The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 7 PARENTING STYLES AND PARENTING RESPONSIBILITIES

7.1 Introduction

The influence and impact of different parenting styles on children has long been a subject of debate among developmental psychologists and other social scientists. Darling (1999) identifies two important elements to parenting style - parental responsiveness and parental demandingness. According to Baumrind (1991), parental responsiveness (or parental warmth or supportiveness) refers to the 'extent to which parents intentionally foster individuality, self-regulation and self-assertion by being attuned to children's special needs and demands'. Parental demandingness (or behaviour control) on the other hand refers to 'the claims parents make on children to become integrated into the family whole, by their maturity demands, supervision, disciplinary efforts and willingness to confront the child who disobeys' (Baumrind, 1991).

Of course, as noted in the sweep 1 report, there is much disagreement over the importance and impact of many aspects of parenting. Differences in parenting practices and styles cannot be simplistically reduced to 'good' and 'bad' parenting. However, in terms of understanding the needs and experiences of families in Scotland today, it is important to understand how parents interact with their young children. Further, by measuring various aspects of parenting now, GUS will enable us to examine the impact of different parenting practices and styles on our cohort children in the future.

The GUS sweep 1 overview report explored attitudes towards various aspects of parenting among parents of babies (aged 10.5 months) and toddlers (aged 36.5 months), including:

• Attitudes towards parenting - covering ease and comfort asking for advice about being a parent and views about smacking, which can be viewed as one aspect of 'parental behaviour control'.
• Activities the parent does with the child - including play and educational activities, which may be associated with notions of 'parental responsiveness' to children's individual needs.
• Household division of labour, which may interact with the parenting styles of men and women in couple households.

This chapter revisits these broad themes, using sweep 2 data. In many cases, new questions were asked at sweep 2 in order to enhance our understanding of attitudes to parenting - for example, sweep 2 included a new series of questions on attitudes to different parenting techniques (including specific methods of 'behaviour control') and asked about different parent-child activities from sweep 1. Moreover, sweep 2 also included an interview with the partner of the child's main carer. Given that 99% of main respondents were female while 99% of partner respondents were male, this allows us to explore gender differences in attitudes to discipline and perceptions of household division of labour, as well as differences in the extent to which male and female carers undertake different activities with their children.

7.1.1 Types of analysis

The tables in this chapter present the following main types of analysis:

• Comparisons of the answers given by the main respondent at sweep 1 and sweep 2 (where the same questions were asked at both sweeps). This includes both straightforward comparisons of the proportions giving particular responses at each sweep, and analysis of whether the answers given by individual respondents changed between sweeps or not.
• Comparisons of the responses of main respondents with the answers given by their partners at sweep 2. ¹³ Again, this includes both straightforward comparisons of the proportions of main respondents and partners giving particular responses, and analysis of whether the answers given by individual couples vary or not.
• Analysis of the answers of main respondents and/or partners by factors that might help explain these answers (for example, the age or educational background of the respondent).

7.2 Parenting techniques

The relative merits of different parenting and discipline techniques are a recurring theme in media and popular debate. The success of recent television programmes like 'Supernanny' and 'The House of Tiny Tearaways' and the controversy sparked by criticism of author Gina Ford's advice on bringing up babies on the 'Mumsnet' internet site reflect high levels of public and media interest in this area. The second sweep of GUS interviews explored parents' awareness, use of and views on a range of approaches to parenting and discipline.

7.2.1 Awareness of different techniques

Table 7.1 indicates very high levels of parental awareness of a range of discipline techniques, including traditional strategies such as 'ignoring bad behaviour' and strategies popularised by recent television shows ( e.g. 'the naughty step'). Over nine out of ten main carers of children in couple households in both the birth and child cohort had 'definitely heard' of each of the techniques we asked them about. Levels of awareness were also very high among their partners, although they were somewhat lower than among main carers. For example, while 92% of main carers in the birth cohort had definitely heard of the 'time out' technique (where a child is put into a room and ignored for a brief period of time), only 82% of their partners were sure they had heard of this.

Table 7.1 Respondent and partner's awareness of discipline techniques by cohort (couple households only)

7.2.2 Use of different techniques

While most parents in both cohorts had heard of a wide range of parenting/discipline techniques, there were differences in the extent to which they used various techniques with the sample child (Table 7.2). Parents in the birth cohort (whose child was aged
22.5 months) were most likely to have ignored bad behaviour and raised their voice
and shouted at their child (67% and 63% respectively of main respondents in couple households had done each of these with the sample child). Parents of children in the older cohort (whose child was aged 46.5 months) were more likely to use removing treats or privileges (74% of main respondents), the naughty step (or room/corner/area) (65% of main respondents) and 'time out' (60% of main respondents) in addition to ignoring bad behaviour or raising their voices. This may reflect perceptions of the increased effectiveness of such techniques in controlling children's behaviour as they develop greater understanding of consequences.

There was relatively little difference in reported use of most of these techniques between main carers and their partners, suggesting a fairly high level of consistency in approaches to discipline between parents (Table 7.2). One exception is that partners were somewhat less likely than main carers to say they ever 'ignored bad behaviour' - for example, 69% of main carers compared with just 59% of partners in our child cohort said they sometimes did this. Given the division of responsibility for child-related tasks (discussed later in this chapter), this may reflect the fact that mothers generally spend the most time looking after the child generally, and are therefore likely to have more opportunities to ignore bad behaviour for a period of time. Partners in the birth cohort were also slightly more likely than main carers to say that they used removing treats and privileges with the sample child (40%, compared with 29%).

Table 7.2 Discipline approaches respondents and partners ever used with cohort child by cohort (couple households only)

7.2.3 Smacking

There is long-standing debate about the use of smacking as a discipline technique. Around one in eight main respondents and partners in couple households said they had ever smacked the sample child in the birth cohort, rising to over a third for the child cohort (Table 7.2). Parents were less likely to say they used smacking than most of the other discipline techniques the survey asked about. However, given the moral nature of the debate about smacking there may be more issues around parents giving 'socially acceptable' responses to questions about smacking.

Respondents in both cohorts who had more than one child were slightly more likely to say they had ever smacked another child in the household than that they had smacked the sample child (Table 7.3). For example, 37% of main carers in the birth cohort said they had smacked another child in the household, compared with 16% who said they had ever smacked the sample child. This is unsurprising, given that parents were more likely to say they had smacked children in the older cohort and that the siblings of children in the birth cohort are likely to be older. An earlier survey on disciplining children found that the use of physical chastisement did vary significantly by the age of the child (Anderson, Brownlie and Murray, 2002). In that survey, 38% of parents of children under 2 reporting having smacked them on the bottom, rising to 68% of parents of children aged 3 to 5 and 49% of those aged 6 to 10, before falling to just 14% of parents of children aged 11 or older.

Table 7.3 Discipline approaches respondents and partners ever used with any other child in household by cohort (couple households only)

In spite of the fact that around one in eight parents in the birth cohort and a third in the child cohort report smacking the sample child, the vast majority of parents in both cohorts believe that smacking is either 'not very' or 'not at all useful' as an approach for dealing with children of that age (Table 7.4). In fact, although main carers of children aged 46.5 months were more than twice as likely as those of toddlers aged 22.5 months to report having smacked them (34% compared with 16%), they were equally likely to say they thought smacking was not a useful approach (84% and 87% respectively). This suggests that the higher use of smacking with the older cohort is not primarily driven by a belief in its increased efficacy as a discipline technique as the child gets older. While partners in the birth cohort were almost as unlikely as main respondents to think smacking a useful technique, partners in the child cohort were slightly more likely than main respondents to think smacking could be 'very' or 'fairly useful' with children of the sample child's age (19% compared with 13%).

7.2.4 Usefulness of other techniques

While smacking was the approach least likely to be rated useful across both cohorts, there was more variation by the age of the child in the other techniques perceived as useful (Table 7.4 again). For example, removing treats or privileges was seen as 'very' or 'fairly useful' by 82% of main respondents and 84% of partners in couple households for children aged 46.5 months. In contrast, just 42% of main respondents and 51% of partners thought it would be useful for children aged 22.5 months. Again, this probably reflects perceptions of the appropriateness of different techniques for children at different stages of cognitive development.

In line with the fact that fewer partners than main respondents reported 'ignoring bad behaviour' by the sample child, partners were also less likely to think that ignoring bad behaviour was a useful approach (63% of partners in the birth cohort, compared with 73% of main respondents thought ignoring bad behaviour was 'very' or 'fairly useful' for a child aged 22.5 months). In contrast, partners in both cohorts were relatively more likely than main respondents to think that raising your voice or shouting is useful (45% of partners compared with 33% of main respondents in the child cohort), while partners in the birth cohort were more likely than main respondents to believe that removing treats or privileges is a useful approach to use with children aged 22.5 months (51% compared with 42%).

Table 7.4 Respondent and partner's views on usefulness of discipline techniques by cohort (all who have heard of techniques, couple households only)¹⁵

7.3 Parent-child activities

The sweep 1 overview report summarised how often parents did various social, educational and play activities with their child, including: going to the park or playground; visiting friends with small children; playing indoor or outdoor games; going to the library; painting and drawing; reciting nursery rhymes and singing; playing at recognising letters, words, numbers or shapes and using a computer. Sweep 2 of GUS asked parents about a different range of parent-child activities, focusing less on education and more on 'everyday' activities associated with both care-giving (such as bathing the child) and emotional bonding (such as cuddling, or just talking or chatting with them).

Although main respondents were more likely than their partners to play with their children, cuddle them or just chat or talk to them more than once a day, the vast majority of both main carers and their partners do all these things with their child at least once a day (Table 7.5). For example, in the child cohort, almost 100% of main respondents and 94% of partners said they chatted with or talked to the child at least once a day (96%/ 83% more than once a day). Although partners in households with children aged 46.5 months were slightly less likely than partners in households with younger children to play with the child at least once a day (74% compared with 87%), the majority still played with the child on a daily basis.

Gender divisions between parents were more apparent with respect to activities like bathing the child, dressing him/her, and getting them ready for bed. In both the child and birth cohort, the main respondent did these activities more often than their partner. For example, 60% of main respondents in couple households are involved in getting their child ready for bed once a day or more often, compared with just 21% of their partners (child cohort). Although these activities also involve spending time with the child, they may be viewed as part of childcare, rather than being seen as specific parent-child 'bonding' activities like talking, playing or cuddling. Thus these gender divisions may reflect the fact that the main respondent is also (usually) the main carer for the sample child.

Table 7.5 Frequency of activities with the child - respondent and partners answers by cohort (couple households only)

7.3.1 Variations in parental activities with children

In this section, we explore variations in the frequency with which parents undertake different activities with their children by socio-demographic and other factors. We focus particularly on partners given that, as seen above, there is greater variation in the frequency with which partners take part in these activities.

The sweep 1 overview report found variations in the frequency with which parents looked at books or read stories with their children by the age of the mother, with mothers aged under 20 less likely than mothers aged 40 or over to do this very frequently. Similar variations can be seen with respect to the frequency with which both main respondents and their partners read to their children at sweep 2. For example, among the birth cohort 67% of mothers aged 40 or over read to their child at least once a day, compared with just 48% of mothers who were aged 20 or under at the time the cohort child was born. However, by the time children are 46.5 months these differences by the age of the mother when the child was born are much less pronounced - 51% of mothers aged under 20 when the child was born read to their child at least once a day, compared with 58% of mothers aged 40 or older.

Younger partners (aged 24 or under ¹⁷) are also less likely than partners aged 30 or older to read with the child on a daily basis (19% compared with 32% for the birth cohort). These differences by the partner's age are still apparent by the time the child is 46.5 months - 25% of partners aged 30 or over read to their child at least once a day, compared with 15% of partners aged 24 or under.

Parents of both sexes who are highly educated are more likely than parents without qualifications to read to their children. For example, 66% of partners qualified to at least Higher level read to their (birth cohort) child a few times a week or more often, compared with 37% of those with no qualifications.

Partners who are more highly educated are also more likely than those without qualifications to bath the child, dress them and get them ready for bed more often (Table 7.6). However, there is no significant difference by education in the proportion of partners who play with their child, cuddle them or just chat to them more than once a day (Table 7.7). This suggests that education has a greater effect on the extent to which men are involved in childcare-related and educational tasks (such as reading to the child) than on the frequency of other bonding activities between men and their children.

Table 7.6 Percentage of partners who do various activities with child a few times a week or more by sample type and highest educational qualification

Table 7.7 Percentage of partners who do various activities with child more than once a day by sample type and highest educational qualification

Another factor that might influence the frequency with which partners take part in various activities with their child is time. Perhaps those who work (particularly full time) have less time available. However, Table 7.8 suggests that the relationship between working and taking part in different activities with children is not as straightforward as this. While partners who work full time are less likely than those who work part-time or not at all to dress the child on at least a few occasions a week, they are more likely to bath them a few times a week and (among the birth cohort) to read to them a few times a week or more. This may in part reflect differences by education, noted above (since partners who work full time are more likely than those who do not work to have higher educational qualifications, a factor also strongly associated with reading to the child more often). It is also possible that the division of different care-taking activities in couple-households varies depending on working patterns - for example, where the father works full-time, perhaps they are less likely to be available in the morning to get the child dressed but more likely to be involved in bath times when they get home from work.

Table 7.8 Percentage of partners who do various activities with child a few times a week or more by sample type and partner's employment status

There is some evidence that those partners who feel they have 'plenty of time' to spend with the sample child are more involved than those who feel they have 'nowhere near enough time' in at least some of the activities we asked about. For example, 71% of those who feel they have plenty of time to spend with the child help get the child dressed a few times a week or more often (baby cohort), compared with just 54% of those who feel they have 'nowhere near enough time' (Table 7.9). Similarly, 71% of partners in the birth cohort who say they have 'plenty of time' with their child play with them more than once a day, compared with just 49% of those who say they have 'nowhere near enough time' (Table 7.10). However, those who feel they have plenty of time with their child are no more likely than those who feel they do not have enough to read to the child a few times a week or more, and are only slightly more likely to bath them or get them ready for bed a few times a week or more often (Table 7.9). Thus while perceived time constraints may affect how engaged fathers are in some care-taking and emotional bonding activities with their children, it is clearly not the only factor. Age and, in particular, education appear to be relatively more important in explaining differences in involvement in childcare-related tasks.

Table 7.9 Percentage of partners who do various activities with child a few times a week or more by sample type and feelings about amount of time they have to spend with the child

Table 7.10 Percentage of partners who do various activities with child more than once a day by sample type and feelings about amount of time they have to spend with the child

7.4 Household division of labour

Respondents were asked how they divided tasks relating to the sample child and household chores more generally. These questions were included in both sweeps 1 and 2 of GUS. In sweep 2, they were also asked of partners in couple households. As discussed in the introduction, 99% of main respondents were female (almost always the child's mother), ¹⁸ while 99% of partner respondents were male. Thus comparison of main and partner respondents' answers allows us to explore differences in perceptions of the household division of labour by gender.

7.4.1 Main respondents' views - sweep 1 and sweep 2

Table 7.11 shows relatively little change between sweeps in main respondents' perceptions of who is responsible for child-related tasks, such as feeding the child, changing nappies, and generally looking after the child. The majority of child-related tasks continue to be undertaken by the mother while children are aged under 4. As at sweep 1, this pattern is most pronounced in respect of feeding the child and generally being with or looking after them. That said, there was a small increase between sweeps in the proportion of respondents in the child cohort who say they share both feeding the child (from 19% at sweep 1 to 23% at sweep 2) and generally being with and looking after them (from 26% to 32%) with their partners. There was also a small decrease in the birth cohort in respondents saying they are mostly responsible for getting up in the night if the child needs to be comforted (from 58% to 51%) - perhaps reflecting greater sharing of this task with partners once women return to work after a period of maternity leave.

Table 7.11 Responsibility for child-related tasks by cohort and sweep (perspective of main respondent)

Table 7.12 shows that, overall, mothers' perceptions of the division of household tasks also remained fairly similar between sweeps 1 and 2. The majority still say they do the most cooking, cleaning and laundry when their children are 22.5 and 46.5 months. There has even been a small increase (from 67% to 72%) in the proportion of main respondents' in the birth cohort who say they do most of the cooking.

Table 7.12 Responsibility for household tasks by cohort and sweep (perspective of main respondent)

However, although overall mothers' perceptions of the division of child-related and household tasks appear to have changed relatively little between sweeps of GUS, it is possible that this picture masks greater changes in perceptions of the division of responsibilities within individual households. Table 7.13 and Table 7.14 show that while most respondents gave the same answer at each sweep, there are also some interesting shifts in responses among a minority of respondents. The most common shift in respect of child-related tasks is from the main respondent saying they do most, to saying they share these tasks equally with their partner. For example, in the birth cohort 10% of respondents said they fed the child most often at sweep 1 (when the child was just under 1), but now say they share this equally with their partner. However, there are also some households where respondents indicate a shift in the opposite direction - for example, 13% of respondents in the birth cohort said they shared looking after the child when they were ill equally at sweep 1, but now say they do most.

In respect of household tasks, again most respondents gave the same responses at each sweep. However, a minority of respondents in each case give responses that indicate either a shift towards or away from sharing these tasks more equally with their partner (Table 7.14). For example, in the birth cohort 10% of respondents said they shared cooking equally at sweep 1 but now say that they do most, while 6% said they did most of the cooking at sweep 1 and now think they share it equally.

Table 7.13 Change in main respondents' perceptions of responsibility for child-related tasks between sweeps 1 and 2, by cohort

Table 7.14 Change in main respondents' perceptions of responsibility for household tasks between sweeps 1 and 2, by cohort

7.4.2 Comparison of main respondents' and partners' views

Table 7.15 and Table 7.16 compare the perceptions of main and partner respondents on the division of child-related and household tasks. Overall the proportion of partners who say 'my husband/wife/partner does most' with respect to child-related tasks is fairly similar to the proportion of main respondents who say they do most, suggesting that there are not very large disparities in how men and women view the division of such tasks. That said, the proportion of partners who believe that they share child-related tasks 'equally' tends to exceed the proportion of main respondents who think this with respect to feeding the child, changing nappies, looking after the child when they are ill and generally being with or looking after the child. For example, among the birth cohort, 31% of main respondents say they share 'generally being with and looking after the child' equally with their partner, compared with 42% of partners who say the same.

Table 7.15 Perceptions of responsibility for child-related tasks - respondent and partners answers by cohort (couple households only)

Differences in the proportion of main respondents and partners who say they share household tasks 'more or less equally' are somewhat less pronounced overall - for example, among the child cohort, 17% of main respondents say they share laundry and ironing, compared with 23% of partners. That said, there is still a 10 point gap between the percentage of main respondents and partners who say cleaning the home is shared equally - in the birth cohort, 22% of main respondents said this compared with 32% of partner respondents.

Table 7.16 Perceptions of responsibility for household tasks - respondents and partners answers by cohort (couple households only)

Although these over-arching tables suggest there are some differences in the way men and women view the division of child-related and household tasks, the exact nature of these differences is not completely clear. Table 7.17 and Table 7.18 show differences in views within individual households. This indicates that for child-related tasks, the most common difference of opinion between main respondents and their partners involves the respondent saying they do most, while the partner believes the task is shared equally. This was most pronounced with respect to looking after the child when he or she is ill - in 20% of households in the birth cohort the main respondent believed they were mainly responsible for this, while their partner thought they shared it equally.

Table 7.17 Differences in respondents' and partners' perceptions of responsibility for child-related tasks by cohort (couple households only)

With respect to household tasks, again the most common difference of opinion occurs when (female) main respondents say they do most and their partners think the task is shared equally. This is most pronounced with respect to cleaning - in 14% of households in the child cohort, the main respondent believes they are mainly responsible for cleaning while their partner sees this as a shared task.

Table 7.18 Differences in respondents' and partners' perceptions of responsibility for household tasks by cohort (couple households only)

7.5 Key points

• Most parents have heard of a wide range of discipline techniques, including techniques such as the naughty step and 'time out' made popular by recent television programmes about bringing up young children.
• Parents of the older cohort (aged just under 4) in particular are making use of a wide range of different techniques for disciplining and controlling their children's behaviour.
• Parents were less likely to admit to smacking the cohort child than to using any of the other discipline techniques we asked about. Parents of the older cohort were more than twice as likely as parents of the birth cohort to say they had smacked the sample child (34% compared with 16%).
• Smacking was not seen as a particularly useful discipline technique by parents. Most think it is 'not very' or 'not at all' useful.
• The perceived usefulness of other techniques varied depending on the age of the child, with ideas like the naughty step, time out and reward systems or sticker charts seen as more useful for the older cohort (aged just under 4).
• The vast majority of male and female carers take part in 'bonding' activities like cuddling, playing with their children and just talking and chatting to them on a daily basis.
• Gender divisions are more apparent with respect to activities like bathing children, getting them dressed and getting them ready for bed, with women doing these activities more often than their male partners.
• While there were no significant differences by education in the proportion of male partners who play with their child, cuddle them or chat to them more than once a day, men with at least Higher level qualifications are more likely than men with no qualifications to be involved with bath time, dressing the child, getting them ready for bed and reading to them.
• There is also some evidence that time is a factor, with male partners who feel they have 'plenty of time' to spend with their child more likely than those who feel they have 'nowhere near enough' to help get the child dressed and play with them more often. However, male partners who work full time are more likely than those who work part-time or not at all to bath the child and read to them more often, suggesting that time is not the only factor affecting male involvement in day-to-day activities with their child.
• At the overall level, there was relatively little change in main respondents' perceptions of the household division of labour between sweeps 1 and 2. For all the child-related and household tasks covered, the respondent was most likely to say they did most.
• However, at the level of individual households there were some shifts, most commonly from respondents believing they did most at sweep 1 to feeling they shared particular tasks more equally with their partners at sweep 2.
• Overall, the views of main respondents and their partners on the division of child-related and household tasks are fairly similar. However, partners are somewhat more likely to believe that these tasks are shared equally, while the main respondent believes they are mainly responsible for them, especially with respect to childcare-related tasks.

7.6 Conclusion

Interviewing partners at this sweep has allowed interesting analyses of the extent of shared parenting and the contours of the domestic division of labour. The overwhelming evidence is of a highly gendered domestic division of labour, with women reporting greater involvement in and responsibility for the range of household tasks. There is some evidence to support sociological work (Jamieson 1998) that suggests a discourse of equality exists that exceeds actual day to day behaviour. Partners are slightly more likely to believe that tasks are shared equally than the main respondent. Nonetheless, it is clear that partners are involved in a range of child and household related activities. The factors that influence partner involvement do not only relate to time. Although those who report that they feel that they have plenty of time to spend with their children are also more likely to report that they do so, the evidence suggests that male partners who work full time are more likely than the rest to bathe or read to their child. Education may be an overriding factor here, alongside couple expectations and working patterns of the mother.

The results demonstrate that parents are aware of different parenting techniques especially relating to discipline and utilise a range of options themselves. This would suggest that popular TV programmes about parenting, wider media coverage of the role of parents and maybe the existence of parenting programmes such as Triple P, are having some influence on parenting behaviour. Certainly, smacking is not the most popular form of discipline. Although over a third of parents of the child cohort do report ever having smacked their child, they also report that they don't think that smacking is a particularly useful technique. It seems, then, that parents reflect on parenting techniques and use a range in order to discipline their children.

Just as Chapter 5 reported high levels of involvement in a range of social and educational activities, this chapter finds the vast majority of respondents and their partners interact with their child - by cuddling, playing or talking once a day or more. Partners are less often involved in activities more associated with physical care, such as bathing, dressing, getting ready for bed. This appears to be mediated by working patterns, education and use of formal and informal childcare. As in Chapter 5, the analysis presented here suggests that education has an effect on the likelihood of parents of both sexes reading to their children. Partners who were more highly educated were also more likely to report being involved in child care related activities.

Overall, these findings suggest that respondents and their partners think about parenting and parenting styles. This might imply that interventions, such as parenting programmes, might be well received by both mothers and fathers, if they are sensitively delivered in a way that takes into account current good practice and parental expertise. Data in Chapter 8 (section 8.4.2) shows that virtually all parents who had attended a parenting class in the last year found it to be very or fairly useful. Such classes may help parents to deal with emerging concerns about discipline and their children's behaviour. The findings also suggest that the relationship between work outside the home and work inside the home are interrelated in a complex way: it is not always those fathers, or indeed mothers, who work full time who spend least time involved in caring and interactive activities with their children.

« Previous | Contents | Next »