push more if we are going out of the house, but if they are just going to backyard i don't. We live in a climate where no one is going to be frostbitten. But she allows liberal screen time, and I don't. She pushes more for piano practice But has the one child, I have three, and I do what I can.

[...................]

^^ these are all good questions Sadie.

 

I thInk homeschooling CAN be one way to make life more healthy. :)

[Bluegoat]

If parents are overinvolved ( and by what do we measure that ?! - mere contrast to earlier times ? - lack of involvment is neither historically standard nor always benign) why might that be ?

 

It's not because parents are stupid. 

 

If life is scary and hard, and it's making parents behave in overprotective ways, then shouldn't we be looking at ways of making life less difficult ? Less frightening ? Rather than simply saying to parents - stop being so overprotective! and making it a personal or a group failing.

 

Sure, look at where its coming from, and try and address that.

 

A lot of conversations I've seen about these phenomena do involve those questions.  Why do parents in some cultures seem so competative or success oriented, or why do people overestimate dangers to kids, or fail to appreciate benefits to theings they think are risky.

 

Sometimes I've seen really good ideas about change.  Looking at liability issues, for example, or suggesting we examine how authorities treat various situations, or linking it to fears around social mobility.

 

Some of the things are difficult to do anything about.  Making sure everyone gets a living wage is a tall order.  But in other cases the main thing is probably going to be changing attitudes.  So, maybe you think twice about letting your kid walk to school, and then some other parents do the same because it doesn't seem so strange.  Getting people thinking about it seems to be the key, there.

[luuknam]

If parents are overinvolved ( and by what do we measure that ?! - mere contrast to earlier times ? - lack of involvment is neither historically standard nor always benign) why might that be ?

 

It's not because parents are stupid. 

 

If life is scary and hard, and it's making parents behave in overprotective ways, then shouldn't we be looking at ways of making life less difficult ? Less frightening ? Rather than simply saying to parents - stop being so overprotective! and making it a personal or a group failing.

 

Except life isn't scary and hard. At least not compared to way back when or compared to some geographical areas. A few centuries ago, it was practically a guarantee that not all your kids would make it to adulthood. So trying to make sure all your kids turned out fine would've been a fool's quest - way too many things out of your control. Whereas now people seem to think that it is all under their control, and that if something bad happens to their kid is their fault. Making life safer isn't going to make that better.

[SKL]

Good point - making things safer and easier only tends to give people more of a sense that if humans just do the right things, everything will be perfect.  So, no excuses.  No "that's just the way he is."

[maize]

Except life isn't scary and hard. At least not compared to way back when or compared to some geographical areas. A few centuries ago, it was practically a guarantee that not all your kids would make it to adulthood. So trying to make sure all your kids turned out fine would've been a fool's quest - way too many things out of your control. Whereas now people seem to think that it is all under their control, and that if something bad happens to their kid is their fault. Making life safer isn't going to make that better.

I think there's some truth in this.

 

The tendency towards smaller families also contributes to more intensive parenting--it is simply not possible to pour as much individual focus into each of five or ten kids as it is into one or two.

 

My mom had tigerish tendencies, there were parts of Amy Chua's book that made me laugh in recognition--but her energy was spread over ten children not two, which diluted the effect significantly.

Edited November 28, 2016 by maize

[vonfirmath]

Seriously? I hated timing my kid's reading in K-2nd grade - I'd refuse to micromanage junior high homework.

 

My daughter is in K now and they don't have timed reading. Just write down the books read. (For an incentive. Not for a grade. When the child fills three pages of reading logs, they get to eat lunch with their teacher. It's a HUGE deal to my daughter. Both books read to her and books she reads herself counts. So we do a good mix)

 

My son only had to actually time the amount of reading one year -- other than that, they wanted the names of the books read kept track of.  I knew he was reading PLENTY of time, so I estimated the time and didn't keep a clock on it. The teachers were fine with that.

[FloridaLisa]

I'm going to come back to this thread when I'm on my next break today but I wanted to make a book suggestion. I read TigerMom's book and was appalled at the WAY she went about pushing her children. It was extreme and seemed to be at the cost of relationship. I think there's a better balance. 

 

And that's what I found in this book: Top of the Class: How Asian Parents are Raising Top Achievers and You can Too. It was written by a daughter cheering how her parents had helped she and her sister in their education. There was no toxic fall out -- it showed a healthy, purposeful, encouraging parent child relationship. 

 

https://www.amazon.com/Top-Class-Asian-Parents-Achievers/dp/0425205614/ref=sr_1_fkmr2_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1480353760&sr=1-1-fkmr2&keywords=asian+parents+how+educate

 

Lisa

[daijobu]

Except life isn't scary and hard. At least not compared to way back when or compared to some geographical areas. A few centuries ago, it was practically a guarantee that not all your kids would make it to adulthood. So trying to make sure all your kids turned out fine would've been a fool's quest - way too many things out of your control. Whereas now people seem to think that it is all under their control, and that if something bad happens to their kid is their fault. Making life safer isn't going to make that better.

 

I respectfully disagree.  Sure, life is easier here than in Syria.  And it's easier now than in the middle ages.  But life isn't easier now than it was in the 1950s, when you could coast through high school, have fun, and get a high-paying factory job that could pay for a house, boat, college education for your kids, plus a pension.  Even now a college education guarantees nothing except a job as a barista.  

[luuknam]

I respectfully disagree.  Sure, life is easier here than in Syria.  And it's easier now than in the middle ages.  But life isn't easier now than it was in the 1950s, when you could coast through high school, have fun, and get a high-paying factory job that could pay for a house, boat, college education for your kids, plus a pension.  Even now a college education guarantees nothing except a job as a barista.  

 

But why are we comparing to the 1950s? In the middle ages people weren't tiger parenting or helicopter parenting or w/e. Hard and scary does not automatically lead to overparenting - plenty of times it leads to underparenting or w/e parenting. Overparenting really is about the illusion of control, as far as I can tell.

[Bluegoat]

But why are we comparing to the 1950s? In the middle ages people weren't tiger parenting or helicopter parenting or w/e. Hard and scary does not automatically lead to overparenting - plenty of times it leads to underparenting or w/e parenting. Overparenting really is about the illusion of control, as far as I can tell.

 

I think this is an element.  But maybe maybe some sort of vicarious experience as well?  Either though seems to raise the question, why do people feel that so keenly?  It can't just be western culture, since it isn't present in many countries with similar standards of living.

[...................]

All these other great points aside, Overparenting is definitely about control, definitely.

[Roadrunner]

His thread sent me watching a documentary on school children in Korea. These kids are studying until 11 PM at night, the official time tutoring services close. Western parents also value education, but not at the expense of our childrens' happiness. I say this without blinking because according to the documentary, half the kids in South Korea have thought about suicide. That is appalling. I don't know what the numbers are here, but I doubt it's anywhere near 50%.

I think a massive backlash against tiger parenting has to do with realization that the only way to stay competitive is to work just as hard as those kids especially in communities dominated by Asian immigrants and that is simply a cultural shift western moms aren't willing to make.

[Pen]

From way before the term tiger mom got popular, I had a book that described parenting as a road (one direction) with a goal of keeping toward the middle, with pitfalls of too  controlling on one side (whatever the term then was) and too permissive on the other, and way at either side the extremes where one has gone off into the rocks, or off the cliff or whatever it showed. (been a long time, or maybe I made it up myself since I have never come across the book since)    Anyway the goal was to try to aim for the middle, but it would take steering correction and changes as the child grew and changed, and maybe as the culture and times change too. And I think that the "center" may not even be the same for every child or every situation.  Including that as I recall the Amy Chua approach (meant as a positive ideal, wasn't it, not as something negative) worked better for one daughter than the other.

 

I am interested in that Dolphin Way book--I am thinking it may be another approach that similarly aims for a middle of the road approach.

[...................]

The Dolphin Way is a little different in that it's not (IMO) a middle way...it's more about just understanding the healthy human --body and mind, and social, family etc.  IOW a healthy human works, (because of one's own desire, gently guided by parents), plays, rests, sleeps, eats healthy, is active, is mindful of one's inside emotions and outside surroundings, etc.  The idea is to allow your child to learn from early on that you will consistently support and encourage them to work toward their own goals, more and more as the child gets older, but that nothing good will come of any of the striving if one is not an overall balanced person that knows how to rest, play, be a family, sleep well eat well and even just take time to breathe.

 

It's just kind of different...it's kind of like, create a safe pod and model healthy mindful, restful, behavior, and your child will follow suit.  Then, when your child is a healthy invididual, any goals or aspirations he or she may have whether very ambitious or more "run of the mill" will flow naturally and be attainable because they know how to just BE HUMAN.

 

It's hard to explain.  For me this book is a beautiful, necessary and important part of my life.  ((But again I am a type A American living among a LOT of over achievers both Asian and otherwise, in a highly educated, highly affluent place/society, and I do have (thank God) the time and even money to turn my kids lives into a never ending hamster wheel...IF I didn't know better.  Maybe this book would be more common sense for some, but I find it helpful and refreshing.

 

[Pen]

His thread sent me watching a documentary on school children in Korea. These kids are studying until 11 PM at night, the official time tutoring services close. Western parents also value education, but not at the expense of our childrens' happiness. I say this without blinking because according to the documentary, half the kids in South Korea have thought about suicide. That is appalling. I don't know what the numbers are here, but I doubt it's anywhere near 50%.

I think a massive backlash against tiger parenting has to do with realization that the only way to stay competitive is to work just as hard as those kids especially in communities dominated by Asian immigrants and that is simply a cultural shift western moms aren't willing to make.

 

 

Also, I think, reports from places like Finland, maybe Germany, that children can spend relatively less time, do less homework, have more balanced lives...and still be "competitive" suggest that there may be better ways.

[Pen]

The Dolphin Way is a little different in that it's not (IMO) a middle way...it's more about just understanding the healthy human --body and mind, and social, family etc.  IOW a healthy human works, (because of one's own desire, gently guided by parents), plays, rests, sleeps, eats healthy, is active, is mindful of one's inside emotions and outside surroundings, etc.  The idea is to allow your child to learn from early on that you will consistently support and encourage them to work toward their own goals, more and more as the child gets older, but that nothing good will come of any of the striving if one is not an overall balanced person that knows how to rest, play, be a family, sleep well eat well and even just take time to breathe.

 

It's just kind of different...it's kind of like, create a safe pod and model healthy mindful, restful, behavior, and your child will follow suit.  Then, when your child is a healthy invididual, any goals or aspirations he or she may have whether very ambitious or more "run of the mill" will flow naturally and be attainable because they know how to just BE HUMAN.

 

It's hard to explain.  For me this book is a beautiful, necessary and important part of my life.  ((But again I am a type A American living among a LOT of over achievers both Asian and otherwise, in a highly educated, highly affluent place/society, and I do have (thank God) the time and even money to turn my kids lives into a never ending hamster wheel...IF I didn't know better.  Maybe this book would be more common sense for some, but I find it helpful and refreshing.

 

 

I decided to use one of my audible credits for it. It sounds like something I'd like and that could improve our home life overall right now. Thank you for mentioning it!

[Woodland Mist Academy]

The Dolphin Way is a little different in that it's not (IMO) a middle way...it's more about just understanding the healthy human --body and mind, and social, family etc.  IOW a healthy human works, (because of one's own desire, gently guided by parents), plays, rests, sleeps, eats healthy, is active, is mindful of one's inside emotions and outside surroundings, etc.  The idea is to allow your child to learn from early on that you will consistently support and encourage them to work toward their own goals, more and more as the child gets older, but that nothing good will come of any of the striving if one is not an overall balanced person that knows how to rest, play, be a family, sleep well eat well and even just take time to breathe.

 

It's just kind of different...it's kind of like, create a safe pod and model healthy mindful, restful, behavior, and your child will follow suit.  Then, when your child is a healthy invididual, any goals or aspirations he or she may have whether very ambitious or more "run of the mill" will flow naturally and be attainable because they know how to just BE HUMAN.

 

It's hard to explain.  For me this book is a beautiful, necessary and important part of my life.  ((But again I am a type A American living among a LOT of over achievers both Asian and otherwise, in a highly educated, highly affluent place/society, and I do have (thank God) the time and even money to turn my kids lives into a never ending hamster wheel...IF I didn't know better.  Maybe this book would be more common sense for some, but I find it helpful and refreshing.

 

For some, even the idea of creating a safe pod raises cries of helicopter mom...

 

Could you elaborate more? 

 

Thanks!