Peace On That

Black Ambition started a discussion on parenting styles: Natural Growth vs. Mission. He presented the work that one author did on the subject. But here is the premise.

Mission Approach:
In the modern age, the nuclear family arose in large measure to provide the environment for the “family’s great educational mission." It’s the reason for that Mozart or Rafi tape in the morning and that bedtime story at night, for finding out all you can about a teacher in the fall and for Little League in the spring, for all the books, crib mobiles, trips to the museum, and limits on TV. It’s the reason, even, for careful family planning; fewer children, properly spaced, allow parents to focus ample attention on each one. Just about everything that defines middle-class parenting—talking to a child, asking questions, reasoning rather than spanking—consciously aims at education or child development.

Natural Growth Approach:
The child-rearing philosophy among the poor and much of the working class is the “natural growth” approach. Natural-growth believers are fatalists; they do not see their role as shaping the environment so that Little Princes or Princesses will develop their minds and talents, because they assume that these will unfold as they will. The natural growth theory says, as long as a parent provides love, food, and safety, she is doing her job.

The basic premise is that middle-class and rich people undersatand and use the Mission Approach and low income parents use the Natural Growth approach. I disagree with this broad brush the author painted and I like to know what others think. Check it out and put in your comment. I’m especially interested in the thoughts of parents.

But, in the meantime, I saw these pictures on Inciting A Riot’s blog and I connected both topics together. This approach obviously falls under the Natural Growth Approach… but you could easily define it as a Mission approch considering she is trying to keep her son out of jail. What say you.





I ain't mad at her!!!