Loading

Attention: Access to DSM-5 resources is currently experiencing issues and we are working with them on a resolution. Learn more

Australian Psychology Society This browser is not supported. Please upgrade your browser.

InPsych 2017 | Vol 39

December | Issue 6

Highlights

Shaping children’s development across the ages

Parenting is one of the most daunting, demanding and challenging tasks that most of us will undertake. Without any training or preparation, and armed only with life experiences and opportunities, or lack thereof, the journey through parenting is fraught. The majority of parents who come to psychologists for assistance do so for the benefit of their children. However, they often come with the preconception that their best efforts will be negatively evaluated and they will be judged as the cause of their child’s emotional and/or behavioural difficulties. Crucially, psychologists need to be aware of the developmental ages and stages of children and the impact of parenting styles and attributes that may optimise child outcomes. They also need to be able to suggest parenting approaches that fit with their child’s emotional, behavioural and personality profile and furthermore, reassure parents that the interaction between parenting and child factors is complex and they can influence outcomes only to a certain extent. Since the relative influence on children’s lives of peers, teachers and other community members increases across the developmental period, the direct influence of parenting on child outcomes into adulthood follows a course of diminishing returns, with the greatest impact occurring in the early infancy and childhood years. Given the impact of cognitive development on the interaction between parents and children, and the necessarily bi-directional nature of the influence of parenting on child development, it is useful to consider the impacts of parenting within each of Piaget’s cognitive developmental stages.

Infancy: 0-2 years

The seminal work of Bowlby (1958, 1973) proposed that the quality of the emotional bond (i.e., attachment) between the infant and a primary carer has a significant, lifelong impact on the child’s socioemotional development. This attachment quality can impact upon relationships with others throughout life, including the quality of relationships with romantic partners and, indeed, one’s own children, through an internal working model (i.e., a cognitive representation of oneself and others that shapes social perceptions). Although research has traditionally focused on mothers, the primary attachment figure need not be female or be a biological parent. Contingent, consistent and responsive parenting encourages secure attachment, and in turn, securely attached children tend to become more capable and resilient adults (Hong & Park, 2012). The parent figure needs to be responsive to the child’s needs for emotional nurturing while encouraging independence, and to be able to repair ruptures in the relationship in a constructive and timely fashion so the child develops confidence to be able to explore its world and to cope with the many challenges it faces. When the child-parent interaction works optimally, a secure attachment forms such that the parent is available as a ‘safe base’ for the child’s engagement in the external world and provides consistent, warm and appropriate responses to the child’s emotional states.

In contrast, parenting that is inconsistent, emotionally unavailable and not congruent with the child’s emotional state is likely to promote development of insecure styles of attachment (for a review of Ainsworth’s attachment styles see Oppenheim & Goldsmith, 2006). Research has consistently associated psychopathology outcomes for children who develop an insecure attachment style (Barlow et al., 2016). It is important to acknowledge that while parents are generally endeavouring to provide the best environments for their children, factors such as parental mental illness (e.g., postnatal depression), lack of social supports and early learning through poor role-modelling of parental behaviours can mitigate against the development of secure childhood attachments. Fortunately, parenting programs aimed at early intervention in the infancy and early childhood period have been demonstrated as effective in moderating the impact of less than optimal early parenting practices (Barlow et al., 2016).

Early childhood: 2-7 years

For children in the preschool years, the major developmental tasks are to develop autonomy and agency, whilst the interplay between the child’s genetic, cognitive, emotional, behavioural and temperament profile challenges his/her parents to shift their parenting behaviours to meet the child’s needs. Parents who have a strong knowledge of the developmental tasks and behaviours of their children across time are able to best meet the challenges of parenting effectively and make adjustments according to the child’s changing needs. These adjustments in parenting according to the individual needs of each child within a family may, in part, help to explain multifinality (i.e., the developmental outcomes for children living within the same home environment with similar early experiences, are different). Parents at this stage of development are helping their children develop skills in communication, gross and fine motor skills, problem-solving and moral reasoning, increasing independence and self-confidence by assisting them to approach and cope with novel situations, and master self-regulation (e.g., toilet training, sleeping, eating).

Later childhood: 7-12 years

The primary school years herald an increase in other determinants of child outcomes, including the influence of peers, school and community and the interplay between the child’s developing esteem and his/her experiences. Educational, physical and social achievement beyond the realm of family is the cornerstone of this phase of development. However, intensive parenting including enrolment in extracurricular activities, does not improve child developmental outcomes (Schiffrin et al., 2015). Some children are temperamentally more vulnerable to suboptimal parenting practices than others. However, encouragingly, The Australian Temperament Project has provided longitudinal data indicating that parents usually shift their parenting behaviour to accommodate their child’s temperament offering protection for the majority of children (Smart, 2007).

Youth: 13-25 years

Perhaps one of the most challenging periods in the changing dynamic between children and their parents occurs during adolescence. The child’s strong push towards individuation from parents coupled with the parent’s responsibility to guide their youth through an ‘apprenticeship’ in life (including academic, social, emotional and physical challenges) makes this stage one in which ruptures often occur. Strong, secure, relationships between parents and their adolescents can withstand the turmoil inherent in this phase and contribute to the emotional resilience and ultimately the mental health of the young person. Outcomes for adolescents who are temperamentally vulnerable (i.e., high reactivity and/or low self-regulation) or who have a high bio-behavioural risk (e.g., for hostility, substance addiction) are worst for those with difficulties in the parent-child relationship and suboptimal parenting (Kochanska et al., 2015; Smart, 2007). It is important, therefore, to assist parents to identify vulnerable adolescents and shift the dynamic in the parent-adolescent relationship to improve child outcomes. Effective communication in this stage of the relationship between the young person and the parent is crucial as it moves into a more adult attachment and paves the way for an adaptive transition to adulthood. Encouraging parents not to abdicate their role at this crucial stage (even though the returns for their efforts are diminishing) involves psycho-education about the young person’s development and parenting communication and behaviours that can best meet the challenges they face.

Parenting styles and behaviours

Global assessment of parenting styles (Ballantine, 2001) can be assessed as: ‘authoritarian’ where the parent demands compliance with their own rules, shows no understanding or regard for the child’s internal states or perspective, and allows no room for negotiation or explanation for their rule; ‘authoritative’ or a consultative style of parenting where the parent insists on family and community involvement but provides a clear rationale and encourages collaborative problem-solving and planning; ‘permissive’ where the parent over-empowers the child to lead decisions, often in developmentally inappropriate situations (e.g., deciding to stay home from school); or ‘uninvolved’ parenting or neglect where the parent disengages from the child, often because of competing self-interests (e.g., substance abuse and some of the more problematic behaviours associated with technology/mobile phone use). The parenting literature points to the parenting styles at the extremes (authoritarian and permissive) as being the most disruptive for child development outcomes. From a clinical perspective, a more helpful approach is to operationalise and assess parent behaviours such as warmth, hostility, inductive reasoning, consistency, overprotection and self-efficacy (Lucas et al., 2010) across each developmental stage.

Perhaps the most fundamental question to consider is whether a parent has the capacity for empathy (to actively seek out an understanding of their child’s feelings and perspective) and to be ready to respond warmly and constructively. This includes the willingness for deference of his/her own desires in preference for the child’s developmental needs (e.g., choosing to watch the child’s soccer team play rather than have an ‘adults only’ lunch with friends) and to be motivated to learn about the developmental needs of their child at each stage of development and to adjust parenting practices to better meet those needs. Active involvement of the parent in the child’s life with their friends, school, community groups and activities builds confidence, independence and resilience and a strong parent-child connection. It is this ongoing connection that young people turn to for guidance, support and friendship throughout life. It is critical for psychologists working with parents and/or their children where relationships are strained/challenged to emphasise that positive outcomes can be achieved at any stage of the developmental pathway, including into adulthood, if there remains a willingness to engage.

The author can be contacted at [email protected]

  1. Dr Lisa Negri is a clinical psychologist, expert in child, adolescent and family psychology, and Director of Negri Psychological Consulting, Kew, Victoria

References

  • Ballantine, J. (2001). Raising competent kids: The authoritative parenting style. Childhood Education78(1), 46-47.
  • Barlow, J., Schrader-McMillan, A., Axford, N., Wrigley, Z., Sonthalia, S., Wilkinson, T., …& Coad, J. (2016). Review: Attachment and attachment-related outcomes in preschool children – a review of recent evidence. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 21(1), 1–20.
  • Bowlby, J. (1958). The nature of the child’s tie to his mother. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 39, 350-371.
  • Bowlby, J. (1973). Separation. New York: Basic Books.
  • Hong, Y. R., Park, J. S.  (2012). Impact of attachment, temperament and parenting on human development. Korean Journal of Paediatrics55(12), 449-54.
  • Kochanska, G., Boldt, L. J., Kim, S., Eun Yoon, J., & Philibert, R. (2015). Developmental interplay between children’s biobehavioral risk and the parenting environment from toddler to early school age: Prediction of socialization outcomes in preadolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 27, 775–790.
  • Lucas, N., Nicholson, J. M., & Maguire, B. (2010). The longitudinal study of Australian children annual statistical report. Canberra: Australian Government, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
  • Oppenheim, D., & Goldsmith, D. R. (2006). Attachment theory in clinical work with children: Bridging the gap between research and practice. New York: Guilford. 
  • Schiffrin, H. H., Godfrey, H., Liss, M., & Erchull, M.J. (2015). Intensive parenting: Does it have the desired impact on child outcomes?  Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 2322–2331.
  • Smart, D. (2007). Tailoring parenting to fit the child.  Australian Institute of Family Studies41834-2434.

Disclaimer: Published in InPsych on December 2017. The APS aims to ensure that information published in InPsych is current and accurate at the time of publication. Changes after publication may affect the accuracy of this information. Readers are responsible for ascertaining the currency and completeness of information they rely on, which is particularly important for government initiatives, legislation or best-practice principles which are open to amendment. The information provided in InPsych does not replace obtaining appropriate professional and/or legal advice.