Mags GarganAuthoritative parenting which is child-centred and responsive is also assertive and demanding
I was challenged by a parent recently about an article I wrote berating a father who had allowed his son to buy a video game with an age rating of 16. I was told I had assumed that this father had given no considered thought to whether or not his son should have the game and my dismissal of this parent’s choice was unfair and unfounded.
With this in mind I reread the piece and found that there was much about what parents shouldn’t do and not very much about what they could do.
For me, parenting is about how we can positively engage with, nurture and place reasonable boundaries around our children and the nub of the issue revolves around managing the tension between an overly-protective, stifling environment and one that allows children the freedom to flourish and develop into adulthood in their unique style. This continuum runs from authoritarian, ‘mammy knows best’ style of parenting to the permissive ‘do as you please’ style. My aim is to land somewhere in the middle.
Authoritative parenting which is child-centred and responsive is also assertive and demanding; it requires more effort than simply refusing or agreeing to everything. In the case of the video game purchase, my position on the father’s choice may have appeared authoritarian but it was an informed position. I wonder if the father made an informed choice in facilitating his son’s access to the game; did he source any relevant information, aside from the admonition provided by the shop assistant in order to make a good choice for his child.
Disadvantaged
It seems to me that much of the time parents just don’t engage in this process. They provide what they think their children want, fearing that their child will be ostracised or somehow disadvantaged by not having what ‘everyone else’ has and in the guise of their child’s best interest they give him what he thinks he wants.
However, allowing something is not the same as actively deciding in its favour. When we passively allow something and things go wrong, we can shake our heads in disbelief and ask, how could we possibly have known? Ignorance is not a valid defence. We are always accountable for our choices or the lack of them. At the very least if we do our best to source the information we need to make an informed choice, it is a choice we can stand over; even if it is one our child is initially unhappy with.
When it comes to video games it is certainly true that age ratings of games can be about the level of difficulty of a game.
Obviously if the game is a difficult one with puzzles or challenges suited to older children, buying it for a younger child may simply lead to frustration and a waste of money. If, as is more often the case, the age rating is a matter of unsuitable content then ultimately parents have to make a judgment on what they deem appropriate for their child.
Making informed judgments in the case of video games is easier than ever to do.
A basic internet search for game reviews can provide a clear account of what the game involves at all levels as well as parental reviews and responses to these reviews covering the widest possible range of opinions.
Some reviews provide lists of other similar game titles at each of the younger age ratings, affording parents the option of providing an alternative rather than outright refusal.
The bottom line is passivity in parenting is overrated; we get to choose, if we could just go to the bother of looking for alternatives..