To the editor:
As a parent and psychologist, I found some parts of Vickie Shufton’s latest op-ed concerning. I did not see a lot of gray space between viewing kids as either meeting full diagnostic criteria for autism or “naughty” and “terrorists” (to use Shufton’s language). She suggests that a behavioral model (“reinforcement of preferred behaviors [and] consequences for misbehavior”) is what these kids need while deriding a strawman version of gentle parenting.
This leaves out a lot of nuance. I do not think kids should be treated from a strictly behavioral stance, as if they are animals we are meant to train as opposed to human beings we are meant to raise. While clear boundaries are important in any human relationship, including those between caregivers and children, it is possible to maintain one’s own authority while also including children in thinking through how to solve problems so they may gradually develop their own internal senses of authority (not simply compliance). It is possible to be both a gentle parent and a firm one. In addition, of course a struggling child may need both sturdy boundaries and support and assistance learning skills for emotional regulation, social engagement, and more.
I hope those of us tasked with nurturing the next generation of adults can work collaboratively and with open minds.
Amy Taylor, Ph.D., ABPP
Great Barrington
Click here to read The Berkshire Edge’s policy for submitting Letters to the Editor.
