By Onision in Philosophy
· 13,704 views
A participant in the Onision Forum recently mentioned experiences with parenthood, prompting me to share thoughts on the subject. During my early years, I often felt frustrated by how adults managed daily life. It seemed to me that they made decisions without clear logic, sometimes appearing to choose inefficient paths that created unnecessary tension for those they were raising.
Rules Imposed by Parents
Many parents establish numerous guidelines, particularly those from the baby boomer generation. These individuals frequently set firm expectations, such as requiring rest to begin at 7 p.m., even if the next day's start time was as late as 8 a.m. This results in about 13 hours of sleep, which exceeds typical needs for many in their developmental stages. According to established recommendations, individuals aged 6 to 12 years require 9 to 12 hours of sleep per day, while those aged 13 to 18 need 8 to 10 hours (AASM Consensus). Similar guidelines confirm that oversleeping beyond these ranges can disrupt natural rhythms without providing additional benefits (CDC Sleep). Reports emphasize that enforcing more than necessary, such as 13 hours for those who naturally need less, may lead to unnecessary confinement and potential resentment (NSF Duration). For younger individuals, such as those aged 3 to 5, 10 to 13 hours aligns more closely, but rigid application for older ones often lacks justification (AASM FAQs).
When questioned about these rules, parents might respond with phrases like "because I said so." This reply lacks substance and essentially admits an absence of reasoned justification. It aligns with patterns observed in authoritarian parenting styles, common among baby boomers, where authority supersedes explanation (Parenting Science). Research indicates that such non-answers can hinder the development of critical thinking in those being raised, as they discourage open dialogue and mutual understanding. Instead of fostering compliance through logic, it promotes resentment. Studies on sleep routines show that consistent but flexible bedtimes, adjusted to individual needs, lead to better overall rest quality and emotional regulation (JPP Routines). For instance, investigations have found that strict, unexplained routines correlate with increased behavioral difficulties, while collaborative approaches improve adherence and well-being (JPP Intervention).
In contrast, evidence suggests that overly rigid sleep enforcement can lead to resistance and poorer sleep outcomes in the long term (APA Monitor). Parents who explain rules based on health data, such as the need for 9 to 12 hours to support cognitive function and mood stability, build trust (Healthy *****ren). This approach contrasts sharply with the boomer-era norm of unquestioned authority, which studies link to generational gaps in communication (Today Parent). To illustrate, if a young person wakes naturally after 10 hours, forcing an extra three hours disrupts their circadian rhythm, potentially causing irritability or reduced focus the next day, as noted in sleep research (Harvard Hygiene). Disruptions to these rhythms in youth can lead to broader issues, including mood alterations and difficulty with daily functioning (Harvard Mood). Authoritarian methods, by limiting explanations, may also reduce the ability of those raised under them to think independently or make decisions confidently (Teachable Academy). Overall, these practices highlight a disconnect between imposed rules and actual developmental benefits, leading to unnecessary conflicts.
Side note: One of the most annoying things from my own *****hood was my grandma always suggesting naps and early sleep out of basic annoyance of us. She'd call it the "blanket party" and say "time for the blanket party" but what it always came off as "I don't like your personalities, and I'm tired of you, so I'm going to force you to be bored and alone now".
Expanding on this, boomer parenting often emphasized obedience without rationale, differing from more modern styles that prioritize dialogue (Times India). Millennial approaches, for example, tend to incorporate flexibility and explanation, reducing resistance (Everymom). Studies show that when rules are presented with clear reasons, compliance increases, and emotional bonds strengthen (UCLA Parenting). Rigid enforcement, however, correlates with higher stress levels and potential long-term relational strain (APA Deprived). Parents should consider age-specific needs; for instance, preschool-aged individuals benefit from routines that include naps totaling 10 to 13 hours, but as they grow, adjustments prevent over-restriction (Sleep Foundation). Ignoring these can result in young people feeling controlled rather than guided, fostering a sense of illogical authority.
Chores and Building Skills
During my formative years, I was assigned regular household tasks, which struck me as lacking clear purpose. Parents often justify these as ways to instill work ethic, yet they failed to spark genuine interest or motivation in areas unrelated to personal passions. I preferred spending time on my computer, an activity that others might view as tedious but that engaged me deeply. Assigning mismatched tasks does not inherently create enthusiasm for unappealing work.
A more logical strategy involves identifying the interests of those being raised and directing efforts toward skill-building in those domains. For example, comparing this to animal behaviors, one would not train a fish to climb trees, as it would yield poor results; instead, focus on enhancing its natural swimming abilities. This principle applies to human development. Research supports assigning age-appropriate chores starting around age 3, noting benefits like higher self-esteem and improved social skills (UH Chores). However, studies emphasize that chores should align with individual strengths to maximize engagement (Horizon List). Reports highlight that when tasks contribute to family well-being and match interests, they foster responsibility and confidence (MSU Benefits).
Drawbacks emerge when chores are generic or excessive. Analyses indicate that overloading with unrelated duties can reduce time for homework or relaxation, leading to stress (Housework PMC). Expert warnings advise against using chores as punishment, as it associates them with negativity rather than growth (CCE Chores). In contrast, tailored education based on interests enhances motivation and achievement. Investigations show that interest-driven learning energizes academic trajectories and boosts success (Interest Matters). For instance, if a young person enjoys technology, assigning computer-related tasks like organizing digital files builds relevant skills, unlike unrelated cleaning duties.
This mismatch in traditional parenting often stems from boomer styles, which prioritize broad obedience over personalization. Modern approaches favor authoritative methods that incorporate dialogue and adaptation (Kinder Care). Why assign chores that prepare for low-skill jobs when the goal is lifelong success? Evidence indicates that interest-aligned responsibilities promote mental health and independence (Bright Horizons). Parents aiming for mastery should avoid scattering efforts across irrelevant tasks, as this dilutes expertise, per principles in vocational education research (ISLS Framework). Furthermore, excessive or mismatched chores can contribute to lower academic performance, particularly if not balanced with personal interests (PMC Housework).
To elaborate, benefits of well-matched chores include building resilience and life skills, such as organization and time management (AACAP Chores). When parents involve young people in family contributions that feel meaningful, it enhances their sense of belonging and reduces behavioral issues (MSU Encourage). However, forcing tasks without consideration for preferences can increase resistance and stress, leading to avoidance behaviors (Psychology Chores). Research confirms that *****ren who participate in chores exhibit higher life satisfaction and better self-care abilities as adults (PT Research). Avoiding punishment-linked chores prevents negative associations, allowing for positive habit formation (CCE Discipline). Interest-driven approaches not only improve engagement but also support cognitive growth, as seen in studies on motivation (Science Direct). In boomer versus millennial contexts, the shift toward personalization reflects an understanding that rigid, one-size-fits-all tasks hinder rather than help (1819 News).
Violence in Parenting
In my early experiences, my father addressed some conflicts through physical means, including an incident where he restricted my breathing for several minutes and another where he forcefully struck my hand against a metal surface (a Washing Machine). My mother employed belts for "spankings" and facial slaps. There was also a time when, after removing my door handle to limit my privacy, she used a fire extinguisher to force me out of the room by filling it with the extinguisher's discharge, an action that succeeded but left lasting resentment.
Such physical approaches raise questions about long-term outcomes. Do parents believe that inflicting harm on their offspring will yield positive results over time? Memories from early years persist into adulthood. Extensive research confirms the detrimental effects of physical punishment. Prospective studies summarize investigations showing associations with emotional problems and substance abuse later in life (Lancet Review). Research reveals that spanking affects brain regions tied to emotion regulation, similar to severe abuse (Harvard Effect). These findings hold across cultures, as per global reviews (UN Report). Later, some parents deny these events, dismissing concerns as exaggeration, a form of gaslighting that exacerbates relational strain (PT Damage). Gaslighting in such relationships can lead to self-doubt, confusion, and lowered self-esteem among offspring (Simply Psychology).
The evidence is consistent: physical punishment predicts increases in behavior problems over time and offers no benefits to well-being (WHO Report). It can impair neural responses to threats, heightening sensitivity similar to maltreatment (PMC Corporal). Globally, an estimated 1.2 billion young people face this annually, with risks to mental health including anxiety and low self-esteem (WHO Facts). Denials or gaslighting compound these effects, undermining trust and intimacy (PT Danger). Parents should recognize that such methods fail to teach positive behaviors and instead model violence, perpetuating cycles (End Violence).
The Core Focus: What Parenthood Entails
This discussion extends beyond critiquing flawed parenting to defining ideal roles. Central to effective parenthood is unconditional love, which involves accepting and supporting offspring regardless of their actions or achievements. It stems from deep familiarity gained through observation from birth onward, providing unparalleled insight into their character.
For parents who guide positively, this love flows naturally as offspring emulate kindness, empathy, and healthy habits. Psychological definitions describe it as affection without strings, fostering resilience and self-worth (PT Secret). Benefits include better stress management, physical health, and brain development (Newport Power). Studies link it to reduced stress and emotional happiness (UCLA Affection).
Reflecting on my own parents, my mother likely offers unconditional love but prioritizes her own needs. My father is more self-focused, with minimal actual involvement in anything positive in my life, leading to estrangement from not just me, but supposedly all his offspring. Ideal parents view their offspring with admiration and provide consistent support. Public criticism, such as on television (my father went on a defamatory documentary to speak ill of me... wild, I know), signals failure, as parents bear responsibility for outcomes (Family Education). Boomer tendencies toward authoritarianism contrast with modern emphases on empathy (Substack Wars).
Unconditional love protects against *****hood stress effects, enhancing immunity and handling abilities (Elite Daily). It models secure attachment, promoting healthier relationships (Newport Institute). Without it, young people may struggle with self-doubt or emotional regulation (Gottman Blog).
Ideal Reflections
Ultimately, if offspring exhibit difficulties, accountability lies with parents. As a parent myself, I prioritize avoiding blame while offering apologies freely (meaning even if I don't think I am at fault, when it comes to being a parent of my two offspring, I take the blame whenever possible to avoid creating any resentment). Boomer parents often resist apologies, labeling concerns expressed by their offspring as irrational (Filby Blog). However, research stresses that apologies strengthen bonds and teach accountability (JFP Apologies). They enhance self-worth and safety (Gen Mindful).
To repair, express sorrow and inquire how to amend (say you're sorry, ask what you can do to improve things). This simple act rebuilds trust (PMC Should). For those with boomer parents, break cycles by prioritizing functionality, kindness, and health (I wish we could just sign all our parents up to "How to be decent parents of adult offspring" courses). Regular check-ins affirm care and stability, fulfilling the parental role well into adulthood.
In summary, effective parenthood revolves around logic, empathy, and unconditional support, backed by evidence showing superior outcomes in well-being and relationships. By integrating researched approaches, parents can foster positive growth, avoiding past pitfalls. Apologies model humility, boosting self-esteem (Gen Mindful Importance). Unconditional love reduces anxiety and builds happiness (UCLA Study). Tailored chores enhance skills without stress (MSU Benefits). Flexible rules promote critical thinking (Parenting Science). Avoiding physical harm prevents long-term issues (Lancet Review). These facts underscore the need for evolved practices. This framework not only clarifies parenthood but empowers better outcomes for future generations.
But really... this might be a test of whether or not you are a great parent: Is there anything that your offspring could do that would ever make you stop loving/supporting them? (within the confines of the law, obviously) - If your answer was "no" or "highly unlikely", your offspring are probably in good hands.
The basis of a lot of our self-esteems lies within the concept we hold of how our parents view/support us. We lose the support of our parents, not only does that make us think less of them, but also leaves us doubling or tripling down on our loyalty to our own offspring so they will never feel the abandonment we do. Your leading job as a parent is to never fail to back your offspring up when they need you.
Sometimes I wish I could have had a dad like me... but then I think... maybe I wouldn't wind up as motivated to be a good dad had I never gone through what I have... and then, I think... well... then I'm lucky I went through what I did, so at least my son & daughter can have what I wish I had.
Better they have a better life, than just me.
Recommended Comments