John Rosemond’s absolutist views on child-rearing don’t match reality
John Rosemond writes the parenting column published each week in the Herald-Leader. To be clear from the start, he isn’t wrong in what he believes and the advice he offers. He just isn’t right, at least not all right.
Like all of us, he is biased. Too often, like all of us, he sees what he wants to see, AND he doesn’t see that the flaws he attributes to others apply equally (and in some cases more) to himself. In this respect, he is more like fire-and-brimstone preacher than a psychologist — a profession he both claims and claims to abhor.
We all want, need, and even crave simple answers, certain solutions that will assure us and simplify our lives, especially in these ever more complicated, contentious, and frightening times. But “beware the false prophet.” The signs are certainty, rigidity, hypocrisy, paternalism, authoritarianism, and hubris. Monolithic, inflexible, doctrinaire, simplistic partial truths are misleading and toxic, even when occasionally offset by more balanced insights. Life is complex and nuanced, thus rife with disparate truth. Make no mistake, Truth—the concept, construct, meaning, and application—not just parenting, is at issue here.
Because Rosemond’s views are seemingly based on stereotypical white, middle class, patriarchal, “American” family parenting as the idealistic aspirational paragon, it’s problematic in at least four significant ways:
▪ Consciously or unconsciously ignoring changing times in which we live.
▪ Paying no attention to diversity.
▪ Presenting a biased, extremely limited view of science and research.
▪ Denigrating feeling(s).
Most of us look at children and are moved in some inherent, basic way. Even stronger is what it means to be a parent or grandparent looking at your child and realizing what your parents felt: The wonder and promise/potential of an “untouched” being and the awesome and awful responsibility.
If not, you shouldn’t be a parent. Parents should want better for their children than they had.
Feelings are what make us human—they are not always pleasant, not necessarily what we want to experience. What would we be without them? Rosemond would have us do away with feelings. What is the impact of answering children who ask why they can’t play with their friends or go to church during COVID, for example, “because I say so,” not attending to and validating their fears?
Rosemond says beware showing your children empathy and vulnerability. Kids can’t handle that, will take advantage. Get control yourself, so you can mold your kids into the perfect, never wrong, always confident self- image we have been indoctrinated to strive to present as adults. Become a stereotypical “manly man.” Far too many are acting that way.
We are faced with the dilemma not only of partial truth, but of disparate truth. Rosemond’s views, like most every “truth,” is not all wrong, just not all right. Reality is uncertain and complex. We need to struggle with context and nuance.
With the advent of reopening schools, far more extensive parenting, including acting as teachers, will be demanded. Reopening global society in our “new” and challenging world is even more demanding. Understanding —particularly recognition of the complexity of the challenge— the need for tolerance, adaptability, mutual support, and acceptance of our flawed views—is essential. We need every tool at our disposal, and the wisdom to guess best when and how to use them.
We would all be better off if we accepted that truth —and not just in parenting. Unless we are omniscient-omnipotent-transcendent, as humans we are destined to forever seek the truth, never reaching that goal. THE absolute truth: There is no absolute truth.
Dr. Rory Remer is a UK Counseling Psychology Professor Emeritus.