

Do Parents Matter? - tyn
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=parents-peers-children

======
swillden
I've recently come to the same conclusion, at least with my daughter. My wife
and I seem to be able to exercise greater influence over my sons, but it's
become clear that my daughter's peers exert vastly more influence over her
than we can -- and she has unfortunately chosen a set of friends who have a
very negative influence. By "negative" I don't mean "funny hairstyles", I mean
hanging around with them, or even just talking to them over the phone or via
computer, has pushed her into depression, self-injury, complete disregard for
school, etc. Ultimately it lead to a suicide attempt, at which point we
shifted from trying to be influential, supporting parents to unabashedly
controlling her life. She's 13.

We're attempting to intervene with medication and professional counseling to
help with the depression and injury. We're also attempting to remove the
negative peers from her life by removing her from school (homeschooling) and
controlling who she's allowed to spend time with.

It's helping, but modern technology has created some challenges. Like most
geek homes, mine is filled with technology, and my kids are adept in its use.
I've had to block Facebook and all of the free e-mail services on the kids'
computers, but short of intensively supervising her computer usage there's
effectively no way to cut off that avenue of communication with her negative
friends.

I finally resorted to writing a script that notifies me whenever she logs in,
and then hacking the GNOME remote desktop tool so that it doesn't display a
notification when I remotely connect to her desktop. Oh, we've used the low-
tech solution of putting the computer in a public area of the house and paying
attention, but that just means she has to pick the right moment. Knowing that
I may be virtually looking over her shoulder at any moment, and there's no way
she can know when that's happening, seems to have closed off that avenue.
Finally. When she's at home.

However, phones have proven much more difficult. We've taken her cellphone
away, and the home phone has no long distance service (her problem friends
happen to be outside the local calling area; she had to cast a wide net to
find a group this bad), but my home office line does, and there are three
other cellphones around the house, not to mention that all of her local
friends and cousins have cellphones.

Short of keeping all of our phones locked up and not allowing her out of the
house, there's effectively no way we can keep her from getting in touch with
her friends. And these friends are so important to _her_ that there seems to
be no punishment, no bribe, no consequence that will keep her from contacting
them.

Without modern communications technology, it's unlikely that she ever would
have found this group of negative peers, and it's certain that we as her
parents would be able isolate her from them. As it is, as long as she's
willing to sneak behind our backs, it is effectively impossible for us to
control her access to them. We can limit it significantly, of course, but
unless we could watch her every minute of every day, as soon as our backs are
turned she'll find a way to contact them.

So far, reducing her communication with them seems to be limiting their effect
on her. The anti-depressants are having an effect as well, and the therapy
seems also to be helping her to understand herself and her value a little
better. However, as you can imagine, the constant close supervision and tight
control is also basically destroying our relationship with her, and reducing
our ability to directly influence her thinking to zero. She sees us as the
enemy.

That saddens us greatly, but we don't see any other option. She was in a
downward spiral last year and we intervened aggressively and she pulled out of
it. Then she convinced us that she could handle herself if we relaxed the
grip. We did, and within three months she attempted suicide (which her peers
think is cool).

So, this has been long and rambling, but the point is that my anecdotal
experience with my daughter supports this researcher's claims. Our influence
over our daughter's behavior and thinking is minimal at best, and I'm
questioning whether it was ever as great as we thought it was. Our influence
over her environment is substantial and we're working that influence for all
it's worth. I guess we'll know in a few years if that approach worked. Well,
sort of. We'll only know the results of what we do. There's no way to know
what might have happened if we'd acted differently.

That, of course, is the hard part of being a parent. You can only do what you
think is best, and there's really no way to know if you're doing the right
things, or how much what you're doing even matters. Still, you have to do the
best you can.

~~~
exsuicidal
You're doing it wrong. I am surprised that what you are doing is even legal,
not to mention you are giving homeschooling a very bad name.

We only imprison a suicidal person to make death impossible for her, having in
mind that the person's life is her own and that if the person could think
rationally she would want to live. This is never to be done at home, though.
It's done in a hospital or clinic, because it's a place that will be hated and
where the person rightly won't want to return to.

I remember being in a mental hospital ward as a young adult and thoughts going
from "I hate the world and I wish I was dead" to "If only I could go out in
the sun and get some ice cream." This hospital had a beautiful garden outside
which you could see from the barred windows and a quiosk where they sold ice
cream. Man, did I enjoy that ice cream once I was allowed to go out for it!
When was I finally released from the hospital (on the condition of doing
therapy, which I quit soon I could, because it was humilliating) my family
took me out to the cinema, to buy videogames and I had no restrictions on
Internet and going out with my friends (I was not a minor anymore, so I guess
it was easier for them to respect me.)

The experience was undignifying and I still have a grudge against my parents
for it, since they got the necessary documents to forcefully sign me into
hospital. I still love them and we talk but I prefer to live in another
country. I also never completely got rid of my suicidal thoughts up to this
day (over a decade after) nor did the experience scared me out to try suicide
a second time. Still, it might have solved the immediate emergency then. I
don't know.

The most terrible thing about hospitalization is the forced medication, which
is brain damaging and useless. The mind is not ill, just wrong.

So I'm sure there is a better way to help. But whatever you do, have this in
mind:

One's home should always be one's home. It should be a person's private space.
It should be a welcoming place where the person longs to be in. Your daugher
should have her own room, her own computer, her own things, her own friends
and her freedom back. She should not be spyed upon by her own family. That
will just make her paranoid. If her own family is out to get her, who isn't?

Understand that a person is motivated to live when they can be free, when they
can have a good life by their own standards. So help her get a life she wants
to live. listen to her. What does she like? Get her more of that.

Also, get her some Ayn Rand. Ayn Rand is great because she gets to the roots
of the self-esteem problem. Teenagers that read Ayn Rand love life, and behave
like they are invincible. I wish I had read her then. Your daughter is more
likely to not be influenced by bad friends when she learns why she shouldn't
care for what others think. The Virtue of Selfishness is brilliant. Get that
one or Anthem for a starter.

------
bbgm
Probably more than anything else in the world. I wouldn't be close to where I
am, or who I am, without mine, and that's an observation that I can extend to
pretty much everyone I know well.

~~~
xenophanes
You observed where you would be without your parents?

You have an _abstract theory_ , partially supported by some observations you
haven't detailed, and which you haven't argued for or clearly stated.

~~~
bbgm
I am pretty sure I would be a different person, perhaps even better, but my
character, as I understand it, has been shaped by my parents. Part of that
comes from them staying out of my way when it came to certain decisions that
would impact the rest of my life (in India parents can get very pushy about
going into certain field) and allowing us to have our disagreements (and we
have many).

I don't need to argue for my observations. I experienced them and quite
enjoyed growing up with them.

~~~
xenophanes
_I don't need to argue_

You don't need to argue, but if you want to find the truth of the matter, then
it might help to argue. Through arguing, but not through asserting, we can
sometimes learn that we have mistaken ideas and change our minds.

~~~
bbgm
Don't disagree there, but you cannot explain evening spent talking, Sunday
mornings watching birds, Friday evenings in the library, walks explaining why
leaves are green and the beauty of mathematics. In other words, how do you
distill 20 years into an argument, when no one else was there to experience a
second of it? I can't.

~~~
xenophanes
You've now described your experiences. I'm perfectly willing to accept that it
seems to you that that's what happened. But did it happen that way?

Once upon a time I talked to this guy, and he runs a group of Objectivists,
and says he's a huge fan of Ayn Rand, and how much her books influenced him.
And he talked a bit about his life. And you know what? He had lived it roughly
in the opposite way to what one of Rand's heros would have done. He played it
safe, didn't stand up for his values, settled for less, cared what others
thought of him, didn't have the drive to pursue difficult goals, etc

He thought he was strongly influenced by something, and lived his life by it,
and he'd failed to notice how little he acted on that influence.

Such stories are common. I have no idea if your interpretation of what
influenced you is correct or not, but I do know that people often are mistaken
about these things.

Suppose you were genetically programmed, and part of that programming made you
think your parents were important. Couldn't that account for your experiences
too? (I think it could not, but only due to some philosophical arguments. I
think your experiences don't contradict the genetic theory.)

------
xenophanes
Whether a child attends school, or is allowed to spend time with peers, is up
to his parents. Therefore parents matter.

~~~
gcheong
The article does not state that parents do not matter _at all_ , just that,
when all the evidence available from studies conducted is considered, they
matter less than what is normally assumed.

~~~
xenophanes
The title here asks if parents matter at all.

~~~
gcheong
Yes, but the discussion should focus on the actual article, no? Otherwise, why
not just make it a Ask HN?

~~~
xenophanes
Well, the article said look how influential peers are. But whether peers are
influential is controlled by the parents. Some parenting techniques allow peer
influence, and others simply don't. When they say peers are influential, they
mean peers are influential in the context of certain common parenting
techniques, but not others. Which kind of defeats their claim that parenting
doesn't matter so much.

Certain types of (non-violent) parenting suppress the influence of peers
completely, but no types of (non-violent) peers could suppress the influence
of that sort of parenting at all.

~~~
gcheong
"Certain types of (non-violent) parenting suppress the influence of peers
completely, but no types of (non-violent) peers could suppress the influence
of that sort of parenting at all."

Wow, I guess she must have completely missed the studies showing this. From
the article:

"Despite the reduction in physical punishment, today’s adults are no less
aggressive than their grandparents were. Despite the increase in praise and
physical affection, they are not happier or more self-confident or in better
mental health. It’s an interesting way to test a theory of child development:
persuade millions of parents to rear their children in accordance with the
theory, and then sit back and watch the results come in. Well, the results are
in and they don’t support the theory!"

~~~
xenophanes
It's not a matter of studies, it's a matter of parents having full control
over who young children meet or do not meet, whether the children leave the
house or not, etc

~~~
gcheong
I get the feeling we must have not read the same article as the one I read was
all about what the studies show (or rather don't in this case).

~~~
xenophanes
My point is not about studies. Maybe you haven't read my comments closely.
Which part of this do you disagree with:

There exists at least one parenting technique which completely negates the
influence of peers, namely not letting the kid out of the house.

------
verdant
I had to do some research for a paper a few years ago that reminds me of this
- I learned that juvenile delinquency statistics could not be correlated
across income level, race, or geography. However, once family situation was
taken into account (stable two parent households vs. other situations), a
correlation was found.

I definitely believe parents matter.

And, as an aside, some parents have no choice but to raise children single,
and they do a great job. It just isn't the ideal situation, according to
research.

------
nickcharlton
Our parents form the basis for all other attachments we are able to form with
people. Our parents form the basis of how humans are able to interact with
others.

I certainly disagree with "So if you want to improve the way children behave
in school—for instance, by making them more diligent and less disruptive in
the classroom", I think most people can see a correlation between poor quality
parenting and badly behaved children. Inside or outside the home. This
certainly proves it's point when the average family of University (or College)
child age is shown demographically. (Assuming that you exclude financial
issues).

Parents have far too great an influence over their children to not matter.
This research certainly hinges on undermining the whole of attachment theory,
and Freud's work on personality types. If parents did not support certain
behaviours then they wouldn't develop. I think that this research on it's own
represents a narrow minded view of later development, not something which
explains how parents shape their children.

Parents do matter because they create who we are today.

Read more: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment_Theory>

~~~
lena
There is a good book about why parents matter, that addresses Harris's ideas:
Hold on to Your Kids by Gordon Neufeld, a clinical psychologist. See:
<http://www.gordonneufeld.com/book.php>

------
timdellinger
For another great article on Judith Harris, see Malcolm Gladwell's 1998 piece
in the New Yorker:

<http://gladwell.com/1998/1998_08_17_a_harris.htm>

------
alyx
If we take evolution as our the model for our species then parents and
parenthood are vitally important to the survival of the species.

At certain times peers might play a bigger role in forming who we are but to
say that consistently peers are more important than parents, I think, is
incorrect.

~~~
tokenadult
Some studies of the most closely related primates suggest that peers may be
more important for them than parents are, as well as for humans.

How many people posting here are parents? I have four children. Since I have
had my second child, I have cherished the saying I learned from another
parent: "Parents of one child believe in nurture, and parents of two or more
children believe in nature."

~~~
gcheong
No children, but if I did I have the feeling I'd one of those parents
welcoming the findings of this researcher.

------
edw519
Yea, right. Every time I was influenced by my peers to do something stupid, I
used the acid test, "Will my father kill me?" He's gone now, but I still use
that test. That's influence.

~~~
donaq
I agree. Furthermore, I don't think Asian teachers necessarily have a special
knack for controlling kids. I behaved well in class (I'm Asian, btw) because I
knew my mother would beat the shit out of me if she heard anything bad from my
teachers about me.

~~~
thismat
My parents were the same way.

There was a very clear line drawn, and we knew the consequences for crossing
it, thus we didn't (too often at least).

------
run4yourlives
Extra-ordinary claims require extra-ordinary evidence. I'm not seeing any.

Here's a quick counterpoint that speaks to the "norm": Almost to a man, every
sports icon I can think of cites the influence of parents in their lives. (I'm
talking real icons here, not T.O. types that happen to be gifted.)

I'm not ready to accept this theory without significant evidence.

~~~
xenophanes
Why do you think that sports icons know anything about what influenced their
lives?

~~~
run4yourlives
Why do you think they don't?

They are at the top of their game. The effect of years of passion, skill and
above all, hard work. Pretty much exactly like an entrepreneur. One would
think that along the way they have been able to surmise and account for many
of the things that got them there.

I've yet to see one that doesn't have extremely dedicated and supportive
parents, notably fathers.

~~~
xenophanes
I suspect they usually don't because human psychology is non-obvious, and most
of them don't spend much time learning about psychology.

I think you will agree with me that even many experts make large mistakes in
their views on human psychology, as the linked guy has done.

------
soundsop
The point of the article is kind of subtle. The research is pointing out that
_excluding genetic factors_ , parents don't really matter. So parents do
matter in the sense that they are the gene providers but not in the sense that
they are the jean providers.

