Intercultural Parenting

How Eastern and Western Parenting Styles Affect Child Development

Koong Hean Foo

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9780429016257
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

How do parenting styles differ globally? How do different, international, parenting practices impact on children's development? Can we bring together and hybridise different international parenting styles?

Intercultural Parenting explores the relationship between family, culture and parenting by reviewing established and evolving Western and Eastern parenting styles and their impact on children's development. Authoritarian, authoritative, permissive and neglecting approaches, as well as newer techniques such as helicopter parenting, are compared with filial, tiger and training approaches, and mixed parenting styles. Practical application sections show how cultural understanding can help demonstrate how professionals might use the information and ideas in their clinical work, whilst parental questionnaires encourage self-assessment and reflection. Dr. Foo Koong Hean brings together the traditional and evolving approaches to the art of parenting practices and also showcases relatively neglected research on Eastern parenting practices.

This book is important reading for childcare professionals such as health visitors, early years' teachers and those in mental health, as well as students in family studies and developmental psychology.

1

Family, parenting, and influencing factors

Bearing in mind the big picture painted in the introduction, let us move on to the topic proper.

To set the scene here, a quick look at select theories and models concerning parenting is presented. Theories and models make a good starting point for discussion, though they are wide-ranging and may not be preferred by some readers. Next, the terms “family” and “parenting” are defined sufficiently for dialogue. The focus on family covers why we want children, the ideal size for a family, the ideal setting for bringing up children, and what constitutes a family. Pros and cons of small versus large families are summarised in Table 1.1 for quick reference. The focus on parenting covers parenting systems and models, the attachment construct, and the significant factors that influence parenting. The list of the latter is long, but only relevant factors are covered here (see Table 1.2).

The chapter finishes with mentions of the styles of parenting, and an introduction to measuring their effects on parenting, which are elaborated on in later chapters. Do ponder the pointers in this chapter for later discussion on parenting. Do note that beside my opinion on parenting, many pointers come from research and studies by professionals and experts on family and parenting. Of course, the reader’s standpoint is welcome too.

Theories and models

Undoubtedly, discourse on family and parenting cannot go on without making reference to natural human development that impinges on every aspect of life. Theories on human development across the lifespan can be broadly classified into four or more groups: biological, socio-cultural, cognitive, and psychological theories (Browne, 2001); of late, cultural models have been developed, and in combination with ecology, like bioecocultural theories. Put simply, these theories concern the structures and processes of the body, the mind, and interaction between people and their environment.¹

Specifically, some of these theories focus on the internal growth of the children, some on their externalising behaviours, and others on their interactions with parents or other adults. The developmental literature identifies mechanisms and processes of influence in parent–child relationships, including parental role modelling, differential treatment of girls and boys, differences in content and style of instruction towards sons and daughters, gendered expectations, opportunities provided, monitoring and management of children’s activities, and emotional communication and regulation (Palkovitz, Trask, & Adamsons, 2014).

As for other major theories, in a nutshell the psychodynamic theory expounds human personality as an assimilation of human behaviour, feelings, and emotions. Each of these is guided by psychological forces resulting from a complex relationship between the unconscious and conscious mind. Childhood experiences are accountable for the development of this relationship. Cognitive-developmental theory expounds how humans gradually come to acquire, construct, and use knowledge. The social-psychological approach expounds the correlation between the socio-psychological needs of parents and characteristics of relationships in the family; the needs that emerge, form, and can be satisfied in the process of communication with another person. Social cognition theory expounds the interpersonal interaction or manner in which children analyse and interpret social behaviour.

Let us take a look at the evolutionary theory. Regarding parenting, it holds that human beings have an ability to parent, and a need to parent, particularly in mothers (Bardwick, 1974), and parents, for reproductive success, invest differently in each of their children (Keller, 2000). This is not to say fathers are not good parents, just that there is a requirement for different parenting skills. Investment (physical, psychological, and social) is dependent on the family climate of the parents. Low parental investment in a poor family climate commonly leads to many children and problems. High parental investment in a rich family climate normally leads to fewer children and better outcomes (Keller, 2000). Nonetheless, parent–child interactions lead to attachment, whether secure or insecure, and other outcomes for parents and children. These outcomes are richly discussed in later chapters, which is one of the main objectives of this book.

Hence, if we apply the above theoretical viewpoints to parenting, we could be looking at emotions, neuroscience or biology, beliefs and attitudes, sex differences, learning and behaviour, socialisation, and personality traits between parents and their children, and other caregivers. These aspects could be operationalised (defined in concrete statements), configured and measured individually (e.g., male), severally (e.g., female, mother, genes), as continuous dimensions (e.g., warmth, hostile), or holistic constructs (parenting style, parenting attitude); compared, related, linked, or cross-cased; and within one period or in the short or long term, to name the common methodology. These represent probably what most research and literature on parenting has been about until today. In other words, it is also about structure and process, role and function, or inter-correlation. Researchers’ definitions, operationalisation of terms, measurements, and methodologies are varied, thought-provoking, and ever innovative. For this book, I’ll just use parenting style to avoid too much wrangling over terms’ usage and processes.

Jay Belsky’s process of parenting model, published in 1984 and widely referenced within the scientific literature, premises that parenting is determined multiply and is influenced by characteristics of the parent, child, and social context. Accordingly, what creates different styles of parenting are:

One, the personal characteristics of the parent; two, social-contextual influences such as the marital relationship, satisfaction with social support from network members, and the work–family interaction; and three, the personal characteristics of the child. These determinants of parenting are likely to influence unequally parental functioning. In fact, central to the model is the proposition that the characteristics of the parent are likely to be the most important because they exert a direct influence on the parent’s parenting, and an indirect influence through their impact on marital relations, network relations, and occupational experiences.

(Woodworth, Belsky, & Crnic, 1996, p. 681)

An interesting cultural model for parenting is the conceptualisation parenting model advocated by Heidi Keller and her colleagues (Keller et al., 2006). They contended that cultural models are expressed in the degree of familism, which informs socialisation goals that are embodied in parenting ethnotheories.

Three cultural models (independent, interdependent, and autonomous-related) were adopted and tested with the following samples: German, Euro-American, and Greek middle-class women representing the independent cultural model; Cameroonian Nso and Gujarati farming women representing the interdependent cultural model; and urban Indian, urban Chinese, urban Mexican, and urban Costa Rican women representing the autonomous-related model. The results confirmed that socialisation goals mediate between broader socio-cultural orientations (familism) and parenting ethnotheories concerning beliefs about good parenting.

(p. 155)

However, the model of autonomous relatedness needs further theoretical and empirical refinement.

Perhaps a more suitable model to explain parenting is Carol M. Worthman’s composite bioecocultural model on child development (Worthman, 2010). Of particular importance in this model is the concept of a developmental microniche, which results from the interaction between the child and the developmental niche. The developmental niche is created by an interacting micro-system of settings, customs, and actors in the child’s daily experience. This niche also includes elements to accommodate conditions or changes in the child and the societal and physical macro-environment. Additionally, the model includes moderators (parent characteristics, family status and relationships, and household conditions) to the developmental microniche and outcomes (habitus, emotion regulation, learning and adaptation, physical and mental health, and life history).

We now turn to the definition of family.

Family

Families are a cultural system that may serve to constrain parents’ behaviours by the sex of members (Bussey & Bandura, 1999).

The first question that comes to mind is, why do we want children? Many couples have chosen not to have children—they were formerly called “childless”, and are now “childfree”—so parenting takes on a different meaning and function for these people. For the majority who want children, two strategies have been adopted to bring them up (Csikszentmihalyi, 1993). One is to have as many children as possible, with general effort, so that some will survive to adulthood. This is not discriminating among children, but ensuring the adaptable ones survive better into adulthood. The other is to have few children but full effort is spent on them to adulthood.

Then comes the question of how many children to have in a family. With strong economies, many developed countries are observed to have small families—that is, three or fewer children—and adopt the second strategy above in childrearing. From my research, I have advocated at least four children in a family, and the more the better, within the parents’ means, for reasons of strong sibling support, economies of scale, and the opportunity for more chances of children helping out the parents in their later age, among other reasons (see Table 1.1 on the pros and cons of small and large families). As to the roles of the members of a family, I am sticking to traditional and modern roles of the father and the mother (see the later chapter on fathering and mothering). Again, it is open to the choices of parents what and how parenting is to be done at home.

Table 1.1 Pros and cons of small and large families

	Pros	Cons
Small families (three children or fewer) Note: Many experts have advocated two children in a small family; I have advocated three, as one more in this family is still within the confines and terms of small-family parenting.	Children get more attention from parents Children get more quality attention from their parents as limited parental emotional and economic resources are not diluted. Higher levels of education for children With more focused resources and attention, children will likely achieve higher levels of education. Smaller impact on family finances Fewer children means less impact (food, school, trips, gifts) on family finances or less pressure on family budgets, therefore relieving strain and emotional pressure. Thus, parents have more money for other uses for the family. Economic success All children will have an equal chance of achieving personal and economic success. Better quality of life for the mother Women are usually responsible for childrearing activities. Having fewer children would give the mother additional time to develop individually and professionally.	Children may be more self-centred For the only child, he or she is deprived of a sibling relationship, meaning he or she cannot learn to share. Even with a sibling or two, there may be less of a need to share. Limited well-rounded development for children Fewer children contribute less to the variety of talents in the family. Children may be b...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1. Family, parenting, and influencing factors
• 2. Fathering versus mothering
• 3. Western (individualistic) parenting styles
• 4. Eastern (collectivistic) parenting styles
• 5. Other relevant parenting styles
• 6. Comparing parenting styles
• 7. The role of significant others
• 8. Assessing your parenting style
• 9. Overview of parenting
• Index