# TIME Magazine Article about "Helicopter Parents" and overparenting



## StoriesInTheSoil (May 8, 2008)

Did anyone else read this article? What were your thoughts on it? I thought it was very interesting.

Do you think that "overparenting" is the problem that this article makes it out to be? Do you know helicopter parents? What is the prevalent parenting style around you, "helicopter" or "free-range"?

The original article can be found here:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...0395-1,00.html


----------



## Wild Lupine (Jul 22, 2009)

I didn't really like the article. While it is an interesting concept, I thought they treated it very poorly, quoting the most extreme examples of 'helicopter' parenting as if they were the norm. Are there really a lot of preschools under pressure to teach Mandarian?

I wonder if the examples are more from a particular socioeconomic class than the country as a whole, because many parents are working very hard just to make ends meet, and don't have the luxury of being too involved in their kids lives because they're working two jobs just to pay the rent.


----------



## Violet2 (Apr 26, 2007)

That was an interesting read.

One thought I had recently was when do I let DD play on her own? Especially outside? Given that we have sex offenders in the area? I don't want to hover, but I need her to be safe too.

I ran all over the place by myself. Almost no supervision, but I had a good head on my shoulders.

I can't picture just letting DD go off and running.

There's a logical fallacy imo in the statement (paraphrasing slightly b/c I can't remember the exact wording) "crime was down; but parents watched their children more than ever."

And I just wanted to say, umm, ever think it's harder to commit crimes under watchful eyes?

V


----------



## Violet2 (Apr 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *onemomentatatime* 
I didn't really like the article. While it is an interesting concept, I thought they treated it very poorly, quoting the most extreme examples of 'helicopter' parenting as if they were the norm. Are there really a lot of preschools under pressure to teach Mandarian?

I wonder if the examples are more from a particular socioeconomic class than the country as a whole, because many parents are working very hard just to make ends meet, and don't have the luxury of being too involved in their kids lives because they're working two jobs just to pay the rent.

I do hear about a lot of 'enrichment' type classes at daycares. My friend's kids take a preschool Spanish class. (They also offer a music class and art class for an additional fee.)

But is that helicopter parenting or simply providing a stimulating environment? Especially considering we now know kids learn languages much better when they are younger?

I don't think educational experiences can really be categorized as helicopter parenting. Even if they seem precociously young. To me, it's more the fact that Ernst and Young has to cater to parents of potential employees. That's weird imo.

And I would hate to have my childhood play level be evaluated during a job interview.
V


----------



## ~pi (May 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Violet2* 
There's a logical fallacy imo in the statement (paraphrasing slightly b/c I can't remember the exact wording) "crime was down; but parents watched their children more than ever."

And I just wanted to say, umm, ever think it's harder to commit crimes under watchful eyes?

Yes, I have the same thought every time I read one of these articles, because every single one has some variation on the theme, "The incidence of problem X has reduced dramatically, yet parents are still using problem X prevention strategies." Um, duh.

That said, I really liked the article.

The problems I see are a lot of parents (including myself -- I struggle with this) (a) trying to control the uncontrollable, (b) focusing on tiny probabilities and ignoring large ones, and (c) ignoring the risks of intervention, notably the loss of free play and undirected activity. This happens in both dramatic and subtle ways.

Points (a) and (b) are really more about priority-setting and parental sanity; point (c) is the one that I think would be best hammered home. There are vast swaths of research that show how incredibly productive it is for children's growth to have time in which they are free to think, learn, play, explore, make mistakes, learn how to negotiate with peers, solve their own problems, and so on. Time spent on those things is far more valuable for future life skills than yet another structured class, no matter how educational it's supposed to be.

For some kids, a structured program might be preferable for reasons to do with that child's personality, cognitive skills, interests, and/or home situation. However, the majority of children are best served by free time, preferably with a minimum of screens (video, tv, etc.) and lots of time outdoors.

And while I agree that it would be uncomfortable to be asked about your child play in a job interview, for engineering, it does matter if you've spent time building things and taking things apart. It's actually relevant to job performance, and so I think that's fair game in an interview.


----------



## annekevdbroek (Jun 5, 2005)

I did not like the article. As PP mentioned it seemed like it was taking the most extreme examples and using them to imply that this has somehow become the 'norm.' As for language programs, European counties have taught multiple languages in school as the 'norm' for many years. Parents in the US didn't just recently arrive at that idea as a way to over-parent their children.

I think articles like this are a bit like fashion spreads - they make you feel bad over some unatinable ideal that doesn't exist in reality.

I would say the normal parenting style around me is "happy middle ground" and I don't know anyone who is a helicopter parent as described by this article nor a free-range parent.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Here's my favorite piece of the article:

Quote:

Parents need to block out the sound and fury from the media and other parents, find that formula that fits your family best."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...#ixzz0YC1x12S6
As a type-A person myself, I found the article interesting in that I think that a lot of parents put a lot of pressure on themselves to succeed at parenting, and in doing so, probably set themselves up for failure in many areas. What I got from the article was less about protection of one's children and more about the competitiveness of parenting and the fear of failure. God knows we all want to see our children not only make it through life, but to succeed. I'll be the first to admit that I want my child to do much, much better in life than I have (and I'm not talking monetarily). I want her to make all the right choices at the right times and to find satisfaction and happiness in her adult life. I don't want to flub up as a parent. I can see why people can take the whole parenting thing to the extreme.

Granted, even coming to MDC sometimes makes me feel inadequate! Sometimes the best thing to do is to just block out how other people are doing things and to set specific, reachable goals. We, as parents, are exposed to soooo much information now. Much, much more than my own parents were.


----------



## ~pi (May 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annekevdbroek* 
As for language programs, European counties have taught multiple languages in school as the 'norm' for many years. Parents in the US didn't just recently arrive at that idea as a way to over-parent their children.

Of course not. We're a multilingual family and I deliberately don't speak any English with my DS, so I'm much more sympathetic to the language issue than many of the others. If you don't have easy access to multiple languages in your community, it's reasonable to try to get that implemented in your child's school or preschool. There is a definite window for learning languages.

But I will point out that European countries (as well as many other non-US countries, including my own) teach multiple languages in school because they have large communities of people who speak them right there. There is community exposure, which is a big part of why that approach works.

The example in the article was about parents insisting on Mandarin instruction in nursery school. If the goal is to have your child speak Mandarin as an adult, I would think that learning any tonal language will likely have a similar effect for priming their brain, tongue and ears appropriately. And if you can't manage a tonal language, any other language would still help. Why the need for Mandarin, specifically?

I guess my point is that the drive to add more language exposure doesn't have to be quite so frantic -- unless you want your child to be perfectly fluent, in which case, a class in nursery school really isn't going to be enough, anyway.


----------



## lindberg99 (Apr 23, 2003)

Hmm, personally I see a lot more underparenting than I see overparenting. But whatever. I think this is just the new trend. It's like those articles about people confessing to their bad parenting things and that woman who wrote the book about drinking wine out of sippy cups or something.


----------



## Belia (Dec 22, 2007)

I really liked this article. Then again, I work in a high school, so I see a lot of this stuff firsthand.

My sister is one of those parents whose kids are scheduled every minute of every day. I have no idea how she does it. I want my son to be much more free-range, although I do worry about him getting hit by a car or drowning in the pond down the street.







Haven't figured out how to manage that yet. I also want him to experience disappointment and failure and hurt with little things when he's young, so he can cope with the bigger hurts and disappointments and failures when he gets older.


----------



## noobmom (Jan 19, 2008)

I think the article is really confusing two phenomena: 1) heightening fear/protectiveness/whatever you want to call it and 2) over scheduling kids and excessive involvement on the part of the parents. I consider helicopter parenting to be #2, not necessarily #1. For myself, personally, my mother was very much a protective parent, not allowing me to spend the night at friends' homes, etc. But, she was in no way a helicopter parent. She had no input in what classes I took even when I was in middle school, much less in high school or college.

Maybe it's because I tend towards over protectiveness myself, but I don't think it's a bad thing, compared to the parents who baby their children. Yes, I watch my 3 yo son out in the yard. But he's also can get himself a snack from the fridge, use a real steak knife to cut his dinner, and decide what he's going to wear to school. I try not to step in if he has a fight with another child. By watching him, I'm not taking away his ability to make decisions or learn to deal with problems on his own--I think that is where the difference lies.


----------



## lindberg99 (Apr 23, 2003)

Why does having your kids in activities make you a helicopter parent? I can't see how I'm a helicopter parent because I let my DD swim on swim team or sign my DS up for gymnastics.


----------



## snoopy5386 (May 6, 2005)

My DH works in residence life for a college and helicopter parents abound. I can't tell you the number of times that the 1st time he hears of a problem it is from a parent - not from any of the students involved. Anything from a roommate conflict to a facilities issue. The kids are so tied into mom and dad via texting/cell phones that mom and dad are their first go to instead of trying to actually solve the problem themselves.
He also gets the parents calling up demanding some sort of information about their child (grades, roomate info, what have you) and the parents become absolutely livid when DH can't give them the info. Because you know, their kid is now an adult and that info is private. The parents can't seem to even begin to understand it....


----------



## Bellabaz (Feb 27, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *snoopy5386* 
My DH works in residence life for a college and helicopter parents abound. I can't tell you the number of times that the 1st time he hears of a problem it is from a parent - not from any of the students involved. Anything from a roommate conflict to a facilities issue. The kids are so tied into mom and dad via texting/cell phones that mom and dad are their first go to instead of trying to actually solve the problem themselves.
He also gets the parents calling up demanding some sort of information about their child (grades, roomate info, what have you) and the parents become absolutely livid when DH can't give them the info. Because you know, their kid is now an adult and that info is private. The parents can't seem to even begin to understand it....

Our friend is the assistant dean of the engineering department at a uni. He told us that if the parents could come and take the tests for their kids they would. And that they really can't grasp that this is suppose to prepare their kids for life in the real world, in a job. I have been out of uni for 6 or so years now but I don't remember it being like this for me and my friends. I never complained about this and even if I did I don't think my dad would have known who to call.


----------



## Catherine12 (May 15, 2006)

On balance, I liked the article, but I think it was really about over-anxious parenting, not overparenting (well, since that's not a real word, I guess the author can use it however he likes). Of course, a less ambiguous word would have made for a less enticing cover.

I thought that, as a hsing parent, I would hate the article. But actually, its "don't worry, let your kids be themselves" message was fairly in line with my parenting and that of many other hsers. Also, because I grew up in the Upper East Side of Manhattan (which I have concluded is the target audience for Time), have known "helicopter parents" like he describes.

That said, I agree with all the pps who said they see a lot more underparenting than overparenting. So I wouldn't say this was the world's most useful article, but at least it didn't make me angry (like so many mainstream parenting articles).


----------



## Violet2 (Apr 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *snoopy5386* 
My DH works in residence life for a college and helicopter parents abound. I can't tell you the number of times that the 1st time he hears of a problem it is from a parent - not from any of the students involved. Anything from a roommate conflict to a facilities issue. The kids are so tied into mom and dad via texting/cell phones that mom and dad are their first go to instead of trying to actually solve the problem themselves.
He also gets the parents calling up demanding some sort of information about their child (grades, roomate info, what have you) and the parents become absolutely livid when DH can't give them the info. Because you know, their kid is now an adult and that info is private. The parents can't seem to even begin to understand it....

To offer another perspective... I have always found universities to be much more responsive to parents than students.

I had an issue with a roommate who basically kicked me out and had me sleeping in the hallway and got nothing more than 'talk therapy' with the roommate.

I finally got a new room when my mom got involved.

I had a professor dicking me over--threatening to fail me _after_ agreeing to excuse me for participation in Model UN despite As on my exams--and nothing was done until my mom got involved.

A prof refused to worry about or wait for a missing student at the Model UN at Howard University after the student was last seen with a stranger who had a gun. (She was found safe, thank goodness, but the prof would have totally left her and when I asked him if we should do something he said she wasn't our responsibility).

I know of many cases where young women complained of sexual harassment from professors and nothing was done. It was to the point where older students let younger students know which profs to watch out for. I myself was solicited by a professor and believe I was down graded because I refused to go skinny dipping with 2 profs while on a university trip overseas. That was the only C of my entire college career and I was an honors student.

So, you know, I'm okay with parents pestering the university. Because, ime, universities do not really listen to their students and the tenure system lets inappropriate behavior fester.

And I've lived/visited/attended dozens of universities from Yale to Harvard to Kansas Sate as my step father was a prof. I've seen some flavor of this kind of stuff at most universities.

So while parents need to stay out of the day-to-day, they also should advocate for their kids when necessary.

V


----------



## DariusMom (May 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lindberg99* 
Why does having your kids in activities make you a helicopter parent? I can't see how I'm a helicopter parent because I let my DD swim on swim team or sign my DS up for gymnastics.

I didn't read the article that way. My DS is in activities that he enjoys. I'm certainly *not* a helicopter parent. My take on the article was that you're a helicopter parent if your kid has little unstructured free time to just play, decide for him/herself what to do and how to do it, and learn by playing. Basically, if your kids' every moment (or near to it) is scheduled full of activities then, yeah, you're a helicopter parent. I doubt many parents here on MDC would fit that criteria, though.

Just my take . . ..


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

Did anyone else find this juxtaposition hilarious?

Quote:

"I wanted parents to realize they are not alone in thinking this is insanity, and show there's another way." (See the 25 best back-to-school gadgets.)
Stop the insanity!...but make sure your child has these 25 essential gadgets.







Then there's this one:

Quote:

Then build breaks of calm into their schedule so they can actually enjoy the toys. (See how to plan for retirement at any age.)
Quit worrying about what colleges your kids get into and jump right into planning their retirement! Well, I guess if your kid has been going to that preschool that teaches Mandarin and assigns homework, he's about ready for retirement by age 5.









But those are probably muckups from the Web interface. I thought the most absurd idea in the actual article was this:

Quote:

Dear Abby endorses the idea, as she did in August, that each morning before their kids leave the house, parents take a picture of them. That way, if they are kidnapped, the police will have a fresh photo showing what clothes they were wearing.










Violet2 wrote:

Quote:

I would hate to have my childhood play level be evaluated during a job interview.
I think it's very appropriate to ask interviewees what they did for fun as kids because it reflects their true interests and the skills they've been developing for a long time--at least, if they weren't so overscheduled that they never got to choose a self-directed activity! For example, I spent a lot of my childhood free time poring over address lists, cataloguing my books and toys, and playing games in which numbers represented concepts; I am now a research data manager. One of my friends spent lots of time setting up camp activities for dolls in her backyard; she is now a Girl Scout camp director. The example in the article is about engineers; my dad is an electrical engineer, and he spent much of his childhood taking apart electrical things to see how they worked.

Anyway, overall I think this article is what journalists call a "trend story" that mixes a little solid information with a lot of speculation, hype, and mushy understanding of what the topic really is in the first place. It confuses over-involvement with over-scheduling with physical safety over-protection.


----------



## StoriesInTheSoil (May 8, 2008)

OP here, finally back to post on this!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EnviroBecca* 

Anyway, overall I think this article is what journalists call a "trend story" that mixes a little solid information with a lot of speculation, hype, and mushy understanding of what the topic really is in the first place. It confuses over-involvement with over-scheduling with physical safety over-protection.

I think that this is very true. I went into the article liking it but after the first bit I started liking it less. It seemed to jumble issues, some of which I don't even believe are issues.

I also agree with PPs that I see a lot more underparenting than I do "overparenting" on a day-to-day basis with just the general populous of my area but I have totally known helicopter parents. I lived with them







and a LOT of my friends in high school had helicopter parents.

To the PP that felt like the article was slamming all activities, I don't think that scheduling kids to do things that they enjoy is harmful, I know that there were a few years that I took ballet SIX DAYS a week, one day for something like 8 hours! This was not something my parents pushed me into or even wanted for me though, I just enjoyed it. I would probably have been considered an over-scheduled child with my tutors, violin lessons, ballet, swimming, and gifted school but I had a ton of unstructured time to run around outside because I wasn't allowed to sit around and watch TV when I was home. I think the problem is when the parents are forcing the kids into things they don't want to do and not letting them have any time for themselves to just be.


----------



## Amys1st (Mar 18, 2003)

I know SEVERAL helicopter parents, both as relatives and friends and just people I know from the parenting scene. Such as, dance class, preschool etc.

SIL/BIL have one child. Major copter parents as DH calls it. He actaully calls them M1 (for marine 1, the copter that the president uses). Now at age 7, they are getting a bit better since she is in school ft, but man, they would not be 3 inches away from this child. And if she was, he would have a cow literally. I remember one time another SIL was in from out of town, and she even joked to the SIL- What is she duct taped to you or something? They would not just let the kid explore. One time when my dd requested for her 5th bday a McDonalds party, I got an email saying she "would be purchasing other food that day for her dd". My dd wanted a treat for her bday, something we dont get to have that often. When I called to question, she said she was only trying to teach her daughter what was right. Whatever.

A neighbor who has a dd in my dd's class. Will not let kids out of sight, Will not carpool, even with her BFF to dance 3 blocks away, wont leave her alone at the brownie meeting. If the child is invited to a bday party, the mother drags the whole family and stays. That is unless the hosting parent lets her know its a drop off party and then the child stays home. Cannot believe other parents hire a babysitter and go out with each other. Cannot believe we sent our kids to school, events etc even though the swine flu was going around.

I also have older kids- age almost 4 and 7 1/2 so I may have a different experience w the copter parents than the moms of tots. Now that I am on my second shift of preschool, its amusing to watch the new parents. I was them 4 years ago, so I can answer questions etc but I also chuckle inside at how wound up you are when you start the process. ANother neighbor who went to her 3rd kindy roundup last spring said her and her DH were amazed at some of the questions but them remembered 7 years before being right there.


----------



## Amys1st (Mar 18, 2003)

Oh and to add, I actaully just chuckled at the article because I do know people who have done the stuff said. DSIL signed up for spanish classes and then switched to manderin for her dd at age 4. And yes it was so she had a leg up on dealing with asian people down the road in business settings......
They have already saved her secondary education money. 6 figures.

I remember being at a night time crop and the woman next to me talking to her dd. First she corrected her grammar. Then began to ask where she was going, with who, how was her studying and test etc. I thought she was talking to a 14, maybe 15 year old and I asked her that. She was very offended, it was her 20 yr old!!!!! I told her at age 20, it was none of my parents business while I was at school. She wanted her to text her too when she got back to her dorm.. GIVE ME A BREAK


----------



## chinaKat (Aug 6, 2005)

I guess I just don't see how bilingual education = helicopter parenting.


----------



## ollyoxenfree (Jun 11, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *noobmom* 
I think the article is really confusing two phenomena: 1) heightening fear/protectiveness/whatever you want to call it and 2) over scheduling kids and excessive involvement on the part of the parents. I consider helicopter parenting to be #2, not necessarily #1.

Huh. My thoughts are exactly the opposite. As I read the article, I was thinking that I consider a helicopter parent to be #1 (anxious, overprotective) and not #2 (over-scheduling). I think of a helicopter hovering over them, ready to swoop in at the least sign of trouble and effect a rescue operation.

The overlap between the two seems to be the excessive involvement in the child's life.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EnviroBecca* 
Anyway, overall I think this article is what journalists call a "trend story" that mixes a little solid information with a lot of speculation, hype, and mushy understanding of what the topic really is in the first place. It confuses over-involvement with over-scheduling with physical safety over-protection.

Yeah, good point. It seemed like there was a cut and paste job going on with the writing - a little from this research memo, a little from that study, some more from the archives on parenting articles. I don't think it mentioned "hothousing" or "red-shirting", but I kept expecting those labels to be brought into the mix too. I wonder if they were edited out at some point.

Over-involvement isn't really a new phenomenon. In the 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's they wrote about stage mothers. It might have been less common but it existed and was widespread enough to have a label. It might have been helpful if the article examined the modern social developments that have made it more widespread and culturally acceptable today.


----------



## DariusMom (May 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chinaKat* 
I guess I just don't see how bilingual education = helicopter parenting.

I don't think anyone is saying that, even in the article!

I think it's an easily used (stereo-typical) example to throw out there of parents who are so deeply invested in "enriching" their children's lives that they don't allow the kids to grow, develop, and *play* naturally. Part of that over-emphasis on enrichment at the cost of free, unscheduled play and natural development *could* be something like mandarin lessons at 2 or something. But I think it's more of a rhetorical device and/or straw man than any sort of attack on bilingual education.


----------



## mommyshoppinghabit (Aug 9, 2006)

Just skimmed the article. My gut reaction is that magazines always have to take an angle. This was their angle: there is a new backlash against the "overparenting" or bringing up the "perfect child." I mean, there wouldn't have been an article if what they said was the truth, which is that there always _has_ been overprotective parents who were perfectionists and tried to teach their kids foreign languages, get them into the right preschool, etc, etc, and there always has been parents who take a laissez-faire approach, and then there are parents who are in-between. Booo-ring! Magazines are dying for ad revenue, the business is doing horrible. They just have to take the most sensationalist angle.


----------



## lindberg99 (Apr 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amys1st* 
They have already saved her secondary education money. 6 figures.

Why do you think this is bad?? I wish I could save up that much for my kids' education.


----------



## lindberg99 (Apr 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommyshoppinghabit* 
Just skimmed the article. My gut reaction is that magazines always have to take an angle. This was their angle: there is a new backlash against the "overparenting" or bringing up the "perfect child." I mean, there wouldn't have been an article if what they said was the truth, which is that there always _has_ been overprotective parents who were perfectionists and tried to teach their kids foreign languages, get them into the right preschool, etc, etc, and there always has been parents who take a laissez-faire approach, and then there are parents who are in-between. Booo-ring! Magazines are dying for ad revenue, the business is doing horrible. They just have to take the most sensationalist angle.

I think that is exactly right. I also remember reading a story about how no kids walk to school (not sure if it was Time but some magazine like that). And they gave this extreme example of a guy who drives his kids one block to school. He had to walk with his kids to sign them in for before-school care. And it upset his dog too much if he walks to school with the kids then comes back home, gets in his car and leaves. They pick an example like this instead of coming to visit a school like our school where a lot of kids do walk.

I also think they do articles like this because it let's face it, people like to criticize other people. Parents can read these articles and think "I'm so much better than that!" and feel good about themselves.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

I did like this quote:

"The way kids learn to be resourceful is by having to use their resources."

But I felt the article confused issues. I don't think there is anything wrong with outside acitivities -- music or language or whatever. It's really about the attitude of the parent, not exactly how the family spends their time. Kids can be using their own resources while learning an instrument or on swim team or whatever -- or they can just be going through the motions while the end result is more of a reflection of the parent's committment than the child's passion.

My kids are 11 and 13. The helicopter parents of kids' their ages are still checking their backpacks, telling them what activities the can/can't be in, telling them what books and movies are OK, taking their things to school if they forget, getting them up in the morning, and never leaving them at home alone. They don't allow the children an appropriate amount of responsibility for their age.

I don't know that 10 is the new 2, but I would say that 11 is the new 5.


----------



## Bluegoat (Nov 30, 2008)

I think the point of the "overschedualing" component, in relation to the "overprotective" component was an idea that we have to control each aspect of a child's like to ensure success. So we must be vigilant at every moment and waste no opportunities to help them get ahead.

To me, teaching preschool kids Mandarin to make sure they can do well in business as adults is a bit like putting a pre-schooler into tim-bit hockey so he can play in the NHL. A few might, but thinking about a hockey career at age 4 is likely to do more harm than good. It isn't the hockey itself that is a problem, it is the attitude toward it.

OTOH, I did find the bit about parents saying their relationship with their kids had improved since the recession was telling. I think being in a lot of activities, even when kid's really enjoy them and have a good attitude, can have negative effects. Sometimes being forced to slow down can make it easier to see that something like dedicated family time was missing from the mix, or rest time.


----------



## JamesMama (Jun 1, 2005)

I've seen this hyper protection to the point of it being ridiculous. Late summer in my area there were several child abduction attempts. I live in a small, pretty safe town. Yes, it freaked me out a little bit that there was some freak going around trying to lure young children (usually 8/9 year olds) into his car. That is scary. But I didn't really take any more precautions than normal. I still let my 4 year old play in the back yard alone (he knows not to go into the road, he knows to stay in the BACK yard, it's not fenced, but he just knows).

I had friends that were scared to go to the store just them and their kids, who wouldn't go on walks just them and the kids. Who wouldn't take more than 1 child to the car at a time.

It was almost comical.

The wannabe kidnapper never targeted anyone under the age of 6, he never targeted anyone within easy access of a parent/adult. It was kids by themselves, at the bus stop, walking home from school or at the park alone. Always.

Now I wouldn't let my 4 year old walk anywhere alone wannabe kidnapper or no, but I was not afraid to go to the grocery store or walk to the library or go to the park.

Of course now the police have caught the freak so it's back to business as normal. No more panic attacks trying to get into Wal-Mart from my friends.









There was a guy I went to school with that went off to college, he got up to his dorm room, dropped off his stuff and then found the resident adviser to ask when the 'cleaning service' was going to come make his bed for him. He was 18 years old and had never put a sheet on a mattress. I've seen college age (usually men) who are unable to use a washing machine. Who cannot cook anything aside from cereal or microwave dinners. THAT is helicopter parenting to me...making your child so utterly sheltered that they can't function in normal life.


----------



## DariusMom (May 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Bluegoat* 
I think the point of the "overschedualing" component, in relation to the "overprotective" component was an idea that we have to control each aspect of a child's like to ensure success. So we must be vigilant at every moment and waste no opportunities to help them get ahead.


yep. I think that was a very good point. My kid is also in a few activities that he really likes. So I don't think it's about activities per se. It's about control and absolutely no down time.


----------



## ~pi (May 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Bluegoat* 
I think the point of the "overschedualing" component, in relation to the "overprotective" component was an idea that we have to control each aspect of a child's like to ensure success. So we must be vigilant at every moment and waste no opportunities to help them get ahead.

To me, teaching preschool kids Mandarin to make sure they can do well in business as adults is a bit like putting a pre-schooler into tim-bit hockey so he can play in the NHL. A few might, but thinking about a hockey career at age 4 is likely to do more harm than good. It isn't the hockey itself that is a problem, it is the attitude toward it.

OTOH, I did find the bit about parents saying their relationship with their kids had improved since the recession was telling. I think being in a lot of activities, even when kid's really enjoy them and have a good attitude, can have negative effects. Sometimes being forced to slow down can make it easier to see that something like dedicated family time was missing from the mix, or rest time.

Exactly.

I don't have a major issue with going for multilingualism (we're a multilingual family) or putting children in an activity or two that they enjoy.

I've known families who make their children choose one activity per season, with restrictions on which night it could be. At the time, I thought that was too restrictive, but now that I'm a little older, I see the wisdom in that approach. They reserved certain nights as family nights where they don't have to rush off to an activity, and I see genuine value in that.

I definitely agree with pps who pointed out that it's actually good for children to be bored and to have plenty of free, unscheduled time. That's where the real brain magic happens.


----------



## geekgolightly (Apr 21, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lindberg99* 
Hmm, personally I see a lot more underparenting than I see overparenting. But whatever. I think this is just the new trend. It's like those articles about people confessing to their bad parenting things and that woman who wrote the book about drinking wine out of sippy cups or something.

In Johnson County, Kansas there is alot more overparenting. Now I am in a small blue collar dying steel town and there is a bit of underparenting, and lots of what I consider to be reasonable parenting.

Kids here do play outside without parental supervision. Which is fabulous. I never saw that in JC, KS, where I lived for five years up until last year. It was very refreshing to come to a city wherein kids are allowed to be kids.

Unfortunately I have to move back to JC, and I am not looking forward to it. I will have to deal with hyperactive super go-getter parents and will again be ostracized for my laid back style.

I WANT my child to learn by himself what is ok and not ok. I am there for him in case he gets into trouble. I am not there to prevent any and all dangers.

At age five, he goes outside by himself and knows better than to run into the streets or go past his zone (which is the yard.) I am raising a reasonable, smart, independent human being and I fear that in JC he might be barred from playing with other kids if his parents see my child in the yard alone because _obviously_ I am a horrible parent and should be reported to CPS.


----------



## alexsam (May 10, 2005)

Personally, I think a lot of the "helicopter parent" stuff has to do with parental isolation. I think when there are more "mom communities", each mother can sit back a little, knowing that other adults are keeping an eye out too. I think parents (ok, lets face it- moms) whose children are around other adults who they trust, they can talk about and learn from them, can rely on them to care for their child to some degree as well, and can bounce ideas off of- all reducing the feeling of "I need to be there all the time or something bad will happen". However, there are lots of moms who are parenting in relative isolation. With scare-media, all these very well known "dangers" lurking around every corner, the idea that everyone besides parents are sex offenders it can be easy to feel that you NEED to be right by your child. But, if you know that other people are looking out- that when the kids play on the block that the other parents are sitting on the porch and are watching too, that when your child goes to school you know the teacher, that when there are toddler "disagreements" at the playground, another mom will respond gently and calmly, there is a community that is surrounding the child, protecting and caring for them. Not just a mother.

I also think the lack of community makes it hard for isolated parents to truly understand the range of development. Lots of toddlers hit (thy just do- few words and high frustration make this happen for a lot of toddlers. It is not the end of the world). Pre-schoolers whine and tell things that are "not quite true" by adult standards. Boys often go through a "gun thing". Potty accidents happen. Some pre-schools are better than others and it is good to talk about it. Maybe helicopter parents wouldn't be so nervous if they really had a safe place to see all this and learn what is "normal". But many places do not have close communities, they do not have a few generations or even parents with multi-aged kids to learn from, they do not have a safe place for parents to find out that they are not the first to go through what they are going through and what is down the road.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alexsam* 
Personally, I think a lot of the "helicopter parent" stuff has to do with parental isolation. I think when there are more "mom communities", each mother can sit back a little, knowing that other adults are keeping an eye out too.

I see the point you are making, and yet what often happens is that in places where helicopter parenting is the norm is that parenting becomes a competitive sport. Rather than the moms seeing what is *normal,* they just see parents putting their kids in Chinese class, math and reading tutoring, violin, tumbling, and gymnastics, all before the age of 4.

Nothing in the article seemed odd or outrageous to me compared to some of the places we lived. We move a lot for my DH's job and made a conscious decision to live beneath our means on our last move in hopes of being around more *normal* parents.


----------



## geekgolightly (Apr 21, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Linda on the move* 
I see the point you are making, and yet what often happens is that in places where helicopter parenting is the norm is that parenting becomes a competitive sport. Rather than the moms seeing what is *normal,* they just see parents putting their kids in Chinese class, math and reading tutoring, violin, tumbling, and gymnastics, all before the age of 4.

Nothing in the article seemed odd or outrageous to me compared to some of the places we lived. We move a lot for my DH's job and made a conscious decision to live beneath our means on our last move in hopes of being around more *normal* parents.










ITA.

That is what we hope to do eventually as well (husband is in pharmacy school so we have moved a couple times for it.) I tend to relate better to working class people. I grew up punk rock, and work as a nurse, so it suits me.


----------



## ~Katie~ (Mar 18, 2007)

There were a few interesting tidbits but otherwise I'm not a fan of how the article was written. I consider my parenting style to be reasonable, but I only have a 2 year old and 6 month old. In social situations I've been called a helicopter parent because I don't let him out of my sight or far away from me, but that's because he has sensory issues and does not understand how to keep himself out of danger. I've attempted to turn my back on him during playdates to socialize but he uses that as an opportunity to run out of a building and into a parking lot, for example. At home he's pretty much free to roam as he pleases. I demonstrate common sense when playing outside and don't leave him alone, but that has more to do with his safety than whether I think someone is going to come along and kidnap him.

One thing I have noticed in social situations is other parents discouraging young kids from interacting with each other. I understand watching toddlers on the playground, but I don't understand the need to pull them away from each other when they interact. If DS shows an interest in another kid I let him play with them as long as they're being kind to each other. I'm not a fan of highly structured learning being emphasized over fun and exploration, I think natural consequences are an important part of learning as well. I can definitely see how sheltering would lead to an inability to learn basic life skills.


----------

