I'm curious how Judith Harris came to write an essay like this 8 years after she was first on the cover of Newsweek saying the same thing. I mean, the fact that she blieves this is hardly new.

Anyway, I couldn't disagree with her more profoundly, as I wrote in this essay for Salon.com countering her views right here:

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/1998/09/17feature.html

Reply

I see what she's getting at, but how can a bad parent have an effect, and a good parent not? We've all seen evidence of bad parenting affecting children (and I'm talking about neglect/abuse) and we generally assume that these events have fostered certain behaviours in children. So why is it wrong to believe the opposite? It just sounds like the "kids were nicer when we beat them" argument taken to the nth degree. We can't prove that children were happier or angrier 50 or 60 years ago since no one was doing any research in the field. (That I know of-I'd love to see the data if it's out there)


The hypothesis sounds simplistic to me, but I'd like to read the book and see if it makes any more sense then. If parents had no influence, I cannot imagine the point of having offspring that require parenting beyond a short time period.

Got me thinking though....

Reply

The mistake she makes is saying that parents have little or no influence. Of course we have influence on our kids! My kids are learning to love because of the affection they receive from their mom and dad. They're learning to laugh because I'm passing on my sense of humor to them via Bugs Bunny, Mr. Bean, and Laurel & Hardy. They're appreciating the value of education because I'm teaching them who math, history, and science related to the world around them.

Most of all, my kids are developing a a high level of self-confidence because of the words and actions of their parents.

My kids will be happy, well-adjusted, intelligent adults because of many different factors, but the biggest influence of all will be the way their mom and dad raised them.

Reply

She is probably oversimplifying. I mean, it is likely that there is some validity to the idea that modern parenting trends are too focused on self-esteem, and that every child has a baseline personality that is not formed by 'nurture,' but I think there is way too much evidence out there (e.g., studies about the effect of absentee fathers, for example) that parents have a major role in shaping the way kids cope.

Reply

Of course parents have influence on their kids. They don't have total control, though.

All of us have free will. We each have our own personality and we each make our own decisions.

I didn't use your link, only your summary. It seems to me that the parents she is talking about love their kids, but don't know the "right" way to express that love *and* help their kids grow into fine, upstanding citizens. It's not that they have no influence, it's that their actions are ineffective at producing the desired results.

Reply

I think her argument that 'doling out too much praise which in turn devalues it and turns the kids into the masters of the home' proves her main point wrong (her argument turns against itself). If the parents are raising kids who are 'masters of the home' who seemingly are so because of doting parents...then the parenting has had an effect (albeit not a positive one). If kids are catered to so much that they lose any drive to succeed on their own, then the parents have had an effect. So, as someone said above, why isn't the reverse true?

I think kids are born with different hard-wired personalities to parents with a certain parenting styles. Kids born to thrive in unstructured environments may not respond well to very structured parenting, or (alternatively) they may adapt and be just fine. Anyway, I agree this theory is WAY too simplistic. HOWEVER, I like and do agree with the idea that parents need to give themselves a break (or maybe bring our egos down a knotch). Every little mistake is not determinative in defining our child's future.

Reply

I think that she is *somewhat* right. I don`t think that she is saying that parenting does not matter at all. It sounds to me more like she is saying that parents do not have to worship their children in orcer to raise them properly. A child doesn`t need to have the parents faking it and making them think they`re wonderful and perfect in order to grow up. I think that her definition of "Parenting" is just that. Kids will grow up to value themselves without the constant praise and "self esteem building" that seems to be so popular now. I side with her opinion that parents need to have a strong and loving relationship with their children - more along the lines of that with your spouse. I know I certainly don`t spend huge amounts of time trying to "mold" my husband, so I don`t see any reason to do so with my son. Even at 2 he has a strong personality - That isn`t going to change without the most extreme bahavior on my part, and I do not plan to even attempt to change it. I think too many parents blame themselves for the quirks and bad habits of their children when these things would be there no matter what sort of parenting they were receiving. Genetics play a FAR greater role in determining the outcome than they are really given credit for.

For example... My mother is a total failure at any parenting. I was raised from around 9 months by my grandparents, then went to live with her at 13. I ended up raising my sister and brother as she was never around.

Fast forward to now - it seems that I am VERY much like my father, down to interests, quirks, and the way I deal with problems. You could contribute that to parenting.... Except that my mother left my father soon after I was born and I have only met him a handful of times in my life. There is no reason for me to be like him other than genetics.

(Currently trying to find and contact my father, if only to let him know that I didn`t end up like my mother.)

Reply

I don't know if any of you were watching the Nanny 911's and Supernanny shows, but it became really apparent to me that it was the parents that needed to be addressed in their style of parenting that was causing their kids to act out. The parents were yelling and disrespecting each other and their kids, so then their kids were doing the same, at home and at school or in the world outside the home. This seems like obvious evidence that the parents were having a direct and immediate effect on their children. Nanny comes in, gives them some techniques to use, mostly based on strucure and mutual respect, and lo, the children get it together, the parents start communicating with each other and the whole family is on the right track.
But after reading her article, Judith acknowledges her simplification, saying it was for the sake of scientific clarity. She actually really seems to be saying respect your kids as individuals, not mini-me's to be molded into some perfect human machine. She says "A good relationship is one in which each party cares about the other and derives happiness from making the other happy. A good relationship is not one in which one party’s central goal is to modify the other’s personality."
I agree there is a problem with praise, it does devalue the effort. If you tell a child he is "good" for doing something, then logic follows that he is "bad" when he does not do that same thing. for example you say "you are such a good girl!" when you see your daugther share her toy. The next time she is playing, if she wants to keep playing with her toy and not give it up to little susie, then is she a "bad girl"? What message are we sending? That your actions define you. That parental love is conditional?
I agree Judith seems to be making an inaccurate blanket statement, but I think her point is more to value your kids for themselves, not for who they may become.

Reply

"Nanny comes in, gives them some techniques to use, mostly based on strucure and mutual respect, and lo, the children get it together, the parents start communicating with each other and the whole family is on the right track."

Having seen those shows, I strongly suspect that a *lot* of the turnaround is due to the power of editing.

Reply

Two different questions - do parents influence outcome, or do parents influence personality?

Both are yes and no, and complex I think.

I believe it is obvious that parenting affects children's behaviour...but maybe not outcome in life or personality. A lot of that may have to do with both parents and circumstances in life expereiences, the inherent personality/temperment of the child etc...

I do think that what she's saying is that today's parents often try too hard to provide everything for their kids and kids don't get the chance to develop self esteem thru overcoming adversity. Self esteem isn't something parents can GIVE or PROTECT...it is earned and developed by facing adversity in life and getting thru it successfully. If adversity isn't provided (i.e., life is so good b/c of "ultra perfect" parenting) then kids may create their own adversity thru acting out, developing fears and nightmares, attracting situations or making choices that result in adversity.

Personality is a combo of nature and nurture. Environment and genetics are so linked biologically it's nearly impossible to separate them.

I have found with my clients, and in my own healing that beliefs about self can develop very early - prenatally/birth and early infancy. These "beliefs" about self then guide us in our life, our decisions, how we interpret the world around us and our relationships.

And of course, parents are a part of that, but not the only factor, and certainly not necessarily an overriding one.

Reply

I'm often struck by how different toddler personalities are. When my playgroup gets together, it's fun to see how my co-workers' children reflect the personalities of their parents. Luke is serious and needs approval, like his mother. Hayden is rambunctious, but deeply sensitive like his father. My son is curious and goofy, like his parents.

Of course we influence our children's personalities. They will be individuals of course, and not mirror images of us, but we influence their character and morality. We're raising our son to be conscious of other people's feelings, to always be striving for integrity and to make honorable decisions, even if it causes hardship. We praise him a lot, and lavish loads of love, but he'll still know right from wrong. He'll know he can make mistakes and his parents will still love him, but he'll know that bad behavior has consequences.

Reply