I think the author is using a different definition of helicopter parent than how the term generally is used. Other articles I've read on the subject typically refer to being overly involved and interfering rather than letting the child learn for themselves and make mistakes, even up through college and young adulthood. This includes doing their homework for them, arguing with teachers for better grades, asking the coach for more playing time, writing their college admissions applications, etc... The result being young adults never having had any responsibility to take care of or fend for themselves and being unable to make decisions independently because their parents have done everything for them.
This is a failure in parenting, regardless if it results in the kids getting good grades and a good job.
133
This author shares a narrow interpretation of culture that fits a popular mindset blind to what it is manifesting. Depression, anxiety and suicide are the epidemics of youth today, regardless of achievement level, and this article is shamelessly disconnected from these truths.
Resilience (emotional bandwidth) is an essential quality to not only surviving, but to thriving. It is developed through exploration, where one encounters the unfamiliar through independent experience for the sake of learning, not results.
Helicopter parenting is the antithesis of this. It prioritizes performance and overlooks the resulting collateral damage to emotional health.
41
Helicopter (hovering ) parents: Produce kids with peanut allergies because the poor kids never had the chance to get dirty and eat dirt ( the medium in which peanuts grow, duh, think there is. correlation?) and other ailments due to lack of exposure to germs and worms as an infant and toddler.
Authoritarian parents: Schedule out every minute of their kids day, so the parents can live vicariously through their children; making sure the kids "have the opportunities they never had" (whether they want it or not). This produces adults (incapable of making their own decisions) with an academic or physical 'talent', yet no social skills to adapt in society.
21
Helicopter parenting works for the children of parents who have the time and resources to be hyper-involved in their nurturing, which means the children whose parents do not have those resources may not be able to compete with their peers. Forcing market competition onto children's education is the result of neoliberal ideology. Children with involved parents are always going to have an advantage, but public education was instituted to overcome class privilege so that all children could receive optimal eductions. America's neoliberal political economy eliminates the equality of wage earners and the education of their children; helicopter parenting is one response to the abandonment of community for the responsibility of each individual for even elementary education.
15
I feel like there is a huge disconnect in the piece. It's totally possible to be an authoritative parent without hovering over your kid all the time. Authoritative parenting does not equal helicopter parenting...
57
Please put this headline on a tee shirt!
More entitled brats....... what could go right?
12
It certainly works for producing new generations of angst-ridden, materialistic, neoliberal citizens. It enables a sea change in values, from an obligation to be your brother's keeper to every man for himself. That's the only message a kid could possibly take away from this behavior.
17
Hmmm. The people who care the most about the kid. The people who do the most for the kid are actually right about what is best for their child?? Does this mean that parents know best and others should stay out of it?
7
Um, the op-ed pretty much debunks it's own argument by acknowledging correlation does not equal causation!! C'mon Times! I'm not paying for this tripe!
10
I think it's interesting that the top Reader Pick comments are all siding against the helicopter parent. Perhaps it just reflects our own parenting insecurities, but truly, if you think helicopter-parented kids are helpless you ought to interact with kids whose parents have barely raised them at all. These are kids with terrible self-esteem; no concept of what hard work might accomplish, i.e. they have no confidence that cracking the books will help them learn a subject or do well in a course; they accept terrible grades because they "passed"; their future goals are about fifteen minutes out; they embrace any disability label somebody throws at them (rather than read something complex, they'll proudly announce they are a "visual learner" - which isn't even a thing); so many are disorganized, unwilling to follow instructions or deadlines, undisciplined with their financial aid... Need I say more???
Be careful when blaming highly involved parents on what you perceive as fragile, screwed-up kids. You should see the other extreme!
18
This is so absurd. No control for heritability. Please refer to Lukianoff and Haidt's "Coddling of the American Mind" much more thorough and conscientous study.
6
I’m sorry for long range success be a lighthouse parent not a helicopter!
I raised my kids to be gritty and self reliant there were very clear consequences for rules not followed and I followed through every time....they were encouraged to explore and fix their own messes.
Both of my kids successfully flew the nest and ask nothing of us but friendship. I witnessed many helicopter parents in action as did my daughter who was a RA IN college. Long term I don’t find they have more success intact I find their parents still paying their bills and running to fix their kids messes at age 25 and 30.
Data can be screwed how bout common sense here folks!
9
The title of the article was misleading. After reading the article I wish the author didn't refer to "helicopter" parenting, which is widely open to subjective interpretation. A good read otherwise.
12
Isn't helicopter parenting associated with parents who don't foster children's independence, who hover and make choices for them past the age when this is appropriate? This piece says that parents who foster independence have children who are likely to succeed.... so, the opposite of helicopter parenting?
Isn't the usual concern with helicopter parenting that it has downsides when the children do finally attempt to leave the nest? This piece seems to rely on a study of 15-year-olds, who would not yet be suffering the consequences of trying (and perhaps failing) to fly on their own.
18
As a K-12 Director of School Counseling, I know that authoritative parenting works. Authoritative parents know when to intervene or back off, they model values and set standards with feedback to their children. The research on parenting styles has been around since the 1980s. Since then, not a single one of the thousands of parents I have counseled since 1985 has ever looked up this research on his or her own. So, here is a primer: Authoritative parents model educational values and a strong work ethic while they help each child to identify and develop his or her strengths and interests. Beyond that effective parents: Limit technology, emphasize sleep, impart healthful habits, and try not to be fear mongers who scare their kids about the future.
28
Putting extra time and resources into the first couple of decades of parenting has probably made it easier moving forward. At least that's the way it seems now looking back on everything. But I don't think that is what goes through the minds of parents as they are raising their children. Blueprints for perfect parenting don't exist. The article points out some healthy principles and they make sense. Authoritarian relationships (political, workplace or at home) have some terrible consequences - and they hardly ever last. Taking a sincere interest in the development and well being of others (especially your own children) creates a better future for everyone. The old saying that nobody on their death bed wishes they had spent more time in the office says a lot. It is equally true that no parent wishes they had spent less time with their children. Before we know it, our children are grown, out of the house, raising their own families, and trying to figure it out for themselves.
6
The surprising thing to me is that the "it works" applies to financial success. Didn't that way of thinking peak about 50 years ago? We seem to be stuck in that idea of success ever since then. What about quality of life, a catch phrase for sure, but lets start by breaking it down to being happy, caring about other people, having a good attitude, making time for those important in your life, and appreciating the beauty of it all. The helicoptered kids that I have met as adults are self centered, lack social skills, and freak out when they don't win or get praised for everything they do. I don't consider this to be the definition of success.
7
Something is missing in the analysis. Many of us had permissive parents and excelled scholastically and professionally. The personality of the child and his or her innate abilities may have much to do with later success, assuming they had the opportunity for quality education in the public system. However, as long as class sizes are 30 students and teaching, regarded as an inferior profession and paid accordingly, quality will be elusive. And blame will be placed elsewhere, e.g., on the permissive parents.
5
There's a difference between involved and hyper-involved. Helicopter parenting, is not the same as authoritative parenting. Authoritative parenting encourages children to develop critical thinking skills and and independence. Helicopter parenting does just the opposite- helicopter parents swoop in and take over, thus robbing their children of the opportunity to fend for themselves and learn from their experience. The mistake is Druckerman's, she is interpreting the research evidence inaccurately.
16
Can we please stop trying to name & judge every parenting style? I'm so tired of hearing about helicopter parents & all of the judgement that goes along with that term. Of course children with involved, caring parents are going to have advantages in this world. As adults it is our job to help kids learn to navigate childhood & young adulthood. It is our job to teach them well. Sometimes we parents hover too closely, sometimes we step back too far. It seems as if there is always someone there to cast judgement on how well we are doing with that. How about as a society we show parents some compassion? Social safety nets are almost non-existent today - healthcare & childcare costs can sink a family. Laws have changed & require parents to be with their children at all times in public places . These factors alone can provoke extreme anxiety. Add to that the inherent stresses of parenting – just trying to figure it all out as you go along (kids don’t come with manuals) – getting food on the table or in a lunchbox 3 times/day, making sure that kids are keeping up with basic hygiene, homework, & doing okay getting along with other people….. it’s all a sometimes beautiful, sometimes ugly, huge mess of things to do. Can we please start with the assumption that the vast majority of parents are trying to do their best by their children? And how about if we work to bring back social safety nets so that more parents have the flexibility & support to parent well?
13
I'm sorry, but helicopter parenting is not equal to authoritative parenting. Reasoning with your kids sounds great (and makes sense to me), but what about the parents who go into their college aged children's classrooms and take notes for them? Or who write their kids' resumes and take them to job fairs? I think we have seriously different definitions of what helicopter parenting is.
15
Yes and no. I recognized a long time ago that without my help, input, and insight into the college system (where I was an academic advisor for 25 yrs.), it would be very difficult for my daughter to navigate and obtain the education she deserved and worked so hard to achieve. She had a goal of publishing her first novel before she graduated, but had no idea how to get there. I used my hard-won knowledge to use the system to her advantage, and--as a result--she produced the first installment of her graphic series, complete with a recording for the blind and visually impaired, to extend access to her visual art for this audience. That was important to her, since she was diagnosed with a massive brain tumor at age ten and underwent 3 surgeries and 15 mos. of chemo in the course of a decade, which left her with half her field of vision in both eyes (hemi-anopsia). She graduated in 2017 with a 4.00 cum. gpa, and she is now completing Ch. 2 of that graphic series, complete with an audio companion, thanks to a state grant, and she was recently chosen for the interview round in the MFA Illustration programs for which she applied. Whatever school she chooses, I am now confident that she is strong enough to succeed on her own. My own family, on the other hand, had no experience with the fine arts and no ability to assist me as I have assisted her. As a result, I did see success by my own efforts, but not nearly the kind of success or opportunities that my daughter has.
3
Way over thinking it.
2
This article doesn’t seem to describe helicopter parents (hovering over your kids so they never learn anything on their own by falling or failing) as much as it does involved parents (pushing your kids to work hard and strive). I think the Times went for a catchy trend to entice readers.
12
Please define success
4
This essay is a text book definition of privilege. Oh, Ms. Druckerman, how is it that that you are allowed to write such lazy (confusing authoritative with helicoptering) arguments about parenting and get the NYT to publish them? Children are human beings who live, just like we all do, in specific communities which express our national history differently. Does living in France blind you to the history of injustice in the US and how parents struggle to support and challenge their children in different places, facing distinct challenges depending on the historical legacies of white supremacy and its aftermath, immigration policy and our intereventions abroad, in our own communities? Geez. Please spare us next time you think you have a good idea for an article based on the bubble you live in.
2
This should article should have a footnote that explains that this type of parenting works and is necessary in the overcrowded and overpriced cities of the northeast corridor. Of course many New York Times writers seem to be oblivious of the cultural life outside of the northeast bubble, so we should not expect this article to be any different.
2
Your bias is a NYT standard. Now, please point out the suicide rate of children whose parents voted for Hillary, then their rate of drug consumption, of sexual preference, and of professional psychological treatment.
Good family relations and good mental health are not detrimental to good politics. Politically Correct extremes are not compatible with a democracy nor is the sole measure of success being wealth.
We now have two shrill, screaming pools of political leaders, each driven from extremes. Pick your asylum team. It's all that's left of democracy.
3
That helicopter parenting works is very bad news for me and my son. I am far too lazy to do so much hovering.
4
The headline for this article is so wrong! The headline writer should print a correction for misrepresenting the findings of the research and for steering parents down a path that leads to anxiety ridden children who do not know how to navigate life in a useful and productive way. I have taught a form of authoritative parenting to parents for 25 years. There is no similarity between that parenting style and helicopter parenting or high pressure parenting.
Patricia Cancellier, MPH
5
Oh, Jeez. I didn't vote for Hillary. Was I supposed to?
1
Helicopter is so yesterday. Drone parents now.
11
Absolutely terrible science! Pamela should take a course in evidence based analysis before she presents the results of "research". Especially when she compares the poor with the rich. Sounds kinda like Fox News.
1
Absolutely ridiculous! All helicopter parenting has accomplished is to raise an entire generation of entitled & spoiled millennials. They think society owes them something for their mere existence. They are dependent rather than independent. They lack crucial problem solving skills. And they don’t know what the word boredom means because they’ve had their heads stuck to little phone screens their whole life. I know because I raised three of them and did my best to let them roam. My kids are light years ahead of their peers as a result.
3
Horrendous post modern nonsense.
1
So sad "sucess" is measured in $$$$$$$. Pity the poor artist at heart who was flown into a career tract my chopper mom.
4
If you want your baby rat to grow up to win the rat race, start their training early!
7
Depends on how you spell $ucce$$.
If that's what all takes to float your boat... go for it. But you'll never know heaven.
3
Terrible headline, very misleading, and in this day and age, careless.
2
This article is inadequate, uninformative, incoherent and incomplete.
I wonder how many times this article will be referenced by many since it originated with the NYT. Come on NYT!
if you are going to publish articles about parenting, do right by your readers.
There is not one single formula for parenting and teaching, but a menu of choices to choose from to bring out the best in our kids.
3
The preminse of this article is so off. And frankly elitist.
When did private school become surnonimous with helicopter parents? Do you think other parents aren't as actively involved in their childs lives?
Tell me I am wrong Pamela Druckerman. Isn't that the opening premise?
WOW. - such elitism.
3
Were the parents "angling to get him into a preschool" or were they "ambivalent". The author "suspects" that they'd take it. Well that certainly seems more likely than the parents doing something they didn't even want.
This is not only not good journalism, it's not journalism. It was presented as opinion piece, but there's barley even an opinion here, but I'll give you and opinion, this is drivel.
4
To the commentator Al, from Boston :
Are you a helicopter parent of the author of this opinion article ? Whether so or not, all your responses are either mean (to Lisa H.) , curmudgeonly , or exceedingly self -important . Sometimes all of the above. And what, pray tell,is meant by your employing the by employing the 'royal we ' when referring to yourself in several of your replies ??
2
I think of helicopter parents as those who put an inordinate and inappropriate amount of energy into ensuring that their special darlings always have the softest, smoothest path, never experience failure, and always feel superior, even when they've done nothing to deserve it.
Trying to get your child into a good school, engaging with your child, talking to them, reading to them, encouraging them: that's good parenting.
2
Not only is the headline to this article misleading, but the data as presented seems to paint paint with a very broad brush over parenting techniques. “Helicopter parenting” is a derisive term categorizing parents who do not allow their children to make any independent decisions or face any challenges without parental intervention. It is not the same thing as authoritative parenting and support by caring parents. Supervising what children do with spare time and how they apply themselves to academic pursuits also have many levels of intensity. It would be beneficial for Druckerman to help differentiate these levels so that readers don’t end up believing that they help their children by eliminating all traces of independence.
4
The parents that can afford to be helicopter parents are better off careerwise and travel in more affluent circles. They have better connections. Most of the college kids that I've seen land prime internships and jobs , get them because of who their parents know. These kids can afford (or mom and dad can afford) to move to a strange city and pay for an apartment for 3-6 months. for an internship. Other kids are busy working jobs to try to pay for tuition. So it is no mystery that helicopter parents produce kids that get good jobs.
The parents working to stay afloat, don't have those connections. They can't afford to be helicopter parents and even if they could they don't have the prime social connections that lead to good jobs for their kids.
One other thing I have seen from these kids raised by helicopter parents is a lack of compassion for animals, poor people, etc. Researchers always bill self esteem as a positive but I think some of the self esteem these kids have is from being told how much better they are than everybody else. They believe the universe revolves around them because that is the only life they have ever known.
6
This article just makes me want to cry. I was a child in the 50's and the freedom and independence we had formed me. I came from a working class, one car, no luxuries, live in an apartment family. I still value my public school education. My parents couldn't afford ski or tennis lessons but I always got a week away at camp. My older brother graduated from an Ivy League University and got a Phd in Physics. I received a BFA from one of the top art schools and also got an MFA. We both were the first in our family to go to college and we managed to graduate without significant debt (for me under a $1000). To think of my mother checking up on me via a cell phone gives me the creeps. She did help me with my multiplication tables. What has happened to our lost youth. (I saw a clip of a 9 yr. old boy walking to a park about a block away for the first time alone!) Is this country only geared toward making a lot of money? Is that the only way success is measured? Does nothing else count, like freedom to be?
15
Parents who take an active interest in their children's education are not "helicopter" parents. I reserve that term for parents who never allow young children away from their side and hover over them in the playground with both hands ready to catch them if they drop off the monkey bars, who supervise climbing the ladder up the slide and rush around to catch them at the bottom.
4
No mention of how helicopter parenting affects parents? Their marriage? Their sanity? It's also important for kids to grow up watching their parents prioritize their relationship. Or in the case of single parents, to demonstrate self-care and taking time to pursue one's own interests. Parents often lose themselves and their partners by being hyper-focused on their kids. We don't need any more pressure to keep burning ourselves out on being our children's wait staff in the name of ensuring their future success. We can choose balance and teach our children that the world does not revolve around them.
7
No mention of how helicopter parenting affects parents? Their marriage? Their sanity? It's also important for kids to grow up watching their parents prioritize their relationship. Or in the case of single parents, to demonstrate self-care and taking time to pursue one's own interests. Parents often lose themselves and their partners by being hyper-focused on their kids. We don't need any more pressure to keep burning ourselves out on being our children's wait staff in the name of ensuring their future success.
Kid's success at what? Making more money, getting better grades? Let's measure something else: kindness, responsibility for ourselves and our planet, making a difference in the world.
11
This article mixes authoritative parenting with helicopter parenting, and draws some pretty outrageous conclusions because of that. We know that authoritative parenting has better overall outcomes for children than permissive or authoritarian. And yes, maybe helicopter parenting can get students into college and graduate school. But nationwide, more of our students are not completing their four year degree in six years. More of our kids with college degrees are not finding gainful employment, while other sectors of the economy are hungry for workers, and many of the open jobs do not require a four year degree. Electrical engineers, pipe-fitters, nurses, all are areas where more and more jobs are open, the pay is solid, the work can't be outsourced, and one does need an ivy league degree to get hired.
I don't think it's economic opportunity that parents are striving for when they helicopter parent, I think it's perceived status. Because why else would my neighbor be running his son through the ringer in middle school to make sure he got into an ivy league college, when his son's goal is to become a history teacher? Last I checked, schools pay teachers the same, regardless where they went to school. But when I mention the advantages of the honors program at our state universities, I get looks of shock and horror, even though those schools have high rates of students passing the licensing exam, as well as placement in graduate programs. T
1
So the entire thrust of this article is that if you have money, use it to aid and to give your children that extra oomph it can buy.
This has been true everywhere and and at all times and boils down to "it's not who you are buyt who you know".
You can read this in "the catcher in the rye", and see it on 1850's TV which often celbrated cowboys and gunfighting skills but occasionally showed that the country was run, 150 and more years ago-from the East Coast by a coterie of wealthy people who knew one another and went to the same schools.
Of course, even among the chosen wealthy few, some would act in a diffeent manner-a la Theodore Roosevelt, who was chosen by the fatal bullet that Killed President Mckiinley-thrusting him into the White House, where he might only have visited as a guest, otherwise. Fate has done the same for men as diverse as Harry Truman, Andrew Johnson and LBJ.
This merely shows that at least occasionally, history and accident make the most fateful decisions.
Does anyone other than history stents and aging boomers remember the name of the college LBJ attended or what he did with his degree, before he entered politics?
2
But how long does it last? How far into the child’s development is helicopter parenting effective? Through college? Into adulthood? The article mentions comparisons by means of a test for 15-year olds. But there are real-life examples: a college student still being closely overseen; and a son, 28, still being monitored by his mother multiple times a day via txt messages, with the mother taking care of problems and resolving “issues” for him. Will the studies follow these children into young adulthood? Is data currently available on the effectiveness (or danger) of this phenomenon?
This also seems to relate to factors identified by Kate Julian in her recent article in The Atlantic on the “sex recession” — Young people not dating, not forming relationships with their peers. How does helicopter parenting affect this?
4
@Richard
President Roosevelt's mother managed his finances when he was president. Lot's of wealthy people manage their children well in to adulthood.
1
No, it does not. The author is focusing on only the upside. It only works where conformity to multiple standards make achievement overcome ambition, and that is her focus. Parents learn to help the kids cover whatever measures their children are subjected to. Relatives who work at a medical college report to me the dependency that develops between the hovering parent and the child, even among medical students. Having someone always do something for you does not make you better at that thing, it makes you dependent. It's the emergence of the Oedipal complex. How many times does a mechanic have to fix your car until you know how? Infinite times, because you'll never learn.
2
This is a very interesting article. Now I understand that my grandchildren are living at a "heliport."
Things change a lot every generation, but when I raised my five kids, it was already a choice. It was not in my value system to live this way and it might not have worked for my children that well either. We lived in the country. As adults, they are good people. They are not CEO's. They are all very good at what they do. I liked this article because it said what the issue is, clearly: in todays' world, preparing for the competitive future, this type of parenting helps to raise the future's good successful adults, happy in themselves and in their world. I assume part of helicoptering includes teaching children things of real value too, like kindness, awareness, generosity, ethics. Life is hard work. Now taking care of an elderly parent, what I wished I had been taught early on is that life is hard work from beginning to end.
3
I wish the author had defined helicopter parenting. To me, it’s pushing your children to do activities they don’t want to do and follow career paths they don’t enjoy. Authoritative parenting, which “uses reasoning” and “emphasizes adaptability, problem-solving, and independence” is totally different.
3
As many commenters pointed out, this article appears to support authoritative parenting, not helicopter parenting. Big difference. The helicopter headline draws attention but is misleading.
8
"The most effective parents, according to the authors, are “authoritative.” They use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them. Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence — skills that will help their offspring in future workplaces that we can’t even imagine yet."
If that is helicopter parenting then let's have more of it. Adaptability, problem-solving and independence. If that is not a recipe for success in life I don't know what is.
3
The only way to succeed is through failure. That's how we learn effectively and achieve innovation. Therefore, this article only supports the success of mediocrity and unethical behavior currently evident everywhere.
The fact that helicopter parents are successful in placing their children in elite institutions does not mean they will succeed. Moreover, this success at access explains why we have a declining democracy and lack of rigor, integrity, and character in government and corporations. In other words, we have a government and corporate culture staffed by self-centered selfish untalented individuals who excel only at cheating and who think they can be disrespectful and get away with it. The truth is it will catch up with them and they will fall much harder than those who persevered when facing obstacles. What is the point of greed and wealth without a soul and a sense of what defines excellence and humanity?
3
OK. But what about my friend’s nearly 30 year old daughter who calls her mother when the Uber doesn’t show up? Seriously. Articles like this annoy me, drawing conclusions on what could be argued as weak correlates. And the nearly 30 year old who cried to Mommy because the Uber has the nerve to be late? Ivy League grad.
9
It all depends what is success for you. This author of this article seems driven by a social success, which can hide emotional problems and a person´real needs better, but for me that is not being successful in life.
4
"And they seem most successful at helping their kids achieve the holy grails of modern parenting: college and postgraduate degrees, which now have a huge financial payoff. Using data from a national study that followed thousands of American teenagers for years, the authors found that the offspring of “authoritative” parents were more likely to graduate from college and graduate school, especially compared with those with authoritarian parents." I hope those authoritarian parents are also paying the exorbitant student loans and interest rates.
1
She’s got the wrong bottom line. What the article shows are ill effects of structural inequality in our society. One more reason to do something about it.
4
I don't care if it "works", I refuse to be a helicopter parent to my bright, funny, warm, kind and happy 13-year-old son. It would make us both miserable. I will make sure he can wash dishes, clean a toilet, cook a meal, wash his clothes and learn to work hard before he goes out into the world. I have seen the results of helicopter parenting and it is not pretty.
6
The author writes about authoritative parenting and helicopter parenting as though they are one and the same. They are not.
4
Hmmm . . . Almost correct --
"The most effective parents . . . are “authoritative.” They use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them. Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence — skills that will help their offspring in future workplaces that we can’t even imagine yet."
Actually, the most effective parents first demonstrate love and caring for their children. When children feel they are living in a safe, loving and secure environment, their curiosity explodes in ways that dwarf "the promise of AI" with actual intelligence. You can see them growing inside faster than the corn in Iowa in June.
At which point, then you bring on the "authoritative" parenting model wherein adults suggest healthy options to everything and give kids support and structure to follow through.
But the love always comes first. Without it, time stops, nothing works. A procedure is not a parent.
5
Since when is "helicopter parenting" the same as authoritative parenting?
5
NYT articles are more and more clickbait and read like high school essays. Especially anything having to do with science (social science included)
As a long time subscriber I implore the publisher to improve the quality of authors.
8
It all depends on how one defines success.
Is everybody happy?
1
I wonder if we all have the same definition of "success"? Good parents find ways support their kids in multiple ways -- and it certainly is easier if they have the time and money. There's no doubt that some of what you say is true about helicopter parenting. But at what cost? I see mothers modeling behavior that I am sure they don't want their daughters to mimic. Eating lunch with their children at school? Give me a break. Interfering later on with grown up children's jobs? Puhleez. Let's analyze the amount of stress for everyone, parents and children alike. Does this really make sense? "Helicopter" parenting holds women back in the work place and makes them nuts at the same time. Most of the young mothers I know are miserable -- not sure they are getting it right with their children, their jobs, their partners, their lives. The children benefit to a point .... Then what?
1
I generally enjoy Ms. Druckerman’s writing, but here she is obviously conflating “helicopter parenting” with authoritative parenting. They are not at all the same thing. It is possible to care about your children’s educations and enrich their lives with activities without being a helicopter parent. And if it takes eighteen years of high stress hyper-parenting just so your child can get into Columbia rather than Stony Brook, I’ll skip it, thank you.
3
No proof of causality. Hmm. So high test scores and STEM degrees = happiness? That would certainly account for the zillions of maladjusted code writers who post themselves feeding themselves #adulting. And saying the world forces this on them just reflects parents who don't have a good sense of a strong inner self to pass on. It's all a bit sad.
4
@jrk
When I look around and see the state of America it is clear to me that parents have failed to educate their children in values that contribute to an individual's capacity to meet life's challenges and to understand their responsibility in contributing to a healthy and progressive democracy and functioning society.
Such values are for losers according to Trump as is telling the truth. Our children have few role models to understand the extraordinary scope of what it means to be successful. I cringe at the thought of Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, executives at Google, and Apple as the hallmarks of accomplishments in human progress. Individuals and corporations who exploit their customers and violate their system of government, the rule of law, and breach the social contract for the sole purpose of profit.
Yes, it is more time consuming for parents to teach values but it provides a child with a moral compass. These core values are taught by parents not schools. Greed and grotesque wealth have become the measure of success. Politicians collude with wealthy individuals and corporations to further pervert the noble endeavor of public service and the common good.
Parents need to do the hard but rewarding work of parenting. They need to appreciate their child's autonomy, treat them with respect, and take satisfaction in contributing to the development of an unique, well rounded individual fully engaged in exploring their potential and participating in their community.
A study indicates that aathoritative parenting correlates with high levels of education later in life.
Rewording this as "Helicopter parenting works" is a dishonest non sequitur.
This doesn't even get into the likelihood of a correlation fallacy. If, as I suspect, authoritative parenting is more likely to be practiced by more educated parents, then a more likely conclusion is that children of the highly educated are more likely to become highly educated themselves. Not a shocker and even further from Ms. Druckerman's conclusion.
And, by the way, people with advanced degrees can be part of "a generation of stressed-out kids who can’t function alone."
How did this nonsense make it past an editor?
1
I would not call "authoritative parenting" "helicopter parenting." In fact, as it is described, it seems the exact opposite as it encourages independence and cognitive skills.
Helicopter parents, as far as I've seen the term defined up until now, discourage both; if the child of helicopter parents faces a problem or a challenge, the parent takes over and solves it for the child so the child develops no problem-solving skills. Some good examples I've encountered as a university professor include a mother who called my Dean to say her daughter should not be charged with plagiarism , even though it was proven, because her daughter did not like me as a teacher. In another case, a mother asked me to raise her son's grade because she was planning a graduation party, and, if the son got the F he had earned (I never saw him after the first day of a seminar class & the only assignment he turned in was gibberish), he wouldn't graduate, which would ruin the party. When I refused, she, too, took it to the Dean. I have read of helicopter parents who tried to go to job interviews with their progeny.
One archetypal helicopter parent I've read of is Brock Turner's father Dan Turner. After the Stanford swimmer was convicted of raping a woman who was too drunk to give consent, his father argued the son should get only probation because the boy has suffered enough by losing his appetite and his swimming scholarship. That's a "helicopter parent."
5
One of the most irresponsible articles I have ever read in the NYTimes. I work in one of the top high schools in the country with very loving, highly intrusive helicopter parents from a wide of socio-economic backgrounds. The balance of mental health "counseling" I do to teaching has shifted, over the years, to the point where I might as well give up my subject matter and hang out a shingle. Suicidal ideation is so prevalent we have sent out warning letters to the families. The kids are EXHAUSTED. This article infuriates me.
5
@Patty Deal
That is very interesting. I appreciate reading this comment and it puts a lot in perspective for me. I assumed that the author included the emotional component in her statement that helicoptering works. Perhaps she didn't.
But since there is no formula that works for everyone, and we understand that there are so many stressors outside of the family, having a lot of students coming in who are deeply depressed does not necessarily negate everything she said. It means that there is still no guarantee that doing everything for your child that you can think of is going to make them stable, happy adults.
Thank you so much for giving a very important part of the picture-
Anything that "works" to sustain and extend the insecure, tribalist, morally relative and above all selfish society we have today should be swiftly thrown in the garbage can, doused with gasoline and set on fire.
2
So if we get rid of religion and Trump and the world will be a much better place? Agree. I would like to read more about the economists work, but we should throw having to manage and interact with people raised by helicopter parents into the mix of metrics, because those results are less pleasant...
This is one of the most irresponsible articles I have ever read. As someone who works in higher education, I have been on the “receiving” end of this helicopter parenting. Students are horribly unprepared and ill equipped to be in college. They expect faculty and staff to take over the parenting role leading to irresponsibility, lack of work ethic, and much unhappiness and stress. There is an attitude that we owe them A’s and everyone gets a prize even when the work is substandard. Many are unable to get themselves to class or honor deadlines in a timely manner with the absence of their helicopter/snow plow parents. Student counseling services are finding it more and more difficult to keep up with the demand and are seeing sharp increases in depression and suicidal cases. There is a severe lack of coping skills to deal with not only being in an academic environment but in being able to take care of such mundane tasks as laundry.
When my now adult sons were growing up they expressed frustration about being assigned chores and responsibilities like homework; yet also about how their school was trending towards everyone being gratuitously rewarded, even for bad behavior. The justification? So everyone would feel good about themselves.
Parenting is the hardest job ever. By not being a helicopter parent and allowing my sons to figure things out with reasonable supervision, they are, and continue to be, fine young men.
2
Who gets to define success, you or your kid?
The reality is that parents for the past several decades have refused to accept life's only certainty: they will die.
When you die, horror of horrors, your kids will actually have to make their own way in the world, the world they find themselves in, not your world, let alone the world as you wish it were. All you can do as a parent is give your kids the tools to interpret and manipulate the world as they find and perceive it, not as you do. And, if you deny your children the ability to develope those tools, which include handling and moving on from disappointment, failure, fantasies, and dreams, you are guilty of child neglect, perhaps even abuse.
Of course as a parent you want your children to be successful. Just don't conclude from that justifiable feeling that you inerrantly know what will count as successful to them, even if you do manage to browbeat them into thinking they actually hold and believe your version of things.
In addition, parents should always question their own motives and as themselves whether they are trying to live out their own fantasies and failures through their offspring.
2
The definition of "success" here is too narrow. Not everyone is cut out to be a corporate lawyer, a brain surgeon, or a CEO. And a person can be one of these things and end up as a dreadful human being, a source of shame rather than pride for the family.
Yes, you should have high standards, but in the end, it's your child's life, not your source of bragging rights.
Your goal should be for your children to find a niche in which they are contented and putting their talents and skills to good use. For some, that may indeed mean being a brain surgeon, but for others, it may mean being a furniture maker or a kindergarten teacher or a classical musician or a pastry chef.
3
Mother of a doctor and a corporate executive here. We had few rules in the house when they were growing up, but the ones we had were expected to be followed without argument. You really do have to pick your battles with your kids and not draw lines in the sand because if they have any gumption, they will cross that line every chance they get. You want to quit piano lessons? Ok. You want to bail on soccer camp? Uh, no, not when I shelled out a couple hundred bucks. Also, both were expected to work part-time starting in high school and through college as we gave out no allowances. Funny how kids value money more when they've worked for it.
4
"Helicopter Parenting"
You keep using that phrase, I do not think it means what you think it means
(apologies to Inigo Montoya)
2
Parent or not, anyone interested in the research on this important issue might want to read The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure by Greg Lukianov and Johnathan Haidt.
3
When I was a kid, this was known as “parenting”. Normal involvement in your kids’ lives. Being a parent, an adult, an authoritarian figure who leads by example, and not your kids’ “friend”.
3
Parents should always question their own motives and ask themselves whether they are trying to live out their own fantasies and failures through their offspring. After all, who should get to define your child's success, you or your kid?
The reality is that parents for the past several decades have refused to accept life's only certainty: they will die.
When you die, horror of horrors, your kids will actually have to make their own way in the world, the world they find themselves in, not your world, let alone the world as you wish it were. All you can do as a parent is give your kids the tools to interpret and manipulate the world as they find and interpret it, not as you do. And, if you deny your children the ability to develope those tools, which include handling and moving on from disappointment, failure, fantasies, and dreams, you are guilty of child neglect, perhaps even abuse.
Of course as a parent you want your children to be successful. Just don't conclude from that justifiable feeling that you inerrantly know what will count as successful to them, even if you do manage to browbeat them into thinking they actually hold and believe your version of reality.
3
"...in today's unequal world." When was the world ever equal?
...whatever that means.
2
In today’s competitive world, kids who’s parents aren’t super involved have no chance.
4
Didn't the Times just run a piece about the importance of allowing children to be "bored"? A helicoptered child is never left to his or her own devices, i.e., to learn how to relieve boredom through creative play, day dreaming, discovery, and learning.
3
I was enjoying the article fine until it somehow turned to Trump and Hillary. Gosh! Can't we even have a parenting conversation without invoking partisan politics?
What's success, though? Winning the rat race? Unless it means retiring at 40, then no thanks.
So...the “helicopter parenting” aspect of this piece went no deeper than the headline. The argument emphasizes an observed difference in outcomes for “authoritarian” parents (i.e., those who are directive, expect obedience, and sometimes use corporal punishment) versus “authoritative” (i.e., those who use reasoning and persuasion to guide their children’s behavior, in effect promoting adaptability, problem-solving and independence). Children reared under the latter strategy, so the story goes, tend to do better. Nothing mind-bending in that. But what does an “authoritative” parenting style have to do with “helicopter” parenting (i.e., overprotective, controlling and meddlesome, in effect promoting long-term dependence)? In fact, they seem to be opposites. The essay doesn’t fit the thesis.
1
The author seems to be conflating helicopter parenting and authoritative parenting.
2
Maybe. Or maybe the "adaptability, problem-solving and independence" which Druckerman extols as being encouraged by "authoritative" parents will, sadly, never, ever create the revolution which a world where, ultimately, material success is the be-all, end-all desperately needs in order to survive.
But I guess that so long as all those helicoptered kids have BAs from Harvard, BMW's in the garage and 2.3 kids of their own in a nice neighborhood, then the apocalypse will be nothing worse that just another distraction, kinda like a really, really good video-game.
Cheers.
To Jeff Van Syckle who wrote:
"I guess the measure of the success of helicopter parenting has a lot to do with the value system by which you measure accomplishment and what you hold to be morally and ethically important."
Yes, yes and yes! I want my kid to earn a living wage. I want him to be able to feed my grandkids and to afford health care. I am *not* ashamed!
Arguably unethical clickbait title “helicopter parenting works.” Although “intensive” parenting style correlated with achievement outcomes, FAR more importantly in this moment of authoritarianism on the rise in the Western world, the authors find authoritative parenting predicts far healthier outcomes
than authoritarian parenting.
There are so many unsupported leaps and suppositions in this loosely structured essay, it's ridiculous. A few years ago, Ms Druckerman was touting laissez faire parenting styles as per the French model. She had young children then. But she was so convinced she was correct! Now that her children are older and she has come to realize that they need to make their own way in the world, this silly person is touting the opposite. She was overstepping her expertise then, and doing the same now. Accessing the best education for your child as no relevance to "helicopter parenting." The fact that you publish such nonsense is curious, to say the least. Bah!
1
Parenting is far too complex and individual to be dumbed-down by this "research" and simplistic article.
Pass.
1
This is the dumbest opinion piece I’ve read in a while, including the dreck coming out of the Wall Street Journal these days. The title is super misleading so as to get hits. Shameless.
I’ll say this: my parents didn’t helicopter me, but they did care and they did spend time helping me. They never told me I needed ten activities and carted me around. Actually, I had a lot of alone time and time for self-directed play and exploration and that resulted in me becoming a creative thinker. That got me into an Ivy League - twice - and it has allowed me to get paid very well for essentially pursuing a hobby and turning it into a profession.
More importantly, my parents taught me to be kind to others and listen and be confident in myself, and I took that to heart. That’s real achievement - not the academic and economic benefits you seem to equate with success.
1
As a Chinese person, I’d have to say duh, no kidding, why do you think the Asian parents spent all that time making their kids do the piano, get tutoring, etc all these years.
If you helicopter, you can get more kids into college.
BUT you also kill incentive and independence, so when they start working they won’t be as successful as the kids who were not tiger parents and went to college anyway because they found school interesting.
It’s a trade off.
2
I love everything she writes, don’t you? Seriously, she is remarkable.
This is such wrong-headed thinking. What does success actually mean? Does winning at the rat race guarantee us any kind of happiness?
1
There is an extremely large body of research literature on authoritative parenting. We know that is is the type of parenting associated with the outcomes that rational adults would choose for the next generation. It is NOT the same as "helicopter" parenting. If an undergraduate in one of my developmental psychology classes submitted a paper with the conflations and misrepresentations in this article, I would not accept the paper. It is certainly not the reporting I expect from the New York Times.
3
The author mistakenly connects authoritative parenting (also referred to as democratic parenting) with helicopter parenting. These are two very different concepts. Helicopter parenting involves rescue missions and saving your child's missteps and is more likely to lead to anxiety prone offspring.
This is not a positive parenting strategy and nothing close to authoritative parenting.
NYT isn't delivering useful or accurate information with this article.
1
I wish these helicopter parents would teach their kids to recycle and dispose of trash in an apartment building! They may live in expensive apartments and go to great schools or have great jobs, but they have no feeling of responsibility to the community in which they live, including disposing of their own garbage! When you raise a child with blinders fitted with mirrors focused on themselves, you do your child, your community and your country a disservice!
1
An opposite opinion is offered in a book entitled "The Coddling of the American Mind" by Lukianoff and Haidt.
As I understand from the essay authoritative-helicopter parenting came to mean just good solid parenting, in being fully involved in your child's/ teenager's development, in helping him/herself shape, mold him into an ethical, well functioning human being.; isn't that the duty of being a parent? One gives life to a dependent and he/she takes precedent in one's life decisions until he/she is a self reliant- independent adult. By the way I am a liberal democrat and voted for Hillary, I believe in healthy helicopter parenting (not crazy person helicoptering, just solid parenting ) I think the generalizations, assumptions about liberal democrats are not helpful.
"Authoritative" parenting isn't about "helicopter" antics or being pushy, it's about that roots/wings cliché. About learning about both freedom and limits, and trying to provide the context where the child develops the personal capacity, values and confidence to act effectively as their own parent ("executive function") as they grow and become more and more autonomous.
It's also about being an effective "mentor" for your kids - recognizing that this one's personality and attributes suggests a mentoring tweak of this type, while that one would do better with a mentoring tweak of another.
A parent's function and obligation is to become redundant - to do extended midwifery resulting in grand and lovely and vibrant autonomous humans. Who are themselves gifts to society in how they act, treat themselves and others, and contribute - benefitting you and your kids, FWIW.
If I spent more time chauffeuring, or coaching both soccer and English essay writing ... and didn't have as much "me time" doing adult stuff ... big deal. Who said life is or should be about me? Or, for that matter, about my kids?
1
The article tries to steer a course for helicoptering between authoritarian parenting and authoritative parenting. I fail to see the helicoptering relates to either of them. I was an authoritative parent and was certainly not a helicoptering one. I sought no special privileges for my children, though I confess that they grew up and went to school in a good community with good schools. But they worked their own way wherever they went with little attention to their grades--I suppose expectations from college-educated parents with advanced degrees were still communicated--or their extra-curricular activities except to enable their interests. Both have successful careers, and I let them be proud of their success. They earned it.
1
Ok, but try being on the other side of the helicopter parent. I taught at UC, Berkeley for 23 years. Toward the end, an increasing number of students became what I call "entitled" students. My teaching and substance did not change, but these students expectations changed measurably. These students, for reasons unknown to me at the time, expected an A grade even if they did not put in the work. Four times over the course of the last 10 years teaching, I got calls from mothers (the fathers didn't do this in my case) demanding that their child (three daughters and one son) "will" receive an A grade in the class because they were smarter than the other students. I'm not making this up. I refused, of course, and stated that these students didn't show up for class, missed lab exams, did not produce as the other students, etc. One of the mothers became so enraged that she could hardly talk. I assume that her experience in whatever high school her daughter attended was different. She took it first to my department chair, then attempted to take it to the Chancellor. My department chair told her the same as I did, since I gave him the data. So, I can't say if this student and her helicoptering parent created success, but I never saw her at commencement, so she must have changed majors, or found success in another venue.
2
As a parent of now 30 and 28 year-olds, I have some perspective on this issue that I didn't have when I was raising them. It isn't as simple as this article makes it sound, although I agree that authoritative parenting is the way to go. What I learned boils down to this - you need to be involved, a lot, but you need never to do their work for your kids. They need to fail and see the consequences of their lack of work or motivation. My very meh high school and college student is a genius engineer with a great job and future. He learned what he needed to know on his own. My other more successful student was a self-starter that resisted interference strenuously. She also learned what she needed to know on her own. She graduates from med school in May. Neither of their roads were without epic failures, and I started from their births giving them a lot of stimuli and education, but the most important thing they learned was that only they were responsible for their successes and failures. IDK - maybe I just got lucky.
2
I am delighted to read this. Because parents will vary in what they infer from this article, I expect a fair number of people to derive that spending of time and money are useful surrogates for direction of attention and firmness.
The contrary evidence is also clear. Inattention, lack of firmness produces weak, ineffectual kids.
If (some) parents - now informed by this article - spend time and money, but are inattentive and not sufficiently firm, I guess it will produce only more opportunities for my kids. I.e., knowledge has rarely liberated people from the perils of poor choices. Immediate gratification, local sensemaking, likely trumps actions based on reason and insight.
Thank you for a great article.
1
"Since there’s apparently no limit to how much people will do for their kids,"
This just too horrible to be true.
"the prognosis for parenting doesn’t look good."
We must stop those pesky parents from meddling in the lives of children.
" Yet another reason to elect people who’ll make America more equal: We grown-ups can finally stop doing homework."
Maybe fines can be implemented for parents who interfere too much in the lives of children. And if that doesn't work, children can petition to be declared "liberated". The nerve of some parents wanting to provide the best they can for their children.
The horror, the horror, the horror...
2
I'm not sure how authoritative parenting can be construed as 'helicopter parenting'. I believe 'helicopter parenting' has more negative connotations and it is not clear whether the study cited has accounted for the subtle aspects of the degree of involvement of the parents in their child's development. An authoritative parent ,as described in the article, comes out more as a model of how a parent should be and doesn't appear to be a a synonym for a 'helicopter parent' hovering around his or her ward incessantly.
4
This article describes my son perfectly. Frankly when I visited he and my grandson in the past I was pretty sure he was going overboard in terms of his time consuming involvement. Now I think he's right on the money with how he parents. As a dad from the late 60s I plead guilty with an explanation.
2
No, what works best is parenting that teaches intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, good habits of the mind.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
1
Visiting homes where helicopter parenting takes place is a frustrating experience...it's kids, kids, kids! There is no adult conversations!
3
Great article. I personally, subjectively observe that the greatest confidence boosters come from within family— particularly the mother. There are still vestiges of preference to the first born son. I’m sure there’s plenty of evolutionary reasons but something to be aware of and guard against.
2
Let me see, I have to justify a self-indulgent behavior of mine in print--my total selfish absorption in the raising of my gene repository (aka: my kid)--so I'll cherry pick some studies and see if I can't convince others how good my efforts have been and, in consequence, how wonderful and self-sacrificing I am. Voila: My celebration of helicopter parenting.
Where's an air flight bag when I need one?
3
@eric: You left out the punchline...
But since that can lead to so-called inequality, it must be somehow prevented.
2
Cyntha, while I largely agree with the sentiment of your comment, way back in 1958 Micael Young commenting on his book, ‘The rise of the meritocracy’ warned, ‘it is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others’. From this point of view it is just a matter of the privileged ensuring that their offspring inherit privilege and power as in any class system and in the long term this is not good for society.
1
As an American mom raising a child in France (in a public school), I wonder what Pamela Druckerman thinks of the "authoritarian" (in my opinion) school system here? My child's teachers and my neighbors look down on my "authoritative" parenting style and think I'm too permissive. Ms. Druckerman, have you also noticed the tendency among adults here to expect strict obedience and to ignore the benefits of emphasizing creativity and adaptability in children? I have very real concerns that my child will not get the benefits of "authoritative" parenting while being schooled in what I perceive to be an authoritarian system.
1
There is a balance that could be pursued when developing parenting startegies. While enthusiastic, well researched techniques for raising kids should be applauded, there is an elephant in the room. That's called dependency.
It's the young adult who needs to talk to her mother multiple times a day about the most mundane decisions.
It's the young person who still lives in the parental house because he hasn't been booted out.
It's the young person who doesn't know how to cook food - let alone grow it.
It's the young person who can't decide what book to read next (if any).
This list is long.
While being a guide as a parent is critical, being an example may be even more important. Let's have that discussion more often.
So my thought would be that after being sure a kid has received a nice balanced educational day, send him outside with an apple: "Go play". If she can't figure out what to do with that, one may have created an emotionally dependent cripple with no creative fun in her bones. I wouldn't want to hire him/her.
And I especially would hope that my kid doesn't marry someone that "enabled". It would be a drag.
Being able to entertain oneself feeds the creative parts of a brain and provides a basis for innovative behavior and personal independence. While I am sure some kids who have been "helicoptered" turn out fine, I am meeting young people who have emerged as sad robots.
It is astonishing that this kind of nonsense is published in this paper. The analysis is superficial. The history is wrong, permissive parenting began in the 50's and there were many reasons for it including the post-war baby boom, widespread prosperity, the growth of the suburbs and a generation of parents who fought WWII. And the conclusion is obvious. It isn't exactly news that wealthy kids get a better education than poor ones, that it isn't a new thing. Finally it doesn't come close to proving its point that helicopter parenting works, in fact it only proves that the author doesn't understand what helicopter parenting is.
7
So, we're surprised to learn that parental supervision, guidance and involvement helps children and gives them better chances for success in throughout their childhood.
I grew up on the sidewalks of the South Bronx, Mott Haven and also in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Queens. Mom and Dad did not hold my hand. I went to PS 65 and 64. I was also a member of our synagogue and a Cub Scout pack at PS 64 on Townsend Ave at 175th St.
Somehow I muddled through and retired 6 years ago. When I was a kid mom and dad were busy working and raising 3 other children. Dad often came late and mom was forever busy with the little ones. I was expected to help shop, watch my younger sister and brothers, help around the house, and later in Glens Falls NY take care of the yard and whatever else I was asked to do.
School was my responsibility. No one checked my homework or guided my activities of orchestra, choir or sports. The science fair projects were my own. Grades were my responsibility.
But! I brought my children up differently and my wife and I involved ourselves as much as possible. We reviewed homework and drove our kids to activities that we also stayed and watched them participate in. Homework not reviewed was not handed in and poor homework was redone until we were satisfied. That included algebra, science, music, English literature and history. We took the kids to ski, ice skate, soccer and other activities.
We raised a successful lawyer-organic chemist and a speech pathologist
1
I grew up in the 60’s and 70’s when most parents were self absorbed, with high divorce rates, alcoholism and fear of missing out on the sexual revolution as the social fabric epidemics of the day. I can remember the turmoil and uncertainty my own parents divorce visited on my teenage years. I watched alcoholism and stress wreck my friends families. I saw competent parents become ineffective in the face of social change well beyond their scope of understanding.
Yet my friends and I thrived. The majority of us found a way to go the university, some going on to advanced degrees, some achieving fame and fortune through the arts. I don’t discount the benefit of parental involvement, but to characterize helicopter parenting as the answer to the reality that your child just may be average intelligence or talent as the fix will only make a generation of kids who will end up in therapy.
Everyone is born with a gift. Some find it, some need it found, and some need over bearing parents to keep them from being lazy or living a life without curiosity. The rest of us will get along just fine.
4
"Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence."
I'm sorry, but this seems like the exact opposite of helicopter parenting (aggressively trying to protect your child from negative experiences, being obsessed with safety at all costs, etc.). Get your terminology straight, please.
10
I agree with Voltron.
Authoritative parents do not helicopter. This style of parenting allows for the child to be guided through his/her own decisions without the dictatorship style control of those parents who helicopter over their children. Helicopter parents thwart the child’s independent decision making by undermining the very decisions that lead to that child’s autonomy.
2
I was helicopter parented. Gifted child. High expectations. Music lessons. I felt like I was never a child and never misbehaved. Later on, as an adult, I had a hard time growing up and making decisions for myself. It's wonderful to nurture children, and give them every opportunity. But please, allow them to participate in the decision making process--it's their life, and they need to eventually be able to function independently.
9
We should be careful about what the problem is here. As the author points out this is a phenomenon of inequality in society. Helicopter parents are able to give their kids such advantages, because there’s no one speaking for the others.
The main subjects are items like starving of public education, lack of opportunity in inner cities, and the political power of the ultra-rich.
6
The successes she describes that helicopter parenting brings bring me nothing but anxiety. It's a life-long methodical pursuit of being a 'have' and not a 'have-not.' Too bad the studies can't measure one's sense of fairness and compassion and wisdom.
4
The inequality started in the 1980's. Could this be related to Reagan policies in which he constantly stated that government is the problem. This was the beginning of the corporate takeover of the country. Helicopter parents by definition represent an authoritarian attitude of parenting and destroy the creativity of childhood. Creativity is related to free association, not creating automatons for the corporations. Mark Twain wrote that "He never let his schooling get in the way of his education." A structured education without the child learning on their own may produce a lot of codependence and psychological problems later in life, a lot of resentment when the child achieves adulthood.
3
@jeff bunkers:"he inequality started in the 1980's"
You are wrong. The middle class started losing wealth in 1973. Some labor segments recovered but the trend began.
Though it does make for a better polemic to use the 1980's as a started point.
This article conflates helicopter parenting with authoritative parenting- two very different things. Helicopter is overbearing, overprotective, and infantilizing. As the author noted, authoritative parenting encourages problem solving and independence. The fact that authoritative is more successful than authoritarian is old news and the headline is misleading.
I was a non- (and anti-) helicopter but consciously authoritative parent and now enjoy healthy relationships with my three 20-something, fully independent, and self-supporting children.
4
Eh, if you define success's apex as graduating with a degree, this works. But once they actually start working, some independence is a good thing. I know a whole lot of kids who came from less than stellar backgrounds and never went to college, but leveraged hard work into very good livings. I met a guy the other day who went from low income, rural household, to the military and into a Union trade where he makes close to 6 figures. I could go on with examples.
Degrees are a great foot in the door, but once you are in, you need to perform without your hand held.
3
Absolutely.
I would be curious about how children's success was measured? My lovely son is a public defender because even when he chose to go to law school, he never intended to become a personal injury lawyer and always intended to work for a non-profit or in some other capacity try to make the law work toward justice. When he tells people what he does, he often gets either a bemused smile of admiration (sort of) or an acknowledgement that he will "never make any money."
His girlfriend is in school and was the kind of student described in this article as successful. Together they will have a nice life, but both seem more concerned about having a family, being comfortable, and living as much as possible according to their values than they are accumulating wealth. Of course, I am very proud of them both, even though I didn't raise my lovely future daughter-in-law and can take no credit there.
4
@wanda You are spot on. We all have our personal definition of what success entails. I had a stellar career before I took a break for my daughter. And seeing her grow is my success story. I think we are too obsessed with idea of success being too uni-directional.
2
Is fit or fittest for a game of musical chairs the definition of successful parenting"
Depends how you define success - money and status maybe. Not sure about resilience, empathy, ability to make and keep relationships, be good citizens in a democracy. Surely the headline should have been a question, not a statement.
6
In my view, helicopter parents do everything from pre-school admission to attending meetings with college advisors. They rarely allow their children to experience and learn from mistakes. They don’t allow their children to advocate for themselves or make their own decisions. They rarely set boundaries and “no” is never used. I see this daily: from ill-behaved kids who believe they are entitled to whatever they want to parents who manage their child’s every action.
3
Sure, helicoptered kids may get better test scores and get a leg up on college but is mommy and daddy going to go to work with them? At some point, parents aren’t going to be able to help their children navigate the workplace or the complexities of adult life. You have to instill independence and let them make their own mistakes and solve their own problems.
6
Yes, would agree that helicopter parenting does advance the "signaling" function of schooling---obtaining the right credentials/resume to get into the right colleges and right job. Having said that, the educational function of schooling becomes a liability in this race for a credentials, and it is problematic that such hovering helps the child develop socially and emotionally. Each day, we read in the media story after story of men and women at the top of their game---they are doing everything right---but, they are not doing the right things.
2
I think you're confusing helicoptering, which is basically doing everything for your kids, with involved parenting, which means not being your kids best friend, having reasonable expectations, setting boundaries, requiring involvement in daily life's responsibilities and so forth. My sister recently asked me to layout her kid's writings in an organized and pleasing way for the kid's college applications. That's helicoptering. Telling the kids to do it herself albeit giving guidance for doing it well is involved parenting. Setting a kid up for success can be helicoptering or it can be involved parenting, it just depends on whether you're nudging or letting the kid play video games while you do it yourself.
7
As a baby boomer therapist (2 masters, state schools, low college debt paid, very good to excellent salary, did it without any parental help), I can tell you this article leaves out the area of the huge emotional toll helicopter parenting takes. I see teens, young adults and middle aged adults who were/are helicoptered by over- ambitious parents who have trouble seeing their children as anything but extensions of their own egos.
Trust me on this. Far better to have a self sufficient, caring, non-neurotic kid with a degree from a decent college or technical school than a kid who cannot function emotionally, can barely think for themselves, or communicate with others but has good money earning potential.
The study is seriously flawed. It leaves out the human elements of emotional wellbeing, happiness. Measures success in terms of money earned. Doesn't compare to others, ie, all of those people who are successful in many areas of life despite lack of helicopter parents.
12
What defines success? Is the definition only economic? Do "helicoptered" children grow into better human beings? On this we surely have little data, because, unlike economic success, that other kind of success, whatever we might call it, is far less quantifiable. What kinds of personality traits does an overinvolved parent unwittingly breed in a child? One might imagine that self-absorption, ultra-competiveness, and perhaps even certain forms of dependency (other than economic) might be among them. The question is worth pondering.
5
Take it from a high school teacher—the parents of helicopter parents are often entirely inert, listless, disinterest in everything but their YouTube tastes. I have parents of seniors emailing me for the date of graduation (students have been told 500 times), seniors who cannot do the cap-and-gown order paperwork on their own, and seniors who have no idea where they’ve applied to college. I’m not kidding.
Parents AND the school system need to be willing to let kids fail and learn from it. Kids today often sit back and let the currents of other people’s oversight take them where they may. They are disconnected from their own lives.
It won’t work. They will be home forever.
7
As an educator, I see another side....the side where kids are forever waiting for their parents to excuse behavior, to bail them out, to do their work FOR them.
Involved parenting is very different from true "helicopter" parenting. Those Heli-parents do NOT let their kids fail...they catch them before they can. These kids grow up not knowing how to recover from the inevitable failure; they have zero idea of how to bounce back, how to examine what happened and plot their next course of action.
Expecting your child to achieve and helping them do so is less helicopter parenting than GOOD parenting.
Spare me the parent banging on my door or filling my inbox with "what can we do to pull that grade up?" inquiries.
Letting your child experience some failure is good-it should not come as a shock the first time that they aren't successful at something as an adult, then have zero idea as to what to do next.
One of the Ivy League schools (Dartmouth?) sent out a letter to parents of freshman students telling them NOT to email professors asking about assignments, grades, etc.
THAT is helicopter parenting-that is crippling.
7
This article headline feels like a little like click-bait, a way to enter into debate on a 'sexy' topic.
But the author's well-written article seems to more accurately point out class issues. Kids whose parents can afford better schools and have the cultural capital to put them on the right track do better. That's not hovering. That's taking advantage of opportunities, which are not equal for everyone.
Helicopter parenting, as I think most people have come to understand it, means over-involvement of parents to the degree that they are doing the science project, hiring the personal coach, and finishing the powerpoint. These parents communicate that the child's ideas and what the child can do on his/her own isn't good enough, and add a lot of pressure to excel to adult standards.
I don't think it is the same thing.
Then, what does Druckerman mean by 'It works.' If sending your kids to good schools that promote self-esteem and can help them achieve their potential works, that's no surprise. If doing their work so they get an 'A' works, then I'm not so convinced. Works to achieve what?
4
"Tell me about the 'olden days' when you were a kid," my sixteen-year old asks, during our 6:50 drive to high school.
As she settles into her seat, I tell her about my childhood neighborhood of the early 1970s: the families of sheet-metal workers and mason's living a few doors down from a dentist's family, the lawyer who lived on the next block, next to the truck driver. I tell her about downtown, no homeless in doorways, the elderly men still wearing fedoras, coming out of the men's housing. Memories of taking a city bus to the pharmacist, Dr. Woodsum, to pick up a prescription for my Mom.
"Did you really know the pharmacist, by name? Seriously?"
I tell her that for a big trip we'd see the travel agent, Mrs Agnes, and a week later Mrs. Agnes would telephone, our plane tickets ready to be picked up. How strange the tickets looked, red print on duplicating paper.
Homework of an hour or two a night, rarely more. The delight of getting a college brochure in the mail, touching the pictures.
Her eyes are half-closed as she listens to my tales of a mythical past.
And then, it's 7:00, we're at school, time for her to go thru the metal detector, past the wall-sized screens scrolling events, sport team pictures, anti-drug messages. Her phone has been buzzing for the past 30 minutes (Snapchat, Powerschool grade updates from yesterday's Bio quiz) and as I drive away I wonder if my 1970s past really did happen....
19
Interesting no mention of the mental and emotional stress on the children of hovering parents. I, the early nineties I was teaching a high school English honors class. I had my 1st brush with a helicopter parent at fall Open House. A father asked what his daughter had to do to get an A in this class? He informed me that his sister received her degree in Med. from a prestigious school and a law degree from an equally prestigious institution. He looked at my expression, offended, "he's she's one of THOSE" - His daughter was a wonderful student, newspaper editor, musically inclined and a tremendous actor. She cried when she had me review her college essay - her heart was in theater but he parents wanted a doctor. She was accepted at a local Ivy in a nearby college town - her father though refused to speak to her because it was not Harvard or Yale. With therapy and courage my former student is successful - if one uses happiness in life as a yardstick and not the impossible ego-serving, money-chasing measurement some helicopter parents use to justify a certain need to control.
5
Helicopter? So 20th century. What this describes is snow plow parents. Not those that fly in during an "emergency" but those that make sure there are no problems, and hence no maturing, for their offspring to learn from.
6
It all depends on how you define "success." To those who define success as "lots of money," yes, your helicopter parenting may pay off. To those who define success as "satisfaction with your life and your job," you may find you are setting up your children to fail. There have also been studies to show that sometimes the most unhappy people, are those with the most material "success." Teach your children that it actually DOESN'T matter if they go to Harvard or not, as long as they're happy...and they won't see failure to get into Harvard as "failure." It's not the destination, ,it's the journey. Dying with more stuff is not "success."
2
The over-involvement of parents leads to anything but "adaptability, problem-solving skills, and independence." If parents are doing a kid's homework the effort is already off the rails.
4
Interesting article and a lot of interesting comments. Ms. Druckerman, you are in the cross-hairs!. This speaks to the effects that income inequality is having on our society. Perhaps we shouldn't forget this. Also: the research referenced by Ms. Druckerman tracks well with what I've observed in social trends beginning in the early 80s, since I was in the cohort that graduated from college in the mid-70s. Everyone reading this article should read Angus Deaton's book The Great Escape.
2
Authoritative parenting is not the same as helicopter / lawnmower parenting. The authoritative parent has expectations that are commensurate with the kid's developmental abilities, while providing lots of warmth. However, the helicopter / lawnmower parent has excessive warmth with lowered expectations in fostering independence. That behavior is closer to how the indulgent (permissive) parent operates.
Ultimately, we know that there are risks to indulgent parenting, risks to neglectful parenting, risks to authoritarian parenting, but no risks to authoritative parenting.
Let's focus on getting people to stop physically and verbally assaulting their kids (authoritarian parenting), rather than dissecting how to get advantaged kids through PhD programs. The crisis we face sees generations of kids suffering from violence at the hands of their parents, yet child welfare varies from state to state on whether corporal punishment is up to the family. The countries with far fewer incarcerations, drug abuse, domestic abuse and mental health problems have banned spanking in the home.
We've got bigger fish to fry. Pandering to high achievement over safety isn't helping the kids who are in dire need of advocacy.
1
Authoritative parents don't do anyone's homework. Helicopter parents create and complete the science project and then put the kid's photo in the local paper.
6
As a adolescent therapist I can say Ms. Druckerman is confusing the positives of an authoritarian parent - rules and expectations - with a helicopter parent. They are very different. The kids I see who have been taught to problem solving, adaptability and independence do very well, a helicopter parent does just the opposite - they jump i and protect the child from any emotional upset and prevents the child from learning the resilience needed to handle the tough times of adolescence. Of course, none of this accounts for the other variations of genetics and mental health issues.
3
We all lose when parents like those cited in the article, believe that they need to remove their children from public schools in order for them to succeed.
2
Raising 3 children on a working class income in the 90's, I used the 100 or so dollars I could have put in an IRA each month and enriched them with activities. Whenever they asked to explore some new adventure, if it was within my ability, I said yes. While I have no retirement savings and will work as long as I am healthy, I would do it all over again. I did something right!
4
I think that the idea that you need a degree from a fancy college to do well in life is false. I'm an old millennial, and I know tons of people who went to state schools, or even started in community colleges and finished at state schools, and then got degrees in things like nursing or social work. They are doing fine. I have two friends that actually dropped out of school and then rebounded and went to no-name local schools, one becoming a nurse anesthetist and one a NP, and they are doing extremely well.
Also, I went to an Ivy, so I see what my former fellow students are doing now. Honestly, most of them live a life like mine, and my life isn't that different from that of my friends who went to Hofstra, SUNY Binghamton, etc. We're all middle class, some maybe with more than others. Yes, I have friends from my college days that are wealthy now. But most of those people were already wealthy growing up.
5
Not one mention in this article about parenting that builds character, compassion, sensitivity, altruism, empathy. To me, the parenting described falls short miserably in what it relentlessly neglects.
6
Pop science at its worst.
Not only can your researchers not prove causation, they make many assumptions, unannounced and unexamined, based on social and political bias and they (or you) fail to examine and report closely on the concept of "parenting effectiveness".
This isn't to say there is not an effect, maybe even a large and positive one, associated with what you term 'helicopter parenting'.
It is to say something about or co-occurring with helicopter parenting, or authoritative parenting (including hitting!) appears to also be associated with earning more money, getting more degrees, and being on the winning team in unequal societies.
Maybe whatever that is would be more widely, more efficiently, more safely available elsewhere. Maybe we should find what that is before endorsing hitting our kids.
Odd that here, of all places, we're finally paying attention to science.
Never mind the death of the planet, the death of so many people at the wrong end of a gun, never mind that we allow our fellow citizens needlessly to die for lack of access to care, we choose to ignore all the good science there, even edit it out of our national conversation, but we'll jump with both feet into only reasonably well done study of studies concluding that borderline abusive parenting is a good thing and the best chance for success in a perverse, money-oriented, authoritarian society like our own.
You're not helping, Pamela, and your "Good Housekeeping" commentary is not useful.
2
As a high school English teacher, I assigned many essays to be written in school in the computer lab where I could monitor the students' efforts. I was fed up with reading essays essentially written by "helpful" parents. By the way, any experienced teacher can easily spot adult syntax. A teenager writes in a far more simplistic style. Of course, the student will deny that the writing is not completely his/her own
3
Parents should not be so involved in every detail. When I lived in the US I worked at a University. We had Freshman parents calling because they disagreed with a grade, or they thought their child should get a do-over. The Freshman came to school and lived in the dorms, not knowing how to dress appropriately for the weather because there was no adult telling them. They all seemed so clueless. I love how here in Norway the focus is on letting kids be kids, let kids figure a lot of stuff out on their own (not everything!). The older teens here seem so much more mature and sure of themselves. Also, here there is an emphasis on university track or vocational track. Not every child is cut out to go to college, and then to grad school, etc. You may have the best intentions, but a lot of times your child will be who they will. There is so much stress in children in the US to perform. Suicide is on the rise in children as young as 10. Let them be children, let them make decisions and mistakes, and they will be fine. And if your child isn't the next great supreme court justice or high powered executive, celebrate the fact that we also need electricians, plumbers, car mechanics, carpenters, etc. There is something out there for everyone. Life is too short for so much stress and competition.
6
What is described here is not helicopter parenting. The article even states that authoritative parenting encourages children to learn independence and critical thinking. Children of helicopter parents don't have coping skills because parents don't let them make decisions or advocate for themselves or feel loss or disappointment. These kids need to realize that sometimes you lose and work through it. I see it every day when young adults don't get what they want or think they deserve. Or they are so stressed out about having to get all As and take a high school load that doesn't include lunch just to take one more class. I read once that a key to olympic athletes was proving the support while the athlete provided the drive. Kids need to work through figuring out where they want to put their energy. Give them some space and encoragement along the way and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at how insightful they can be.
4
I'm not following the causal link the author makes between authoritative parenting and expensive private schools. Paying for private school is evidence of having enough money to pay for private school. It is not evidence of a particular parenting style.
7
This simply underlines the effect of our class system.
3
What does it serve to get little Percy into Harvard if he can't survive in the real world without his Mummy? That's what I'm seeing with the students in my classes who have been helicoptered? They can't complete assignments on time. They can't get to class on time (starting at 11). They are totally clueless. Why? Because Mummy isn't there to wake them up, help with assignments, etc.
4
Lots of potholes in this article, the most dangerous being the damage parents do to quality of life, and the human community as a whole, a kind of new age savagery. Go into a Starbucks near NYU and observe the narcissism and utter self-absorption, or to Eastern Mountain Sports to observe the decadence and absurd disconnection from reality, apple displaced by the obsession for traveling to chic hiking destinations. By the thousands.
What we are producing is a generation of career drones who need a Xanax to relax, or a $10 green juice, same thing.
It's not getting better and this trend is ultimately destructive to the very fabric of our culture.
8
When I look back on my parents as well as my friends parents in the 1950 Ohio decade I see no helicopters, only avoidance of parental responsibility.
Those parents were resentful of the demands of parenting and left the children to fend for themselves unless guilt drove them to actually provide some financial or moral support.
The landscape of parenting was an horizon of mothers and fathers that had little or no aptitude for parenting and couldn’t wait for the children to be grown and gone!
4
Clickbait headline.
No single style of parenting will be right for every child. There’s just no substitute for getting to know your children, and staying flexible and alert to their needs, as opposed to your own needs. Your child might need some rescuing at different times, and she will definitely need to be allowed to become more and more self-sufficient. And you won’t know what he needs until you’ve blown it a couple times, probably. Learn to be resilient, learn to apologize, learn to be firm when you have to, ask around to professionals when you’re not sure when to be firm.
We got completely opposite advice from the pros throughout our children’s lives, so we tried varying tactics, and sometimes we got it right.
Today they’re adults, they’re ok, and we all adore each other. Whew!
6
Not a single word about learning how to look up to the sky, sense the wonders of the natural environment, or take relaxed deep breaths. These are my hopes for my children, and I will helicopter them right past the definition of success to which this article subscribed.
3
The authors mixes authoritative parenting with helicopter parenting which is not the same.
10
I read the study you based this article on and I think you’re premise is overblown if not misleading. In a nutshell, the study concludes that, paraphrasing here, the best data concludes that “helicopter” parenting MAY marginally increase access to elite colleges. I would ask at what cost not just for the kids but for the parents. Kids who see their parents with rich social lives, meaningful work, and fulfilling pusrsuits that don’t always involve “the kids” will aspire for the same.
6
A teacher here. Overbearing parents ruin the childhood experience of their children. Teenagers are still children, their natural tendency is to explore and discover and make mistakes, and grow resilient along the way.
I have had plenty of helicopter parents hovering my way. I feel that they have no way of emotionally connecting with their children, so they act in this way, to convince themselves that this is caring.
Helicoptering is the opposite of emotional neglect, but both induce deep insecurity in children.
We have had two suicides at our school, and my theory applies.
Love your kids, let them explore, let them choose who they want to be.
7
"We grown-ups can finally stop doing homework." Ah, but then you'd have to confront how meaningless and empty your own lives are when not filled with anxiety for your kids' "success," that they might grow up in turn to have lives filled only with anxiety for their kids' "success," and so on and so on. Try imaging you have no kids and set them an example by making a life of your own. There's far more to be had from life than chasing "success" to death.
2
The title suggests that causality is strongly supported. It is not.
4
Authors always talk about 'helicopter parenting' as something terrible and tiresome. In my case, it was great. I really enjoyed spending time with my child. But I didn't do the work for them, I mainly just provided consistent attention and as many enrichment opportunities as I could. We had plenty of fun along the way. I did it because the competition is real, and as a lowly middle class parent, no scholarship would have meant no college and fewer opportunities in life.
2
A high score in a test is not in itself “success”. A college or post-graduate degree is just that - a degree. It is not a golden ticket to “happiness”. These are important achievements to be sure but there are many other favtors that drive success, including failing from time to time...
5
It sounds to me like this piece is mixing up authoritative parenting with "helicoptering." I was under the impression that helicopter parents were those that "hovered" over the child, not letting them explore, get dirty, basically have a life of their own. Authoritative parenting, in the psychological literature, means parenting that involves strict rules and standards, along with a certain freedoms. These are the parents that will allow children to go out with friends, but will also impose a strict curfew. Authoritarian parenting, a parenting style with very little, if any, permissiveness, has also been shown to be a beneficial parenting style for certain populations. These parenting styles of various pros and cons, with authoritative parenting showing more beneficial outcomes for the child, but the author seems to be confusing authoritative parenting with helicopter parenting, which would have basically no permissiveness.
7
As a psychologist, I am sick to death of economists playing psychologists. Go spend 7 years obtaining a PhD in psychology and make sure several of those years involve working with both adolescents and adults. Then share your expertise on human behavior — but not before.
13
The major concerns regarding helicopter-parented children are for their mental and emotional health. Focusing on research done by two economists seems a poor way to address those issues. It would have been more intellectually honest to at least have incuded a response from people concerned and knowledgeable about the mental health of those kids, even if they did get into good schools.
7
This kind of parenting is exactly what leads to college students with anxiety, little resilience, no coping mechanisms, and an astonishing lack of self-reliance. Then college is meant to do the cleanup work and get them ready for the real world?
If you love your kids, let them fail, force them to work problems out on their own, and give them a job and responsibility.
10
The best strategy for parenting is also the simplest. Love your children, Enjoy every moment you get to spend together. No sacrifice required but the occasional shedding of your burdensome assumptions. A child is the compounding dividend of an altruistic investment in the happiness of another. Training is for animals and animal trainers.
5
Well, some child training is necessary. Lax parenting makes for some pretty self-absorbed, whiny children, who believe that since their parents let them get away with stuff, or give them stuff, their teacher should too.
The best-adjusted kids I taught were those whose parents set both standards and limits and administered justice fairly and lovingly. No helicopter parents, those -- just really good parents.
Life isn't just smelling the flowers; it's working hard to achieve a good environment for you and yours and a better life for those around you. That takes some emotional discipline.
There should be a happy medium when it comes to parenting. Kids whose parents hover over every aspect of their life, grow up to depend on their parents for everything in their life. And the opposite of that is true. Children who grow up without parental supervision and are left alone to fend for themselves, grow up without direction and role models.
3
As a college professor I am very supportive of involved parenting and nurturing parenting but vehemently against helicopter parenting. My students that have these parents have HUGE difficulty making decisions, taking risks, being creative, and accepting criticism. They have trouble functioning without their personality binary, be it mom, dad or both. Without their parent deciding for them they have trouble functioning. Their fears drive their anxiety issues. At least a third of my students are on anxiety meds. These kids have never been allowed to fail so they have no cognitive skills to deal with failure other than complete meltdown. Failure is part of the learning process!
19
There's a difference between authoritative parenting and helicopter parenting, the latter representing an extreme. Those parents convinced the only way they can assure their children's success in life is through helicoptering are suffering from the same distortion as those convinced their kids will be kidnapped If they aren't under constant supervision. Ultimately, if they redirected a fraction of the energy they frantically direct towards their kids into changing the social conditions that promote increasing inequality, they could change the social and economic forces they so fear will disadvantage their children.
4
Does anyone stop to think anymore that perhaps the accumulation of wealth and consumerism is just not that important? I was always there for my kids, played with them after work, and encouraged their dreams. I told them to do what spoke to their heart. I tried to teach them that it was more important to serve their fellow human beings and do work that mattered than to accumulate things. I told them to study what they wished in school and that the money to live on would take care of itself. Yes, I taught them to have faith. And guess what? My three kids are bright, talented, happy and earning a decent living. They may never get rich, but they are rich in their spirit. They do work that serves others. And that makes me tremendously happy.
17
What about the effect of the “old boy’s club” on success? In other words, it’s not just an advanced education or degree that contributes to success, it’s the connections your kids make at those schools. I am consistently surprised by very successful people I meet who attended the “the right schools” but are not very bright.
8
So-called helicopter parents are often accused of coddling their children too much. But, in fact, the very same parents are often extremely demanding about academic performance and extra-curricular activities -- the basics of a good college application.
The more laissez-faire parenting style is, arguably, less stressful for the child, but, apparently, less likely to prepare the child for a financially successful adulthood. Good or bad? Money isn't everything - but most people seem to prefer more rather than less.
Some parents criticize others for not being authoritarian enough. They're in favor of punishing disobedience, often physically, to shape behavior rather than using reason. It's hard to convince them there's a better approach.
So, this is a welcome article. Thanks.
1
The obvious difficulty with this title is that it is based on one, unduplicated study. While the research sounds solid, all studies must be duplicated in some form before they van be accepted.
More importantly, the metrics she Druckerman claims prove certain parenting styles "work" are riddled with their own problems. They could just as easily be explained by r factors like lack of creativity, submissiveness, or phobias. A good next step would be to ask children to qualify their own views of how they were raised.
This study is important, but hardly sufficient to say what "works" for children.
2
Helicoptering as a word for hands on parenting is a derogatory term. It does not hurt my feelings however. When my father died, I was 24 and I did not know him. I promised myself that if I had a child, especially a boy, he would know me. Well, I have a son and he knows me. He is now 30, and we talk daily by phone since he resides 500 miles away.
4
As a psychologist who thinks a lot about parenting style and how kids spend their time, I think it’s important to not equate authoritative and “helicopter” parenting - authoritative is the parenting style to be strived for, as it teaches kids that adults expect something of them but that flexibility and reasonableness get to be a part of the picture. Helicopter parenting is quite different - it teaches kids that they are ineffective without an adult hovering just above, nudging them without careful attention to their actual interests, individual needs or temperament.
11
I really never wanted children. They were annoying little pests to me whose parents fawned over them. Then I had my first at 34 and fell in love when the doctor handed her to me. Had the second at 36. They were both a joy to be around from day 1. They were funny, mischievous, energetic. Just plain fun. We laughed a lot at their little antics. We didn’t have a lot of money to splurge but did a lot of things together that didn’t require money and they didn’t feel deprived. We had a few basic rules that they knew not to break - like do unto others as you would have them do unto you. We are not religious at all. Never have been. They both had good friends they competed with in sports and academics. We never had to tell them to do their homework. Now they both now have solid jobs with insurance and pensions. They will never be in the top 1% financially but that is not something they have any interest in. It wasn’t that hard.
3
Only in the US! The argument here is circular and confounded by class and race. The obvious solution, don't have public schools funded by local property taxes. More money into social programs less into the pockets of wealthy people.
9
It succeeds in getting kids "success" as defined by the parents. It does not teach kids how to think for themselves or how to fend for themselves. I'm glad I came from a different age and got to succeed at being myself.
8
Thank-you. My supremely selfish and disinterested successful parents made my path clear. Sacrifice for my kids. It has paid off too, however even if it hadnt, we, they and I, loved every minute of their childhood.
The author uses the term helicopter parenting very imprecisely, but the point that parents spend more time and money on kids and are more worried about where they end up is spot on. There is more of a fear of missing out if they are in the wrong school or activities.
The key here is not just time and money, but know-how: upper middle class parents are savvy about which school districts are best, which college programs pay off, how to teach kids financial skills. Working class parents even if they have the time/money rarely know this. Moreover, crucially, more educated and more wealthy parents have better networks.
A fairly mediocre upper class kid will do great in life because the parents take care of getting him/her connected. A brilliant poor kid with immigrant parents may break out, but may end up a drop-out...not only because his/her parents lack the time/money but because they don't know how to get their kid "in".
5
How about we put our energies into creating a more just and equitable society instead of a winner takes all mentality? The model we have created is unsustainable and is creating massive wealth inequality, exhaustion, and empty lives filled with acquiring and strategizing for wealth above a passion to use our talents for good because it may not pay a lot. I see so many young people in college with autoimmune diseases such as Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis that don’t appear to occur as often in groups of kids that are not under such intensive pressure to perform. Public University should be free for all who want to pursue learning and not another of life’s greatest stressors saddling students with debt that steers them only into careers that pay well. We have lost our way as a society and have become a very sick culture.
9
God help the 23 year old who’s just discovered that they aren’t the most important person in the room. As much as it annoys me to hear colleagues complain about managing millennials there are very good reasons why it’s a theme. (I’m saying that as a millennial who manages other millennials, who also adjuncted for 8 years.)
As a manager you get invested in helping your employees be successful. I’ve had these adult children as employees, and they look to me to step in and make all of their decisions and solve all of their problems. For a while I would do it, thinking they just needed some extra help while they got oriented and built confidence. Only the dependency never seemed to fade, and pushing them to be more independent just made them feel resentful and unsupported.
Now the biggest things I look for when hiring are the things that helicoptered kids lack the most- strong judgement and problem solving skills. A lot of skills you can start to learn in your mid-20s, but for those it’s a little too late.
8
I second your experience. I work with university students. I am finding that first year college/university students are very emotionally immature. Young men (they call themselves “boys”) act more like 12 year olds and young women (calling themselves “girls”) act more like 15 year olds. Worse more than a few young men openly admit they are very afraid to grow up — they want remain “boys” rather than embrace “scary”adult male responsibilities. As a group, they are passive — acting like observers of life — life viewed through a cell phone —fearful of making commitments and very distrustful of any institutions — some go so far as preferring to never identify or commit with ANY group. Many feel alone and isolated; most lack basic conversational skills. They are unable to handle conflict. Some men as old as 25 are actually petrified at the very thought of asking a person out for a date — terrified of being rejected! Mommy and Daddy drove for them, shopped for them, cooked for them, washed for them, cleaned up for them, and took charge of running their lives and actively tried to shield them from the “trauma” of failure. They might be successful in obtaining advanced degrees but how many will be ready for adulthood?
1
What's really missing is 'innocent rebellion." How many of these "helicoptered" children cut a day of school to simply see a movie, go to ballgame, hangout, shoplift a candy bar? Give them some sense of independence. I can't imagine what it would have been like if parents in my days were able to track their kids via a phone with a GPS app. I would have chucked the phone in the East River.
So, take away their cell phone one day a week, let them ride a bike without a helmet, only handout trophies to the top three soccer teams - and let them learn the feeling of failure, frustration, and what it's like to lose.
4
Please, what are the criteria for "helicopter parenting works"? Who established that criteria? I an brought into a local state university to writing workshops. The first thing I do is ask te students how many of them feel exhausted - most of them raise their hands. Most of them are taking a course over-load, engaging in extra-curricular activities and working a part-time job. You figure out what is driving their desperation. The first thing we do is ten minutes of absolutely nothing. More than a few fall asleep. All of them thank me.
1
Helicopter. You keep using that word -- I don't think it means what you think it means.
Helicopter parenting is hovering around the kids, making choices for them without their input, micromanaging their time and intervening on their behalf constantly. This is unrelated to authoritative parenting or where you send your kids to school. It is possible to be authoritative and still allow kids to develop independence. self-confidence and life skills.
Helicopter parenting leads to a lack of independence, lack of time management skills and lack of self-motivation. It often leads to failure at advanced stages of education, especially in college because the parents can no longer tell them how to do things or bully educators. I have heard of some very rich, somewhat desperate, helicopter parents pay for non-student personal assistants/room mates to continue to help their kids succeed because they don't on their own.
9
Wow, spot on.
for me the fundamental issue raised if only obliquely by this article is how one defines success. and it seems it is about financial success, or the success of attaining status associated with the "right" schools, etc. (which it is assumed leads to financial success) rather than accomplishment framed in any other terms but money or in personal satisfaction and happiness. save me from that definition of "success."
9
This article is so misleading. As a parent of a young boy, this my philosophy: Let the kids be kids and do not try to exploit their childhood. I was raised with the same philosophy in a poor country and now I am professor in an extremely competitive workplace.
My best graduates students are average folks who have passion for work left when they come to graduate school. Not a burnt out students with no mental capacity left. My best students are always the ones with passion for life, truth and love of knowledge. No amount of helicoptering can help with this! Let the kids enjoy there childhood, so when they are are grown ups, they are passionate about achieving meaningful things in life: joy, love, knowledge, etc.
11
@Kapil: I did part of my graduate school research at what is regarded as one of the most prestigious universities in Japan, the land that invented helicopter parenting.
The students had sacrificed their childhood and youth to pass the entrance exam for this school, but once they were in, they were clearly burned out. They were indifferent about their classes, avoided the library, which wasn't open very many hours anyway, and spent most of their time in the campus coffee shop reading magazines and manga or in their club activities.
Real life was a mystery to them. My fellow students were surprised that I could live alone in an apartment and do some of my own cooking. Their mothers did everything for them.
I hate to see this combination of pampering, close monitoring, and pressure to succeed in conventional ways spreading to the U.S.
Nonsense.
Getting a straight or firm definition on helicopter parenting is a tricky wicket at best.
My daughter just graduated from Juilliard Drama and has already landed a Netflix series. My son's in his third year at Amherst College. They both attended public schools K-12. There's been no hovering from either parent. . .just hard work to cover what scholarships don't.
Probably our children's greatest advantage is coming from family on both sides that have several generations of college graduates.
A legacy of education is the key and angle to story.
4
Yes but the kids they raise will be wrecks - they will be the kids who fall apart when they get to college and don't get As in everything, they will have no self-reliance because they never had to figure out anything for themselves, some will rebel and not try at all. I find this parenting style terrifying - everything is over analyzed, kids have no time to just be kids and getting into the right school becomes far more important than growing up to be a good person. Give me a neighborhood where my kids can roam and go down to the creek (and yes they still exist), where I trust my neighbors, a public school where they will be exposed to all kinds of kids not just those who are hyper competitive and driven by parents, and some extra curricular activities and my kids will do great. And guess what, they did and I was a single parent so I know of what I speak.
6
We teachers just can't win. When kids don't perform well in school or on standardized tests, we get the blame. When they do...the parents get the credit?? Honestly, the information in this article came as a bit of a shock to me. Ask just about any teacher today, and most will attest to the fact that students (even in affluent areas), are less and less willing to think for themselves, have a tougher time paying attention in class, and seem to be emotionally fragile. Whatever type of parenting style is in vogue, be it helicopter, lawn mower, or bubble wrapper, it doesn't seem to be resulting in resilient, hard-working, creative thinking people - quite the opposite from my experience.
16
My parents were authoritative but they were certainly not helicopter parents.
I was an authoritative parent; I was certainly not helicopter.
Authoritative parents teach responsibility and independent thinking and work.
No, helicopter parenting does not work. Authoritative parenting works.
That simply used to be called being a parent.
24
While I am intrigued by the book and appreciate the author raising the ways in which engaged parents help improve outcomes for their kids, I am troubled by and question the facile conflating of authoritative parenting with the hyper-parenting of helicopter parents. The hyper-vigilance of HPs and their predilection to anticipate and solve problems for kids that kids can (and should) solve for themselves deprives children of the very opportunities they need to test themselves, develop both intrinsic motivation and resiliency, and foster the sense that they, not someone else, is ultimately responsible for their successes and failures. A high school senior I know voiced a far too common sentiment (here about college admissions, but it could apply to most anything): "Mom, I feel like if I get in, you'll think it's because of you, and if I don't, you'll think it's because of me." What a lousy position for parents to put their kids in order to feel more in control (of their KIDS' lives!) themselves. I would hate for any over-hovering, over-controlling parents to read this article and feel justified in infantilizing their children by doing for their kids what they can and should do (and be allowed to do) for themselves.
12
This is a narrowly-focused view. It measures success by whether kids can do well in college and go on to grad school. If you took a sample of these helicoptered kids when they become adults, you would likely find a high proportion of bankers, hedge-fund managers, physicians, lawyers; you would also find a low proportion of poets, musicians, novelists, and inventors. The first group provides important services--to business, health, and the functioning of everyday life. The second can result in the greatest human achievements. The choice depends on what one values.
8
Key is who owns the experience of growing up, the parent or the kid? Given public school today simply does not have the resources to give everyone a fair educational chance, and private schools have more resources, the pie is not fairly distributed. We should change that (the rich should pay more taxes to support public schools!) but change takes time, if not generations, to happen. So given the reality, parents who are deeply invested in their child's future, should not get a bad rep for trying hard. the word helicopter is often pejoratively used to lump toxic controlling parenting with invested and involved parenting. Very different things, even when the same person is doing it.
Look at Asian-American parents, regardless of income, who make sacrifices for giving their children a good education. That should be lauded, not vilified as "tiger mom" parenting. I
3
Sure - I'll take your word that it 'works' for the kids, at least on achieving educational (apparently equated with monetary) goals. But how is this 'working' for the mothers? Because we all know which parent does more of the helicoptering in most middle-class families. Many women invest enormous amounts of time and money in their own educations and careers. So often this is supposed to be put on the backburner or abandoned entirely so that they can do a sufficient amount of helicoptering and watch their own talents, ambitions, and dreams go down the drain. No thanks.
6
I was on my own and often wished for a more involved, supportive set of parents. Luckily, I went to a cheap state school, got a few scholarships and was able to work at the same time to pay for it without debt. Since graduating with an undergrad BS, I’ve had a pretty good, fulfilling life. That cheap state school and the ability to earn enough at that time made the difference. So for those unfortunate souls who don’t have the money or parents to climb to the top, cheap supportive schools can make a big difference.
9
An excellent reminder on the need to wait for confirmation studies.
Because I'm not buying it.
There is no way these results control for other factors. "Helicopter" parenting, as generally rendered, is in and of itself a luxury item for those affording themselves the time and energy to overly control their children's lives. What the study shows is that people with more resources can get better drag their kids through hoops than other kids can hop through them by themselves. Super.
Read "Excellent Sheep." It shows where the helicopters really land.
14
I suppose it has to do with how you want to define "living a successful life."
There is no belittling the blessings of financial security, but
is Trumpism really making it okay to be this warped?
Could we please, please have a little more 1968 (with the science we've discovered in the intervening 50 years mixed in) and a whole, whole lot less of 1983-93? The seed that leads to articles like this (and this type of parenting) is the financial divide that we've allowed to explode in our society. And that divide is all the work of one political party.
5
This piece radically oversimplifies complex issues that are socio-economic, racial, educational, and a whole bunch of other stuff. Wealth, high anxiety, upward mobility, out-sized expectations, manic competition, genuine love and hopes for their children, fear of failure, and a host of other fear factors drive parents to over-provide, over-involve, and over-drive their offspring. (I've been headmaster of two private schools, one in Atlanta. My wife and I have 23-year-old triplets.)
Helicopter parents hover, often producing young people who lack their own efficient sense of responsibility and power -- those parents may or may not be authoritative. Two different issues. Despite all the bewailing of adults who say kids are coddled, or over-protected, or whatever -- we adults are in charge of the times that have created that ethos: we over-work, over-market, over-buy, over-schedule, with no idea how to rein ourselves in.
And our times have changed, and God help us, this may be how things are now. Technology has sped us up, kids seem used to it, though mental stress says it's also breaking them down. BUT parents have the ability, finally, to say: You don't have to go to Harvard. You don't have to take 5 APs in high school, sign up for 8 clubs, and start your own company at 16. You don't have to feed the madness.
There are alternatives. But you have to step outside the race. And that takes the boldness to be your own person.
12
Much more important is what happens when these children become adults. Helicopter parenting may get them good test scores, the ability to play the violin, and admission to the college of their parents' choice. However, if they are managed, will they ever be able to manage themselves when the time comes to be an adult?
6
The definition of "helicopter parenting" in this piece doesn't match how the term is usually used, at least in higher education and mental health.
Here is a sample of how it is described in the research literature: 'Helicopter parenting is “a form of over-parenting in which parents apply overly involved and developmentally inappropriate tactics to their children” (Segrin et al., 2012, p. 237). These “hyper-involved” tactics are designed to protect offspring from potentially negative outcomes and to ensure success. Helicopter parents are involved to the point where they prevent children from assuming responsibility for their own choices (Segrin et al., 2012). The example is from C. Bradley-Geist Jill B. Olson-Buchanan Julie , (2014),"Helicopter parents: an examination of the correlates of over-parenting of college students", Education + Training, Vol. 56 Iss 4 pp. 314 - 328
The definition of helicopter parenting here is almost the opposite of "authoritative parenting." The latter teaches "adaptability, problem-solving and independence." Helicopter parenting prevents children from developing those skills because parental care prevents the need to adapt or solve problems and encourages dependence on the parent to solve problems (at least in some domains.) Research on the effects of helicopter parenting on college students has found that students who had helicopter parents have lower self-efficacy, less ability to self-regulate, and possibly higher levels of depression/anxiety.
4
This seems to assign a lot of causation to correlation. It would be much harder to "helicopter parent" if the family was on the edge of starvation or divorce, or if mom or dad is an addict or abuser.
In the long run - what matters if one is raising children now - helicopter parenting will torpedo the value of the credentials children earn. Why would a company pay for a degree that is the result of a endless parental intervention, especially when that intervention includes universities that try to maximize their graduation rate.
In more technical terms, these interventions may not work in an equilibrium even if they are a beneficial response to the short term state of the world. There are other examples of such "traps", such as rapidly raising minimum wages.
Myopically responding to social data is tricky. The world is a moving target and any response will be neither unique nor hidden.
1
Rearing our children in the 90s & 00s, we fought the intrusion of schools into family time and the influence of guidance counselors & other school staff who led students to believe their success depended on attending an Ivy League or sub Ivy college. Educators like these labelled parents as a way of diminishing the parent's influence and increasing their own. Many families bought into the myths peddled by these thoughtless educators. The result was middle class parents taking on huge debt so their progeny could attend whatever expensive private college said child was accepted at. Many of the students burned out under the pressure and the parents continued to support them into their early 30s.
3
This stuff is a mystery to me. I read to my kids a whole lot. They had lots of unstructured free time. They didn’t do much in the way of extras, because we didn’t have much money, but they did travel overseas more than many, because my family is outside the US.
We refused to pay for grades, as so many parents apparently do, because - as I explained to them - their grades were for themselves, so they’d have choices.
They both got jobs at 15. They had to pay for half of their cars. They wrote their own college essays. They’ve had more than some, and less than some. We’ve made enough mistakes to give them plenty to gripe about. They’re doing great.
Which is to say - who cares about all the academic theory? It’s irrelevant and confusing to most parents.
5
So many measures of success in our culture revolve around being nice docile workers and consumers. There’s more important things in life than doing well on standardized tests and making and spending money.
5
This title, as well as the claims the author makes within, do not seem to be backed up by the evidence she points to in the research and in the books. The research shows a correlation between parents who set and maintain high expectations for their children and economic achievement. The research, at least that which she presents in this article, makes no relational claims between the deterministic "helicopter" parenting which not only lays out a course for a child, but actively clears out any obstacles that child may face along the way. That is the key difference. It is obviously good for a child to have strong boundaries and expectations enforced by a supporting and present parent, I see this in my students all the time. However, the pitfall of helicopter parenting is that it is not the child who has to live up to those high expectations, but the parent. Helicopter parents are not setting goals for their children, they are setting them for themselves. That is the complaint against the parenting style and this article, despite its provocative title, completely avoids the issue and presents no research which actually finds benefits to such parenting.
8
Either the author or the headline writer confused the parenting styles discussed with the phenomenon of helicopter or "Velcro" parenting.
Being a permissive, authoritarian or authoritative parent has less to do with "involvement" in the child's life, and everything to do with social class. Generally speaking authoritarian parents reside in the working and lower classes, permissive parents in the middle classes, and authoritative parents in the upper classes. It has nothing to do with degree of involvement, per se.
The Helicopter/Velcro phenomenon is over-involvement in a child's life regardless of parenting style or social class. And it remains destructive to the child, period.
1
Having worked in Korea for 13 years in different areas of the English education industry, and being a father myself, I have some worries about the parent/education/work/success dynamics.
As an outsiders looking in I can see the cycle where kids spend up to 12 hours studying various subjects at school. In high school, kids are expected to stay at the school studying until about 11:00 in preparation for the college entrance exam. This test dictates where a kid can got to school, and can also influence what a kid majors in at university.
After graduating from college, men usually at the age of 26-27, young adults enter the work world. The job with some of the highest marriage potential is to become a civil servant. Other jobs with high social value are to work a the the big companies. Workers at these companies can earn nice salaries but generally have all three meals at the company and have work days between 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. The late night is usually a coerced dinner and drinks with one's boss or co-workers.
While I agree that helicopter parenting has it's benefits, I really wonder what the definition of "success," is. Why does prestige have to come from a job title? In America, there are plenty of jobs that require training, but not a fancy education, I found this out the hard way when my Anthropology degree wasn't exactly an asset when I got rejected for an $8 per hour job in a pharmaceutical warehouse.
5
Set expectations for kindness to others. Teach a child, early, to consider why others might act the way they do.
Help them think through their homework but don’t do it for them. Feel free to say “I have my diploma(s)” or “this is your work” when considering who needs to learn from the task.
Let them know you share their aggravation when Amanda gets an A on the impressive project she admitted she “helped” her father complete, while your Bobby got a B on the same assignment he didn’t tell you about, but completed on his own (and showed talents you didn’t know he had, even if the teacher failed to at least comment about that). Remind them that there will always be people in positions of authority they need to please, somehow, and the trick is to figure out what that is and to perform to the best of their ability.
Agree that things don’t always seem or turn out to be fair, but that’s not the last word.
Allow them to explore what they can do, and try not to impede their paths. That may be the best gift you can offer. Let them find their wings.
3
I found this sentence to be very offensive: “Religious people, regardless of their income, are more likely to be authoritarian parents who expect obedience and believe in corporal punishment, the authors found.” Just exactly who are “religious people” and what method did the researchers use to reach such a broad conclusion? My husband and I are very active in our Catholic parish. Our daughter went to Catholic schools from elementary through college. We were “authoritative” parents by the author’s definition, not “authoritarian,” despite (I would say because of) our religious beliefs. She graduated summa cum laude and is a normal, well-rounded young adult who remains close with us and is also an active Catholic in our parish. Broad statements like this just reinforce harmful stereotypes.
4
@Diane
Broad statements are just that, broad statements. No one means for them to apply to everyone. What matters is the overall statistical correlation, even if there are exceptions.
2
This article doesn't describe helicopter parenting as I understand it. Helicopter parenting is when parents do everything for their kids, swooping down to smooth out any/all obstacles (even when those obstacles are for their own good). I work at a university, and I dread the helicopter parents. They're the ones who call, text, and email me because Johnny or Susie didn't get an A+, and when I explain that Johnny or Susie didn't come to class, didn't do the work, didn't take the exams, didn't respond to me when I asked if s/he was okay, was help needed (tutoring, counseling, etc.). Helicopter parents expect deans and professors to be their kids' alarm clocks, to hold their hands, to wipe their noses and butts for them. That's not helping, that's a hindrance to their development as fully functioning adults. If Johnny can't be bothered to set his alarm clock and come to class, how will he hold down a job? If he can't be bothered to do the assignments, take the tests, ask for help, how will he ever survive in the world without mommy to take care of him?
What the author is describing is the difference between kids in wealthy families and communities whose parents went to college and who can help them and guide them to succeed. Poor kids don't have the same chances and lack the support at home. I'm 1st generation college, got no help from my parents, and I wish they had been able to guide me better. When you're 1st gen, you don't know what you don't know.
4
This method might work well for yielding boring middle managers, doctors, and lawyers - the necessary and stable bourgeoisie in any society. But if you want to yield literary/musical/artistic geniuses, you'd do better traumatizing your children. Alcohol abuse, parental suicide, and tyrannical domination worked wonders for both Hemingway and Mozart. Sure, artistic geniuses are few and far between, but they're the ones who really make life worth living.
This being said, I'm hoping my mother's suicide and my lifelong struggle in coping with it will bear some fruit. Actively traumatizing your children, of course is a stupid joke - much like this entire article.
1
So I wonder if Trump is an example and/or result of bad helicopter parenting.
In all seriousness, I always thought "helicopter parenting" was when parents constantly hovered over their kids' every move which is different than being hyper-involved. And then maybe I'm incorrect across the board and this is all simply a case of semantics.
There's one thing I know in my heart - I would have been a rotten kid mom because I would have been constantly giving them mixed messages - stay close to my apron strings because I want to keep you safe from harm vs. go out into the world on your own and become a strong, independent, self reliant adult. They would have been strong candidates for professional care before the tender age of five. On the upside, I am a great dog and cat mom. They love me being hyper-involved in their daily lives because WE take long, exciting walks, WE jump into the lake to retrieve thrown tennis balls and WE love volley ping pong balls off the shower wall and hallway doorways. At least I know what my limitations and strengths are. And I'm also a great listener when my pets feel the need to jump onto my lap and bark or meow or purr.
2
Despite the erratic logic flow in this commentary one thing is indisputable.
Kids with ignorant parents with drug and alcohol dependency issues -To say nothing of anger persecution and self hatred and religious dogma driven - sinmeister sexual repression - Along with status deprivation based on tribal racism - ( i would include most of trump's supporters in this demo of lost souls)
Have NO chance of becoming happy/normal -let alone getting a decent job.
2
Great all of my helicopter friends can feel vindicated.
1
And feel superior to you......
I grew up in the 1960's and 1970's. I recall playing outside with the neighborhood kids. We played hop scotch, Chinese jump rope, games with rubber balls, reading books in bed, on the toilet, in the screened little porch, kick ball, magic ball, tag. We climbed trees, told jokes, took piano lessons, tried to learn guitar on our own and sometimes lay on our backs in the grass staring up at trees letting our minds roam. This is when dogs were let of the back door to run around and relieve themselves and then they returned home. I walked home from girl scouts and to and from school. In high school I did volunteer work, drove my brothers to activities, drove friends to an unknown site to go camping. I wrote short stories, acted in school plays and was a chorus member in all of the high school musicals, I walked around the neighbor hood with a clipboard collected signatures against the Vietnam War. I graduated college where I engaged in a bunch of questionable activities. I finished graduate school and have been an occupational therapist for over 40 years. My childhood and adolescence was magical because I created my own experiences that were meaningful to me. My parents watched from a distance and let me learn on my own.
4
The 5 th grade science fair
Lol
A veritable buffet of helicopter parents presenting projects they helped their offspring complete
I remember dread of that semester , usually spring
I refused to do elaborate projects and experiments for my kids
So they got laughed at and essentially ridiculed while the PTO mommies whispered together in a corner
The science teacher was even more appalled by a mom who wouldn't do the project because she thought she wasn't suppose too!
Her kid had a glass of water with blue food color and a dandelion soaking up the color to demo perfusion
Not good enough
Raising children isn't a competition but we parents sure try sometimes
The article says that authoritarian parenting is bad parenting and causes children to be poor. Seems legit, I guess, if you are entirely oblivious to class and race in America.
Black children, particularly boys, are judged far, far, far more harshly than white children for the exact same behaviors. They are seen by white people as older than their true age. White people think black boys are teenagers. They think black preteens are grown men.
Do not take my word for it. Look at the social science research.
A black child can't just be well-behaved for their age and developmental stage. They have to be extraordinarily well-behaved for a child five years older. Their safety depends on it. Their ability to occupy white spaces depends on it.
Racism is why black kids have to be taught to respect authority, constantly self-monitor, self-regulate, and yes learn "strict obedience." And all that self-regulation takes a cognitive and physiological toll.
Racism is also the reason for gaps in familial wealth and opportunity.
But Pamela Druckerman cuts hundreds of years of racism neatly out of the picture, leaving only the poverty and the authoritarian parenting in the frame. Those are the only two things she sees, so there must be a causal relationship.
It makes the prescription a simple one. If everyone in America just parented as if they were rich and white, they would BE rich and white. So easy! Thanks, Pamela!
3
@A
I think you missed a major point of the article, clearly stated at the end.
"Yet another reason to elect people who’ll make America more equal"
Helicopter parenting confers advantages, says the author, but it is clearly not an option available to all. In a more equal society, such over parenting would not be nearly as advantageous.
I never realized my kid would be an introvert. Oh, heck. I wasn't much of a helicopter parent but apparently too much for him.
On the other hand, every generation I know about of my family has had a beef with the way they were raised by the last generation. They start to get over it when they have kids and realize it's not as simple as it seems.
So, maybe they whole syndrome runs in the family.
The key words in this article don't come until pretty far in: "the authors can't prove causality." In other words there is no proof that "helicopter" parenting works, despite the headline.
Helicopter parenting born out of Fear.
Works.
I agree with these commenters. That was a misleading title, perhaps even clickbait. This isn't talking about helicopter parenting at all.
2
“It doesn’t spark joy for parents [but] works for kids.” So, amongst all the benefits herein enumerated, it also teaches our children that parenting “sparks no joy”. Good luck if you’re hoping to one day be a grandparent!
“Our unequal era”? Seriously?
'Merica used to be known for it's innovation and out of the box thinking. The ability to create, imagine and do.
Now we are full of widgets and yes men/women.
Desperate to get ahead, rather than being a good person/citizen.
Competitive even when winning is losing.
Me, me, me. Mine, mine, mine!!!
1
I think these economists should stick to economics.
If by "success" you exclusively mean "adult salary," then sure, it "works."
1
“ . . . they found that an “intensive parenting style” correlated with higher scores on the test.”
Ah, yes, scoring high on tests, years and years of tests.
I think of all my male friends — mostly in their 50s, 60s, and 70s — and note their accomplishments in life, which are impressive. Nearly every one of them reached the top of their game by a circuitous route, with failures, wrong turns, etc. The underlying model of education that this column supposes assumes a straight path without screw-ups — from kindergarten to grad school. Work hard, succeed, work hard, succeed. I see no time for daydreaming. It’s almost like, let’s see, a conveyor belt. It may produce “successful” careerists with comfortable and affluent middle-class lives, but will it produce lively, eccentric, and interesting people who are really equipped to be citizens and unafraid to buck the systems they inhabit? I really do have my doubts.
Is this clickbait?
Authoritative parenting aint' nothing new, and this is the first I've ever seen anyone confuse it with helicopter parenting. False premise, much?
Also, how about defining your terms for success?
1
Pamela Druckerman is a writer but as far as I know she is not a child development expert nor does she have any credentials to sort out the nuances in this data. She speaks in such generalizations. Disappointed on this one and I say this as a practicing clinical psychologist.
1
Good piece, but I wish it had focused just a little bit more on the very real economic anxiety that drives (my) pushy parenting. In the 1980s, I could do okay in life with a mediocre degree from a mediocre college. That isn't true anymore. There are so many more educated people competing for the good jobs/mates/apartments that only the best of the bunch have a hope. In this Darwinian new reality, my kids have to do better than me just to have a hope of a decent middle-class life. this isn't about my ego; I simply want them to survive in this ugly new world.
263
I understand but also believe that “success” can be achieved regardless of the university, if any, that one attends. There is no legitimate evidence of any correlation between one’s university and whether success is achieved. Think about it because there are so many factors involved in whether “success” is “achieved”.
42
@Cyntha Our niece's husband, age 28, was just made National Sales Director for the Supplement Vitamin company that he works for - with no college experience at all. This kind of success is still possible, apparently.
11
@Cyntha
I get it - but as a high-school teacher I see kids who are so incapable of dealing with adversity, so used to waiting for someone to come along to 'fix' things when they feel the slightest discomfort, who are cowardly to the point of not being able to take the subway, that I can't even begin to imagine what kind of adults they will become. Darwinian reality will eat them alive.
45
I think what this really means is that helicopter parenting is perfect for the corporate-controlled world as it creates dependent, money-obsessed workers who will "achieve" in their "careers" of making profits for shareholders while being unable to sustain relationships or find joy in life because they are used to being controlled and manipulated.
1
This is ridiculous - have humans biologically evolved to need this level of constant intervention? It’s constantly rammed down our throats but completely exaggerated. Expectations might have risen but the need for independence, common sense, empathy, and basic survival skills - cooking, cleaning and emotional intelligence - have not changed one bit since the majority of us were kids. Let’s get real and report on meaningful stuff like the destruction of the environment and voter apathy and not imagined problems.
241
@Cat Have humans evolved much in the last 200 years, or even 2000? No. Has what is necessary to fit into today’s society evolved in that same time? Absolutely. Evolution isn’t just limited to biology (see definition of memes, not the funny pictures but the real one from Dawkins). This means that parenting must also adapt. It’s not to say the skills you mention aren’t relevant, just not as important as a few hundred years ago (see reduction in # of people required to farm to feed our population).
What will move the needle on the issues you want addressed is ... good parenting. Not many adults today are capable of seeing the other side’s position; a fault of parenting? Quite likely. Good parents, who are there and inquisitive of their children, will encourage critical thought and open mindedness to address the massive issues you mention.
17
@Cat Agree. Parents need to make sure their children make the right decisions and develop a good sense of values.
However mistakes are unavoidable and attaching a leash will not prevent them.
7
@Paul
Parents, if they are inclined to communicate with their offspring (many are not), may try to impart their values to same. The best bet for society, however, is to teach young people to think critically. This will enable them to make choices according to their own values, not the values of their parents or their communities.
3
As many have already pointed out, what’s depicted here is not helicopter parenting. Secondly, the celebratory tone is uncalled for since the upshot ends up being the reproduction of dominant class structures that undermine the ability of working class children to get ahead however deserving they may be for their skills, talents, intelligence, industry, and so on. Ultimately, it’s the society that suffers for the loss of human capital and resources.
1
Could not agree more w this comment. @nytimes please recommend?
Always Always better to be a lighthouse parent never helicopter...Take this from a very loving no nonsense mom who raised two very independent children who flew the nest successfully. They only ask for my friendship.
210
@Jane You sound like a good mom. But, we'll never be friends with our kids. It's not possible. But, we can always be the parents that they can trust.
5
@Jane Even the first time I saw The Wizard of Oz I was struck by the help Glinda gave Dorothy. Just once. Just when it was really needed, when Dorothy et al had been put to sleep by the Wicked Witch of the West. Glinda wakes them.
2
As in all things, somewhere there is a happy medium.
I always have a problem with the stereotypical, one-dimensional definition of 'success'.
IMHO, success is figuring out what makes you truly happy...that you shouldn't listen to or believe society when they try to tell you their own ideas about 'success'. Success is different for each person. Far too many kill themselves for the trappings and outward appearances of 'success', and then wonder why, despite all that, they still feel unfulfilled.
I see kids getting out of school each afternoon, and their 'hyper-involved' parents double-parked up and down the block in their SUVs, waiting to chauffeur the kids home, just a few blocks up the street. Oh, they'll say it's for 'safety' reasons, or this or that. Meanwhile, plenty of other kids are headed to the bus stop, to take public transportation home. These are the kids who'll be better off, and more self-sufficient (and less fat) in the end.
5
I wonder about the fact that birth ordering was not mentioned in the article - but maybe it was in the studies. I believe that it has been well documented that eldest children get substantially more individual attention than later siblings, and do "better" on the values that seem to be related here to helicopter parenting. Economic status was mentioned, and again previous studies have shown that again economic advantage translates into general improvement in the "values" mentioned. So success for kids means having higher socio-economic status and spend more time with them as if they were all oldest children. Helicopters not required.
1
Was one of a large family, as was my wife.
We raised five of our own, and agreed, fortunately, on what it took to raise kids.
Our first goal was for them to be happy adults, self-supporting and doing whatever in life gave them satisfaction and joy.
Accordingly, we didn’t over-emphasize academic achievement, just pointed out the consequences of not being educated and insisted they did homework and got acceptable grades. If not, there were consequences, no friends sleepovers, no allowances, no use of the car as teens etc.
They got the message and all graduated from HS, three went to college and are successful and happy in their careers. A fourth is a professional construction tradesman, he can fix/do anything mechanical, and very successful and financially happy. Our fifth was our academic superstar, we were convinced he was going to be an academic PhD! But he became disabled and needs care now, a tragedy.
So, my point? Parenthood is a challenge, and the job is to produce self-sufficient adults who enjoy their lives. They aren’t you, they need to set their own goals, and pushing them in directions you think they should take is problematic. We thought of it as building a foundation on which they could build their lives. It seems to have worked for us, so I share it, and we cannot see helicoptering parenting as a good idea.
6
I think there is a difference between being an “involved” parent and being a “helicopter” parent. Perhaps it is semantics, but helicopter parenting invokes the image a parent exerting too much control over the child. Those children rarely experience failure or consequences because the parents are always there managing things for the child. Children of “involved” parents may be prodded along but are still given enough autonomy to make decisions and develop the ability to exercise good judgment.
4
One can be an "authoritative" parent without being a helicopter parent. And monetary success does not necessarily equal life satisfaction and emotional health.
4
Whose life does the child of a helicopter parent live?
Certainly not their own... I think there is confusion with attentive parenting and helicopter parents long range I haven’t seen many kids who don’t keep leaning on their parents or who aren’t bitter for their parents making choices for them when they have been helicoptered
1
As a child of the 70's with parents who were basically between helicopter and free-range is that there is a balance between the two and that all of it comes down to a mesh of the kid's own sense of self, the kind of parents they had, the kind of school they attended & teachers who taught them, the piers they surrounded themselves, the opportunities afforded them, their health, their personality, their drive, their location, etc etc etc. I have an 11 year old now who seems to be thriving, but I stress myself out on a daily basis about whether I am too involved or not involved enough. I have no idea but to go on my gut and follow her lead.
4
My niece helicopters her youngest son who is a teenager ; all I see is a kid that stresses , gets depressed , while at the same time plays her big time to get that Mac pro , the expensive camera , he only used a couple of times (which she can barely afford) because it's for school . He is a talented musician but mom is always there , attending not only concerts but also activities meant only for the students , driving him to and from including dates (he's 18) ; I would call that helicoptering . I agree with a previous commenter ; there is a difference between being a tiger mom and a hovering whirlybird , totally unhealthy .
3
You guys were a generation behind. My wife and I formed a helicopter/tiger mom combo in the 80s, had managed to push our 3 kids to a top Ivy league school, then medical schools; residence/fellowships in top institutes for specialists.
It is more than filling up forms and driving them to music and sport activities... It's a long road that requires "resources" as well as blood sweat and tears.
Now they are in their 40s and all have a thriving medical practices.
One drawback though. They still depend on mom and dad in their daily living decisions...
Well you can't win them all..
Um, you realize the average income for a Times subscriber is like $200k? Most of the people commenting here are like hedge fund managers and tech millionaires. A few of them settled for being physicians I guess.
There should be a follow-up study on these kids after they reach their 30s/40s. Certainly, we want parents to guide their offspring in formative years, but they also need to begin letting go as the children approach adulthood.
Are they successful adults, defining successful as: happy in life, comfortable with risk, happy parents themselves, able to achieve their financial goals and self-supporting, successful marriages etc.
The concern about helicoptering parenting is that it infantilizes children and adolescents, doesn’t let them face and deal with adversity, challenges, and personal relationships on their own. As a college trustee we hear regularly from administrators of the nurturing demands, increasing year by year, posed by entering students who have never faced life on their own.
They describe the irate or upset calls, texts, emails that administrators and faculty receive from parents advocating on behalf of their child for a better grade, or roommate, or dorm furnishings, or dining hall food choices etc etc.
Until we can demonstrate that such parenting results in comfortable adults we need to be cautious about endorsing helicoptering parenting.
3
This is no new news and it’s not helicopter parenting. Authoritative parenting as a concept has been around since the 1980s. I learned about it in grad school in 1989. Helicopter parenting is something else altogether.
4
I was brought up in a Chinese immigrant family ignored for the most part by a scientist father and a neglectful mother. Despite their hands-off parenting, my siblings and I grew up with a work ethic and drive to succeed in the world.
I've been a helicopter Mom more than not for my three daughters, now grown because a) their father was never around and when he was, he was invisible; b) they succeeded in reaching their goals to live and work in the areas that make them fulfilled (human rights, cardiac nursing and teaching French.)
So, who knows what works? Benign neglect but strong values? Strong values and helicoptering? Probably the strong values, imparted in whichever way worked.
4
Our society is in denial about the nature of life as a fragile and temporary endeavor. Everyone is pushing to do more, work more hours, participate in more extracurriculars. We push through the temporary pain in the hopes of great rewards in the future. This is exacerbated by a winner-take-all economy where a small fraction of the population either builds a successful business or gets into a handful of upper middle class professions and the rest are relegated to a life of serfdom.
What is the purpose of all this competition? What is the purpose of all this wealth? Can a house filled with the latest gadgets fill the emptiness of a lifetime of memories as a spreadsheet jockey in a glass office tower? The happiness that comes from the praise of others or material possessions is temporary, a fleeting hit of dopamine that leaves the junky craving more. Happiness is internal and cannot be achieved when your internal self is a neurotic, adderall-ridden mess. We need to remember that work should not define us and is only one part of a successful life. Children need time to dream, think, wander, and find themselves. For that matter, so do adults.
9
And then of course, there are helicopter parents without a pilot. Clueless adults who insist on micromanaging every detail of their kids lives while adding no value whatsoever. I’ve seen a bunch of those in my day.
7
I have to disagree. Overparenting encourages helplessness in the most cases and in the worst cases it will fog a young person ability to learn and reason based on their own experiences. Overparented folks are either a.) unhappy about who they became later in life or; b.) unaware of who they really are. Parenting styles that encourage and promote freedom from an early stage breed children (and animals) who are markedly more self-sufficient, curious, responsible and capable of making decisions who create happiness in later life. It's the fear of the fact that young brains need to survive the process of learning from their own experiences in the first place that create overparenting. If you love someone, set them free.
4
But this article isn’t about really about overparenting is it? It is about authoratative parenting and reasoning children to do things that we know are good for them. The key points I got from the article are reasoning, persuasion, fostering independence and problem solving.
Unfortunately children while very creative and always wanting to learn may not always know what is good for them. I know I will be slam for the previous sentence but it rings true. Or we could all just leave them out in the wild and everything will still be fine. Hence as parents we need to model good behaviors and encourage/ steer them into beneficial activities.
5
I agree that the authoritative parenting style is the best. This article describes a certain way to succeed. Our son had learning disabilities. We were told he would have a hard time in college and have difficulty making it through a public HS. We had him in private prior. Meanwhile, he was surrounded by very bright kids. super bright kids. Several of them have flamed out in college and he is ticking along as a B/C student in college and doing just fine. He is finding himself and has several possible options for jobs come graduation. With insurance! With benefits ! and with money!
4
I look forward to reading about the rates of burn-out, addiction (technology and substance), and use of anti-anxiety and depression medications 20 years hence...
7
The things that "work"--authoritative parenting and "intensive styles"--are not helicopter parenting. Helicopter-parenting is something that take those qualities to the next level while simultaneously limiting autonomy and providing too much protection from harm. The things that "work" that are cited in this piece are old news in the parenting literature.
9
Druckerman’s assertion in the title is that helicopter parenting “works“. I found myself wondering, works for what? And there it was at the end: “those Who can afford to helicopter parent make things more unequal for the next generation.“ Why do we deem this something that “works“? It doesn’t work for those with less resources… It doesn’t work to bring equality work to our world… Aren’t these things parents want? I for one would like to read about parenting practices that promote equality and a more even distribution of resources in our world.
4
I agree.. but it also depends on the altitude the parents are flying.. Fly too high miss the mark.. Fly too low.. destined to crash.
1
Helicopter parenting works well when parents raise independent kids. Can your kids cook a meal for themselves and do laundry? Did they learn to do their own research on their term papers? Do they pay for their own cell phone? If not, the hovering is stunting their growth.
7
What Druckerman describes is not helicoptering. Parents who convince their children to work hard, strive and work independently because of the benefits are anything but helicopter parents. And choosing the best possible school with the best possible programs is not being overly involved, either.
And they are aren't tiger-moms either. Tiger moms choose the classes, the activities, review and critique work and effort and push, push push.
Druckerman describes parents who set expectations, wind up their kids and let them go forward. They give the kids an opportunity but don't make each decisions like which classes, which instrument, which sport, which leadership activity. And they give opportunity - choose a tutor, choose a course or self-study for SATs, APs etc.
Of course those kids have self esteem - and self discipline, self reliance and self respect, too. They built it themselves.
6
Confusing terminology here.
I think of helicopter parenting as micro-managing, hovering, intrusive and pushy.
Authoritative parents don't need to be that way. Authoritative parents act as adults, not "friends," they set expectations, have high standards, encourage independence, are encouraging and supportive, and enforce fair consequences.
You don't need lots of extra money to do that.
12
I can't tell you how many kids in our high performing school district are being tutored in nearly every subject. It isn't because the kids need the help but because parents want to make sure their kids get good grades. However they're doing their kids a huge disservice. They need to figure out material on their own, outline a paper on their ownmlm. They're not learning to think for themselves. We're around for our kids if they have a question (rare) or want to bounce an idea around but that's it. We don't obsessively check into Power School to check their grades. They also have to self advocate for themselves with teachers and coaches. They will have to do that in college and in their careers, not us.
4
I think most people are mix of parenting styles, based a lot on the needs of the child. We were authoritative with our older girl (OG), who was responsible, self motivated and focused. I had a fight on my hands with the first (supposedly high quality) ES when she was in the third grade. She had a bad teacher who constantly screamed at the kids; they put my kid in with a bunch of troublemakers. After our meeting, they never messed with me again, and she then got all the highly regarded teachers. OG rarely needed my intervention; she excelled at an elite public HS, a large state university, law school, and in the Army JAG. Today OG's a happy married mom of three and a law partner with lots of friends.
Younger girl (YG)was a VERY different kettle of fish--- simultaneously very gifted and severely ADHD, socially awkward' now bipolar. She required some helicoptering, but I never did her homework for her or anything like that.She had to face consequences if she messed up on anything. We put her in a Catholic HS which kept her out of trouble (she was headed there). There was lots of therapy and tough love, which was VERY difficult for us. YG did well at a small college, lives with her BF, and is now an editor, trying to build a freelance business in DC.
We were not perfect parents, and made our share of mistakes. But I'm proud OG asked us to move from DC to LA to be near her new family. YG calls us at least once a week, is making friends, loves her nephews, and visits often.
5
I was just in a store and overheard two parents. One mother was helping her daughter pick out supplies for a school art project.
The other mother yelled at her kids to stop touching things before she “beat” on them.
Anyone want to guess which kids will succeed in life?
6
@Third.coast
The verbally abused children I bet, because their bosses in the corporate world will demand they play obedient sycophant to irrational authority and they'll have that game down pat.
Now if you had asked which child would be happier, obviously that would be a different answer, but few people understand the distinction between "success" and happiness,
@Arthur ...so many oppositional people in the world.
A friend and I raised our daughters at the same time, I was 'helpful and supportive' of my daughter, while she was completely obsessively invested in making her daughter a 'star' in athletics and academics. The lengths she went to was embarrassing (special arrangements with coaches, pulling strings for private school financial aid, fanagaling college 'recommendations' from name-worth people she barely knew). I let my daughter decide if she wanted to stay in sports, where she went to school, etc., but my friend basically coerced her daughter down a well-planned path.
The whole spectacle seemed truly obnoxious, I was sure her daughter would turn on her and rebel. But no, not at all! The daughter went on to be a junior olympic athlete AND get a degree in engineering from Stanford. The summertime interning job her mother arranged for her at an engineering firm turned into handsomely paid full time employment, the girl bought her first condo at 25 on her own AND married an equally bright engineer from the firm.
The packaged wrapped up so neatly, I still can't believe it. I never saw that coming . . . it certainly is not my style, but it showed me Helicopter Parenting DID work!
11
I thank Lisa Huntington of Santa Fe for her comment. It indeed was brave words to share and it rang true to me.
With two younger siblings, each single parents, each with one child - both helicopter parents. My eldest niece was born an old soul, she clearly loved learning and at five learned to advance beyond her father - he was constantly hovering over her and she literally said, Dad, get over your OCD. Brilliant. She is off to a marvelous career and working towards her PhD.
The other sibling suffocated her daughter with intrusions, judgements, wouldn't stop speaking for her daughter and did little to encourage exploration, self awareness, self esteem. That niece is now 18 and trying to discover as a young adult so many of the things denied to her by her helicoptering parent. She is very much behind the curve and has a lot of catching up to do. We know she'll make it, as long as she can break free after graduation and live outside the confines of her mother's overbearing and controlling personality. And her mother is a smart woman, just not good parent material.
1
Everybody wants themselves and their children to be above average, but by definition, 50% have to be below.
The damage done to children by over-ambitious parents has been described by Arthur Miller in 1949, seventy years ago.
"Death of a Traveling Salesman" is still recommended reading after all these years.
We and our children are all mediocre, and there´s nothing wrong with that. For one exceptional child, there will be 999 average ones, many of them unhappy for life, because they can´t accept it. That´s not a price worth paying.
6
As both a teacher and parent of teens I can see the value in having real engaged and ongoing communication with the young, because no parents, or teachers, know what their kid's world will be like in 10 years. with AI, robotics, and climate change, authoritarianism is for the dinosaurs ("but dad , then why is that guy the president?... excellent question son!). Being a bully is not the same as doing the long slog of actually caring, but some people never learn that.
3
From my admittedly small sample size, two children nine years apart (so, basically a generation), daughter first, then my son, here are my conclusions:
1. A lot has to do with when you're born, from month of the year to generation. (In case you missed it, it might be a good time to read Malcolm Gladwell's 'Outliers.') I'd also include where you were born - area of country, neighborhood, etc.
2. A lot has to do with each child's innate personality in combination with circumstances (so, nature and nurture; and I would have liked to italicize 'and'). Some children are more pragmatic; some are more affable; some are arty; some are introspective. You get the idea. In this category I'd also place the age at which 'first bad thing' happened, like death of a parent (my children's father, in this case). Daughter in college, son fourteen. So daughter had gotten much further along before 'first bad thing.'
3. I had no idea how much influence other people's children could have on my children. That’s a tough one. Don’t think tough kids are necessarily immune.
4. Definitely in school, one must set reasonable expectations, steer toward perseverance, take issues of criticism seriously (whether from students of instructors/advisors, or vice versa).
5. Accept that you have a whole lot less control than you thought you would when the doctor/midwife initially handed you that baby. That's how life works. Work from there.
9
Just one minor comment on your response: be very wary of anything written by Malcolm Gladwell. He's heavily distrusted in academic circles for spouting ideas without proper backing. Epitome of pseudoscience.
Higher test scores, college admission and wealth aren't the same as "success". As a parent of two boys, I'll be happy if my sons achieve a life they find fulfilling. That might be college and conventional success, but it could be a very different path.
15
Teachers around the world have have know this for ages' (education psychology classes.) Firm, but caring is the key. Too strict or too permissive...bad.
And read to your kids as soon as they are born...as often as possible...even if it is math equations or tech manuals. Encourage curiosity and don't overly correct mistakes. If your young kid points to the TV and says, "Samsung" even though it is a LG tv...let it go instead of telling them they are wrong. They will figure it out and have increased curiosity.
If you want more info, look at Harvard's early childhood development website.
7
When parents prize academic excellence and a well-rounded intellect and sensibility, they make sure their kids read, do their homework, go to museums, know how to behave in different situations, know their family history, whatever it may be, and spend time doing good for others -- and they also make sure their kids hang out with the kids of like-minded parents.
If that's helicoptering, then it's a good thing.
Anything less is parental malpractice.
13
TL;DR
Everyone becomes a tiger mom and their children all get good grades, are leveraged by their parents into more competitive schools, and are pushed lifelong into the best opportunities possible.
What helicopter parenting does a terrible job at?
Entrepreneurial abilities. Literally self directed, self motivated, self identified, individually solved situations.
Figuring things out on your own, not only successfully, but as a fundamental deeply ingrained way of thinking that operates an unconscious level.
its one of those things that self help books try to teach adults, but its really something you have to learn from the time of a young child.
THAT is what is lost with helicopter parenting.
So that middle/upper class parent who went to public schools an played kickball?
That situation in which someone is allowed to engage in self directed, unmanaged social and hand eye/spatial/physical problem solving OVER MANY YEARS....
That is lost with helicopter parenting.
lets use monetized youtube channels as survey.
the vast majority of those are people in their 30s or older, or at the very youngest their very late 20s. That would make them "80s kids" or older, meaning that they grew up RIGHT AT THE END of the old phase of parenting that the author describes here.
Excluding inborn intelligence, entrepreneurial talents are learned through self directed problem solving.
As with all things, its far easier to develop those skills when they are learned at an early age.
2
As a college professor, I'm curious about the correlation between parenting style and the epidemic of student mental illness (my employer estimates that fully one third of our student body will have some debilitating mental issue during their time on campus). Perhaps the challenge is that the current expansive definition of "mental illness," includes the inability to cope, to resolve minor emotional problems, to accept so-called affronts to one's identity and world-view, and so on. It's also a concern that the modern university enables this with all manner of non-teaching, non-researching, budget-consuming support infrastructure.
11
Absolutely bogus.
As a professional in the financial services industry, I had candidates for entry level positions come to job interviews with a parent (usually a mother).
There was no way that I was about to hire someone who could not present themselves as the professional bearing required for the role.
Likewise, I have friends that are professors at a prestigious world-renowned university, whose parents complain about grades the child/student received.
Logic defies the premise of this "study" --- how can someone who has had their intellectual and emotional independence sapped by an overbearing parent from the age of reason be expected to become a truly independent adult able to discern the world and make reasoned choices??
18
Every generation complains about the permissiveness of some parents and strictness of others. This is NOT new. Yet every generation seems to believe it has unique insight. All children need love, guidance, and adults who are involved and caring, without being punitive or shaming. This will never change. They are basic human needs for healthy development. (Usually "helicopter parenting" describes parenting in which parents do everything for their children and do not allow children to have their own experiences, make or solve mistakes independently, or ultimately develop into responsible adults. But, the "helicopter parenting" described here, sounds more like parents just being decent human beings. What can be wrong with that!)
7
Poor title for this article...helicopter parents do EVERYTHING for their kids which stunts their childrens development of problem solving; an EXTREMELY important life skill that aids in relationships, employment, house and personal life etc ... Helcopters do not allow any room for mental growth fighting their kids fights, doing their kids homework, talking to adults and their kids peers for them ... and when little Timmy or Sally screw up its zero consequence. NO, I say!
Parents who shelter their kids from consequence are doing their children a great diservice if not harm. Personally, as an educator, the consequence free zone our kids seem to live in is freakin' SCARY.
Tiger Parenting would much better suit this article as a title. Such parents advise their kids on how to solve problems and allow their kids the room to FAIL (Fisrt Attempt In Learning) in all aspects of life. Of course when necessary, Tiger Parents give consequnces with teeth.
Blurg...helicopter parents are excuse making machines that see their kids through rose colored glasses.
12
Helicopter parenting does NOT work emotionally. It shoehorns children into predefined lives their parents expect them to live and shows no mercy for diversity, imagination or tolerance. Wanting the best for your children is not a sin but over here it manifests itself in zealous sports team involvement, special diets and constant emails to schools and coaches. Over-involved moms cheering at every sports match with over-protective SUVs are not the route to independence or the appreciation of anything non-financial like art, theatre or music. Life becomes a race. Emotional literacy is not empirical. Playing in the woods or letting your children play around rock pools in the world of discovery is what happy childhoods are all about. Helicopter parenting is about avoiding failure at all costs, the fear of failure and projecting onto your children a life plan in which they are subservient machines and emotionally stunted. Much of it equips offspring for success at every turn, a top university and a life plan predrawn from the foetal stage and according to zip code.
3
Seems like the author conflated authoritative parenting with helicopter parenting. However, a truly authoritative parent would establish clear boundaries, and not transgress their child's boundaries. They model successful interactions for them rather than solving their children's problems. Helicopter parents on the other hand transgress boundaries and attempt to solve all their child's problems to the detriment of the child. A shame she mixed things up. It is a topic worthy of analysis. I'll stick with Jonathan Haidt's analysis in the future.
14
If by "works" the author means your goal is to create a weak, whinny, thin-skinned, human completely unable to cope with any challenge before them no matter how minor, then yeah, helicopter parenting it works just fine. (Clearly Donald Trump's mom - or rather, his nanny - ascribed to this parenting style)
But for the real world, there's a huge difference between supportive encouragement/sacrifice and enabling.
5
As this article only tangentially acknowledges, this phenomenon is tied to rising inequality. It is impossible to ignore the politics of the top 5% pulling themselves away from the rest of the pack in the 80's (Reagan's tax-cut years), and the top 1% opening the yawning gap between themselves and literally everyone else in the intervening decades. What else has happened? Tax revenues and federal assistance that once funded schools dried up. The wealthy and those close enough to wealthy sent their kids to private schools. Everyone else had to make do with the scraps. Public colleges and universities also lost funding and prestige. Suddenly, though, especially if you read the NYT, it was all about individual "parenting styles" that led to children's success. Before you helicopter parents give yourselves a smug pat on the back, understand this: It was never your parenting style that helped your children succeed. It was your wealth. Will conflicted liberals whose politics seem to be at odds with their personal choices do anything to change this? Ask them - would they be willing to pay higher marginal tax rates? Would they be willing to ask their wealthier neighbors to pay even higher rates? Every time the subject comes up, the pearl-clutching begins, the "socialism" jeers start. It's only going to get worse.
7
@HumplePi
Money helps, but all that's needed are an involved mother and father. No amount of taxation or social engineering will be able to make up for bad parents. Mine could only afford to dress me in clothes from thrift stores and the church basement, but they still made sure I kept my nose to the grindstone. I went to a public school in a bad neighborhood, but still got a decent education because teachers and the principal were allowed to discipline unruly children so that the rest of us could learn. Likewise the state university I went to had more faculty than staff; the dorms were bland but cheep; the gym was in the basement of a 100 year old building and full of hand-me-downs from varsity athletic programs. We were exposed to ideas that made us uncomfortable by professors who would play Devil's advocate. This taught us not only to think critically, but that you don't fully understand a position until you can form a coherent argument for both sides. All of this kept tuition cheep enough to work my way through college and made the degree prestigious.
The wealthy have always looked down on others and sent their kids to private schools. It was the SJW liberals and their obsession with equality of outcomes that set the torch to the rungs I used to climb from the bottom 20% to the top 5%
4
@I want another option
Often, the right amount of taxation does indeed help, but that's the inconvenient truth that the right wants to ignore. ("Social engineering" is a snide pejorative that I will otherwise ignore). That bare-bones public university you worked your way through (and I went to one, too, gratefully) doesn't exist anymore, thanks to the tax-cutting fervor that made public universities poorer relations to the private schools, and forced them into financing fancy dorms and sports centers in order to attract wealthier kids who didn't make the ivy league cut. I barely recognize the formerly scruffy publicly-funded art school I went to in the 70's; it now boasts multiple new buildings including soaring dorms and high-tech studios; I hardly recognize the tuition either. Adjusted for inflation, it should be less than $3000/year to match what I paid. It's closer to $30,000. Equality of outcomes was never on the table; that's another right-wing smear to discredit attempts to right some very wrongs. Equality of opportunity, though, seems worth reviving. Public spending, like this country once understood was necessary for civilization, is a necessary first step.
1
You write a large paragraph about how inefficient current iteration of publicly funded college education is and end with a requirement that our taxes need to go up a lot so students do not have to pay for it. We would. That makes no sense. You state that state cutbacks forced the high expenditures. It was the other way around. University leaders built small palaces and the states paid. The palaces got bigger and bigger. Finally the states said enough. Then maybe the university leaders cranked the amp to 11.
The current system has to change. If universities want to return to stripped down versions of current edifices, focusing on classroom and lab learning and little else, not even dorms, no gyms, no cafes, then maybe that segment can be fully funded. No, I don’t think athletics takes money away from education, but it adds to making the school more grandiose. We do not need grandiose. Curiously the above is how most non-US colleges work, the ones with “free” tuition.
"bad news" means she is envious of parents who choose to spend time with and support their kids?
Clearly she wishes ill on others whose kids do well?
Dark hearts among us, politics of envy keeps spreading.
Perhaps we all need to notice when we wish ill, or well, on others.
1
I would vehemently dispute this definition of successful.
7
This “research” is completely flawed from a scientific standpoint. Wealthy people trying to prove they are superior than the rest of us. Where has humanity gone?
8
Meanwhile, American parents are outraged that their children are being asked to do homework instead of playing mindless video games or do social media on their phones all night long. Teenage brains are not fully developed. They are terrible at planning for the future (these are peer-reviewed studied - look them up). They need guidance. And they resist. So parents must keep them on a path that they know will result in rewards later in life. It's not smart to let teenagers make the decisions on their education.
10
Why did I read this and come away thinking that it was more about elitism than parenting?
13
Urgh. I wished I had a helicopter or lawn mowing parent when I was growing up. You know what a pain it is to transport oneself on the subway and bus (2 hr commute to and from school) when you're a tired teenage? You know how hard it is for a teenager to fill out a FAFSA without help? (That form is ridiculously long, no wonder so many poor kids give up!) I won't even go into the self-imposed stress of signing up for too many APs but being too dumb and poor to seek out tutors. I was a nervous wreck throughout most of high school. But I did it all anyway without much parental support because I knew it was the only way out of poverty. It took me years to recover from all that mental and physical torture. I did end up at a top liberal arts college, full ride, but I was so burnt out. I could have gone farther with my life, but I just felt lost for the next 10 years after college.
Now I have my own children and I can't go back and recover that lost potential. I can only "helicopter" my own children, hoping they discover their interests and passions early and plot a reasonable path to reach their goals. I'll gladly fill out the forms for them, drive them everywhere, and tell them what's important and what's not, just so they don't waste their youth. Doing everything on my own when I was young did nothing to prepare me for the real pains and stresses of life: homeownership, serious illnesses, job loss, parenthood, and the death of loved ones.
472
@Scaling: What you're describing is neglect, which is at the opposite end of helicoptering, and is equally corrosive. Find the balance, where love, respect and trust come together.
72
@Scaling
I loved your comment because it rang so true on so many levels with me. Having a parent who was a blue collar union man and a mom who was a housewife, neither had a clue what those college forms and financial aid packets were all about. I plowed through the process on my own, somehow managing to complete stuff correctly and in a timely fashion.
Sometimes the hardest periods of one's youth can also be the best training ground for how NOT to be when you have your own kids. The fact that you recognized the many negatives and painful experiences you encountered as a child, youth and young adult is actually making you a better, loving, caring, compassionate and sensitive parent to your own kids. You learned all of these things the hard way, but the fact that you did learn from them is what's key.
I do not know you but I am so dang proud of how you want to raise your kids and how perceptive and aware you are of what they will need and encounter down the road.
I wouldn't go so far as to say your parents did you a favor by not being there to help you, but you learned from their lack of help and now know how NOT to repeat that pattern and process with your own family. Your kids are pretty dang lucky to have you as their parent. They will do well by you.
86
@Steve M I don't know, poor parents don't often even have a conception of what it takes to get admitted to college, or its importance. They can only teach their children what they know. I think @Scaling 's initiative shows how much of a toll that can take on a kid who wants to get out of poverty, and thus why it's so rare, but judging just from what he wrote -- if his parents had known how to guide their kid through FAFSAs, AP sign-ups, tutors, and so on, then they probably wouldn't be in poverty.
38
Children want the respect and admiration of their parents. They need to know how to set boundaries and how to enforce them. They need to be hugged and told that they will be loved no matter what they do. They need to know that love, integrity and courage will always be there for them. They, as with all people, seek their greatest potential.
They need to know that they can take risks, and that it's going to sting if they fall, but standing up afterwards is a win by itself.
They need to know that money is a horrifying substitute for love.
We all have a pure brilliance inside of us and it's beneath contempt to have someone place a material value on its fruition.
4
I think there is a huge false premise in this article...an "authoritative" parent is defined in the article as "Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence."
I don't think this is at all what most of us would define as helicopter parenting; rather, most of us see it as being involved in a child's life in a way that is overcontrolling, overprotecting, and overperfecting, in a way that is in excess of responsible parenting.
The "authoritative" method was how I was raised as a boy in the 50's and 60's. Our parents encouraged us, supported us, but expected us to solve our own problems wherever possible, a skill that served us all well in later life.
One final thought on our teens today, regardless of what we call the parenting method. The CDC statistics show over a 44% increase in suicides of kids aged 15-24 from 2000 to 2017. Things aren't all "working".
8
@Greg
I totally agree that the author is conflating "authoritative parenting" with "helicopter parenting." I don't see them as one and the same at all. My parents were authoritative in that they released responsibility to us as we "earned" it. That is, they had high expectations of us (not just academically, but interpersonally, emotionally, etc) and when we met those expectations, they gave us more freedom. They always told us to "do what we loved" and we would be "successful" (however we defined it). They also exposed us to many different experiences to stimulate our intellectual curiosity and creativity. THAT is not helicopter parenting, because they gave us the freedom, and support, to pursue our interests, without imposing their own agenda on us (though they DID expect us to pursue a college degree - as a means to furthering our expertise in whatever interested us.) I am doing this with my own daughter, who wishes to pursue a career as an animator. I have no artistic ability, and don't understand the field at all. But, I support her (buying supplies etc) and encourage her. Is that helicopter parenting? I think not. Is my support providing her with an "unequal" advantage? Perhaps. But isn't it every parents job to help our kids pursue their dreams?
6
"...they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence"
Nonsense. This does not in any way describe helicopter parents. This is the complete opposite of that. Helicopter parents are the kind who don't let their kids out of their sight and won't let their kids play outside among themselves, which is what actually develops adaptability, problem-solving, and independence.
13
Helicopter parenting? No clue.
The topic is way to complex in order to generalize it this way.
Some kids might need it, some don't.
And in Holland we rammed it up too in the 1970s?
I doubt.... the kids here have a pretty good life, seem quite happy in general and have a lot of freedom.
I see best results around me with parents who take it easy, relax and be there when needed. It is impossible to put your ambitions into a kid, you can only trigger the ambitions they have themselves.
Loving support, or as we say, a certain degree of loving neglect works best since the way a kid steps into the world differs from the way you as a parent did it some 30 years ago.
Have a very good eye for the needs of your child, be generous (not material) and forget your own fears and ambitions.
And let them make mistakes! I made as well myself, also when parenting ;-)
A dad of six.
6
Whenever I see people on articles like this justifying the avoidance of the hard disciplined work needed to make it in today’s competitive global world I’m just glad to see my job will be a little bit easier.
2
The author of this article incorrectly assumes helicopter parenting is synonymous with authoritative parenting. We’ve known for a long time that authoritative parenting works. (ie: assigning tasks and roles but explaining the merits and reasoning behind those tasks - also, conflict resolution via reasoning and not blind obedience).
As some of the commenters point out, helicopter parenting is something entirely different and leads to children being ignorant, blind to the inequalities of society, and also anxious wrecks of human beings.
As a pediatrician, I see a surge of diagnoses of anxiety, depression and conversion disorders in these “helicopter parenting” households because children do not have the appropriate skills to deal with and overcome social stressirs appropriately. So in other words, in contradiction to this article’s title, helicopter parenting does NOT work.
If I am to put in more scientific terms, there is yet to be proven correlation between societal success and helicopter parenting.
11
I'm a little confused by this article. "Authoritative" parenting isn't a new parenting effort. It was one of four styles studied by Dr. Diana Baumrind at UC Berkeley in the 1960s. And it wasn't about being a helicopter parent, which implies protecting kids from natural consequences. Instead, it involved combining warmth with high expectations, and letting children learn from natural consequences instead of arbitrary punishments. Maybe this book ties them together, but "helicopter parents" and authoritative parents are different concepts.
8
It “works”? You mean that success is about making money. This is very scary and sad. I have many college students who are still being helicoptered, and a decent portion of them are afraid to do something their parents will not like, like becoming an artist or a historian. We are creating s generation that will have nervous breakdowns at middle age when they finally realize that success is not about money.
6
Nobody really argued it didn't work on that metric, the argument was more about mental and emotional health. Sure your helicopter parenting produced a lawyer, but are they happy? or is the pressure eating them alive? What are the rates of substance abuse, suicide, and divorce among these individuals? how many burn out and leave their professions in their 40's and 50's? How many have good relationships with said parents that never allowed them a moment to relax, to think for themselves, to be creative?
Success does not equal a well rounded human being, just a well trained worker bee.
6
The big takeaway is this:
REDUCE INEQUALITY.
Do that a whole lot of more desirable behaviors - not limited to parenting - will become much more commonplace.
Vote, please, to reduce inequality.
4
Define "helicopter" parenting. Setting aside time for your child to do homework is one thing. Doing her science project for her is another. I think you're misusing the term "helicopter parenting." At least, as most of us understand it.
7
Teachers cannot be expected to be parents but parents can teach and supplement what they learn in schools and Universities. Helicopter parenting or hyper parenting is going over board and probably gives parents the satisfaction that they have done their best and nothing problematic about that. It is under parenting that I would be concerned about that contributes to problems in school, Universities and in life.
Above all parents should be educating their children by example as much as by verbal instructions. Values that brings success in life and longevity is not encoded in genes but are a result of nurturing and example. Grand parents also should be allowed to play a role in the up bring of your child. My father who is in his 100th year by example he got me interested in physical activity, proper diet, humble behavior, very moderate occasional drinking, no smoking, frugal living, no drugs, hard work and passion for reading. Pretty much those values got transferred to the next generation and the generation after that.
3
It does depend on how you are defining success. If you define it as simply getting into a good college, you may say this style of parenting works. But how many kids in elite colleges transfer, fail to graduate, or suffer from crippling anxiety because they don't know how to function. I work at one of those colleges and see it all the time. That is not success. I would like to see a long term study including ten years post graduation.
5
This is a misleading title. Honestly, very few parents need to to read the authors supporting research to know that providing one’s children ample attention including instructing them on life, listening to them and engaging in genuine dialog - and yes, helping them understanding their mistakes in a humane way will result in competent, happy young people. What this article really should be exposing is the source of inequity that creates the circumstances where some parents can afford to deliver such attention and extra resources versus those who must struggle significant challenges to assure rent can be paid and food provided. What it should point out is how we need is transformational leadership and associated public participation resulting in a better community where the distribution of child rearing resources across our economic classes result in ALL children receiving healthy adult guidance. Otherwise, those who start off in privilege will continue to widen a gap which may feel right in the immediate context of assuring their kid gets into the right college, etc., but will only exasperate the polarization of haves and have nots.
I’m so grateful that I was a free-range 70s kid. My parents basically said to try as hard as I could, then left me to fend for myself academically. I spent my afternoons doing sports I loved, and my evenings doing some homework.
I graduated from high school with a B average, then graduated from a good California University with a B average. I worked part time throughout high school and college.
I had a lot of fun in college, as well—partying a little too much, but also enjoying taking a lot of art, literature, and philosophy classes. I then put myself through grad school while working full time, graduating with a 3.9 GPA.
Because my parents allowed me to grow up independently, I developed the crucial skills of creativity, toughness, and flexibility, which have allowed me to thrive despite the tremendous economic, health, and family traumas that I have faced (much more than most people my age).
The best thing that parents can do for their kids is tell them to get a part-time job starting in high school through college. This teaches discipline, accountability, and independence and builds crucial career skills.
8
The author cherry-picks bits of evidence to support her (obvious, if you read the whole article) own choice to be a helicopter parent - like doing her kids homework for them. To her credit, she acknowledges that there is very little causative evidence linking helicopter parenting with thriving in life. Rich, more "successful" parents end up sending their kids to more expensive schools/universities more often...no surprise
6
Learning is a life long journey. Knowing how to learn makes the journey more exciting and doable. Making learning a joy and meaningful is a gift parents can share with their children.
Offering opportunities, guidance, love is good parenting. It may start with reading to your little one and simply asking what do you think will happen next. Oh, why? Inquisitiveness is a trait to be cherished and instilled(probably there from birth). Asking questions by the learner makes the acquisition of knowledge his. Instilling 'active learning' propels the youngster on, not helicopter parenting.
Guess I'm trying to say love and gentle guidance goes a long way.
3
While I agree with the commentators here that Ms Druckerman uses terms imprecisely, there is a deeper point that deserves emphasis. Regardless of whether one calls it 'helicoptering' or 'authoritative' or just 'involved', like so many other things in contemporary society, parenting is part of an increasingly unequal society, and if this involvement improves outcomes in the next generation, we can be assured that the next generation will be more stratified than the current one. As she points out, even among those parents who are equally committed to their children's outcomes, time, resources, knowledge, social contacts, and a host of other things give some families an advantage that others can never achieve. And while absolute equality of families' initial resources may never be possible, our society has done little to try to level the playing field, and much to favor those already privileged.
3
I guess the measure of the success of helicopter parenting has a lot to do with the value system by which you measure accomplishment and what you hold to be morally and ethically important.
503
@Jeff Van Syckle
Because - come retirement time - every parent wants a really happy ethically-balanced middle aged son in the basement.
11
@SteveRR That’s a false choice.
9
@SteveRR
Middle ground much?
7
Parenting is the hardest job there is, harder than a generation ago, and there’s no good apprenticeship other than being raised by good parents. By the time you figure out what works and what doesn’t, you are likely beyond the active phase.
For me, it’s about the willingness to keep fighting losing battles, and not giving in to the fear you are doing more harm than good. For every 9 times you mess up, there will be a tenth time you will be validated. Embrace that ratio.
If academics are the criteria by which we judge success, as a parent of kids who got into the very top tier colleges from the springboard of public schooling, I can attest that there are many products of questionable parenting at these institutions, scions of the rich and entitled, lacking in manners or empathy, clannish, ambitious and disdainful.
1
As has been pointed out by so many who comment here, this is a poorly written article that conflates issues surrounding parenting and is even contradictory in some instances. How this made it past the NY Times editors is beyond me.
6
Ms. Druckerman,
Suggest that you read Blueprint, DNA makes us who we are by Robert Plomin, the doyen of behavioral genetics. He lays out 45 years of twin study and other hard-core research that indicates parenting means - get ready - almost nothing.
The kids of helicopter parents simply share their parents genes.
2
@peter bobley Genes are not destiny. Humans are incredibly behaviorally plastic. Parenting and peers have huge influence than young children.
2
This is a muddled article full of inaccurately defined concepts & false equivalence, capped by a headline that borders on clickbait.
NYT fail :-)
6
There is a huge difference between authoritative parenting style (a clearly defined and well studied construct) and "helicopter parenting" (a pop psychology term that has not been well defined nor extensively studied). This writer needs to look into it, as she seems to be basing most of her pronouncements on the benefits of authoritative parenting rather than helicopter parenting.
5
¨a sign of success is a sign of greatness¨
“...the new parenting efforts seemed effective. Dr. Doepke and Dr. Zilibotti can’t prove causality...” is the cue to stop reading. It should have been the author’s cue to stop writing.
3
Interesting article but it repeats a fallacy:
"Working-class and poor parents might not have the leisure time to hover . . . "
Studies have shown that high income earners work longer hours that the working class and poor.
"In 1983, the most poorly paid 20 percent of workers were more likely to put in long work hours than the top paid 20 percent. By 2002, the best-paid 20 percent were twice as likely to work long hours as the bottom 20 percent. In other words, the prosperous are more likely to be at work more than those earning little. This trend has been a puzzle for some economists."
https://www.nber.org/digest/jul06/w11895.html
It may not be PC to say this, but the same overachievers that work longer hours at work and make more money doing so may even work harder at being helicopter parents.
"Higher-income parents spend nearly a half hour more per day engaged in direct, face-to-face, Goodnight Moon time with their children than low-income parents do"
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/10/american-kids-are-starving-for-words/381552/
1
@mmm
Every poor person I know works damn hard. I don’t know any rich people that don’t have a trust fund to fall back on.
2
My son will graduate from college next year. He grew up in an exurb where a lot of helicoptering went on, but not in our home. Many parents want to be friends and not parents, maybe because that is easier. Though we let our son pursue whatever activities interested him, we did far more observing than acting. We let him make a few mistakes and we never pushed.
But I think that the most effective parenting tool we used was the family dinner. Over the dinner table, we discussed college pros and cons and how much we were going to contribute to his college education. We asked how things were going at school...what classes he liked, who his friends were. We imparted our values and related our mistakes…often through stories of real-life experience. We talked about family finances. And, we made sure he understood that we were always in his corner. Always.
This communication wasn’t always easy or pleasant. Kids go through a lot of strange periods and behaviors. Often, they won’t talk, they are sullen to the point of being irritating, and you can’t be sure they are even listening. But they are… you’ll hear your words coming back to you one day. Now, we are seeing our son mature into the young man we hoped he would be. It is clear that our values took hold and that he has the tools and the confidence to make a happy and successful life for himself. I can’t describe how gratifying that is.
4
Grade: C-
This is a poorly reasoned opinion piece with sloppy use of language and a misleading and inaccurate click bait heading.
Helicopter? Authoritative? Authoritarian? Are they the same? Distinct? You use the terms interchangeably.
For example:
An authoritative parent will insist that you do your best, be careful with your reasoning, and get your article proofread.
An authoritarian parent will lock you in your room, and if you don't get an A will take away your cell phone for a week and make you do vocabulary drills.
A helicopter parent will be calling me to complain about your grade, and will schedule a meeting with you, me, the principal, and your educational therapist to explain why the C- is detrimental to your emotional well-being.
11
In general this article makes sense, but I don’t think helicopter=authoritative or authoritarian. I think that headline is click-bait.
I think of helicopter as those who lurk at school every day spying on their kids, telling them what they like and what they should do. Or, moms who relentlessly pack the kid’s schedule with piles of activities.
Also, I believe the cause for a shift in attention paid to kids is not the change from 1970s equality of outcomes (i.e., degree vs. no degree job prospects) to 1980s inequality, but population growth and educational institutions that didn’t grow in proportion. I don’t think people discounted education in the 1970s, it just became more scarce in the 1980s and beyond. The elite class grew at the same population rate and takes up more of the finite seats. See https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html for comprehensive data.
Having the resources and time to provide a variety of enriching activities will certainly increase inequality. But, I think you’d be hard pressed to find the most progressive, educated parents forgoing opportunities for their children.
So are you of the logistical Chinook variety, helping with the heavy lifting, or more of an aggressive Apache attack helicopter?
3
Agree with previous comments this article confuses parenting techniques and styles...She also wrote Bringing Up Bebe or French Children Don't Throw Food as an FYI.
I wholly agree with authoritative parenting, but it is hard to be authoritative while being a helicopter. How can you instill independence and individual thought when the typical helicopter parent is hovering over the child's every move and zooming in on them before they make mistakes?
The only positive points for "helicoptering" is that they are more likely to be involved in their child's education and push for them to be in better qualified events and schools (which isn't helicoptering its common sense in the modern era).
The article doesn't touch upon how much is too much though and how to set boundaries -- everything should have balance.
1
The world is essentially competitive ,though unequal in certain respects.And the so-called helicopter parenting is part of the hard work needed for success in such a world .We just can’t laugh it off by giving it funny names.
Frankly, if you actually work with college students, this has been obvious for some time.
It's the difference between our ideals and reality.
Our ideals say that, as they enter into adulthood, individuals should make their own way, shoulder more responsibility, develop initiative, etc.
Our reality reveals that, in fact, prosperity itself is being rationed. The parents are fighting a rear-guard action. If they're lucky they will preserve the standard of living in their families for a single generation.
If you dislike the idea of helicopter parenting, welcome to the club. Maybe you should take a hard look at how the world currently works.
2
Parents are gaming the system.
Tests for admission to schools and programs were designed to ascertain the ability of children based on a common background. When children receive extensive tutoring and test preparation, their scores are not indicative of their true potential and they are thus less able to succeed in competitive programs without continued extra-curricular support; they take space from those who can.
'Grinds' come to dominate in fields such as medicine, research and computer science where creativity and intuition are necessary to achieve the best results.
2
I find the author’s message misleading. I learned in my Pediatrics training - more years ago than I care to admit - the benefits of authoritative parenting over authoritarian or permissive parenting styles. That’s nothing new. But I am troubled by the author equating authoritative parenting with “helicopter” parenting. Authoritative parents set clear limits but allow children the freedom to explore, negotiate, and make mistakes within those limits. And neither parenting style is necessarily dependent on the ability to provide financial resources or exceptional experiences to their children. Not sure if the book muddles these concepts, or if they were misunderstood by the author.
8
It "works" -- to what end? If my only goal in parenting is to raise kids who make it into the 1% (or even the top 25%), I'll choose a helicopter parenting style. But if my goal is to raise resilient, self-sufficient, kind children who are well-adjusted as adults and understand that the world does not revolve around them -- well, then, I'll choose another style. One that attempts to balance discipline with love and boundaries with self-exploration. One that considers not only what's good for my own kid, but what's best for society as a whole. And I'll stop thinking that I'm the one who dictates how my kids turn out and also recognize that part of it is up to them.
5
This article is purportedly about "helicopter parenting" but the beneficial research described refers to authoritative parenting. These are not at all one in the same. A helicopter parent may very likely be permissive or authoritarian. Many "free-range" parents I have known are quite authoritative. If the article were appropriately titled "Authoritative Parenting Works" I don't think anyone would read it because that's old news.
5
How is this bad news? Let's be honest with ourselves: if everyone had the financial wherewithal, most would probably helicopter parent.
The bad news--and it's really not news--is that most and a growing percentage of people don't have that wherewithal.
So the article says helicopter parenting yields smarter, more capable children. Makes me wish all parents were helicopter parents.
This article lends to the belief that everything is political, whether implicit or nuanced. Not that I don’t like good political analysis, but can’t an article be written on child rearing and leave it at that? Mercy!
1
Since when wasn’t everything always already political?
Finding a good school is simply called parenting, not helicopter parenting.
3
The type of parenting described here isn't what most people mean by "helicopter parenting".
3
Actually, neither helicopter parenting, abusive, parenting, neglectful parenting, is good. What is good is that children believe that they have parents who actually wanted children, are good communicators, and have the skills necessary to help them have good eating, sleeping, and social skills, and are consistent, is what they expect of them. That works, each, and every time. However, most children have two working parents, or only one parent, are on their own a lot. They also see bullying on a daily basis no matter if they are black or white, females are bullied by males, often, there is competition for extra curricular activities like sports, in the larger schools, so that is why many students gravitate towards, arts, debate, music, theater etc., things they can enjoy their entire life. Also, having free time, is very emotionally healthy for all children, and even teenagers. They are less likely to have depression that way.
2
The author has a very strange definition of "helicopter parenting," and I can't help but to think this term was selected specifically to act as click-bait. Just because it's an opinion piece doesn't warrant free use of hyperbole at the expense of accuracy, and sending the wrong message to anybody who just reads the title. Disappointing to see on the NYT.
5
“Helicopter parenting,” “permissive parenting,” “authoritative” parenting, “intensive parenting style.” Quotation marks are not explanatory and do not discharge the burden of further elaboration.
As for “monster mothers,” is that not just another misguided, envious rubric for “Japanese mother?”
You forgot one—“tiger mom.”
The main takeaway: engaged and nurturing but not overzealous parents produce better adults.
After your silly article about an ageist French writer with “yellow fever,” I am hardly surprised.
1
Honestly, although this column is in the Opinion section, it is poorly researched, conflates terms and ignores decades of research. "New research" - as stated in the title, is by economists, not psychologists. The term authoritative parenting was first coined by Baumrind in the 1960s, this isn't new.
"Psychologists, sociologists and journalists have spent more than a decade.." excuse me? Do you confuse journalists with highly trained social scientists? Who, again, have been studying this for more than 50 years?
This 'journalist' should stick to writing about what she knows- apparently living in France- since there is no basis here for an educated article.
Sorry, Pamela. The premise of your entire argument is flawed because you misuse the term helicopter parenting.
2
Teachers (myself included) all over the country face-palmed upon reading this headline.
Gee, thanks, NYT...
479
@Hendry's Beach Yes yes yes!! Teachers are tired of being driven over by parents who "know best." Teachers have a hard job on all sides these days.
15
@Hendry's Beach
Really? Which part do you disagree with? Data show that involved and educate parents are directly correlated with kids who do well and stay out of trouble.
3
@Hendry's Beach, I'm sure you're a wonderful and dedicated teacher, but like any profession, there are some bad ones. The ONE time I intervened at school for our older girl was due to a bad teacher in ES. Afterward the administration never messed with me again and she got all the preferred teachers. Luckily OG was self motivated and a great student. She is now a happily married mom of three boys, a law partner, and has served in the Army JAG.
1
The article, as others have pointed out, has a muddled definition of helicopter parenting. There is a difference between ambitious parenting (which some commenters are calling "tiger parenting" and involves things like obsessing over getting into top pre-schools and over-scheduling lessons and extra-curricular activities to groom a child for competitive college admissions) and hovering, fussing, over-protective parenting (which involves too much helping with homework, not allowing much independence or freedom to make mistakes, etc.). Both have indeed been perceived as problematic parenting practices, and it is possible that new studies show both producing successful results, but if the studies aren't breaking down and analyzing the rather different behavior patterns in these two parenting styles and making more fine-tuned distinctions, the results are too generalized to be useful. Whether this is the fault of Drukerman's summary or the original studies isn't clear.
3
Different measures of success. Helicopter and Tiger Parenting yield people who succeed within human sociological constructs. It's dangerously presumptive to think that matters much. In the cosmological sense, the world and the universe are physical places. Survival requires different guidance and skills.
There should be a balance of both. We need renaissance kids, not straight A students.
2
Good grief! How do these families break the cycle of co-dependency? After college, kids can't live with their parents forever. Parents certainly aren't welcome in their child's workplace. What happens then?
I'm glad I grew up, then raised my children before helicopter parenting became the norm. I'm relieved to have raised two independent, well adjusted adult children who worked for and earned their own success.
3
Whenever I read these things, I simply can't relate to them much. I suppose we were "authoritative" in that we reasoned with our kids, occasionally nudged them, and encouraged them. Both of our kids got into their absolute first-choice schools and love what they did/do.
What we did as parents was to respect what they wanted to do. Not only were they with the plan, but their motivation came from within. That made our job infinitely easier. Part of it was respecting who they are, part of it was luck, and the tiniest part was being authoritative.
2
This article is misleading on many levels, starting with the headline. "Helicopter parenting" is NOT to be confused with "parenting" which involves teaching kids the importance of discipline, grit etc by way of either role-modeling or by teaching.
The author was successful in catching eyeballs, but I hope they realize its not worth sending wrong messages!
5
Many comments seem to be from readers who themselves are children of helicopter parents.
1
I agree with many other commenters. The title of this article is terribly misleading and the author has carelessly employed scientific research to back up her weak logic. Authoritative parenting does not equal helicopter parenting. And didn’t we already know that authoritative parenting was the good kind? This is not news.
2
Not so fast.
Authoritative parenting is not the same thing as "permissive" parenting. And Helicopter parenting is actually more similar to Authoritarian Parenting than to Authoritative Parenting.
Those parents of children in the 1950s who allowed their children great freedoms were not "permissive." They still had rules, structure, and guidance. They just didn't hover and "rule over" their children., i.e., they weren't Authoritarian.
1
Sorry, for every study that shows helicopter parenting to be effective, I can produce 5 that show otherwise, all recent. Ha, I have a friend whose cousin was a helicopter parent. The kid got into Yale but never wanted to go home. The fact that the study cited is by economists tells me that are fairly oblivious to the mountains of clinical research showing the negative effects of parental pressure. Furthermore, many of the negative effects of helicoptering parents do not surface until years later. True, many of these kids have become very financially successful--they can afford therapy 3 times a week. Because of its evolutionary utility, pressure is inherent in the parent-child relationship but my studies and research have given me the insight that the majority of parents pressure their kids in the wrong direction; for example, pressure their kids to learn rather than to become curious; pressure their kids to be accepted by others rather than feel secure in themselves. A parenting style that helps a child build their COTE of Armor --confidence, optimism, tenacity, and enthusiasm -is the key.
5
I have 2 small children and, of course, we have a lot of interaction with other parents so we get to see other styles.
I agree with other comments on here: jumping in to solve your kids problems is unambiguously bad. We all need consequences. That is how we learn.
Where I see the biggest advantage for kids from wealthy families is in experiences. They get exposed to a lot of different things. That makes them aware of what is going on in the world and what is possible.
Involvement is good. It shows you care. But as with all things, too much does more harm than good.
For what it is worth, we are more focused on raising 2 independent adults that can function in the world while treating others with respect. We also want to give them a lot of experiences en route to adulthood so that they are able to identify areas of interest where they want to devote their lives as adults.
I see a lot of kids whose parents are on top of them. I think we are going to end up with a lot of really neurotic adults incapable of making a decision because they are used to being told what to do.
Kids have to learn to think for themselves at an age appropriate level. They have to fail. Then they have to figure out a new approach. If that process gets short-circuited by over-involved parents, you end up with adults that largely helpless.
1
Well this is a relief. I have two children, nearing adulthood, with “invisible” special needs, and I have been accused many times of being a helicopter Mom when I’m just trying to keep them in school and out of the hospital. I think many parents who devote a significant amount of time to parenting can relate. I have seen other children with similar issues and less involved parents end up in some scary situations, and i am grateful I have had the resources to give mine the help they needed. Glad, for once, to see an article that doesn’t tell me I’ve done everything wrong and ruined my children. I wish people would stop jumping to conclusions about how other people parent and would just support each other.
3
Define 'success'.
It's so exhausting to watch parents drive themselves and their children crazy with expectations of what it means to succeed. As if their very survival were at stake if they missed out on getting a Harvard Law degree. Please take some time to examine your sloppy assumptions.
How many dollars a year equals a successful person? If you are gainfully employed, cover all your expenses, have a reasonable roof over your head and satisfying relationships, does that count at success?
The implication here is that people should not rest unless they can guarantee that their children are achieving at the highest levels: doctor, lawyer, corner office, mover and shaker, macmansion, three-car garage.
Trust me, your future happiness does not depend on the pre-school you got into. I don't care what the studies say. The idea is completely absurd.
Maybe we need to spend some time thinking about what defines a good life.
For one thing, helicopter or not, not everyone is cut out to achieve greatness and/or wealth. Most people are going to earn a modest income and be just fine. If 'doing fine' sounds like abject poverty to you, you need to question your assumptions.
For another thing, I'm not sure our planet can sustain much more 'success'.
4
As a Foreign Service Officers daughter, my parents just couldn't understand how importance guidance was, particularly when one is constantly moving, constantly travelling, and living in sometimes a different country a year. I guess these days one would call it free-range parenting, sort of the opposite of the authoritative parent.
I have run loose through the streets of Beirut in the sixties when it was at it's most beautiful, travelled all over europe with inter-rail and eur-rail passes from our home base in Frankfurt, from the age of 13 on, enjoyed the silence and imaginative wonder of early dawns at the Parthenon, the Al Hambra, Stonehenge, really in gorgeous places the world over. That type of freedom and experience cannot be force-fed, and the loneliness and lack of guidance seems a perfect start for the future artist.
3
That's pretty awesome. Jealous.
1
This is an incredibly misleading headline and article. Helicopter parenting is equated to the loosely defined "authoritative" parenting as though they are one and the same. But they are 2 different things, as I understand it -- where helicoptering is seen as negative because it means the parent protecting the child from any failures, pain, need to think for themselves or plan anything out, all of which results in children and young adults who can't think for themselves or tolerate any setbacks. Whereas "authoritative," as it's presented here, means using reasoning, adaptability, and problem-solving in conjunction with your kid, in order to instill those skills in them. I would take that as a positive thing, and pretty much the opposite of what helicoptering does.
The basic premise of this article just doesn't hold up, and the editors should never have put it out with this misleading headline.
2
This probably works given the "nuclear family isolated family living in the suburbs" in the US. Not so in the eastern countries, kids get to mingle with all age groups, elders watch the kids , doors are always open for visiting neighbors. Where people dont need to make appointments for every social activity. People in eastern countries will think you are a psycho, if you keep hovering your kids all the time.
1
This article’s headline is unfortunately misleading. The article seems to argue the merits of authoritative parenting style; something professionals have been advocating for years. To sell helicopter parenting as synonymous with authoritative parenting is not only erroneous, it’s downright dangerous. As a clinical psychologist who works with teens and young adults, I see the harmful effects of helicopter parenting. While it may lead to increased academic success and graduation rates, it has a detrimental effect on children turning into adults who lead meaningful independent lives. I don’t consider
the metrics of “success” to solely be grades, degrees and salary. In fact I find these to be illusory metrics in my patients’ lives. To me, the ability to regulate emotions, tolerate distress, build reciprocal meaningful and healthy social and romantic relationships, along with living a functional life that passes the “if my parents were struck by lightning” test, are far more definitive of “success.” Helicopter parenting achieves none on that and in fact does the opposite.
6
Interesting article. Although as a teacher at an independent school, I couldn’t disagree more. My most successful students, both emotionally and academically, are those who have been granted a certain amount of independence without blatant parental over-meddling. Years of being in the trenches have made me wary of “academic researchers.”
5
This is not a STEM research. In behavioral research, for every study that ''proves'' proposition P there are a many studies that support proposition Not-P. Makes for interesting reading, but not for reliable knowledge.
Not really on the subject of parenting, but...
I really don't like it when people use financial status as a qualifier. "Poor parent" or "rich parent." It's much more respectful to use person first language. Just like with disabilities. "A child who is on the autism spectrum" is much more respectful than saying "an autistic child." Does their situation define who they are? They are people first.
So, try saying "a parent who is low-income" instead of "a parent who is high-income." And you have to define your qualifiers. In the Bay Area, where I live, a salary less than 50k is low-income! What about the availability of activities in communities with higher crime rates or less extracurricular activities for children? Do those parents even have a choice?
1
Micro managing your kid's life may get him/her into Harvard but it will not necessarily make them a better person. It might not allow them to grow up to be a happy person, either.
The most miserable people I have encountered in life were young adults trying to live up to family expectations. In the end we need to find the life that makes us happy and fulfilled- not the life others would pick for us.
3
Your study doesn't go far enough. We need adults who can do critical thinking. You used to get that from a high school education. Now, I've met PhDs who are high-functioning autistics who think they're geniuses because everyone's told them they were.
1
As others have noted - it would be hard to miss - this piece offer no evidence of success resulting from what we know as “helicopter parenting, ” nor does it even address the topic! It opens with an anecdote about public vs private schooling, switches gears to a comparison of authoritative vs authoritarian parenting styles, and concludes that we must either elect Democratic presidents or keep doing kids’ homework for them.
1
This piece seems to be all about "the holy grails of modern parenting: college and postgraduate degrees, which now have a huge financial payoff."
I'm a modern parent, and these are not my holy grails. I am trying to raise an adult who is emotionally secure, independent, has good critical thinking skills, and can do her own laundry and shop and cook for a meal.
5
@KEL
Of course we want our kids to be financially secure. But I tell my kids so long as they are self supporting I don’t care if they are rocket scientists or plumbers...whatever degree or training you get and whatever job you have, work hard, do it well and with dignity.
3
@kel YES! That is my definition of success too!
If the Supreme Court decides corporations are people, then it is obvious the same could be said for schools that are ready to leave behind any student in the national quest to build a master race.
Helicopter, what ever it takes to keep an eye on your kid because the corporate machine has installed an HR office mechanized to crush, spindle and mutilate the weak.
1
This just in, "Rich people get richer".
6
while the writer makes an interesting story, she fails to present the actual data on the "study". Most social science "science" has poor design and methodology, and is seldom repeatable by other scientists.
Without the data or a link to the study, we must merely read with amusement and wonder why American education fails to build skeptical and scientific minds.
Thanks, Pamela, for the reminder.
I agree with those who say that the piece is conflating more than one idea, either a sign of bad research or a poor understanding by the reporter of what research tells us (unfortunately all too common in media coverage). The term “Helicopter parenting” is not just about an intense focus on education and achievement. It also includes intensive and often intrusive attempts to control for any potential negative experience or influence in a child’s life, including in areas that are not under anyone’s control. I would be surprised if a study that clearly defined those variables and controlled for for a host of possibly mediating variables did not show some type of negative effect on healthy development.
Secondly, the concept of authoritative parenting as superior to authoritarian or permissive parenting is nothing new and is a confound if it is being considered all of a piece with the previously mentioned research.
Good research usually looks at very small questions to rule out alternative explanations for a hypothesis. The hope is that findings in a study can be replicated and expanded upon in a stepwise manner. And there is always the old saw—correlation does not equal causation, which is often ignored, buried, or under-explained in coverage of research in popular media. There is one takeaway of the article I can be comfortable with—that the issues discussed, however imperfectly, may be associated with ever-increasing income inequality. But is that a big surprise??
3
Basically "helicopter" parents have figured out the recipe for success. And why wouldn't you do it? Helicopter parents are the ones who went away to camp, college, travelled, etc - or have studied "successful" people's recipes - their "to-do" list - learn a musical instrument, participate on a debate team, read, excel at a sport, etc. Part of parenting is being a coach, right? But in the end, the child/player must perform. Parents are just trying to provide the best tools and resources possible.
Success? This is a relative concept.
Say i could push my child into the Ivy League using a certain strategy and that these credentials would create a net worth of a million plus by age thirty.
Most people would call that success, but it's not - it's wealth.
Say I knew that my child had a contemplative, loving nature, that they were kind to a fault and really liked the idea of living of the land and sharing. i could let them grow up and go off to a commune in Oregon where they'd make sublime organic raspberry preserves for the rest of their lives sending packages of it every christmas.
Would that be a success?
Suppose instead of allowing such folly I pushed the same child into competitive team sports. With held approval unless their performance improved. Only rewarded them when they showed an academic win. Stressed the principle of Milton Friedman's boot straps and disdain for those to weak to 'win".
Would I have a success on my hands?
Many parents want what's best for their children.
Many others see children as property or simply an extension of their own ego. What they want from them is what they want from them, not what the children want and they defend this defeat of another person's will by claiming success.
5
Achieves results according to a parent-determined metric.
Does not produce healthy well-adjusted adults who know how to run their own lives, make their own decisions, and make their own mistakes.
4
How are you defining helicopter parenting? And how are you defining success? In both cases, apparently not in the way I am.
2
Life is not fair. People born with advantages (money, talent,brains, supportive families) will generally have an easier time of it. The more advantages the more times that one can mess up and still get more chances. People with fewer advantages must work harder and will have fewer opportunities to make up for missteps. And nothing is as valuable as a support system, especially a loving family and particularly if they have money and/or influence. Again unfair but still true.
3
I didn't have helicopter parents, per se, but every minute of my childhood was planned out with activities I mostly disliked: swim lessons, piano lessons, choir rehearsals, church and religious events, school and social clubs. I resented such an obligatory full calendar.
I grew up in a mostly middle class neighborhood in the 1960s where my peers didn't have as high parental expectations I did. My friends rode their bikes, played Frisbee, watched cartoons, played kickball, and went to the movies.
My childhood was nothing like that. The expectations of my parents were too heavy-handed. I resented them insisting I play the piano, take ballet, sing in the church choir. I had little time to myself. As a result, I wholly relish my freedom to do as I please now.
With my own child, who is autistic, I led him to do things I knew he'd genuinely enjoy. His disability gave me the freedom not to worry about a prestigious education. I see his happiness as an adult as being part of that.
Of course it's important to encourage your children to be successful adults. But their own choices and abilities as individuals should carefully be considered.
3
Dear Ms. Druckerman,
Will my child seek the beautiful, the true, and the good? Will my child exemplify the cardinal virtues or the seven deadly sins? Will my child have empathy and compassion? Will my child have courage? Will my child pursue productive achievement? Will my child have friends who would lay down their lives for her and her for them?
I don't know if such things can be attained by helicopter, but I do know that I will have succeeded if I can say yes to such questions.
Cordially,
S.A. Traina
4
I thought that true helicoptering was more about not letting kids fail, to the point that moms & dads were doing major paper editing, science fair projects, etc., all the way up to calling professors to argue about grades in college. This article describes attentive parenting, which is a far cry from what the traditional helicopter parents have done for the last 10-15 years.
In my nearly 22 years of parenting, I've seen moms wring their hands over a less-than-stellar test grade, hire professional coaches to ensure their kids make the team, badger high school principals to let their 9th graders take AP classes with seniors...I could go on. That makes no sense to me, as my kids will spend many more years without me than they did with me -- my job is to listen, support, and give advice when asked. Nothing more.
4
"college and postgraduate degrees, which now have a huge financial payoff." That is debatable.
2
Everyone seems so defensive.
I guess that is to be expected when discussing child rearing.
Just take the major theme and go forward with it.
My wife and I are about to become first-time parents, and neither of us can picture ourselves debating with our future 8 year old son. At that age, children lack the mental capacity to fully weigh the pros and cons of their decision-making.
2
There's a huge logical gap in this argument -- equating authoritative parenting with helicopter parenting, and also somehow the middle class and secularity? Citing a study that shows that children raised by authoritative parents have better life outcomes than children raised by permissive or authoritarian parents has no bearing on if helicopter parenting makes kids more likely to succeed. The tl;dr of this article, once you make it past the sweeping conflations of unrelated descriptors, is that economic inequality starts in the cradle and social mobility is on the decline -- why not just say that?
4
Very misleading title.
What the author describes - authoritative parenting - is /NOT/ helicopter parenting.
Authoritative parenting involves setting strict, clear rules and guidelines for your offspring to manage their own lives within. This teaches kids how to be self-reliant, how to properly analyze their own lives and make good decisions, and ideally how to rely on people they trust when they need guidance, including authority figures. The guidance provided to a child through the best authoritative parenting comes with safety bars in the form of rules which prevent your child from going astray, coupled with good advice, reasoned discussion, enough attention, and a strong emotional bond.
This is /NOT/ helicopter parenting. This is what I call “good parenting.” Helping your child understand their homework is what this article describes, good attentive parenting. Helicopter parenting is /DOING/ your child’s homework, /FORCING/ them into the extracurriculars you’ve selected as best for them, and /CONTROLLING/ minute aspects of their lives to force them down not only the path you think is good, but the path you’ve selected as the best of all possible good paths.
Those behaviors absolutely deprive children and young adults of skills and experiences required to navigate the world socially and emotionally, and can be psychologically damaging, in some cases devastating.
5
Sorry, don't buy this. I"m a mother and teacher of many My experience both at home and at school tells me that the children over whom I've hovered most ( because I really wanted to help them succeed) didn't do as well as those who were self motivated from the very beginning. I think it's much more nature than nurture. Much more.
1
There's a confusion of terminology, here.
My parents used a lot of logic and discussion with us. They were aware of where we were and what we were doing. They were "involved." But they also gave us independence. Instead of not letting us walk to the park for fear of kidnapping, they let us walk but discussed the risks, how we should manage those risks, and what we could do better. Instead of telling us how to do our homework (or worse yet, doing it for us), they discussed what we were learning and expressed interest in it.
There's a difference between a young college student who calls their parents for help after conflict with a college professor -- which is fine -- and a young person who lets their parent call the professor directly. It is that latter version that we mean when we say "helicopter parent" -- and I see little good in parents who refuse to prepare their children to be functioning and independent by doing things for them.
4
When I was a kid there was no such term as, "parenting".
These days we don't give kids enough credit for learning on their own (and letting them fail and learn from their mistakes). Children are much smarter than we give them credit for and they usually do best when their parents get out of the way.
Raising children is like caring for plants: give them what they need but don't over water them.
3
The answer depends on how you define success. Test scores and economic opportunity or happiness?
1
kids with helicopter parents wind up being adults who need helicopter bosses.
3
Recent commenters (drollere, liesje) are right this article never should have made it past NYT editors.
There is nothing "essential" about any parenting style (Druckerman's term). These are simply broad correlations that have been known for decades. Yes, it's better to when parents are involved, just as it's better to get exercise, but parents are just one part of a broader mosaic of childhood development. No one piece (or parenting style) is "essential."
In addition, the term "helicopter" is not synonymous for "authoritative." And it is certainly not conducive to the kind of 'independence" that the author also claims, correctly, is important.
NYT's readers count on precision in terminology (and the organized thinking this requires). This article is thoroughly fails on that front. Parenting is hard enough.
2
"they [authoritative parents] emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence"
This is literally the opposite of helicoptering. Did I miss something?
4
Druckerman's article is of course ironic, since she is criticizing our unequal society and satirizing helicopter parenting.
1
@Rebecca Hogan
I think you're giving her way too much credit.
She uses a lot of words but really has nothing to say. Hamlet is echoing in my head: Words, words, words! (Please, make it stop!)
3
This article seems to be saying that helicopter parenting and authoritative parenting are the same thing. To my mind, the two are not mutually exclusive. Helicopter parents guide their children through every experience and generally select those experiences for their children. (i.e., They "prepare the path for the child instead of preparing the child for the path.") Authoritative parenting does not necessarily include helicopter parenting. Also, putting one's child in a private school doesn't necessarily involve helicopter parenting or authoritative parenting. This article is conflating these three phenomena, making the results of this study impossible to characterize in a way that is helpful to parents.
2
The author writes as if economic advancement is the sole purpose of child rearing. Not even a mention of ethical behavior or morality.
Many of us want our kids to be more than paycheck-cashing automatons.
12
Yikes!! Way to just add to competitive parenting and the associated anxiety.
Glad I’m an aunt and not a parent.
2
I'm confused. It seems that “authoritative” (i.e., effective) parents "use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them. Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence — skills that will help their offspring in future workplace situations that we can’t even imagine yet." Doesn't sound like the typical understanding of a helicopter parent, who obsessively micromanages a kid's life without really understanding her needs.
2
Growing up in Portland, Oregon in the 60s and 70s, it didn't snow much but when it did entire families in our neighborhood would head over to SW 16th St. which went straight downhill for six blocks or so. Lots and lots of kids sledding and dragging their sleds back up to the top to do it again... and many parents were there watching and laughing. Much later, in the 2000s, back in Portland visiting the old neighborhood, by chance there was a big snowstorm. With great anticipation I went over to the 16th Street hill... no one was there! I couldn't believe it and couldn't understand it. Where were the new crop of neighborhood kids? At home studying, looking at their screens or possibly did their parents feel it was all too dangerous? Standing on the snowy street corner I thought how much they were missing out!
5
@Eric May
I've noticed the same thing in Chicago. No kids on the most delightful, sunny, snowy days, even on weekends.
I remember when my son was little and told me he thought snow was "the best toy in the world, and it's free, and it's everywhere!"
2
Involved, and hyper involved are not the same. And its a question of the mentality brought to it.
All of my highly successful Tamil Brahmin friends from India, Ph.D.s or Engineers earning a good living with stable families, married when young and with kids doing well in school and receiving a lot of love, come from parental and extended family structures where there were expectations and involvement, but not hysteria. That to me is the diff.
Among successful upper middle class United Stateseans i see so much rushing about like chickens without a head, so much fighting, anger, rudeness, teens who dislike their parents, tons of alcoholism and estrangement. Los of bragging.
Whereas my Indian friends, when they have a baby the parents come from India and stay for a year and they love that they do. They want the parents to move in with them.
Obviously this is not every case, i am generalizing, but from 45 years of observation. My Indian friend's daughter recently refused a scholarship to Stanford so she could stay closer to home and enjoy mom's cooking. They all seem pretty happy to me, and far less stressed out than the USA born parents/kids i know of the same age. And they enjoy each other's company.
And these kids are very scheduled, Sanskrit, Tamil, Carnatic music lessons on the weekend, with expectations they will do well in school.
Maybe one diff is they dont all play club soccer and team volleyball
1
Research that has counter-intuitive results is the best kind. it gets you to rethink your premises, reexamine accepted truth, and change your attitudes. I visit a park with a playground almost daily. I will have to rethink the multitasking parents who are always doing work and talking on the phone as well as the ones who carry on a running dialogue with their kids and look skeptically at my dog. Thanks.
There is an incredibly small amount of "evidence" in this article that helicopter parenting "works." Some kids did better on a test. Of course. The helicopter parents paid for expensive tutors and the kids crammed.
Doesn't mean you're a better, happier, person. More like a programmed robot.
And "helicopter parenting" doesn't mean going to private school. It means hovering over everything they do, living vicariously through them, driving them everywhere, and not allowing any free play.
Today's kids are fairly miserable, with awful schedules, sports teams that are all about winning and never about fun, and way too much homework.
I feel sorry for them.
5
How irritating. Yet another article that does not define its terms and then goes on to use them inaccurately. There is a difference between healthy, intelligent involvement in children's lives and helicoptering. The NYT knows this. I suspect that Pamela Drukerman knows this. But both seem happy to obfuscate as long as it makes a good headline and pretends to be challenging the prevailing wisdom.
Ick.
1
Your Texas story is not surprising. They are called limousine liberals. Go to any progressive city and you can see the wealthy liberals (yes, I am a liberal) who vocally believe in progressive values for everyone except their offspring who they shuttle to exclusive private schools with the expectation that they will achieve access to the elite universities.
3
Are we defining "works" as school admission? How do these kids function on their own when they're 27? I know an top manager who has had to deal with younger hires calling Mommy from the office and attempting to get her involved in work situations. That is NUTS.
340
@Blair
"Are we defining "works" as school admission?
From the paper you're commenting on
"The benefits aren’t just academic. In a British study, kids raised by authoritative parents reported better health and higher self-esteem. In the American study, they were less likely to use drugs, smoke or abuse alcohol; they started having sex at older ages, and they were more likely to use condoms."
8
@Blair When I was a manager, I had wives asking husbands to call and dispute low scores on evaluations!
5
@Blair. They don't need to function outside of their parents propellers at age 27, they'll be living in the parent's basement.
The problem is that these parents look at the child as an offshoot of them,selves and become so involved because they see a child's failure (actually a growth experience) as an embarrassment.
10
Hilarious. America is done.
"Dr. Doepke and Dr. Zilibotti can’t prove causality..."
What is this article even about?
1
Dear NYT Digital User Experience Team:
I regret to inform you that the article published on the Opinion Page today entitled, "The Bad News About Helicopter Parenting: It Works" seemed to be missing the rest of the headline sentence in my digital view! I am sure it was an honest mistake. I am guessing you probably went to the finest Ivy League school and I know you probably got your job based on your hard work, actual qualifications and not those of your well connected, suffocating, but ultimately very helpful parents. As such, I know pointing out this grievous publication error will roll off your backs like oil on a seagull after a major ocean pipeline breach and you will be prompted to accept responsibility and rush the changes to the copyroom floor Tout Suite- that is fancy French for ASAP (but you probably already knew that)! To be sure, I think what you guys meant to type was, "The Bad News About Helicopter Parenting: It Works for Privileged White People Like a Charm But Has Devastating, Irreversible Effects on the Rest of Society (about which no one has bothered to spend time, money, or effort researching or publishing articles in the NYT or elsewhere, on". Phew- glad we got that settled. I almost thought I had opened a link to The Onion!
Sincere regards, Axe P.
9
As a teacher, now retired, I found that involved parents made for better students. To me, what is called helicopter means knowing, helping, supporting, scheduling, and planning parenting. Those students with supportive parents got their homework finished, turned in projects on time, were attentive in class, had time for friends after school, and sports. These parents were available for conferences and their child's presentations. They were around before and after school, and some helped with field trips with my 4th and 5th grade classes. I rather appreciated the helicopter parents...but I never thought of them as such. It's a derogatory term to describe thoughtful parenting.
1
What you describe as authoritative parenting is not helicopter parenting. Your headline and conclusions, confusing the two, are pure clickbait.
3
I thought the US is at the bottom of the barrel w.r.t PISA tests. I teach 'helicoptered kids' engineering at a selective institution. These kids are not very good academically. Historically speaking, they compare poorly to previous generations and we are constantly 'dumbing down' our curricullum.
4
Having learned a lot about the Harvard Study of Adult Development, I'd say not to evaluate them while they're still in their 20's. See how they're doing in their 60's.
1
The content is informative, but fails to necessarily follow the premise of the headline. The piece fails to define what she believes is "helicopter" parenting, to which people assign their own connotations (often negative). Is authoritative parenting helicopter parenting? Is authoritarian? Based on this article, I'm not sure. Seems as if the editor chose a terrible title to accompany the article.
2
If something works, that's good news!
Says the helicopter parent...
Sadly, Pamela is just plain wrong, wrong, wrong.
Wrong on the facts.
Wrong on the theories.
Wrong on the inputs, which means wrong on the outcomes.
I'm betting Pamela attended her kids college interview and her/his first job interview. You know..just so they wouldn't be anxious.
You know...letting your kid eat mud and get in trouble isn't the end of the world. In fact, it's just the beginning.
3
No, it doesn't.
1
So the key point is "raise kids who will vote Democrat." Jonathan Haidt makes a much more convincing case against this type of parenting as a co-author of "Coddling of the American Mind." Believe me folks, nobody was more adamant about voting for Clinton than me. I didn't need my parents to inculcate that. My common sense--and education did that for me.
1
Aren't these the same kind of kids who commit suicide with regularity in Japan? It's not clear why helicopter parenting is a "thing".
1
"It works." That's it? Seems like she's equating success with Ivy Leagues and money. Happiness, balance, ethics, not so much. So you surround yourself with a bunch of like-minded, stressed out over achievers. No wonder we are where we are. All work and no play makes a dull Jack and Jill.
4
Isn't the author mixing up helicopter parents and authoritative parents? Can't you be authoritative and NOT be a helicopter parent? How is paying for extra activities for your kids related to if you are authoritative or authoritarian? The author is mixing two different concepts here and implies that it is NOT good to be authoritative because that leads to helicopter parents. That is not the correct message.
2
So crazy parenting is not something that just happens to go along with upper middle class, professional families, like drinking certain kinds of wine, and taking vacations in the Faroe Islands? One can wonder whether wearing certain kinds of clothes, or speaking a certain way, or behaving toward authorities a certain way is just as indicative of "success" as crazy parenting. Hell, maybe successful kids have parents who tend to read the NY Times!
1
The somewhat ill-named authoritative parent s merely someone reasonable and linking this to an apologia for the present obscene system of inequality with a sense of approval is just the NYT continuing its role as a primer for the upward mobile.
5
Is this news? Of course we see better parenting results from parents who are willing and able to offer their children more opportunities - more homework help, more swimming lessons, more violin classes, more debate trips, more one-on-one time, more words as babies, more books as teenagers. This doesn't mean you can't also offer your kid more time outside and more independence: a kid can run around freely for an hour AND have time for piano on Tuesdays and soccer on Thursdays. But there is a really pernicious privilege at work here. Even the best parent won't let the kid run around outside if the neighborhood is unsafe, and even the most committed parent won't pay for study trips, schools, or extracurriculars she can't afford. It's not ALL about money, of course: you could hire a tutor, but if you can manage to find three hours a week (and if you know or teach yourself physics), you can tutor your own kid and he'll get some of the benefits. You can send your kids to elite sports camps, or you can do some of that work by practicing with her daily. Good parents of all social and economic classes can take something from this study. But the millionaire can take more, because she can offer more. Money makes "good helicoptering" much easier.
200
@Sally but what is your point? That people who can afford it should not offer their children the best, because others may not be able to?
4
@Sally by “better,” you mean a longer list of things parents can offer a child . That’s not my definition of better. The best parents offer love and encouragement, not an endless assortment of extra curricular activities.
10
@Sally
Your comment about tutoring reminded me of the first time I ever tried to teach someone how to ski. I had been a fairly successful collegiate tutor by this point. It's not like I was new to teaching. I certainly knew the sport I was teaching. Sometimes though, the person you're teaching just doesn't want to hear it from you. Best leave these things to professionals every now and then. Especially with family.
By the very nature of the relationship, there are limits to how much parents are capable of influencing children. You should keep that in mind.
8
I find this article to be extremely irresponsible. Our son went to a private school through the 6th grade only because the local public school was part of the city's political machine and was actually dangerous.
The private school was filled with pill popping helicopter parents, mothers who couldn't allow a chip on their manicures, fathers who worked 14-16 hour days and children who were constantly exhausted, anxious, exhibiting signs of eating disorders and doing a lot of acting out. One little boy was wakened by his parents every morning at 4:00 am to recite French poetry and practice his oil painting. These were both extracurricular to the very difficult school they were attending. Now, at age 30, he has not seen his parents in years. He went to Columbia, graduated and now runs his own website. He is not happy. Helicopter parenting, which I've witnessed over and over again, may get kids into good schools and raise their net worth, but the personal cost is astronomical. I have no idea who these researchers are but they should take a look at my town. I absolutely do no trust these results. She should have backed up her "data" with other sources.
631
@Joanna Stelling The researchers are economists, so obviously the only metrics they care about are financial/socioeconomic in nature. What a miserably reductionist caricature of the notion of happiness, and of what is meant by "a life well spent." Gandhi and Mother Teresa were probably complete failures according to them.
106
@Joanna Stelling
" I absolutely do no trust these results."
Unless, Joanna, you can come up with a better set of data, this is the best we have.
Not trusting the best available data = willful ignorance.
10
@Joanna Stelling
thank you. exactly. as as @somebody points out Ms. Druckerman quotes metrics researchers. Nothing to do with humanity or quality of life. Taking Xanax, Ambien, and ADD drugs might also help you earn more money. I have numerous patients whose lives involve just that--Valium in the a.m., Xanax at lunch, Ambien at night, and Zoloft or Gabapentin on a daily basis. And they earn in the 6 figures. What's wrong with that picture?
64
I recall all too well when my mother would call me every single day when I was away at college. We were always extremely close, but suddenly my life became almost overwhelming. I resented her "intrusion" and felt like I was being hounded on a daily basis. I felt that I didn't need anyone to tell me what to do.
Finally one day I yelled at her to back off and allow me to live my life. I broke her heart. I was a complete and total jerk and self- absorbed college freshman brat who knew everything. HA! What a joke.
After a few weeks, I began calling her. . . every couple of days . . . just to check in and tell her how my day was going. She was incredibly kind, loving, supportive, forgiving . . . the mother she always was. She told me we both learned a valuable lesson - when to listen and how to appreciate one's space and privacy.
Our relationship and friendship was stronger than ever.
Hovering and helicoptering can be useful and important as long as extremes and smothering don't end up suffocating the relationship.
175
@Marge Keller: Your mom was probably working through her own empty nest situation and not thinking how she was affecting you. It's good that you both got past this, but not surprising if you were already close. People can forgive a lot of hurt feelings when they love and know they are loved.
29
@Laura
Thanks for your kind comment. What I was always most grateful for was that this hiccup in our relationship was resolved because four years later, my mother died from lung cancer. If I had never patched up and resolved that hiccup, I would be living a life of deep regret and guilt. It's never too late to say I'm sorry, I made a mistake, I love you.
41
@Marge Keller
Or worse - suffocating a child's sense of autonomy and agency.
8
Super article. Minor editorial quibble, in the interests of turning down the temperature and depolarizing debate - while the research is explained with appropriate caveats, there is an introductory sentence that says "But new research shows..." As the article later makes clear, this kind of research can suggest - it cannot show. I'd also note that the 1970s hands-off parenting was also driven, in some circles (*cough*) by the parents having found new social permission to "do their own thing" and sometimes ignoring the kids was a somewhat self-serving way to buy into a more general social climate. These complicating factors are one reason this type of research cannot produce timeless proofs. All that said, very interesting column!
79
@Barbara
Yes, and readers of John Updike may understand this. Updike did comment along the lines of saying that parents having (and communicating) high expectations of their children would be admirable. I am reminded of Barack Obama telling his daughter Malia, when she received a B+ in high school and told him it was a good grade, that it was not a good grade from the perspective of their family.
3
My mother was a helicopter parent back in the late 70s and early 80s. My father backed her up. Her efforts backfired terribly. I was in very competitive public schools in northern Delaware filled with the children of scientists and bankers working for DuPont, credit card companies, etc. My parents were scientists at DuPont. My mother put an incredible amount of academic pressure on me and never let up no matter what. I was also bullied and shunned in school for not fitting in. My schools were filled with Brett Kavanaugh wanna-be’s. However, my mother was solely focused on my academic performance. I felt like a performing seal. I was one of 20 Merit Scholarship semifinalists and one of four finalists at my high school; the other high schools had similar numbers of high test-scoring students.
I made two suicide attempts when I was 18. I now live with Complex PTSD. I can’t work because my sleep deprivation is is so bad. I’m not talking to my mother because of her intrusive, controlling behavior. I refused to visit my father before he died.
Just remember this, helicopter parents. You do not own your children. If you want to maintain a good relationship with them, don’t push them so hard they can’t even get their basic biological needs met. As soon as they can get away from you, they will.
900
@Lisa Huntington
In no way do I mean to diminish your pain and suffering. It is possible your parents merely exacerbated a condition that is common among the gifted and more acute in the profoundly gifted. I'm a G&T consultant.
GTs tend towards numerous overexcitabilities. They tend to manifest in any or all our senses. More than half of the students on my caseload suffer from social anxiety and hyper sensitivities of one or more of the 5 senses.
I hope you find some peace and joy with the other "hopeless boobs hurtling through space." --Douglass Adams
57
@Lisa Huntington
"Just remember this, helicopter parents. You do not own your children. If you want to maintain a good relationship with them, don’t push them so hard they can’t even get their basic biological needs met. As soon as they can get away from you, they will."
Thank you, Lisa. We're well aware of this, we had very involved, sensible, and wise parents.
30
@al
How brave of Lisa Huntington to submit this comment. And how mean=spirited of those who reply by picking at it.
122
This article doesn't really actually respond to the criticism of helicopter parenting that it leaves kids unable to cope on their own.
It points out convincingly that helicoptering leads to higher test scores and to greater rates of college and post-graduate completion, with a likely attendant earnings bonus.
But there's nothing mutually exclusive between that and having raised kids who can't cope on their own. It may well be that helicoptering is financially rewarding AND emotionally stunting. An obedient worker bee who delivers on all his expectations may be financially successful despite having serious emotional problems that may impair his ability to be happy over the long term in other areas of his life. Few people would say the measure of someone's success as a human being is solely or even primarily determined by the size of his pay package at age 35.
239
@A
There was some discussion of these points but regrettably toward the end of the article.
3
@A Agreed. The headline and text are a poor match, and only feeble attempts were made to differentiate between helicoptering and simply being attentive to children's needs and interests.
11
@A Children who cannot cope is not an inevitable result of helicopter/tiger parenting. In many cases, it leads to a disciplined adult who can complete tasks, achieve goals, and lead a fulfilling, successful life.
3
I still think the way I was raised from the late 40s to the 60s, which was lots of unsupervised free time, self regulated games of football, baseball, etc., riding bikes to great distances, and walking everywhere encouraged creativity, imagination, independence, solid development of skills, and the social skills of collaboration, negotiation, and conflict resolution. Of course my parents attended our music performances, read to us, talked to us about everything under the sun every dinner time, provided clothing, 3 meals a day, and were interested in our academic progress. But they didn't hover, and I think we all grew up the better for it.
9
hyper-involved parenting is not the same as authoritative parenting. And I'm not sure what this has to do with the Texas couple who wanted to get their kid into a good pre-school-- that tells us nothing about whether they helicopter and micromanage their kid at home or whether they are authoritarian or authoritative. There might be a strong correlation between helicopter parents and those who want their kids to go to good schools, but its not the same thing.
6
I detect a difference between my definition of "helicopter parent" and the definition in the article.
A helicopter parent in my experience is the person whom colleges and universities need to block from constantly meddling in their kids' interactions with professors and administrators, as they continue to take on responsiblity for things that by college ought to be borne in the majority of cases by the kids themselves.
Perhaps this begins in high school when parents intercede to prevent their children from bearing the accountablility that goes with making bad decisions.
Whatever, it is NOT the kind of parenting described in this article. It is not defined by the relationship between the parent and the child (as posited here) but in the relationship between the parent and those in the outside world that the child interacts with. It has to do with defending the child against any negative consequences that might come from giving them responsibility and accountability.
Both of which seem to me to be necessary to grow up to be a well functioning adult.
159
@Thomas
You are spot on of what I consider helicopter parents, namely meddling in their children's affairs at a time they are old enough to speak for themselves.
16
@Thomas,
As with any new term, the definition ranges along a continuum. Some helicopter parents will show up in the college library to do research for their children, but not that many.
My youngest daughter suggested that I was a helicopter parent, but then she recalled that when she was 8 that she came home to an empty house.
I then stated my long-held opinion that a single parent cannot "spoil" her children--or, in today's vernacular, cannot be a helicopter parent.
Nevertheless, my youngest did get a graduate degree and earns more than I do.
And sometimes when she emailed me at 1 a.m. from college to get the full-text of an academic journal article, I did.
Some helicopters are just on standby.
8
@Lone Poster
I was charmed by "And sometimes when she emailed me at 1 a.m. from college to get the full-text of an academic journal article, I did. Some helicopters are just on standby."
5
This article misunderstands the term "helicopter parenting". Helicopter parenting is when you frequently hang close by so you can shield your kids from difficulties, preventing them from developing a sense of personal responsibility or independence or learning how to cope with and solve problems on their own. That's much different from using money as a means to give them an advantage, or setting high expectations for your kids and being engaged in their lives.
11
I don't think we share the same definition of "helicopter parenting." Getting your kid into elite schools alone is not helicoptering. Showing up to class with your child, or calling the college president to chat about your student's choice of a major, are examples of helicopter parenting. There has to be some unnecessary and selfish hovering involved.
8
From the article: "The most effective parents, according to the authors, are “authoritative.” They use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them. Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence..."
That is not helicoptering! Helicoptering doesn't foster independence and problem-solving. Helicoptering is micromanaging, not allowing the child to fall/fail.
My peers - self included - raised by traditional "authoritative" parents were told to hit the books, don't mess around, do your chores, pick yourself up when you fall down, etc. with varying degrees of loving tenderness depending on the household. We are largely independent, "successful" (NOT measured in income), content adults. Our contemporaries reared by helicopters (though not nearly as prevalent 35 years ago) tend toward anxiety, self-doubt, and upset.
Children who are raised with consistent discipline and expectation mixed with a healthy dose of affection tend to do well. It is a formula that has worked for hundreds of years. Children who are hovered over and pecked at - both overly praised and overly chastised - often emerge into adulthood scared and confused, lacking the confidence that they can navigate the world solo.
503
@Golf Widow: VERY well said! Thank you.
16
@Golf Widow,
I agree. I am not in the least bit a helicopter parent- my child applied to colleges all on her own, I just did the financial aid bit. she only showed me what she wanted to and when she wanted my input- about 5% of the total.
however, I think I am an authoritative parent though for only three things that matter most to me: health, safety and education. I make sure she has time and resources she needs and then get out of the way. she has a lot of freedom but also expectations and responsibilities that go with it. it's a winning formula, she is very successful but has agency and is not over-stressed. and has enough free time to enjoy things she wants to do- alone or with friends.
6
@Golf Widow
Agree! From this article, I'm not quite sure how the authors of the book (and the article) equate helicopter parenting with authoritative parenting. I suppose it's possible to be both, but all the parents I know who work from an "authoritative" stance would be described as anything but helicopter parents. And there are lots of people who would likely be described as helicopter parents who favor a permissive or authoritarian stance. Conflating these categories is confusing and does everyone (especially kids) a disservice. Especially when this was on the top of the NYTimes trending list today. From my perspective as a teacher, educational researcher and mom, the last thing we need is a misleading headline trumpeting that helicopter parenting "works" when the logic behind this conclusion is so flawed (in more ways than described in my comment here)
19
The author of the article seems to be conflating different categorizations of parenting: helicopter vs free range, and authoritarian vs authoritative vs permissive. You can be a helicopter parent and be either authoritarian OR authoritative. Which means that some of those helicopter-parented students may well be getting those degrees, but they are not happy and well-adjusted kids.
6
This fails to explain how authoritative parenting and helicopter parenting are the same/correlated, and points to positive outcomes described as being correlated with authoritative (but not explicitly helicopter) parenting. I might buy it with more explanation, but this doesn't connect the dots.
2
I never considered effective and engaged parenting as the same thing as Helicopter parenting.
255
@Dmh Unfortunately I have met many who do.
6
"The most effective parents, according to the authors, are “authoritative.” They use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them."
Poor choice of words and it will energize commenters bashing parents for trying to "persuade" toddlers to stop hitting a playmate rather than stopping the behavior.
I consider myself an consummate authoritative parent and I rarely attempt to "persuade" a child to do anything. It's far easier to demonstrate correct behavior and reward it in my child, and to give lots of opportunities for either good or if nothing else, neutral choices. If a bad choice appears imminent I jump in and redirect.
Persuasion is a waste of words for kids. They are very good at tuning out parents once they're school aged.
1
As a newer parent, I agree with you. I’m disheartened that a playmate who is a few months older than my toddler (2 and 17 months, respectively) is simply told to “be gentle” when pawing my son and even pushing him around (once backwards onto his back). The child doesn’t need a suggestion— she needs correction. After providing it myself and having to jump in to prevent injuries, I’ve decided I don’t want to parent someone else’s child. Luckily we have other playmates who aren’t so intent on physical domination!
It's called robbing of agency - as in robbing your children of the capacity to know what self-reliance and confidence and initiative feel like and how to take ownership of one's movement through life. Children need to take risks. Parents need to occasionally find themselves entirely in the dark regarding the risks their children are taking at a particular moment in time. This is how both children and parents grow.
5
If parental goals for their children include and even emphasize getting ahead of other children, social status, and elite institutions, of course helicopter parenting works and always has. If one only want to remain within or join the ruling class, of course. But if one cares more about everyone's children (which would include one's own and the world of one's own) thriving in a difficult world, helicopter parenting creates an unequal society, appalling mothers and fathers, neurotic children, and schools that are left to cater to the helicopter pilots and passengers and leave the pedestrians behind. "It works" really needs to be questioned. As in, it works HOW and DOES WHAT? This generation of accomplished children cannot separate from their clinging mothers. (OK. I'll say it: mothers.) The rise in mental illness among helicopter children is not addressed here. Educators everywhere have noticed it. Turning everyone into an immigrant striver is not the answer. A compassionate world with more equality is.
4
@mary
re: the rise in mental illness.
What rise? In the past, kids were (1) not as medicated (OK. I'll say it: boys) and (2) not as exposed to the therapy industry that seeks to monetize every person, every kid and every family. I recently read one "child therapist" claim every in America could benefit from kid therapy. Really? Hmmm, let's see who would be the biggest proponent of that...@$125 - $150/hour. Many public schools now not only have a nurse on staff but also psychologist/social worker. That's what is nuts, not the kids.
No-one cares more about a child than his/her parents.
Inequality is so high, and most people are struggling to live from paycheck to paycheck.
Equal opportunity is a myth, and it's only getting worse.
No wonder parents put so much effort into a moonshot landing into the middle class for their children.
2
Such parents are basically destroying the society and the world in which the kid would live most part of his/her life.
That's one of the reasons why leadership in politics and corporate America, including in American universities, is becoming a rare thing of the past. Now morons and idiots are more desperate to buying ceremonial degrees like MBA or joining those "leadership courses" in hordes. Yet, the society they live and even the company or division/project they manage/lead would not be doing that great. Overwhelming majority of them behave more like docile servants for the rich master(s) than a leader.
5
If you are doing your child's homework, you are not being a parent. You are helicoptering. This article is a mess.
7
We were not authoritative parents by design, but our oldest child was profoundly handicapped and intellectually disabled. I think partly because of this our younger children had to be better able to be resourceful on their own and help to solve problems related to their older sister. In any case, they do both have graduate degrees.
Before this discussion can occur we should reach a shared definition of what "success" means. I think that is probably impossible. For helicopter parents, success is getting their kids into the best universities and watching them rise to the top in the highest income professions.
For a minority of us, success means watching our children learn about the world and how it works while leaving them room to discover on their own. We hope is that they will find fulfilling work in a profession that works for greater goals than profits. We are certain we are right.
9
Not that long ago, Pamela Druckerman supposedly read a book on the Dutch parenting style, if such a thing exists. The book The Happiest Kids in the World: Bringing up Children the Dutch Way, written by 2 expats (an American and British woman) who are married to Dutch men celebrates a laid-back style of parenting. Druckerman welcomed the book as: “An eye-opening and badly-needed dose of perspective.” And even added to that: “In my next life, I want to be Dutch.”
Druckerman makes a living from the pen. But I can understand why she wrote this particular column. Success is everything, content and quality are of secondary importance if of any importance at all, whether it comes to the lives of children or her books or columns.
3
One can be involved, provide one’s kids with educational and extracurricular opportunities, and insist on high standards (keeping in mind their abilities and interests) without engaging in an obsessive, micromanaging, boundary-challenged overparenting ego trip.
It’s the latter that is the problem, going from supporting your kid to making them an extension of yourself. No, “we” don’t have a report due on Tuesday. Not good for the kid and not good for the parent either.
5
This reminds me of teaching days in public school (all minority classes) who maintained my children had an unfair advantage because “white people don't hit their kids.”
Then others said my children were privileged because they came from a two-parent family.
Or because we taught them to read before kindergarten.
Now, not surprisingly, a case will be (further) made that a real, interested parent helps a child through his/her life. How unfair!
Well, gol-lee, as Gomer Pyle used to say.
All that, plus parents who eschew dogmatic religious thinking, makes for a strong, freethinking kid.
Now if they don’t tax us for it, or discriminate against us as privileged, the self evident truth that parenting matters — well, that’ll stay self-evident!
3
@DD Saying that someone is privileged is not actually discrimination. Some of your examples of things people said to you are fairly ridiculous, but I feel pretty confident in saying that if you confuse being called privileged with discrimination, that is pretty much a sign you've been privileged your whole life. People who have been discriminated against aren't going to conflate those two things.
@Jane Smith
How is privilege "corrected?"
Through quotas or affirmative action or other means that, justified though they may be, constitute discrimination.
It's right that colleges seek to bring more minority students into the fold, but doing so necessarily "discriminates" against other, non-favored populations. Just as legacy and athletic positions do.
But to not use the word discrimination is an Orwellian exercise that just frustrates people who know better.
If a student who is the first to go to college in his family gets in when another equally qualified student with college-educated parents does not get in, a socially desirable goal has been achieved. But someone has been discriminated against -- albeit for "higher" purposes -- and the reason is that he was "privileged" to come from a family with college-educated parents.
Privilege doesn't equal discrimination until an action has been taken to correct it. But those corrective actions constitute discrimination. The discomfort people feel when that is pointed out only proves the point.
Click-bait headline to lure us into reading something that offers no real insights. This article does not describe what is commonly understood to be "helicopter parenting" and instead describes what is obviously just "good" parenting, which has good outcomes for kids. Shocking!
For example, no one would ever argue against the idea of parents teaching their kids good problem-solving skills...
7
Can’t agree more...
Let's abolish private schools so that the children of the rich don't have a better shot at success than the children of the poor.
3
A New Parenting Deal, please.
I'm exhausted.
Helicopter parenting IS authoritarian parenting. I think the author is confused.
2
@LexDad Agree!
I'll let my adult child's therapist know...
Sing this song to the multitudes with a bachelor's or even master's, besieged by student loan debt, who still can't find more than middling, unstable employment. The social and economic bargain implicit in higher education for the past 40 years is changing more rapidly than any parenting strategy focused on it as an object of attainment can account for. It's an unnecessary fool's errand for parents content to delude themselves with the illusion of perfect control and calibration of their children's lives. There is not that control, for parents.
Is it our job as parents to raise productive little economic soldiers, or well-adjusted human beings that can interact effectively with other human beings? The whole concept of education and employment that we've enjoyed in the post-WWII era is being turned on its head. Maybe getting in to the "right" private nursery, kindergarten, elementary, middle, prep school, college, and graduate school will set them up nicely for that future. Maybe.
5
I worked in higher ed at two state schools and worked with countless students as interns in my department. The kids who came from helicopter parenting had little confidence and trouble navigating the world with their parents no longer there to think for them.
Those that did not come from a helicopter environment were much more curious and asked questions when they needed help figuring something out.
5
I really dislike the term helicopter or authoritative. I think the word should be caring. There have always been caring parents, throughout time, who wish to see their children as well or better settled in life than themselves. It is only in recent times that caring has become such a popular word, it has been associated with ‘hovering’. It is simply common sense that a well cared for child, in terms of nutrition, health, security and love would fare better than a child simply allowed to drift.Take a look at your garden or at the survival rates of any living thing. It has nothing to do with economic strata or the job market. It has everything to do with how self aware a particular parent is and how they view the ‘job’ of parenting. In our country, it is viewed by many cool folks as old fashioned and it spawns many parents who claim they need their own space, time coordinates away from family stress. Perhaps if each person looked into why they were having a kid before having them, all parents would be quite good at raising a productive next generation.
4
@Meena
"There have always been caring parents, throughout time, who wish to see their children as well or better settled in life than themselves." Also, and maybe more to the point, the parents you're calling "caring" are parents who "wish to see their children as well or better settled in life than" other children.
It's easy, and expected for parents to "care" about their own children--they are, in essence, extensions of themselves. To care for unrelated children is more of a stretch. It's especially difficult for a parent to be concerned for children not their own, who for whatever reason, may struggle more to get ahead in life--who don't, that is, get into those exclusive pre-schools "caring" parents will do anything to get their own children into. Like any highly competitive system, the consequences are pretty clear for anyone willing to open their eyes to them: some kids get "ahead," because other kids are left behind.
As Druckerman points out, the parents who "helicopter," are "probably making things even more unequal for the next generation." It's perfectly natural for parents to do everything--and anything--necessary to set their children up well in life. They love their children, for one thing, and then too: their children's success is their success.
I just wouldn't call that "caring." It cheapens the word.
This article focuses on the effectiveness of helicopter parenting on the 'kids', i.e., children, teens in school. It's no surprise it works there. K-12 schoolteachers have been endlessly evaluated over the past years with promotions and pay tied to good evaluations and student 'success'. Add to the equation having to confront irate parents of unsuccessful children and the inevitable results: a 'successful' student emerges from the fray.
Then we're in college with enormous tuition burdens. What parent is going to pay top dollar for student failure. You call the school, you complain, you meet with administrators and...surprise, suprise, another happy turnaround and successful student.
But here's a disheartening statistic. College graduates are getting jobs but they are not able to keep them. They never learned the responsibility and hard work ethics that accompanies adult success. They never grew up.
Helicopter parenting in American society?
It just sounds to me like a combination of nurture over nature philosophy to point of nepotism, sheer gaming to get your child into a better place in life. In other words, it's the opposite phenomenon of what would occur if a society had any integrity, cared really about differences in native talent between individuals, and sought to develop these differences regardless of where, in what family, they would appear. Which is to say if a society were to have integrity it would not view all children as roughly equal and then by a mad nurture over nature competition try to mold these children into "the best", which game results in the wealthy and the most hovering of parents getting the best results, it would do the opposite and try to locate as accurately as possible all the natural human talents which exist, which is to say it would follow nature, would have nurture be founded on a true respect of nature, with result that all these natural talents would flourish regardless of where they originated, in what class or sector of society.
I can't believe helicopter parenting generally works because its upside down, false child rearing. And like all trends toward nepotism has a constricted view of what native ability and talent and nurture and final view, "the best" really is in life. Sure, Nero was good at flute provided he got the lessons and any number of other people even if demonstrating talent were locked out of competition.
The average adult will have to move for their jobs at least 7 times during working years; separating extended families, friends, and forcing the nuclear families of one and two parents and one to three kids to be islands unto themselves. No wonder moms are vigilant. There is no aunt or grandpa to drop in on, no childhood friend or neighbor that has known the family to rely on.
1
A problem with this column is that it uses " helicopter parenting" without much of a definition, including no specificity with regard to tjhe age of the sons and daughters being so parented.
If we associate "helicopter-parenting" with hyper-vigilance, "helicopter-parenting" an infant or toddler might be the difference between life and death.
"Helicopter-parenting" a 17-year-old (and even older college students and young people in the workforce) is another matter entirely.
I think much of the (deserved) criticism of "helicopter parenting" applies to parents' treatment of older adolescents and legal adults.
Ultimately, helicopter parenting teaches kid(s) that they can operate the flight only when parent(s) are present, or the lesson is that the parent should control the flight. Good luck to the kid and everyone else in the helicopter's radar when the parent can't make the flight. Stick with ideal of authoritative parenting...
4
the terms "authoritative," "authoritarian" and "helicopter" parenting are asserted as labels. how, exactly, did researchers identify these different parenting styles?
any reliable educational study would clearly report the statistical methods used to interpret those vague "correlations." for starters, how big a correlation, exactly, and with what size of effect on income or use of condoms? parental education and income appear to have been partialled out in one study -- but how large was the effect of "parenting style" before and after this was done?
this study also assumes that the effect of parenting is a mere "style" freely chosen by any parent. but this excludes the obvious considerations of genetics (intelligence, temperament, health) and marital relations (including divorce) between the parents.
no, these are not picky complaints -- it's essential to clearly summarize the relevant facts rather than throw labels and vague assertions on the page.
journalists are just what they write. editors are what they approve to publish. and it's important for editors to clarify what exactly was researched, what was found, how it was reported, and why it matters. as it stands, and speaking as a social scientist, this article is uninterpretable.
and, editors, please ... do we have to encounter Trump and politics in *everything* we read?
3
This is one of the more destructive articles on parenting I haver read in a long time. The effectiveness of authoritative parenting has been supported by endless research and the concept has been around for at least the last 60-70 years. To conflate helicopter parenting with authoritative parenting is an absurdity, they are almost the opposite of each other. Completely ignored in this article is the powerful component of social class in raising " successful "children. We have learned of the inherent advantages that children born to educated, financially secure, parents living in SAFE neighborhoods automatically have, regardless of parenting styles. We must also ask what is "successful"? Does it only mean getting in the "good" schools and making a lot of money or does it also include being accountable, responsible, compassionate, emotionally competent. Then ask how do you learn the latter components if your parents have been hovering over you and have protected you from learning the consequences of your behavior and your decisions and making the mistakes that may eventually be your most valuable teachers.?
13
@Liesje
Thank you Liesje. Well written. This was a supremely unhelpful article and the headline, misleading. Helicopter parenting may NOT work but authoritative parenting, apparently does. And that requires some clear distinctions. But if the headline itself muddies the issue---then the writer's article becomes pointless. A headline gets you to read the article. But this bait-and-switch business is hardly satisfying. Or honest.
For years I have been reading the articles about helicopter parents, along with the dire warnings. I was never sure whether I was a helicopter parent or not! When I read the articles, and especially the comments, it seems like people have different definitions in their minds of what a helicopter parent is. Is it a person who fosters dependency, or a person who helps their child achieve their dreams?
To me, it sometimes seems that parents can be divided into these two groups: people who can't take the time, and people who go all out to support their kids.
All I can say is that if your child's dream is to go to a selective college and a good grad school, it requires the serious involvement of at least one parent. If that's helicoptering, I plead guilty.
5
@Madeline Conant
It does not require the involvement of at least one parent. It has been done a lot without that.
Here and elsewhere there is understandable emphasis on the effects on the children of "Helicoptering parents". I've seen little on the effects on the parents themselves. What is the result of helicoptering on their own (adult) lives, short and long term? For example, what happens when the nest is empty?
3
Not sure if I was an authoritative parent but I took being a parent seriously and felt that if I and their dad didn't demonstrate healthy behaviors, a willingness to admit to mistakes, a willingness to accept failure and recover and the ability to delight in the good things that happen to ourselves and others- that we were doing our three kids a huge disservice. I grew up in the era of Dr. Spock and I guess the takeway at the time was that parents should rely on their common sense when it came to matters of upbringing.
I talked to my kids, made sure we ate as a family most nights and was interested in their wishes and needs- as I would hope my kids could learn to respect the wishes and needs of others different from themselves.
You can model tolerance, work ethic and health habits until the cows come home-be a "helicopter parent" if that's your cup of tea. But if your kids don't feel respected and then don't respect you- then your efforts might lead to an epic fail. People who feel loved and considered tend to thrive despite whatever the household dynamic.
4
@DH Yes. The best lessons are probably learned at home, on a daily basis; empathy is learned around the dinner table, from parents who exhibit that virtue.
"Dr. Doepke and Dr. Zilibotti can’t prove causality..."
That's a pretty big qualifier. We don't know whether helicopter parenting actually works. Over-parenting is quite probably the effect of all these other economic factors. Anecdotally, I can tell you quite definitively a balance between structured and unstructured leisure time produces perfectly healthy and successful children.
A far more sensible theory is your parenting style doesn't make that much of a difference in the mean. Unless you're extremely skewed to one side of the distribution or the other, you're not going to notice a difference.
What we can reliably suggest is successful parents are more likely to have successful children regardless of their parenting approach. However, successful parents are also more likely to be helicopter parents.
Correlation without causality. The question is why are successful parents more compelled to helicopter? I have a feeling wealthy parents are keeping up with the Jones.
5
"Works" at doing what exactly?
Apparently the entirety(!) of this piece is that one type of parenting makes it more likely for offspring to grasp "winner take all" wealth.
Ms. Druckerman seems oblivious:
1. that this may not be the prime purpose of parenting, or
2. that she makes a decent argument for radical wealth redistribution (not parenting)
5
"So why wouldn’t everyone just become an authoritative parent? "
There are some valid reasons. I have a unique perspective; children from 2 different marriages. I've always been intensively involved in their education. And successfully. Sample size - 3. Yes, I know.
Child #1 - became a National Merit Scholar, graduating from his high school with the highest grade point average in their history. He was not driven; but led, and responded wonderfully. Now a PhD engineer, works internationally.
Child #2 - raised the same way; 3 years younger; lived a bit in the shadow of #1, and since even equaling #1s record was so unlikely, didn't try to. Still did just fine, has an excellent managerial job in medical device development.
Child #3 - absolutely refuses to be led. Under no circumstances does anyone, anywhere, know more, or understand more, than she does.
The child's personality is a critical part of the equation; they do have them, you know; and a very large portion of it is inborn. Since #3 is authority-proof; both her mother and I have started trying the simple directive. "Do this." "Why?" "HA. I'm not explaining anything- and you know it. Tried that, remember? All the wasted hours? "
There have to be hard, real consequences; always a big pain and a lot of energy- but - sometimes, "Do this." works, when the long, loving, clear explanations flat do not.
5
@Greenpa I'm not sure child 3 actually departs from authoritative parenting. That parenting always required boundaries. That child 1 & 2 did not feel the need to press those boundaries was as you say a personality issue.
The point of your directives is not to produce an obedient child to the exclusion of all else but to simply uphold reasonable boundaries. Plenty of authoritative parents do that. (It is the chief difference between them and permissive parents, creation and enforcement of boundaries)
Indeed, adapting one's parenting styles to the child's personality is child led.
1
OK. I read the whole article and never saw "success" defined in any way other than money. The Holy Grail of parenting is college and postgraduate degrees that have a "huge financial payoff?" This father of three says: Not my grail.
My sons are young men now (18, 19 and 20) and it's clear they are all headed for different kinds of success:
The eldest has never done well in school, but leads and loves a tough, physical life. Hunting, fishing, camping. He is going to be a firefighter or EMT.
My middle son is gentle, artistic, empathetic. Looks like he will become a teacher or counselor. He scored high on the ACT but gets middling grades. He'll study, but would rather paint or hang out with friends, just talking. Face to face.
The youngest? Fantastic student. Loves math. Wants to major in economics. Interested in wealth in a way his brothers are not. He'll likely have more money than they. But I doubt he will be happier.
I'm proud of all three.
The keys to successful parenting have nothing to do with helicopters or being "authoritative", whatever that means; who among us is an authority on everything?
Here is what has worked for us:
Have a moral code and set a good example by consistently living up to it. Own up to it when you fail. Work hard. Make it clear that all work is honorable. Honor, especially, humble work and the people who do it. Love your kids unconditionally. Accept them for who they are. Stand back. Watch where they go. Step in only when necessary.
33
Yes, this method produces humans that are more productive in our economic system, but does it produce a higher satisfaction with living? This almost seems to imply conflation between socio-economic "success" and satisfaction/"happiness" in life.
3
Aren't there two types of helicopter parents? One kind bulldozes the way for the kids and makes sure they never ever fail. Those children are to be pitied. The other kind simply takes a strong active interest and plans ahead for the best opportunities. I was raised by the latter type, and I really admire the effort and restraint it required. When done right, it also includes a lot of time for "free range" exploring.
3
Given that there is probably a very high correlation between the education / income level of the parents and helicopter parenting, are we really surprised by this finding? I suspect there has always been a correlation between income / education level of parents and the success of their children, regardless of parenting style.
3
I think the opinion writer wrote that the researchers controlled for parental income levels and saw similar results.
This is predictable in a society where a diminishing few are able to have living-income jobs, homes in tree-lined neighborhoods, and piano lessons for their kids. That's what has to change.
Let there be room for parents to make different choices, confident that their kids will have access to music, art, drama, soccer, health care, college or good job training, and hope.
We're fighting over the bones and it is not pretty.
3
These questions involve what the meaning of life is, and whether adopting a particular meaning is rewarded or punished. For us now, the meaning of life is competing and winning. Losing is unpleasant and unhealthy, a hardscrabble effort to survive until the next paycheck and a constant possibility that some unforeseen event (disease, accident, appliance breakdown) will turn an unsteady order into chaos. Those who do not compete and win are punished.
If our economic and values system enable losers to do better (by, for example, a stronger safety net), then winning is not so necessary or important and we are free to have other priorities if we wish. Those who value winning can still do so, but their values and victories will not dominate society, and the rest of us may decide that they are useful but somewhat nuts, slaves to a compulsion most people will not share or particularly value.
In a free country, people would be free not to worry about success and still have an acceptable life.
2
The problem, which is most evident in sports, but occurs in all other aspects of children's lives are the parents who are willing to throw other children under the bus for even the slightest advantage. Sadly, it appears to work out for them.
4
I often enjoy Pam Druckerman's pieces. This one seemed underdeveloped, though. The piece conflates and simplifies a lot of different ideas and tendencies that really ought not to be conflated.
Is it wrong to show love to your children? No.
Is it wrong to talk with them, engage with them, play with them? No.
Is it wrong to provide them with the best education you can? No.
Is it wrong to give them space to exercise good judgment and independence in increasing amounts, with increasing frequency, and with increasing gravity, as they grow older? No.
Is it wrong to suffocate them? Yes.
Is it wrong to displace their passions by forcing them relentlessly to parrot your own? Yes.
Regardless of their background , does society benefit when you raise your children up well? Yes.
And yes, it so happens that society even benefits from your children's success when your family is relatively well off, and when you have deployed your wealth prudently so as to provide for them well in their growth.
6
"Not all the changes were rational. When some parents learned that talking to toddlers helps to develop their young brains, they began monologuing at them constantly."
How is that not rational? Talking to toddlers is, as you concede, known to be helpful in their development. And the cheapness of talk is a byword.
4
Having the same "education" means little...at every school, there is the top 20% and bottom 20%...in theory, both got the same "education". However, being in honors classes (and surrounded by the brighter more driven students) gives you a different experience than being in the "dumb" classes and barely graduating. At my school (swanky NYC private school), students were put in the A,B, and C divisions...it was even on our schedules!
When you finally do become a parent, you realize how much of your kids makeup is out of your control...one child might be anxious and introverted, the other outgoing and confident. Both raised by same parents, same DNA.
4
This is what "helicopter parents" are all about: The child of 'authoritative' parenting (around age 13) will take challenging courses and deal with the difficulties of learning and with classmates him/herself and perhaps tell the parent(s) about it or not, but will do her/his own problem solving, looking for parental or institutional help when needed. The child of a helicopter parent will not have a chance to do that because a helicopter parent will try to contact the teacher and principal to tell them how great the child is, ask how the child is doing and how important the grade is for the child and then tell the child precisely how everything should be managed to succeed in the class. Helicopter parents don't give their kids a chance. You can have helicopter parents of many stripes. Authoritarian helicopter parents will be there to make sure (Gestapo-like) that all rules are being followed. Permissive parents will force their children to have what the parents consider 'fun' and contact the principal and teacher to make sure their child isn't being over-challenged.
5
The column does not seem to be so much about “helicopter” parenting, but rather just about parenting. Give your kids optimal chances to succeed and they’ll have the best chance in life. No guarantees, but no hovering required either.
4
I like the partial focus on the bad effects of wealth/income inequality in our current society.
But you are glib. You do not quote any statistics at critical junctures. You use the word "seems" in highly portentous ways. You say, rightly, "no causality shown," but then proceed as if the causation was established. After all, of course helicopter parents come disproportionately from wealthy families, and of course these families have higher rates of entry into elite schools, and of course the elite school club hires its own into high-paying jobs. Social club, at least in part, as it was in 1940 and 1960 and so on.
The net effect is emptyness. Your article is empty. How about being authoritative yourself? I wish you well. But this output is noise. It confuses. We need clarity, as one of our political parties has descended into pure mendacity and demagoguery. Our sad GOP? It needs helicoptering.
1
Well, I started reading books on my own by my 4th birthday. I got brainwashed on religious instruction after school 4 days a week from the time I was five.
I was always in special honors programs, graduated from college at 19, law school at 22, and got my PhD at 23.
I'm now a 75 year old atheist. Luckily for me, my parents left me alone.
2
I am a surgeon. My staff and I can spot these helicopter parents in the waiting room and exam room and we shudder. We often joke that there should be a license to have children and that these parents would never be able to pass the exam. There children are spoiled misbehaving, unsociable, temperamental, hysteria prone misfits. We dislike even more their coddling their parents who themselves are intolerant and self serving. So I guess it depends on your definition of success...
5
@Adam Orden thanks for outing yourself. No medical provider should be judging and labelling their patients or patients families in this way.
2
@Adam Orden Wow. You really don't like your job, do you? You show no compassion for your minor patients who might be showing signs of clinical anxiety. And, if we are to assume you are only in the profession for the money, you show total disrespect to your paying customers, the parents.
Really, yours is an incredible response. Perhaps you have been bitten too many times by your non-compliant dental patients?
Commentators, if you care enough to leave a comment here, you ARE a highly involved parent - whether you micromanage the process of your child's growth or not. You care enough to put in tremendous amount of time on your child's growth.
Loosely defined, you ARE a helicopter parent. Why do you feel the urge to attack highly involved parenting???
The opposite, are the parents who gift the kids an iPad or Xbox and let them play by themselves. Or the parents who do not spend much time with kids.
How am I supposed to keep switching parenting styles every time a new study comes out? My poor kid just went through an anti-helicoptering phase and now I’m supposed to go back to helicoptering?! Parents already feel guilty enough - stop messing with our heads.
@CD Smith
You dont have to follow every advise you are given. Make your own judgement about the best parenting style - for you.
People who write about it make their living from giving you advises.
Authoritative doesn't sound at all like helicopter parenting.
1
Wow. Simplistic much? are we factoring in gender? how many siblings, position in chronological order of birth, genetic predispositions. The list goes on and on. And of course the giant red flag: how on Earth can you equate material success and happiness. As far as I'm concerned the gold standard is are my children decent human beings.
2
Terrible article!
The goal of parenting is to help our children have an inner sense of who they are.
Conscious parenting teaches you to be a safe place for your kids to figure themselves out and be active participants in their own childhoods.
Kids aren’t extensions of us, we need to free them from our expectations of who we think they should be. We parents have to re-raise ourselves as we raise our kids by owning our mistakes and modeling curious, empathetic behaviors.
The goal is for our kids to be financially independent, productive, kind, and self-aware.
The world needs more people like this.
IU read the article and then the linked texts. This opinion article systematically misrepresents the findings of those works.
"Authoritative" parents are the most effective parents because they use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them? I don't agree with that or else the author of this article has chosen the wrong word.
Utter rubbish and guessing. I have taught young people for over 32 years. The WORST parents are the helicopter parents - they often over schedule their children, they argue for privilige, they teach their children to be privligded and worst of all focus only on attainment of highly selective colleges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with insisting that your child uphold standards and be accountable - that can teach self-reliance and purpose for any child. What helicopter parenting does is simply train young people to not think for themselves, not to follow the things that bring them real joy and passion in their lives (thus leading to the wrong college and by extention the wrong job and so they become miserable in life).
Young people are meant to learn through failure, critical thinking, and finding joy in trying again and repeating that process often. We need parents to honor their children as individuals who, of course need their wisdom and guidance, but are not out to "forcefully MAKE a successful adult" by pressure and doing things for the child - "Hey parents - leave those kids along" to some measure to BECOME who they are - not fit a mold that might have worked for their parents on some level, but is likely out of date and out of touch in today's quickly changing world.
1
sounds right to me.
parents can act like teachers( authoritative) yet empathetic , concerned that the child gain confidence through learning, and kindness .
1
The most effective parents, according to the authors, are “authoritative.” They use reasoning to persuade kids to do things that are good for them. Instead of strict obedience, they emphasize adaptability, problem-solving and independence — skills that will help their offspring in future workplace situations that we can’t even imagine yet.
Religious people, regardless of their income, are more likely to be authoritarian parents who expect obedience and believe in corporal punishment, the authors found.
Please decide on a definition. Is the study confused about the traits of the "authoritative parent", or is it the writer of the article?
2
I'm sorry I just read this article after lunch. There's a word for helicopter parents and ultimately their children: annoying.
Let's hope they at least vaccinate their prodigies before letting them mingle with potentially inferior beings.
1
What the article describes is not helicopter parenting.
1
This is an opinion article as you have properly identified. The Doepke/Zilibotti study is only one study. The author has correctly reminded us that "Dr. Doepke and Dr. Zilibotti can’t prove causality". It seems educators and parents are skeptical.
1
They’re really going to try to pin inequality on parenting styles? Insane, blinkered and unsupported by the evidence provided.
1
Wait, authoritative parenting is not synonymous with helicopter parenting, which Julie Lythcott-Haims makes clear in her wise book “How to Raise an Adult: Break free from the overparenting trap and prepare your kid for success.” In fact, one is pretty much the antidote to the other. And not to pile on but the author’s final contention is glib to the point of nonsensical.