The debate surrounding whether parents should tell their children about Santa Claus tends to be a perennial topic. However, this discussion reveals deeper issues regarding parenting and childhood. The real questions shouldn’t be about Santa, but rather about how we shape our children’s understanding of the world.
One recent article highlights the perspective of child psychologist Mariana Pérez Borrero. She claims that giving coal to naughty children — a traditional consequence — is little more than emotional manipulation. This viewpoint raises eyebrows.
Borrero argues that using fear as a means of discipline leads to feelings of shame for children. “It’s based on fear-based control,” she asserts, suggesting that parents should avoid methods that instill fear. However, this perspective overlooks an essential aspect of parenting: the need for children to understand consequences. Fear, when coupled with appropriate guidance, can teach children valuable lessons. A little fear can foster resilience, enabling them to navigate a world that can be intimidating.
Moreover, the notion that avoiding fear in parenting is beneficial misses the mark. A balanced approach using both fear and affirmation helps children build a robust worldview. Life’s challenges often evoke fear, and if children grow up unaware of this aspect, they may struggle to cope as adults. The world does present threats, and helping children recognize and address these threats is part of good parenting.
When discussing “emotional manipulation,” it’s essential to clarify the distinction between manipulation for control and emotional guidance. Borrero frames this concept negatively, but in reality, subtle emotional guidance is crucial for ensuring children develop empathy and an understanding of societal norms. Without such guidance, emotions can run rampant, leaving children ill-prepared to handle complex social interactions. The phrase “emotional manipulation” is often misused to dismiss effective strategies that help children learn right from wrong.
Borrero’s comments about children internalizing shame also deserve scrutiny. She hints that shame is a destructive force; however, shame can serve a significant purpose in social behavior. A lack of shame often correlates with a societal decline in values. For example, the prevalence of participation trophies or online behaviors that lack accountability stems from a misunderstanding of what it means to earn praise and face consequences. An absence of shame means children may not grasp the significance of their actions.
As for the idea of “conditional approval” from parents, it’s a crucial element in child-rearing. Praise for good behavior helps reinforce positive actions, while disapproval for bad behavior sets clear boundaries. Parents are responsible for guiding their children through life’s complexities, helping them differentiate between right and wrong. Love should be unconditional, but approval must align with behavior. This principle has long been a cornerstone of effective parenting.
Ultimately, it’s clear that the real issue isn’t whether to tell children about Santa — it’s about how to raise responsible, resilient adults. Resorting to coal as a disciplinary tactic is a personal choice for parents. However, what should resonate deeply is the understanding that every child needs a balance of encouragement and boundary-setting. The writer acknowledges that they personally wouldn’t use coal as a tool, but finds it disappointing that contemporary discussions often overlook the larger implications of such parenting methods.
The shift in perspective around parenting reflects broader societal changes. In this age, where childhood fantasies are readily challenged and dissected, it’s vital to consider what messages are being imparted to the next generation. Instead of debating Santa Claus, let’s focus on nurturing children who will thrive and understand the importance of consequences in all aspects of life.
"*" indicates required fields
