Instigator / Pro
3
1493
rating
6
debates
33.33%
won
Topic
#4900
Free-range Parenting is More Effective Than Helicopter Parenting
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
0
1
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
Mall
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
7
1469
rating
341
debates
40.91%
won
Description
Definitions:
Free-range parenting: "Free-range parenting is the concept of raising children in the spirit of encouraging them to function independently and with limited parental supervision, in accordance with their age of development and with a reasonable acceptance of realistic personal risks."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-range_parenting
Helicopter parenting: "A helicopter parent is a parent who pays extremely close attention to a child's or children's experiences and problems, particularly at educational institutions. Helicopter parents are so named because, like helicopters, they "hover overhead", overseeing every aspect of their child's life."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_parent
Free-range parenting is better for developing and teaching a child than helicopter parenting.
Round 1
Pro
#1
Many thanks to Mall for accepting this debate, and I hope we can both create an educating and intriguing debate for all
Free-range parenting is more effective than Helicopter parenting.
Free-range parenting is more effective than Helicopter parenting.
For my opener, I will start with the analysis of many studies:
This study analyzed the parenting methods and academic achievement of 192 college students and 121 mothers.
"Children's report of maternal helicopter parenting was related to extrinsic motivation to learn, perfectionistic discrepancy, and avoidance goals for learning, which have been associated with lower academic performance in prior research."
One of the main reasons for helicopter parenting is the belief that it will improve the grades and discipline of the child, however, studies report the opposite of this.
With helicopter parenting, corporal punishment such as spanking and time-out is commonly associated.
"Being punished erodes the parent-child relationship so kids don't want to follow our lead."
Corporal punishment only creates distrustful and aggressive child behavior.
This study analyzed a group 7th-graders for child emotional development.
"WITH CONSIDERABLE-BUT NOT COMPLETE-CONSISTENCY, ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE VARIOUS MORAL DIMENSIONS WAS ASSOCIATED WITH INFREQUENT USE OF POWER ASSERTION AND FREQUENT USE OF INDUCTION AMONG THE MIDDLE-CLASS SAMPLE."
This study found that less assertive parenting had significant relation to better child development in numerous factors.
This study compared child development of 1,338 children a span countries. In every country, more peaceful parenting consistently created substantially healthier and better developed children than those exposed to a harsher parenting.
As for the idea that free-range parenting is a new idea, and it isn't how children were naturally meant to develop:
Parents in the West typically intervene more often to protect children from harm than is typical in small-scale, non-industrial societies... We find that though Tsimane “free-range” parenting is hands-off compared to that found in Western societies, parents nonetheless restrict children’s travel."
Less industrialized societies are typically free-range. It is only with the introduction of a more modern society (such as that in the west) where helicopter parenting begins to emerge.
It is also worth considering internet usage as it is becoming a new important part of life to traverse:
"For most teens, the benefits of social media — fitting in, social learning, self-esteem – outweigh the costs." ... "Social media, used wisely, is not dangerous, and could help teens develop useful job and career skills."
Allowing children to have freedom on internet usage is also found to be beneficial for children in many ways. Of course, we should not give a toddler a phone and let them have at it, but by age 10, a child should be capable of a good degree of critical thinking.
"At this age [12], most adolescents have developed vital skills, such as problem-solving, impulse control, and critical thinking."
This article provides evidence that children should have a phone by at least age 12, however I believe that even a well behaved 10 year old could have a phone.
Con
#2
This is really a case by case operation in response to what is effective with each child.
Some struggle and require the guidance and supervision of care.
Supervision alone doesn't necessarily cause a problem. A child can act or do things on their own while the parents are in the background.
Do you see any problem in that?
There are those with myself included, necessitate a supervision from a progenitor, a legal guardian or mentor. There are those including myself that have warranted such guidance and supervision.
You may have those that are precocious and excel more expedient which are quite conventionally surveyed into the studies that the opposing side has handpicked.
I can do the same and what would we have?
Most likely a stalemate pushing the point again, it's a case by case of what's effective with each individual.
Such as another case where the environment of a child is poor or perilous. The guidance, supervision and protection are more suitable and serve more effective in that case.
Free range care of a parent, their child leaves home where it's located on the rough streets of an inner city, that child may not return back home.
There really is no one size fits all either way.
"Corporal punishment only creates distrustful and aggressive child behavior."
Are you certain this is in all cases?
"Allowing children to have freedom on internet usage is also found to be beneficial for children in many ways. "
What adversities are found with this?
Does this include computer setting/internet browser setting restrictions or not?
"This article provides evidence that children should have a phone by at least age 12, however I believe that even a well behaved 10 year old could have a phone."
This is my point exactly to my position. There's no one size fits to age. You may have children out there that aren't good until 13, 14 or 11 years old. Whichever, it has to be assessed by the parent.
Just the assessment done with determining leaving a child home alone. I understand in at least one state if not others that the minimum age is 8. The age in another state I know of is totally left up to the parents.
So we can read what others have written, studied, researched, surveyed, take them with a grain of salt.
What's going to be most effective is what is best figured by an authority in the situation.
Round 2
Pro
#3
It seems con does not themselves support helicopter parenting, so I question the point of this debate. However, I will respond to a few points made by my opponent.
1. Cherrypicked data?
No. The data that I acquired are the top searches. The overwhelming majority of the research showed support for free-range parenting.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=free-range+parenting+research&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart <--- Here is what appears when searching for "Free-range parenting research" with google's scientific study filter on.
Perhaps inputing "Free-range parenting" created a bias for what I wanted to see. No matter. Let's change the prompt to "Helicopter parenting research."
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11&as_vis=1&q=helicopter+parenting+research&btnG= <--- Same result. Overwhelmingly for free-range.
In fact, the few sources supporting helicopter parenting seemed fallacious in their reasoning:
"Helicopter parenting helps the children to become more successful. In her study, Dr. Lareau observed that middle and upper-class parents were often more structured and interventionist in their children’s lives than the “natural growth” method used by the lower classes. "
This above study suggests that simply because the parents are higher income, they must know better how to teach their children. Any number of other variables (such as their parents being rich) could lead to the child also being rich. In fact, the study does not tell if it helped the child years later.
2. We cannot let children do what they want at all times.
We can look back at the definition of free-range parenting.
"Free-range parenting is the concept of raising children in the spirit of encouraging them to function independently and with limited parental supervision, in accordance with their age of development and with a reasonable acceptance of realistic personal risks."
1. In accordance with their age of development. As their age of development increases, we can increase their liberties. I emphasize development because it is true not all children are equally developed at age 10, however, one can simply delay or accelerate newfound freedoms in accordance.
2. With a reasonable acceptance of reasonable risks. Of course we should not let a children roam the streets once they turn 6 years old... however we could let them leave the house until 11:30 or even 12:00 at age 16.
"Corporal punishment only creates distrustful and aggressive child behavior."Are you certain this is in all cases?
Based on the prior statistics, more likely than not, it is not a good idea.
"Allowing children to have freedom on internet usage is also found to be beneficial for children in many ways. "What adversities are found with this?
It is the burden of instigator to tell the adversities. A salesperson trying to sell does not go on a rant about what benefits their competition offers.
"Does this include computer setting/internet browser setting restrictions or not?"
Of course. This can scale with age, too. Perhaps they get their phone at age 10, they can only use it to call and text family until age 11, safe search is on until age 12, and so on.
"This is my point exactly to my position. There's no one size fits to age. You may have children out there that aren't good until 13, 14 or 11 years old. Whichever, it has to be assessed by the parent. "
Then what is the point of this debate? "Well I agree with you in many scenarios, however, I agree with you to a lesser extent in other scenarios."
I suppose the point of this debate is where on the scale us two lie?
If 'anarchist' Free-range Parenting is a 1/10, and 'North Korea' helicopter parenting is 10/10, where do you lie? I suppose I would be 3/10.
Con
#4
" seems con does not themselves support helicopter parenting, so I question the point of this debate. However, I will respond to a few points made by my opponent."
When you say "seems", it gives me the impression you actually did not grasp in essence what I've said.
When something is a case by case scenario, each of the options can get a supporting vote to be applied.
I did not once make a statement that my position is against what is called helicopter parenting across the board.
Your position as I get it in tandem with the topic, free range parenting as it's called, is more effective. That is the broad generalized format which impresses upon me that you're for it hand downs.
I am not.
I take more of a detailed strategic proactive assessing approach versus a binary simplistic move such as yours.
"No. The data that I acquired are the top searches. The overwhelming majority of the research showed support for free-range parenting."
Does this data involve any surveys of "helicoptering parenting"?
"I emphasize development because it is true not all children are equally developed at age 10, however, one can simply delay or accelerate newfound freedoms in accordance."
Right, it's a case by case approach assessed by the parent of course.
"Based on the prior statistics, more likely than not, it is not a good idea."
The question still remains is it in all cases "corporal punishment" only creates distrustful and aggressive child behavior?
"It is the burden of instigator to tell the adversities. A salesperson trying to sell does not go on a rant about what benefits their competition offers."
Well the salesperson can run the risk of losing a potential sale when that prospect's question to the salesperson is not answered. They fail to persuade, convince or demonstrate how they compete. You can call it a rant. Whatever.
Furthermore to be appropriate in the analogy, the question is directed towards telling me about the downsides of what you're selling, not somebody else's see . Like I said if you don't answer the potential client's questions, you risk losing the sale and the person walking out on you.
A good salesperson or debater can refute anything they're given that could counter them.
Now by you not telling me the adversities to allowing children to have freedom on internet usage , I take it that there are none or you avoid to say honestly on the grounds to avoid refutation.
But then again, you couldn't even honestly say there are none. So I guess there are .
Directs back to my point again about a case by case assessment. Such as assessing the pros and cons of a particular child doing an activity, their behavior, tendencies, self control, maturity, etc.
The child may require full or only partial monitoring. Goes back to a child being left home alone assessing that.
"Of course. This can scale with age, too. Perhaps they get their phone at age 10, they can only use it to call and text family until age 11, safe search is on until age 12, and so on"
Exactly, a case by case approach again.
"Then what is the point of this debate? "Well I agree with you in many scenarios, however, I agree with you to a lesser extent in other scenarios.""
I do thank you for conceding in your agreement. The point is to debate whether "free range parenting" is more effective or not. We're debating "free range parenting " is more effective. That's in the topic, that is your position.
That's a blanket statement. But being that we can establish unique cases that demand different approaches that would be the most effective for each unique individual case, the blanket statement becomes moot , invalid and erroneous.
But that's the statement you made.
"I suppose the point of this debate is where on the scale us two lie?
If 'anarchist' Free-range Parenting is a 1/10, and 'North Korea' helicopter parenting is 10/10, where do you lie? I suppose I would be 3/10."
You're either for "free range parenting " being most effective or not. If now you're trying to dissect and be methodical with this thing applying and adjusting and reapplying and readjusting, that's different than one fixated size applying completely.
If you're for so called one form of parenting being most effective here and another working best there, that's different than saying this particular style here is the most effective.
Round 3
Round 5
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
Pro forfeited
Damn those helicopters
lol
Agreed. It is sad that we have to buy them when in reality they should be free, iknowright?
Perhaps if you don't know what the words mean, you could read the description that helpfully provides the definitions.
We also know that free-range chickens are better than helicopter chickens, whatever may that mean.
Sad day for anti-anarchists. The only healthy child is a free child.