Why should children all the way to adulthood follow social and ethical standards?
From Benjamin Spock’s permissive parenting to the present “gentle parenting,” the message has been the same: Don’t traumatize the child by frightening them with strong consequences as it might arrest their natural development. A heavy dose of negative reality might turn children into fearful, withdrawn, and introverted people with no backbone to execute their will.
On the other side of the spectrum, a person without experiencing consequences for certain behavior can easily be attracted to behavior that can lead to disastrous results. Naïve children can be led into a life that has no positive future. Loved ones should warn the child about going down the wrong path and administer consequences if they do not heed the parents’ commands.
A threat of a strong consequence should prevent someone from attempting to do something forbidden. Eventually, when a youngster is told,” No, or else,” the child might test the waters by doing what is prohibited. If the strong consequence is not given, the reputation of the person giving it will be weakened and the child will not learn the necessary lesson.
As seen in our present criminal justice system, adults who commit serious, violent crimes are often not punished severely, sometimes not at all. They may receive a “slap on the wrist” punishment, such as minimal time in a correctional institution with a fine that often is dismissed. Many criminals are getting off scot-free, so they continue to do criminal acts. The lack of negative consequences can tempt a person to take the risk of even higher-level crimes.
Although this is bad enough, the true damage to the American culture is the lack of punishment in the way we are raising our children. Today’s child-rearing tells parents that children should not be threatened with physical or mental consequences. Spanking is said to be abuse and even giving a consequence for lying, such as, “If you lie to me, you will lose your phone, dance classes or sports team,” is seen as excessive.
According to our mostly permissive child-rearing experts, consequences create too much anxiety for the child. In other words, the punishment is worse than the crime. This false permissive child-rearing philosophy has removed any fear in the child’s mind that doing something considered wrong will result in punishment that actually affects them.
If the child does not believe the parents’ pronouncements, why would they follow what the parents say? They would not and do not. Without some fear, they would disregard the command until they felt the pain of disobeying.
For a person in charge to maintain their credibility, they have to back up their statements with action. If they fail to do so, their power is lost. This requires a parent not to make ridiculous threats that cannot be carried out by them but to give reasonable consequences for the misbehavior and follow through with them. If an authority figure says they are going to do something, they need to do it to maintain their credibility.
The ultimate thing an authority figure can do is to develop the reputation that their word is gold. Their consequences must be formidable but fair and significantly strong enough to convince the potential transgressor that crime does not pay.
The legitimate fear of a strong punishment for taking the wrong path will lead to keeping the person doing what is right. Parents need to insist their children be held to the highest social and ethical standards to direct them toward a successful and healthy life.
Domenick Maglio, PhD. is a columnist carried by various newspapers and blogs, an author of several books and owner/director of Wider Horizons School, a college prep program. Dr. Maglio is an author of weekly newspaper articles, INVASION WITHIN and the latest book entitled, IN CHARGE PARENTING In a PC World. You can see many of Dr. Maglio’s articles at www.drmaglioblogspot.com.
