惠婧 1900018105, section 1
万易 1900018106, section 2
An outline of “On the Failure of Authoritarian Parenting”
Thesis: The authoritarian parenting style should not be adopted by Chinese parents today, for
studies indicate that it harms children’s psyche, hinders their growth, and results in maladjustment.
I. Introduction: an increasing number of Chinese parents are inclined to adopt the authoritarian
parenting style without realizing its harm. (para.1)
II. The definition of authoritarian parenting: its focus and negligence. (para.2)
III. The harm of authoritarian parenting revealed in researches: (para.3)
A. Zhang’s research: maladjustment.
B. Eisenberg’s research: low EC, emotion fragility.
IV. The case of authoritarian parenting and authoritative parenting leading to different outcomes is
a typical application of the marginal effect. (para. 4)
V. The authoritarian parenting mode hinders children’s growth in both emotional and behavioral
aspects. (para. 5)
C. On the one hand, it makes them emotionally unstable.
D. On the other hand, it leads to either tension or lack of momentum, depriving children of
their motivation.
E. Emotional instability and behavioral inability intertwine with each other, forming a vicious
circle.
VI. Opposition: Amy Chua’s case. A single successful case does not deny the high probability of
children’s maladjustment. (para. 6)
VII. Development: the essence of parenting—independence and individuality matter, not the
fulfillment of certain expectations. (para. 7)
VIII. Conclusion: authoritarian parenting is harmful to children’s growth, so it should not be
adopted by Chinese parents. (Para. 8)
Jing, Hui & Yi, Wan
Professor Liu Lu
The English Department
31 May 2021
On the Failure of Authoritarian Parenting
Recently, a group of feverish parents went viral on the internet. In the past 30 days, they
have been mentioned 151 times by a major weekly in social media, which indicates that the
authoritarian parenting style is identified by more people. These parents enforce their wills on the
children without realizing the negative impacts. The authoritarian parenting style should not be
adopted by Chinese parents today, for studies indicate that it harms children’s psyche, hinders their
growth, and results in maladjustment.
Although these over-zealous parents have been coercing their children for only a few years,
the parental mindset that underlies this coercion is not new. Authoritarian parenting, first proposed
by Baumrind, denotes the phenomenon that parents emphasize obedience and attempt to shape
children’s behavior by punitive methods. Unlike authoritative parents who also have high demands
for children, authoritarian parents pay little attention to nurturing children’s individuality,
confidence, or self-regulation. They discard instructive conversations, but decide for their children
and compel them to act according to their wills. When they provide explanations for their orders,
they usually appeal to emotions or jump on the bandwagon instead of offering logical reasons.
(Zhang W. et al.)
The negative influences of this parenting style are revealed in studies. Wenxin Zhang’s team
research shows that children under the authoritarian parenting style perform worst in their overall
1
The data, as of May 31, 2021, is collected from the Wechat Official Account of New Weekly.
adjustment. Children behave more problematically, demonstrating a lack of social and academic
competence, low level of self-esteem, and poor familial relationships, because their parents offer
little room for independence and treat them harshly (Zhang W. et al.). Eisenberg’s team further
finds out that children under authoritarian parenting exhibit less effortful control and ego resilience,
which means that they have numerous problems and extreme difficulties in dealing with their
emotions. Consequently, their self-discipline becomes weaker, for they do not have the ability to
prevent their feelings from disturbing their interactions with the outside world.
From Zhang’s and Eisenberg’s studies we can see that authoritarian parenting results in
maladjustment, which is a typical application of the marginal effect (Zhao): though a certain degree
of guidance motivates the children to work harder, when the guidance becomes excessive and turns
into control, negative effects start to emerge. Essentially speaking, the line between the two modes
is drawn by the influence on the psyche: while authoritative parents provide the children with
abundant warmth and responsiveness, authoritarian parents behave much worse in this aspect due to
their adoption of coercive disciplinary strategies (Ren et Edwards 617).
The damage brought by the authoritarian mode manifests itself in two aspects: children’s
emotional instability and their behavioral inability. For the former, a study reveals that coercive
parenting produces affective over-arousal which compromises children’s attentional capacities
(Eisenberg 459): they are less capable of mastering their emotions. For the latter, authoritarian
parents tend to constantly push their children towards particular goals without leaving them the
slightest opportunity to relax, making their nerves eventually losing elasticity and giving rise to
either tension or lack of impetus (Chen). Moreover, these parents, who assume to be wiser and
superior, decide everything for their children, leading to their over-dependence and the vanishing of
internal motivation (Zhao). Additionally, these two dimensions intertwine with each other, forming
a vicious circle: the more emotionally unstable children are, the less able they are to prevent their
feelings from affecting their practice; consequently, the harder life strikes them, and eventually the
deeper they are dragged into the abyss of emotions. What’s worse is their parents’ role in this chain
effect: the more parents coerce, the heavier children’s burdens are, and the worse their behavior
becomes; in return, with their expectations unfulfilled, parents tend to press their children harder.
Yet oppositions defending authoritarian parenting may arise. Many people present the case
of Amy Chua—the famous “tiger mom” who coercively raises two girls with dazzling academic
performance and exceptional musical talents, arguing that authoritarian parenting can result in
children’s success without ruining their psyche. But this single successful case cannot deny the
many other cases where tragedies happen: a ten-year-old boy was pushed so hard by his parents that
he exhibited symptoms of hysteria (‘“How Come You Get Only 99.5’”); an Asian girl, as well as a
Chinese actress, gradually lost the ability to socialize under her parents ’authoritarian control
(Zhang L.; “The Control of Zhu’s Mother”). Thus, we may conclude that authoritarian parenting is
more likely to lead to children’s maladjustment than to their well-being.
At its core, this controversy is about the essence of parenting. When duplication of the ideal
takes the place of cultivation of a unique being, parenting becomes a vacant shell. Gopnik sharply
poses the question of “why be a parent” and insightfully answers that it is not worthwhile for “some
particular outcome in the future” or the creation of “a particular kind of adult”; instead, it is
cherished because it “allows a new kind of human being to come into the world” (Gopnik 194).
Indeed, for children, the growth into adulthood means the acquiring of an independent self; thence,
for parents, their responsibility is to assist their children in the development of individuality, which
can only be achieved when certain liberty is granted.
Chua may have won by a fluke, yet in most cases, the authoritarian parenting mode distorts
children’s psyche, hinders the sound development of their personality, and denies them the chance
of becoming an individual of character. Parental authority can only be beneficial when it ultimately
leaves the children to their discretion, for at the end of the day, these adults-to-be ought to decide
for themselves.
Works Cited
Baumrind, D. “Child Care Practices Anteceding Three Patterns of Preschool Behavior.” Genetic
Psychology Monographs, 75 (1967): pp. 43–88. Print.
Chen, Mo. “Top 10 Reasons for Young People's ‘Weak Sense of Reality’”, 14 Apr., 2021,
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FDZfPjSgXoEDPh6Ohndi5A. Accessed 31 May, 2021.
Eisenberg, N., et al. “Relations of Parenting Style to Chinese Children's Effortful Control, Ego
Resilience, and Maladjustment.” Dev Psychopathol 21(2) (2009): pp. 455-77. Print.
Gopnik, Alison. The Gardener and the Carpenter: What the New Science of Child Development
Tells Us about the Relationship between Parents and Children. New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 2016. Print.
‘“How Come You Get Only 99.5’: 10-Year-Old Boy Was Coerced to Hysteria.” The Paper. 25
May, 2021. https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_12839682. Accessed 31 May, 2021.
Ren, L., and Carolyn P. Edwards. “Pathways of Influence: Chinese Parents ’Expectations, Parenting
Styles, and Child Social Competence.” Faculty Publications, Department of Child, Youth, and
Family Studies (2015): pp. 614-630. Print.
“The Control of Zhu’s Mother: the Unspeakable Maternal Love.” Life Week, 24 Jul., 2018,
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/yb_HCRriMa6nogILsTGklg. Accessed 31 May, 2021.
Zhang, L. “The Monologue of an Asian Girl: Why Coercion in the Name of ‘Love ’Never Ends
Well.” 13 Mar., 2020. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/ktxvaeNHHOjXUGZB3tdMQQ. Accessed
31 May, 2021.
Zhang, W., et al. “Reconsidering Parenting in Chinese Culture: Subtypes, Stability, and Change of
Maternal Parenting Style During Early Adolescence.” J Youth Adolescence (2017): pp. 11171136.
Zhao, Qing. “Behind the Coercion of Children.” China Newsweek, 3 May, 2021,
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/PTyaDf8j_r7hlqOgVanKxg. Accessed 31 May, 2021.