The tension between Elias’ informalisation of parenting and the reformalisation of parenting interventions

E. Ball
{"title":"The tension between Elias’ informalisation of parenting and the reformalisation of parenting interventions","authors":"E. Ball","doi":"10.3351/PPP.2021.8387437292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using Elias’ thoughts on the informalisation of parenting (where authoritarian parenting is discouraged and the autonomy of children is encouraged) and relational parenting (parents must think about the effects of their parenting style on the emotions of children) as a starting point, this article discusses the intensification of these parenting techniques as ‘best practice’, particularly since 1997. However, there has been a reformalisation of ‘parenting’ between the state and parents; policy surrounding p arenting best practice and regulation of families are underlined by sanctioning and formalised interventions if there is no improvement in child/parent relations and behaviour. This paper draws on material delivered to a parenting training course for practitioners in addition to participant observation of a parenting course. Interviews with parenting practitioners and parents, who were referred to the course or experienced parenting support, are also discussed. Whilst Elias’ theories of parenting are useful in relation to contemporary parenting policies, it is necessary to combine other sociological perspectives to demonstrate the tensions between parenting policies, local parenting interventions and the experiences of parents targeted by such policies. In particular, the findings show that due to classed and gendered experiences, parenting is situated in practice and due to the amount of pressure on parents to transform their parenting in a short amount of time, parents often struggled to implement informalised parenting practices due to their circumstances and the interventions they are subjected to.","PeriodicalId":162475,"journal":{"name":"People, Place and Policy Online","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"People, Place and Policy Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3351/PPP.2021.8387437292","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Using Elias’ thoughts on the informalisation of parenting (where authoritarian parenting is discouraged and the autonomy of children is encouraged) and relational parenting (parents must think about the effects of their parenting style on the emotions of children) as a starting point, this article discusses the intensification of these parenting techniques as ‘best practice’, particularly since 1997. However, there has been a reformalisation of ‘parenting’ between the state and parents; policy surrounding p arenting best practice and regulation of families are underlined by sanctioning and formalised interventions if there is no improvement in child/parent relations and behaviour. This paper draws on material delivered to a parenting training course for practitioners in addition to participant observation of a parenting course. Interviews with parenting practitioners and parents, who were referred to the course or experienced parenting support, are also discussed. Whilst Elias’ theories of parenting are useful in relation to contemporary parenting policies, it is necessary to combine other sociological perspectives to demonstrate the tensions between parenting policies, local parenting interventions and the experiences of parents targeted by such policies. In particular, the findings show that due to classed and gendered experiences, parenting is situated in practice and due to the amount of pressure on parents to transform their parenting in a short amount of time, parents often struggled to implement informalised parenting practices due to their circumstances and the interventions they are subjected to.
伊莱亚斯的非正式育儿和育儿干预的改革之间的紧张关系
本文以伊莱亚斯关于非正式育儿(不鼓励专制的育儿方式,鼓励孩子的自主性)和关系育儿(父母必须考虑他们的育儿方式对孩子情绪的影响)的思想为出发点,讨论了这些育儿技巧的强化,特别是自1997年以来。然而,国家和父母之间的“养育”已经进行了改革;如果儿童/父母关系和行为没有改善,将通过制裁和正式干预来强调围绕养育最佳做法和家庭监管的政策。本文借鉴了为从业人员提供的育儿培训课程的材料,以及对育儿课程的参与观察。与育儿从业者和父母的访谈,谁被推荐到课程或经验丰富的育儿支持,也进行了讨论。虽然埃利亚斯的育儿理论与当代育儿政策有关,但有必要结合其他社会学观点来证明育儿政策、当地育儿干预和这些政策所针对的父母的经历之间的紧张关系。特别是,调查结果表明,由于阶级和性别的经验,养育子女是在实践中进行的,由于父母在短时间内改变其养育方式的压力很大,由于他们的环境和他们所受到的干预,父母往往难以实施非正式的养育做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信