University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Parenting children of affluence

(USC Thesis Other)

Parenting children of affluence

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content PARENTING CHILDREN OF AFFLUENCE by Susanne Michelle Foulk _________________________________________ A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION December 2007 Copyright 2007 Susanne Michelle Foulk ii DEDICATION This is dedicated to my daughter, Mishelle, for whom I am ever grateful to have traveled with in this journey. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Embarking on a journey toward a doctorate is never a solitary endeavor. I wish to acknowledge and offer a sincere thank you to those individuals who have offered their strength, belief, and confidence along the way. I extend my utmost appreciation to my Chair and Advisor, Dr. Myron Dembo. He personifies the highest standards of personal and academic integrity, which he offered to me as an inspiration for research, teaching, and learning. It has always been an honor to be his student. I wish to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. Robert Rueda and Dr. Ruth Chung. Dr. Rueda offered his guidance with great wisdom, sincerity, and humility. Dr. Chung posed thoughtful and insightful questions that contributed greatly to the success of this project. Additionally, I am grateful to my longtime mentors and friends for their encouragement and moral support: Dr. Nancy Lavelle, for her steadfast guidance and friendship and Dr. Annette Tessier, who I have come to appreciate immensely. I extend my appreciation to my friend Dr. Robert Filback, who always took the time to read my work and offer his feedback. I also extend my gratitude to Dr. Linda Fischer, Julio Martinez, and David Werner who kindly offered their critique and editing skills. I thank my family for their prayers and support. I praise my mother, Charlotte, and father, Frank, for teaching me, from a very early age, the importance of integrity and perseverance. I acknowledge the dear souls who have passed from my company: Florrie Henry, John Romero, Marie Bacon, and Lewie Anderson. You have not died in my heart, but have offered me added strength to complete this work. iv Finally, I wish to thank the mothers and their children who opened their homes and hearts to me. Without their participation and authentic responses, this study would not have been possible. v TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES viii ABSTRACT ix CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1 Problem Statement 2 Background of the Study 2 Purpose of the Study 5 Significance of the Study 5 Exploratory Questions 6 Theoretical Perspective 7 Organization of the Study 8 CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 10 The Spoiled Child Syndrome 11 Early Definitions 11 Spoiling a Child Recent Research 14 Summary 17 Social Context: Parent and Child in Interaction 18 Parenting Styles 19 Behavioral Self-Regulation and Parenting Style 24 Emotional Self-Regulation and Parenting Style 26 Permissive Parenting and Spoiling 27 Summary 30 Culture, Parental Control, Internalized Beliefs, and the Spoiled Child 31 Culture 32 Culture of Affluence 34 Parental Control 37 Behavioral Control 38 Psychological Control 40 Internalized Beliefs 43 Sense of Entitlement 45 Summary 47 Conclusions 48 vi CHAPTER 3. METHODS 51 Participants 52 Procedures 52 Instrumentation 52 Validity 54 Reliability 54 Data Analysis 55 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS 57 Background Context and Characteristics of Community Setting and Participants 58 Context and Characteristics of the Community Setting 58 Nine Portraits 59 Meaning of Spoiling According to Parents 70 Research Question One: Why do Parents Spoil Their Children? 73 Why do Mothers Spoil Their Children? Complex/Dynamic Influences and Pressures at Play 73 Maternal Psychological Processes: Mothers’ Achievement/Performance Goal Orientation 80 Social Contextual: Parent Goals and Needs Circumvented the Child’s Needs for the Development of Internal Processes 85 Cultural-Historical: Time/Change Related to Norms/Values 88 Summary 90 Research Question Two: What is the Nature of the Occurrences of Spoiling? A Focus on Child Effects 91 Self-Regulation 92 Sense of Entitlement 99 Summary 107 Chapter Summary 108 CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION 112 Summary 112 Conclusions 113 Limitations 119 Implications and Suggestions for Future Research 121 REFERENCES 127 APPENDICES 136 Appendix I: Spoiled Child Syndrome 137 Appendix II: Construct of Spoiling 138 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Background Characteristics of Participants 58 Table 2. Meaning of Spoiling According to Mothers 70 Table 3. Goals and Values Parents Reported They Hold for Their Children 81 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The Model: Influences and Pressures Underlying Maternal Interactions in Cases of Spoiling 74 Figure 2. Parent Motivation: Self- and Child Centered 85 ix ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to explore the reasons why parents spoil their children. Analyses of interviews from nine mother-child dyads indicated different factors influencing behavior. Mothers’ own achievement pressures, time constraints, and desire to ease a painful interaction were among reasons mothers gave for spoiling their children. At times, inappropriate parenting occurred because of a conflict between mothers’ attempts to meet their own needs and their children’s development of self-regulation and self-worth. The interview data illustrate how spoiling leads to children’s sense of entitlement. 1 PARENTING CHILDREN OF AFFLUENCE Families from all cultures are increasingly able to raise their children with luxuries and pleasures not previously afforded in earlier times (Goff & Fleisher, 1999), yet the psychological costs to affluence for many may go largely undetected (Luthar, 2003). Although developmental psychologists and counselors are concerned about identifying parental behaviors that place children at-risk, they have not focused on problems that exist for children raised in affluent homes (Goff & Fleisher, 1999; Luther, 2003). Importantly, however, affording with it privileges, power, and influence, the prospect of affluence is becoming a reality for an increasing number of individuals and problems associated with it must be examined (Goff & Fleisher, 1999). Across the United States, many parents reportedly view their child as spoiled and seemingly out of control (Kindlon, 2001; Shaw, 2003). Few studies address this phenomenon directly (Brook, Watemberg, & Geva, 2000; Garner, 1996; Ispa, 1995; Solomon, Martin, & Cottington, 1993; Wilson, Witzke, & Volin, 1981). Although some would even deny its existence at all (Solomon et al., 1993), it is not surprising that children once described as “spoiled” have now become known as “spoiled brats” (Hausner, 1990; Kindlon, 2001). Although, nearly seventeen years since the “spoiled child syndrome” was defined (McIntosh, 1989), the problem persists (Kindlon, 2001). Not only do parents consider that children today are more spoiled than they were when they were young, admittedly, in a recent poll conducted in the United States, 60% of parents reported they spoil their own children (Washington-Reuters, 2001). The problem, extending itself to school classrooms and larger society as well, 2 is hardly something to be ignored (Goff & Fleisher, 1999; Goodman & Goodman, 1999). Problem Statement The popular press has discussed the problem of parents spoiling their children (e.g.Birnbach, 2002; Dickinson, 2000; Gibbs, 2001). However, researchers have not explored, in depth, the term: the “spoiled child syndrome”. Not only have they failed to agree on the nature of spoiling, but also they have not explored the reasons for spoiling children. This lack of investigation exists even though parents, themselves, are aware they are engaging in this pattern with their children (Kindlon, 2001; Brook et al., 2000). Spoiled children are likely to face problems, both in school and in the family, unless their parents understand how their behaviors influence their children and take steps to modify their parent-child interactions. Background of the Study In a recent Time/CNN poll (Washington-Reuters, 2001), 60% of parents considered their children were spoiled and teenagers themselves believed they were spoiled. Although standard pediatric texts do not reference the condition (McIntosh, 1989) and only few studies include the topic of spoiling (Brook et al., 2000; Garner, 1996; Ispa, 1995; McIntosh, 1989; Nelms, 1983; Robinson, 1978; Solomon, Martin, & Cottington, 1993; Swain, 1985; Wilson et al.,1981) the term persists (Bredehoft, Clarke, & Dawson, 2002; Brook et al., 2000; Kindlon, 2001; McIntosh, 1989; Solomon et al.,1993). Despite the derogatory implication the word may imply, avoidance of this terminology among health care professionals and denying the pattern of behavior it portrays leads to difficulties addressing parental concerns about 3 their child’s attitude and behavior (McIntosh, 1989). Children considered spoiled are described among other things, as obnoxious, disrespecting of parents and others in authority, demanding, impatient, inconsiderate of others feelings, and unappreciative (McIntosh, 1989; Swain, 1985). Emotionally, the child is unable to handle stress and described as having temper tantrums not typical for one’s age. Kindlon (2001) conducted a study across the nation and found that among affluent families, parents frequently considered they spoiled their child. His findings also indicate many of the children were often depressed and lonely. Other findings indicate a desire expressed by teenagers who wish for more time with their parents. Confusion prevails regarding this often-used term. When considering clarification regarding how spoiling develops, the description of the syndrome (presented in detail in a later section) indicates it is caused by permissive parenting and not setting limits (McIntosh, 1989). Other researchers state it is not permissive parenting, but the result of overindulging a child (Bredehoft, Mennicke, Potter, & Clarke, 1998; Bredehoft et al., 2002). Parents themselves differ in their conceptualization of spoiling and whether or not spoiling is a positive or negative (Solomon et al., 1993). Some teachers held beliefs that learning disabilities are a consequence of parents spoiling their child (Brook et al., 2000). Psychologists and pediatricians themselves offer differing advice on how to rear children, their own advice changing with regard to specific practices that are best for children. Conflicting messages leave parents confused on how to best raise their child (Bredehoft et al, 2002; Hymowitz, 2001). Feeling a sense of powerlessness, confusion, and a sense that their children are out of control has left the child 4 vulnerable to high-risk behaviors as well as problems that inflict harm to him/her as well as to others in society (Goodman & Goodman, 1999; Hymowitz, 2001). One researcher (Kindlon, 2001) discussed how educated, middle to high socioeconomic income level parents are more likely to consider their child’s self- esteem important and offer them the freedom to express their individuality, yet with this, psychologists recognize an increasing number of children and teens evidencing internalizing and externalizing problems. At least one child psychologist (Ehrensaft, 1997) discussed a spoiled child resulting from the narcissistic nature of the parent. However, Patterson (2003) recently argued of the existence of a more complex interplay of bidirectional influences at play on the development of the child. That is, he discussed that, not only are parenting factors important in shaping the child’s development, but importance also lies in the child’s genetic disposition that evokes certain responses from parents. To summarize, despite confusion regarding how children become spoiled or whether one is actually able to spoil a child, the behavior and the term persists (Bredehoft, et al., 1998; McIntosh, 1989). Children whose parents consider they are spoiled evidence difficulty getting along with both themselves and others (McIntosh, 1989). Research on spoiling has yet to go past the surface with regard to placing blame or determining fault. Further lacking is the question on why and how parents can spoil their children (McIntosh, 1989) and whether or not one can spoil a child (Solomon et al., 1993). Processes related to this phenomenon have yet to be explored. Aside from simply identifying the phenomenon exists, offering a definition, and identifying there are different beliefs parents and teachers have which 5 acknowledge this concept, little else has been investigated (Bredehoft, 1998). Additionally, the concept of spoiling a child has yet to be examined within the context of the actual experience of the parent with the child, basing its understanding in the psychological and social-interaction variables existent in the context of the culture in which the parent-child interaction exists. Purpose of the Study This study explored the nature of parenting in affluent families as it relates to spoiling a child. The research addressed in this study centered on two questions: “Why do parents spoil their children and what is the nature of these occurrences?” Significance of the Study In order to understand more about the problems facing the poor and underprivileged, Robert Coles (1977), sought to uncover the thoughts in the minds of the rich and affluent. Coles captured a glimpse into the attitudes and beliefs that developed in the minds of the some of the most privileged children in the United States through his seminal study. Some of the pain and conflictions that existed in the minds and hearts of these children was revealed through his work, as was a hint into how these patterns developed. The importance exists today in that many of these children will go on to become corporate administrators, policy makers, and political leaders. They are among those who will hold other influential positions and will make decisions that determine how others will live (Coles, 1977). Throughout the course of their upbringing, children learn how to behave toward others and they construct meaning from their everyday interactions, with and without the guidance of parents and other important persons in their lives. Through 6 the course of these interactions, values emerge and are internalized whether intended or non-intended. Children learn to place judgments on how they expect to be treated and may or may not come away with a sense of entitlement and privilege to the extent that they may exploit others. Without direction, many will suffer. Thus, the need arises to address the problem that continues to emerge in our society: the development of the “spoiled brat”. Exploratory Questions The overarching questions this study sought to explore were: “Why do parents engage in spoiling their children and what is the nature of these occurrences?” Questions addressed in the review of the research address the underlying beliefs, perceptions, and experiences involved in the nature of spoiling the child: How does the nature of spoiling differ among cultures? What are the belief systems behind why parents interact in spoiling their children? Where do these belief systems come from? Where is the parent basing his/her understanding of childrearing? How do beliefs / behaviors manifest themselves in parents’ understanding their children’s behavior? How does the spoiling parent make sense of the actions of the child? What are the parent’s affective responses to spoiling the child? What is the experience of the parent who spoils their child? 7 Theoretical Perspective Many theories have surfaced over the years, which address how one develops. It is widely accepted, however, that the context of one’s family represents a highly influential agent through which an individual develops an understanding of one’s self and how one makes sense of others in the world. One’s family is widely viewed as a primary mode of socialization in the early years of development and it is here that the stage is set for later development (Rogoff, 2003). As development is a highly complex process, coming to represent why an individual behaves and thinks the way one does must represent, not only the individual, but also the background setting of culture in which the beliefs and actions of the individual (and the family) are embedded (Rogoff, 2003; Rueda & Dembo, 1995). As Rogoff (2003) suggested, when attempting to understand the individual, one cannot isolate the individual from the context in which he/she interacts. The understanding one derives from the action of the child and the parent should be represented within the context of meanings, beliefs, and judgments about the actions. Neglecting to take all into consideration misrepresents the picture of the child or the parent. Rogoff theorizes the most appropriate unit of analysis in this way is the parent and child in activity. Thus, with regard to parenting, the study of the process of parenting cannot be isolated from the context of the activity. Further, the child’s development originates on a social level with the parent or caregiver, interacts within the individual, and the internal self-regulatory processes shape the child’s further development (Wertsch, 1991). Through this parent-child interaction, knowledge is constructed on the social level prior to the 8 child coming to form ideas about him/herself and how he/she is on the individual plane. This perspective is important in that it stresses the responsibility necessary of the parent or caregiver in the assistance given to the child as the child develops internal processes of his or her own. Learning is not simply left to a chance happening, but is a deliberate and guided process initiated by the parent (Diaz, Neal, Amaya-Williams, 1990). When this process breaks down, the self-regulatory development necessary to monitor, plan, and guide behavior toward meaningful goals, suffers. Organization of the Study Chapter 1 of the study has presented the introduction, the statement of the problem, the background of the study, the purpose, as well as the significance of the study, the questions addressed, and the theoretical perspective. Chapter 2 is a review of the relevant literature. It addresses the following topics: the spoiled child syndrome and related research, the social context of parent and child in interaction, and culture with different views on parental control resulting in internalized beliefs. Following are conclusions and implications that lead to the need for this study. Chapter 3 presents the research design proposed for this study, the participants in the study, the selection process and rationale, validity issues, reliability, and the procedures employed. Chapter 4 presents the results of the investigation. The chapter begins by providing a brief description of the background setting of the community and an 9 introduction to each of the nine dyads. Presentation of the results is according to each of the research questions. Chapter 5 presents an analysis of the results in terms of current research. In addition, discussion takes place on the implications and recommendations are made for future research. 10 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Since being defined over ten years ago (Swain, 1985; McIntosh, 1989), the “spoiled child syndrome” is a problem that continues to persist (Kindlon, 2001), even to the point of being now being considered an epidemic (Shaw, 2003) and discussed in terms of placing a child at-risk of child neglect and abuse (Bredehoft et al., 1998; Swain, 1985). In context, researchers interested in our society, in its affluence and its effect on American society recently argued that we live in society that is spoiled (Goff & Fleisher, 1999). They have asserted that handling the effects of affluence is a problem fundamental to the family. Further, these researchers ask that society as a whole consider the question, “How can we and our children enjoy the benefits of affluence without becoming spoiled by it (p.214).” Furthermore, is affluence, itself, the problem? Alternatively, does it rather have more to do with how rich as well as poor parents manage to rear their children through the challenges and crisis’s that are an inevitable part of parenting? This review of the research explores the important processes and patterns revealed in the research pertaining to the nature of spoiling. Although there is no clear guideline established, several areas of parenting research clarify important processes at play and inform this area of inquiry. The purpose of this literature review is to examine the research relating to why parents spoil their children. With the perspective in mind, that learning occurs on three dimensions: the cultural, the social interaction between the parent and the child, and the individual’s psychological dimension, this study aims to reveal each of these dimensions at work. 11 Beginning this review, a case is presented of the spoiled child syndrome, and although scant, the research that has sought to inquire and address its nature and occurrence. The Spoiled Child Syndrome Early Definitions Swain (1985) described the spoiled child as the following: Occurs when the parent indulges the child’s every whim or wish to the best of his/her ability…the practice of centering the family life around the child’s real and imagined needs…the dilution of the distinction between child and parent on the dimensions of family power and authority. In advanced cases, it is willing the family power to the child on demand, so that the child takes over the control of parents, and the parent becomes the child. To spoil a child is not love, or the expression of love. Love enables growth, it is not destructive. Spoiling a child undermines growth. Spoiling children is done by degrees and it’s a relative matter (p.67). In 1989, pediatrician, Bruce McIntosh further defined the syndrome: The spoiled child syndrome is characterized by excessive self-centered and immature behavior, resulting from the failure of parents to enforce 12 consistent, age-appropriate limits. Spoiled children display a lack of consideration for others, demand to have their own way, have difficulty delaying gratification, and are prone to temper outbursts. Their behavior is intrusive, obstructive, and manipulative. They are difficult to satisfy and do not remain satisfied long. They are unpleasant to be around, even for those who love them, and one often gets the impression that they do not enjoy being with themselves (p.109). Based on early conceptualizations of spoiling, the syndrome identified characteristics and attributed causes. However, according to the theoretical perspective that understands the nature of child development occurring on the dimensions of the social, psychological, and cultural realms, these early descriptions may be reconceptualized according to these three domains. Thus, in light of these definitions, the syndrome can be identified in terms of three separate, but overlapping domains: culture – self/other, social – parent/child interactions and the individual psychology of the child, as well as in terms of characteristics and attributed causes of spoiling according to five variables (see Appendix I). Although some descriptions of spoiling are easily categorized in terms of self-regulatory difficulties as well as psychological control utilized by the spoiled child, some descriptions seem more easily viewed in terms of beliefs parents hold. Beliefs may be largely categorized in terms of cultural expectations regarding self and other as they were described in terms of power, authority, and roles expected for 13 parent and child. Secondly, the above definition of the Spoiled Child Syndrome attributed the causes of spoiling to permissive and indulgent parenting style. As indicated by Appendix I, these descriptions overlap on the culture and social dimensions. Interestingly then, according to early definitions, the Spoiled Child Syndrome has more to do with the cultural and social dimensions than the individual psychology of the child. In terms of the child, self-regulation, a process that originates on the social realm (Diaz, et al., 1990; Pressley, 1995), is a difficult area for the child. Interestingly, psychological control is an area in which children, described as spoiled, engage themselves. Other definitions used more recently, but are not included in the table, share similar meanings to earlier descriptions. Other definitions have been more recently offered. For example, according to the Oxford Dictionary (Jewell, Lindberg, & Thompson, 2001), spoil means, “1. a. damage, diminish the value of. b. reduce a person’s enjoyment etc. 2. overindulge (esp. a child…) (p.806).” Additionally, children who are considered spoiled have been described as expressing obnoxious behavior, holding superior attitudes , having materialistic orientation , and as teenagers often live self-destructive, reckless lives (Hausner, 1990). The definition of a spoiled brat is often used interchangeably and has yet to be conceptually distinguished from the above definitions, although often emphasizes the degree to which a child is spoiled and is marked by an attitude of entitlement, as interpreted by others (Kindlon, 2001). The next section continues the discussion on spoiling a child, adding to it recent research that has been conducted. 14 Spoiling a Child Recent Research There is not one clear definition of spoiling a child (Bredehoft et al., 1998; McIntosh, 1989; Swain, 1985). Both Swain and McIntosh identified the “spoiled child syndrome.” Swain suggested the syndrome occurs from indulgent parenting, resulting in children who are selfish, ill mannered, obnoxious, and immoral. McIntosh identified the syndrome as excessive, self-centered, and immature behavior and suggested it a result of the failure of parents to enforce age-appropriate limits on the child. McIntosh emphasized that a common misconception of spoiling is that it is a result of overindulgence and suggested that when coupled with limits and clear expectations children do not become spoiled. In addition, McIntosh explained that indulgence might result in spoiling when the parent fails to provide guidance for acceptable behavior while attempting to meet the developmental needs for the child with material gifts and uncritical acceptance. He attributed this kind of indulgence also resulting from the parent who lacks time and energy to provide this needed guidance to the child. Hausner (1990), a child psychologist with an extensive background in working with parents and children of affluent families, asserted that numerous problems are associated with the many opportunities affluence creates. Differing from McIntosh’s (1989) explanation of the reasons behind spoiling, Hausner along with Bredehoft and colleagues (1998), asserted the problem was related to indulgent parenting. Bredehoft and colleagues offered further differentiation between overindulging and spoiling a child. Bredehoft and colleagues suggested spoiling a child is initiated as an attempt on the part of the parent to satisfy the child, while 15 overindulgence is based in the needs of the parents. Bredehoft and colleagues (2002) recently asserted however, that spoiling a child is only one aspect of overindulgence (Further discussion on parenting styles takes place in a later section). Hausner, in agreement with McIntosh, also asserted the importance of the values children learn from their parents in shaping the child’s attitudes and behavior. Overindulgence has been considered a form of child neglect (Bredehoft et al, 1998) and spoiling in terms of child abuse (Swain, 1985). Only a few research studies have investigated spoiling (Brook et al., 2000; Garner, 1996; Ispa, 1995; Robinson, 1978; Solomon et al., 1993; Wilson et al., 1981). The primary topic addressed has been that of infant spoiling. Wilson and colleagues found 79% of the fathers and 66% of the mothers believed infants could be spoiled. Further, these researchers determined that more than half of the mothers and 40% of these fathers believed spoiling was a result of not setting limits or letting the infant have his/her own way. Less than 20% believed spoiling resulted from giving the child too many material items, by rocking and holding the child too much, and/or by the infant’s ability to alter the parents’ schedules. Two-thirds of these parents believed in negative outcomes for the infant and less educated parents had more rigid and negative views on spoiling. Based on results from this study, Nelms (1983) suggested further avenue of study should investigate parents’ views on spoiling, how parents deal with behaviors they interpret as spoiled, and suggested the awareness of sociocultural influences may affect parental concerns regarding spoiling their child. 16 Solomon and colleagues (Solomon et al., 1993) developed questionnaire to measure the beliefs and attitudes parents held pertaining to spoiling and found support for a developing construct. Their study addressed whether or not parents believe they could spoil a child and attitudes that placed infants at-risk. Results of the Solomon study identified three types of beliefs: (Type 1) those who did not believe one could spoil an infant, (Type 2) those who believe one could and should spoil an infant, and (Type 3) those who believe one could spoil an infant but should not. Type 1s were more likely to have higher educations and higher income, Type 3 parents typically had lower education and lower annual incomes, and be African American or “other” (Categories only name Caucasian, African American, and “other”). Type 2 parents differed significantly from Type 1 and 3 parents believing a positive impact would result from being over-attentive to the child. Interestingly, although Type 3 parents were more apt to show unresponsiveness to their infants needs for attachment (for a comprehensive review on attachment, see Cummings & Cummings, 2002), neither the variations of beliefs nor the potential risks to the child’s ongoing development were explored. Kindlon (2001) recently conducted a survey (PPM survey) across the nation and found that two-thirds of the upper-middle and high SES parents who filled out a questionnaire consider their child spoiled. Results from his study indicated less than one in twelve of the participants reported their child “very spoiled.” Kindlon reported that parents whose annual family income was more than $100,000 were more likely to rate their child as spoiled. Approximately one out of nine teenagers who participated in the survey considered they were themselves spoiled and believed that, 17 although they were not, others they knew were “spoiled brats.” The teenagers considered spoiled brats those children who were used to getting their own way and continued to expect it. Ninety-two percent of the children and their families were categorized “white”. Eighty percent of students (age 14-18) categorized themselves “white”. Students included in the analyzed responses to questionnaires were obtained from one public, two independent, and one parochial school. Through a series of interviews with children, Kindlon’s (2001) findings also indicated that many of the children were often depressed, anxious, and lonely. Further, they were at a higher risk for drunk driving, smoking marijuana, underachieving at school, and cheating on tests. Girls were also at greater risk of having bulimia. Further, girls whose fathers were identified as indulgent were at greater risk of being very spoiled. Both parents and children reported receiving an allowance without having to do chores was related to being spoiled. Kindlon’s study also identified five characteristics common of teens who did not manifest any of the “seven deadly syndromes” (greed was the syndrome associated with the spoiled brat). The characteristics were: families ate dinner together frequently, parents had not divorced or separated, children were required to keep their rooms cleaned, they did not have phones in their bedrooms; and they participated in community service. Summary There is not one way to define spoiling a child, nor is research clear resolving why children become spoiled (Bredehoft et al., 1998; McIntosh, 1989; Swain, 1985). Bredehoft and researchers suggested there is an underlying attempt to satisfy needs, whether those of the parent or of the child. Early research investigated beliefs about 18 spoiling infants (Solomon et al., 1993; Wilson et al, 1981) and since Cole’s (1977) study, recent research (e.g. Kindlon, 2001) has resumed inquiry into the voices of the children, who are experiencing effects of being spoiled. Interestingly, Kindlon’s study revealed family dinners, community service, and household chores, as common with children who did not seem to experience negative effects of rearing children in the midst of plenty. Further, questions brought up by Nelm’s (1983) regarding sociocultural consideration regarding spoiling have yet to be explored. The next section begins with a look into the social context of the parent and child in interaction. Social Context: Parent and Child in Interaction A major goal of parenting is the socialization of self-regulation (Grolnick & Farkas, 2002). Some researchers have discussed self-regulation in terms of a transformation of an individual from biological processes to higher levels of thought through the assistance of a parent or caregiver who has attained higher abilities (Diaz et al., 1990). Grolnick and Farkas (2002), in their review of the research on parenting and self-regulation, united the many meanings of self-regulation into “actions that are initiated by the self and are thus experienced as choiceful or autonomous” (p.90). According to researchers (Diaz et al., 1990), self-regulatory development requires the sensitive attention of the parent in order to facilitate this process of higher order development in the child as it emerges. Important to its development in the child is the gradual transfer of responsibility from the parent to the child. From this perspective, development is not simply a chance happening, but a deliberate and guided process, initiated by the parent. 19 The child characteristics indicated from the definition of the Spoiled Child Syndrome are: difficulty delaying gratification, inability to remain satisfied long, and proneness to temper outbursts (McIntosh, 1989; Swain, 1985). These characteristics all reappear here in the individual child with regard to difficulties in self-regulatory ability. The discussion that follows examines the literature in two different realms of self-regulation, behavioral and emotional, and identifies problems manifested in each, which are consistent with the characteristics of the spoiled child. Important to this discussion is the interaction patterns revealed in the literature pertaining to parenting style. Concepts represented in literature pertaining to self-regulation are identified in terms of emotion regulation and delay of gratification (Grolnick & Farkas, 2002) as well as social regulation which includes social decision-making, forming a possible link to academic self-regulation (Patrick, 1997). Beginning this discussion of the research on self-regulation is a discussion on parental styles as it is important in understanding parenting communication that either facilitates or inhibits the internalization necessary for self-regulation to develop. Parenting Styles In an early discussion on parenting, Baumrind (1966) conceptualized parenting according to prevalent styles: authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive. According to this perspective, the authoritative style described as verbal give and take, encouraged reasoning and problem solving, yet exercised firm control with the child. The definition of an authoritarian style of parenting was: high parental control, firmness, restrictive, and relied on punishment rather than verbal reasoning as a means to control behavior. Permissive style parents neither set limits, nor were they 20 actively involved in the guidance of the child. The child, left to regulate his or her own actions, was independent of guidance or direction. Interestingly, the term self- regulation used here meant freedom in the sense that it lacked restraint. Baumrind further identified parenting in terms of dimensions of parenting including, parental warmth- responsiveness and harsh-rejecting. Grolnick (2003) recently made an argument related to the issue of being “in control” (p.33) versus controlling. Because this issue comes across in the literature quite frequently, it is important to bring up here. Grolnick’s argument was that the type of control beneficial to children is that of the parent being in control. When, however, parents use manipulation, threats, and other forms of external methods for controlling a child, this undermines their development and control and is detrimental. She further argued that because of a child’s need for the development of autonomy, controlling communication might result in a passive compliance without the real sense of development toward becoming a competent individual. Specifically of interest in relation to the spoiled child and parenting is the notion of permissive parenting. Baumrind’s (1966) review of the historical context in which permissiveness grew revealed variations of understandings parents had according to beliefs and values held of the child. According to Baumrind, these beliefs and values changed as different child experts asserted notions of freedom and control. Permissive parenting is grounded in the thinking that a child should be left on his or her own, free from imposition as an alternative to being controlled by the adult. Self-regulation meant “free from restraint, and unconcerned about expression of impulse or the effects of his carelessness (Baumrind, 1966, p.889).” This view of 21 self-regulation is conceptually different from an understanding of self-regulation that requires long-term development (Pressley, 1995) as well as develops over the course of a guiding interaction that takes place by the parent assisting the child, gradually relinquishing control (Diaz et al., 1990). Further development of parenting styles research revealed two types of permissive parenting, indulgent and neg1ectful (Lamborn et al., 1991). Both categories of parenting shared in low levels of control offered by parents. Revisiting the historical background of this ideology, Lamborn and colleagues discussed reasons for some parents’ laxity are based in foundations of democracy, trust, and indulgence while other families who exercised low levels of control more reflects a lack of responsibility and disengagement from child care responsibilities. Sprott (1994) discussed the importance of considering the cultural understandings of the nature of child development that may differ among parents of different cultural backgrounds, in revealing child effects. Sprott argued permissive parenting for Intuit parents, for example, is to allow their children freedom out of a sense of respect, which ties into their spiritual understanding of the child. Sprott’s argument then is that it is important to note the nature of responsible parenting norms among cultures, which may differ from dominant cultural views on parenting. Much of parenting style research is, however, conducted with Euro- American, middle class families. In order to study these two types of permissive styles of parenting, results were obtained from questionnaires sent out to approximately 10,000 middle income high-schools in California and Wisconsin (Lamborn et al., 1991). Results of the questionnaires revealed that students who 22 reported their parents as neglectful scored with the poorest outcomes in terms of problem behavior and school performance. Adolescents who reported their parent as indulgent also fared no better in terms of academic competence and deviance such as drug and alcohol use and school misconduct than children who were neglected. Indulged children, however, scored highest in measures of social competence and self-confidence, which researchers suggested portrayed these children as psychologically adjusted, yet were oriented toward their peers, especially in terms of social activities that some adolescent peer groups value and that many adults do not so highly value. Interestingly, although greater somatic stress reportedly existed in children reared in more authoritarian families than in those from indulgent homes, authoritarian parenting, which included parental acceptance and strictness, had a positive affect on perceived academic competence of the children (Lamborn et al., 1998). Lamborn and her colleagues suggested the possibility exists there is an additional dimension in parenting that was not measured. These researchers suggested further studies would benefit by using multimethods and informants. Recent research (Chen, Liu, & Li, 2000) has found support for indulgence as a distinct construct and dimension to parenting. Chen and colleagues discussed indulgence meant irresponsible parenting to Chinese parents. These researchers defined indulgence as parents’ attempt to satisfy their children’s desires, yielding to their children’s demands, and high tolerance of inappropriate behaviors in their children. Included in the description of how parents may indulge their children, researchers considered lax limit-setting, while acknowledging that the parent may be 23 warm and affectionate. For Chinese children in China, paternal indulgence, not maternal indulgence, was associated with adjustment difficulties in children. Researchers suggested parenting style changed according to the age of the child. Further complexity exists in understanding the nature of parenting that appears permissive or indulgent. Researchers in the United States frequently interpret privileged treatment of young children as indulgence (Mosier & Rogoff, 2003). However, Mosier and Rogoff found that special treatment of toddlers for Guatemalan Mayan mothers resulted in the development of culturally valued goals, indicating the existence of a separate, culturally specific, childrearing model. By allowing the child freedom of choice when the child was very young, this early, seemingly indulgent treatment, both promoted voluntary cooperation and respect for other’s freedom of choice. This model of childrearing allowed for gradual changes in behavior as the child matured and took on new roles as a family member. Overindulgence as a separate construct has been investigated in the U.S. (Bredehoft et al., 1998). Bredehoft and his colleagues, in what they stated was a first attempt to investigate overindulgence directly, defined overindulgence as parenting that inundates “their children with family resources such as material wealth, time, experiences, and lack of responsibility…give children too much of what looks good, too long and at developmentally inappropriate times…to meet their own needs, not the needs of their children (p.4).” The demographics of Bredehoft’s study indicated adult respondents who reported they had been from indulged families also reported high levels of education (almost 70% with bachelors and masters degrees). Typically, these overindulging families had higher income and children lived with 24 both parents (87%). A substantial percentage (27%) of respondents who reported they were from indulged homes reported physical violence defined as being spanked, hit with belts or other objects, or beaten. Fifteen percent respondents who reported indulgence indicated a family member had sexually abused them. Fifty-one percent reported addiction in their families, which included alcohol (66%), drugs (10%), work (10%), food (9%), perfectionism (2%), codependency (2%), and sex (2%). Behavioral Self-Regulation and Parenting Style Self-regulation is often studied in relation to parenting in terms of outcome behaviors such as drug and alcohol use in children. It is within these interaction patterns that the types of communication that takes place in families are revealed, of children having difficulty in terms of self-regulation. In one study, parental interactions that were reportedly harsher, more unpredictable, and less competent were more common in children with lower levels of self-regulatory behavior (Brody & Flor, 1998). Even, in the case of African American families whose older siblings oftentimes served the role of parents, greater conflicted communications occurred in greater levels in children who exhibited lower self-regulatory abilities (Brody, Stoneman, Smith, & Gibson, 1999). These researchers reported bi-directional influences when observing parental interactions in which parents attended to negative behavior and ignored positive behavior of their children, resulting in the noxious behavior problems in children. Researchers (Patterson, DeBaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989) suggested the child’s behavior maintains this cycle. According to these findings, there are differences in the ways parents respond to, communicate, and attend to their children, in some cases even establishing a cycle of behaviors 25 leading to later antisocial behaviors. Interestingly, stress was a factor that was associated with parents who ineffectively monitored their child maintaining the cycle of coercive patterns. According to definitions of the spoiled child and proposed parenting styles of permissive parenting, this research reveals an interesting pattern occurring when parents regularly ignore children at inappropriate times and do not provide for them the guidance needed in order to develop behavior regulation, that in some cases are considered spoiled. Further linking self-regulation, in terms of drug and alcohol outcome behavior, to parental style offers additional clarification. There is some evidence in studies conducted of college age students, in retrospect, students with lower levels of alcohol use reported they perceived their parents utilized a more authoritative style of parenting (Patuk-Peckham et al, 2001). Students who reported their same-sex parent was permissive also indicated they showed less ability to use self-regulatory behavior with regard to drinking. Those parenting characteristics that were associated with reports of higher ability to self-regulate their drinking were parental warmth, reason, flexibility, and verbal give and take. Eighty percent of students for this study were categorized “white”. Another researcher (Strange, 1998) also found the authoritative style indicative of reports of parents whose college student reported higher abilities to manage their time, exert effort, use note-taking skills, and maintain a sense of control in their academic lives. The groups surveyed for this study were almost 60% Caucasian and approximately 30% Asian. 26 Emotional Self-Regulation and Parenting Style The ability for a child to develop the ability to regulate one’s emotions begins early in life and research reveals the joint effort of the parent and child communication proposed by Diaz and colleagues (1990). An example of this is from one study conducted of mothers’ interaction with their infants resulting in differences in emotional regulation (Rosenblum, McDonough, Muzik, Miller, & Sameroff, 2002). Parents with their infants progressed through three brief segments of time challenging affective self-regulation. In the first segment the mother/child dyad, interact in playful face-to-face play, followed by a brief period of interruption where the mother was to remain unresponsive to her child, and then a period of attempting to reengage the child. Infants displayed mixed patterns of reengagement with the mother. Infants showed signs of difficulty reengaging and parents varied in their means of initiating reengagement through non-verbal (visual affect, picking up the child from the high chair) and verbal means. These researchers found that emotional warmth, acceptance, and sensitive responsiveness characterized parents who were not distorted in their representations of their infant’s response. They suggested that when parents seemed to have distorted representations of their infants during reengagement, greater emotional turmoil might have exacerbated further negative affect. Mothers in the distorted category represented higher depressive symptoms. Importantly, response interactions only showed differences on the reengagement segment of the observation and were similar in the initial interactions parents had with their children. 27 The above research findings indicate a pattern of interaction, affected by the mother’s understanding of her child’s behavior, that resulted in difficulties the child faced in regulating his/her own emotions. As emerged from behavioral regulation research as well, parenting communication patterns shaped abilities the child had, pertaining to self-regulatory processes, and resulted in different outcomes. From the above studies, the difficulty exists in determining how parents and their children are actually constructing the information, which establishes and maintains interactions that may pose a long-term threat to child developmental processes in terms of self- regulation. Permissive Parenting and Spoiling Research indicates that parenting is a complex and dynamic process that requires gradual and long-term investment resulting in child effects (Grusec, 2002). Based on the findings, the research on parenting style is inconsistent at best. There is no indication permissive parenting causes spoiling. While permissive parenting shares some commonalities with characteristics of spoiling, there remain several questions and limitations that challenge the currently held view that spoiling is a result of permissive parenting. First, there is no indication spoiling, marked by a sense of entitlement, is a direct result in children whose parents adopt a permissive or indulgent style of parenting, rather, that spoiling is likely the effect of a number of different processes at play. Second, there is gap in the research that addresses parenting styles in different sociocultural groups outside of middle-class, European American families (Chao, 2000; Chen et al., 2000; Hyesoo & Chung, 2003). In particular, there is a gap in the research that addresses parenting in affluent 28 communities (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005) making it difficult, if not impossible, to make any definitive conclusions for affluent parent-child relationships. Third, there appears a mismatch of the permissive construct and spoiling in terms parental control, which may imply a distinct model of childrearing underlying spoiling. First, although the research on parenting style, in particular, permissive and indulgent parenting addresses several of the emotional and behavioral outcomes that characterize the child considered spoiled, a common theme among practitioners and researchers on spoiling is the child holding a sense or attitude of entitlement in which the child comes to expect and demand special treatment from others. Hence, although research on permissive parenting reveals some of the outcome behaviors associated with spoiling, such as those relating to self-regulation, further investigation requires addressing the question of why, specifically, an underlying attitude of entitlement develops in the child. Second is the issue Nelms (1983) may have referred to when suggesting the need for sociocultural consideration regarding the issue of spoiling. When applied to socio-cultural groups outside of middle-class, European-American, mixed results are obtained pertaining to parenting style and child effects. In particular, in the United States, while permissive parenting is traditionally viewed as a disapproved style of childrearing, recent research (Chao, 2000; Chen et al., 2000; Mosier & Rogoff, 2003) indicates different cultural models of childrearing exist in which parent-child effects vary with cultural beliefs and values in different settings. These models challenge the traditionally held belief in which permissiveness may be dismissed in terms of parents bringing their children toward an internalization of culturally valued goals. 29 Further, recent research into the problems affecting affluent families (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005) indicates parenting in this context may represent a separate cultural model for childrearing in which underlying cultural beliefs and/or goals may differ from the traditionally studied families in the United States. In terms of spoiling, this would require the particular investigation into spoiling within the cultural models of childrearing for affluent communities. The third area, which raises questions with regard to whether or not permissive parenting is the same as spoiling, is concerning the dimension of parental control. Spoiling is similar to permissive in that it shares the lack of parental limit setting, however, both permissive and indulgent styles are operationalized to have low levels of control. Characteristics representing spoiling, however, indicate there may exist high levels of psychological control. The implication here is that for parents involved in the process of spoiling, underlying beliefs may represent spoiling as a distinct model for childrearing, which includes the dynamics existent in processes of psychological control. In light of the research on parenting styles, although permissive parenting shares in some characteristics with spoiling, it differs in others. While parents who adopt a permissive style are characterized with laxity concerning discipline (Baumrind, 1966) and those who indulge their children may give their children too many material items (Lamborn et al., 1991), the interaction that shapes the occurrence of spoiling deviates from permissive in the sense that it also promotes a marked sense of entitlement in the child. Further, the implication here is that the parent-child interaction is characterized by beliefs that relate to psychological 30 control, which is contrasted from the permissive or indulgent styles, which identifies low levels of control. Thus, given the complexity of the parent-child relationship that establishes the child’s later development, the context embedded in this interaction warrants consideration. Inasmuch as cultural beliefs and goals held by parents shape parent-child interactions (Rogoff, 2003), underlying beliefs held by affluent families that shape these occurrences of spoiling, require further exploration. Summary This section presented research on parent-child interactions as it has traditionally been viewed, based primarily on middle-class, European samples in the United States. Discussion took place regarding the indication that exists that different underlying parental beliefs may relate to various child effects. Discussion continued with an examination of parenting style research and self-regulation effects as it relates to spoiling a child. Special attention addressed the permissive style of parenting as pertaining in the literature to a style of parenting that allows free reign to children (Baumrind, 1966). High school students who reported they were from permissive-indulgent families reported high social competence yet engaged in deviant behaviors including drug and alcohol use and school misconduct (Lamborn et al, 1991). Investigation into a sample of college students who reported they were overindulged had parents who were predominantly educated and were two-parent families (Bredehoft et al, 1998). A substantial number of those who reported overindulgence in one study also reported abuse (27%). Behavioral (Brody & Flor, 1998) and emotional self-regulation (Rosenblum et al., 2002) were examined, 31 revealing patterns of parents interacting with their children that evidently develop and maintain children’s ability to regulate their emotions well into the college years. While we know there are some common effects of the permissive-indulgent styles of parenting as operationalized in the literature and spoiling parenting, there remain challenges to the acceptance of the permissive parenting style construct in explaining spoiling in its entirety. While, it may be implied from the research just presented that parents who engage in patterns of spoiling interaction do not provide the guidance needed in areas the child needs to develop, these effects are evidently context specific and largely embedded in underlying beliefs not well addressed by the permissive parenting style research. For example, while emotional outbursts may typify the spoiled effect in the child and may demonstrate the child has not been required to develop necessary internal processes, in other settings the child may present him or herself as highly socially competent. Underlying these inconsistencies, discussion must go beyond the identified styles of parenting and address the underlying cultural beliefs and goals that become internalized. The next section attempts to answer some of the questions remaining from the literature just presented. Particular attention in this next section is on underlying beliefs as they shape the interactions between the parent and the child in the process of spoiling, and result in internalization. Culture, Parental Control, Internalized Beliefs, and the Spoiled Child As discussed earlier, the cultural context creates a background, rich with ways of viewing childrearing that parents may oftentimes take for granted (Rogoff, 2003). While individuals are members of families that create a culture, they may also 32 participate in a wide variety of other cultures, such as schools, churches, temples, and other organized groups that collectively hold values and goals for their children. Although each individual within a culture varies in the way s/he understands and makes sense of their selves and others, within this context, certain expectations exist in which families socialize children in similar ways of viewing the self and others in and out of the community. In thinking about why spoiling takes place within the context of the parent-child interaction, it is important to consider the context that gives meaning to these interactions. At this point an expanded view of spoiling a child is presented (see Appendix II). This chart is separated for the sake of clarification between the parent and the child in terms of domains and constructs associated with spoiling. Domains are consistent with Appendix I, which represented culture, social, and individual realms important in understanding spoiling. Further, constructs related to spoiling for the parent include self-regulation, control, indulgence, permissiveness, and beliefs. For the child, self-regulation, control, and beliefs are important constructs that pertain to spoiling. The nature of control, the components of indulgence and permissiveness, guidance given toward self-regulation in the child, are all constructs related to parenting and spoiled child effects. For the child, internal and external needs are outlined as well as beliefs of entitlement. Discussion follows regarding those characteristics identified on the chart. Culture The need exists to explore cultural models of childrearing while holding a view of cultural beliefs loosely, not stereotyping certain cultural groups as forming 33 one belief system or another (Sprott, 1994). Frequently, however, countries are represented in research as holding polarized views of cultural values (Raeff, 1997). While some cultures are viewed in terms of the value placed on collectivism, Western society is frequently viewed as placing emphasis on individualism (Harwood, Leyendecker, Carlson, Asencio, & Miller, 2002; Raeff, 1997). Collective values emphasize concern for interdependence, placing priority on the well-being and needs of the family and others over the self (Chao, 1994; Harwood et al., 2002; Steidel & Contreras, 2003). While collective goals may center on promoting relatedness, individualism, however, promotes notions of independence, freedom, and goals of autonomy development in children. Grolnick (2003) pointed out that autonomy development from the perspective of self-determination theory is not in conflict with relatedness. While broad general statements have been suggested, research reveals the diversity of goals that exist within cultures in shaping childrearing patterns (Raeff, 1997; Grolnick, 2003). It would be inaccurate to represent the United States as a composite of individuals who hold individualistic views to the extent that they devalue community and family; rather, the U.S. consists of individuals, as in all countries, who embrace both important in various degrees (Oyserman, Coo, Kemmelmeier, 2002; Raeff, 1997). While overall, researchers suggest the U.S. tends to hold beliefs that are more individualistic and less collective than individuals in some countries, variation exists among communities and individuals. For example, Oyserman and colleagues (2002) concluded from their meta-analysis that individuals studied from a Latino background tended to hold more collective views, yet were similar to individuals in 34 the U.S. in terms of individualistic beliefs. Research comparing Latino cultural values, however, largely reveals tendencies for individuals of this background to place priority on the needs of the family over the needs of the self (Harwood et al., 2002). Furthermore, differences exist when comparing those who are more acculturated to the way of life in the United States to those who are less acculturated (Harwood et al., 2002; Hyesoo & Chung, 2003). Acculturation research informs an understanding of changes in beliefs that develop within individuals among the larger culture of the United States corresponding with time spent in the U.S (Phinney, Ong & Madden, 2000). Phinney and colleagues found that, while collectively shared beliefs may exist in one context, as a result of a new experiences in a different setting, different beliefs from the dominant culture emerge. While a diversity of goals exist in the United States, the culture of affluence largely reveals an emphasis on individualism, materialism, consumerism, and the pursuit of status, power, and success as it eagerly plays out in everyday activities (Goff & Fleisher, 1999). Achievement of a level of affluence in the United States can be viewed in terms of attainment of the American Dream. Recent research (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005), however, reveals underexplored challenges to the well-being of affluent children, similar to those challenges experienced by children living in the inner city. Culture of Affluence Recent research (Kindlon, 2001; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005) reveals costs to affluence as it pertains to the individual and family well-being. While some parents 35 pursue and attempt to maintain the American Dream, the cost is paid by the children. Depression and anxiety are adjustment problems just now coming to the attention of researchers as problems affecting children in affluent communities. While Luthar and Latendresse discussed the assumption exists that these children would have the resources to receive attention to problems that emerge, problems may actually go unattended. They suggested that while depression and/or anxiety may be discretely remedied by medication and/or psychotherapy, the lifestyle patterns and its toll on the parent-child relationship needed for the child’s well being, may less readily receive attention. It has generally been assumed that children of affluent families were not at- risk when compared to children from inner city backgrounds, yet recent findings reveal great similarities of those at each extreme of the socioeconomic strata (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). In comparing the results of inner-city students with affluent suburban students, Luthar and Latendresse discovered that early adolescents at both SES extremes showed admiration for displays of contempt toward authority. These researchers concluded affluent adolescents were similar in comparison to inner-city counterparts in their value of some attributes of peers that could compromise their well-being and overall competence. Affluent suburban children as young as the seventh grade revealed self- reported adjustment problems (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). Luthar and colleagues discussed their findings as revealing behavior disturbances across several domains and increasing with age. These researchers also found strong emphasis of physical attractiveness among affluent girls related to popularity. Affluent high peer status 36 was linked with low academic effort and aggressiveness in girls, while substance use was linked for boys. Luthar and Latendresse’s examination of one cohort studied revealed twenty percent of the affluent students reported involvement with substance use as well as suffered from depression and physiologically manifest anxiety. Across the three affluent cohorts examined, researchers found a disconnect in families and pressured lifestyles that posed challenges to these youth’s well being (Luther & Latendresse, 2005). Luther and Latendresse discussed reasons behind difficulties faced by these children included high pressured lifestyles and isolation from adults. In relationship to one family routine, eating dinner together with parents, the researchers identified a link with self-reported adjustment and performance at school, even after accounting for dimensions of parenting which included emotional closeness with parents. Embedded in this culture of affluence, researchers (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005) argue, are beliefs of materialism and the pursuit of happiness. Csikszentmihalyi pointed out that, while early thinkers such as Locke identified these pursuits as rights to enjoy, they were based in the understanding of the importance of self-discipline and prudence. The dominant ideology today, he argued, is a “thoughtless hedonism” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999, p.821) and Diener (2000) argued of its entrapment, the similarity of a “hedonic treadmill.” Csikszentmihalyi stated there is a dominant call in this affluent culture “to do one’s thing regardless of the consequences (p.821).” Thus, these researchers suggested, inasmuch as the addictive pursuit of power, status, and material wealth becomes an end in itself, its effect may result in much less than the happiness it once promised. 37 Luthar and Latendresse suggested this attempt to control the material environment contributes to the depression and anxiety experienced in families while leaving the children in loneliness and isolation. Thus, while the pursuit of wealth for its own sake may offer some control in life, the very attempt to maintain the status and power that comes with it may rob children of the internal development needed to derive internal satisfaction in life (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). Discussion now turns attention to parental control as it elucidates spoiling in the parent-child relationship. Parental Control An underlying theme of control has emerged in each of the previous areas of discussion. Of considerable importance in revealing the processes underlying spoiling is attention to the notion of control evident in the parent-child interaction. Interestingly, however, as discussed earlier, one critical point of divergence of spoiling from permissive parenting is at the dimension of control. According to researchers (Wertsch, 1991; Grolnick, 2003), the goal of self-regulation or autonomous behavior requires the gradual relinquishment of control according to the needs of the child. Differences exist, however, according to when parents offer control, are in-control, and whether it is acceptable to control child behavior at all (Grolnick, 2003; Rogoff, 2003; Harwood et al., 2003). Accordingly, changing beliefs all interplay within the parent-child interaction as the child and the parent construct meaning from the interaction, whether developing in the child the means to self- regulate or display self-control. Interestingly, whether political practices, such as the “one child policy” in China (Fong, 2004; Hesketh & Zhu, 1997) or economic 38 changes allowing increased resources to children in the United States (Goff & Fleisher, 1999), child effects are increasingly being reported with regard to problems attributed to child spoiling (Fong; Goff & Fleisher; Hesketh & Zhu) and children described as “out of control” (Kindlon, 2001). Behavioral Control The important issue of control, and moreover, how the parent and child construct their understanding of the communication that takes place in this dyad, is addressed in this section. Researchers, Barber and Harmon (2002) described traditional measures of parental control as attempts on the part of the parent to regulate the behavior of their children, either through disciplinary strategies, rewards and/or punishments, or in the ways in which parents supervise their children. This definition particularly refers to behavioral control. Considered behavior control, child monitoring is identified as a protective factor against adolescent drug abuse (Wright & Pemberton, 2004). For African American families, authoritarian reared children, who used control, yet communicated with warmth, reported better outcomes (Brody & Flor, 1998). In one study, researchers (Brody & Flor, 1998) suggested maternal religiosity and outside resources linked with parent’s ability to monitor her child contributed to factors that enable the mother to better assure her child's protection. Thus, an aspect of child monitoring has do with maternal resources, identified as important for many parents in relation to their ability to monitor the child when the parent is not physically able to do so (Brody & Flor, 1998; Murry & Brody, 1999). This however, still does not assure the child is developing self-regulatory processes, but that the 39 parent maintains control of the environment, thereby reducing the possibility of threat to the child (Grolnick, 2003). In the case of affluent families, Luthar and Latendresse (2005) discussed that children are often left alone for extended periods of time. Given that parents have the resources to provide appropriate monitoring of the child and do not, perception of threat to the child may be low because of the context, therefore inviting lax monitoring. Permissive parenting, as discussed earlier, displays patterns of low levels of control (Baumrind, 1966). However, according to the theoretical perspective that requires a kind of scaffolding according to the child’s needs, children would require that parents differ in their response to their child’s needs regarding supervision and monitoring, offering more or less when needed. The research just discussed, conducted by Brody and his colleagues (Brody & Flor, 1998; Murry & Brody, 1999), supports this view. In a recent study, researchers (Pomerantz & Eaton, 2000) also found that although parent’s motives were positive, there were differences, according to age and perceived competence, in how parents monitored and helped their children in homework activities. Drawing from this separate domain of monitoring behavior, the important implication is there are dual messages in how children interpret parent’s monitoring and involvement behaviors, as suggested by researchers with regard to homework monitoring. That is, while children may present themselves competently to parents in one domain and demand greater autonomy and independence, spoiling may occur when the child lacks the internal processes to ensure decision-making that supports the child’s well-being. 40 Furthermore, according to some researchers, (Bredehoft et al., 1998) parents may not vary their practices according to the needs of the child, but according to their own needs. With regard to child monitoring, this lack of provision offered to children or teens who still require it is problematic. Grolnick (2003), in her discussion on the reasons behind parental control, suggested there are internal and external needs parents have in the determinations they make regarding decisions to control. Grolnick suggested, while external needs parents have may be demanded from the environment, internal needs may center around egoistic needs, or needs centering on the parent. While lack of behavioral control is one area thought to be linked with spoiling, psychological control represents an area relatively unaddressed in relation to spoiling. Psychological Control Until only recently, researchers studied parental effects strictly in the behavioral realm (Barber, 2002). However, a shift was made in being able to distinguish behavioral control from psychological control (Pettit & Laird, 2003). Skinner (1971) interestingly wrote that those so adamantly opposed to manipulation of behavior often vigorously employ mind manipulation. The rationale for this, he stated, is that there appears to be no threat made when the mind is responsible for change in the behavior. However, researchers now find there are costs to psychological control (Barber, 1996) as well as are there costs to refusing a child the needed involvement required for the child to form higher-level thinking. On this, Skinner (1971) wrote, “to refuse control is to leave control not to the person himself, but to other parts of the social and non-social environments” (p.84). Grolnick (2003) 41 recently suggested that parents may become so involved in their cultural surroundings; they may not notice the shaping effects the social context has in translating into their own behavior. Detrimental to a child’s sense of self-processes, psychological control differs from behavioral control from the standpoint that its primary purpose is simply to control the thoughts of the child (Barber, 1996). Characteristics that identify this type of control include invalidating feelings, guilt induction, withdrawal of love, inconsistent expressions of emotions, and constraining verbal expressions. Of particular interest toward an understanding of the nature of child spoiling is Barber’s inclusion of deifying, babying, and excessively gratifying the child in further characterizing psychological control (Barber & Harmon, 2002). Counter to a child’s development of self-processes, psychological controls are parental attempts to intrude and manipulate the child’s thoughts by means of shame, guilt, and anxiety (Barber, 1996). Psychological control can have widespread effects on the child’s ability to internalize the thought process necessary to formulate one’s own goals and carry them out effectively (Barber). Research reveals internalizing and externalizing problems associated with psychological control (Barber, Olsen, & Shagle, 1994; Galambos, Barker, & Almeida, 2003). Internalizing problems such as depression, loneliness, and confusion were significantly related to both mother’s and youth’s reports of psychological control (Barber et al., 1994). Psychological control was measured by questions assessing parental messages of pressure to change and using love withdrawal as a means to manipulate behavior. Externalizing problems, which included drugs, truant 42 behavior, and swearing, were reported in relation to behavioral control when mothers utilized psychological control as well. There was, however, a negative relationship between psychological and behavioral control which researchers discussed represented that parents who tend to intrude psychologically on their children appear predictably less restrictive of what their child is doing. Other researchers (Galambos, et al., 2003) found similar results in a longitudinal study. While recent research identifies variables at play with regard to spoiling, nowhere is the complexity and dynamic nature of psychological control existent in some affluent families better illustrated than through the actual parent-child interaction. The story of a child named Larry, encountered by Robert Coles (1977), through his interviews with some of the most privileged in the United States, illustrated the nature of this interaction. Depicted was an example of a seemingly well-meaning affluent parent who ultimately silenced his son and rather developed in him the quality of becoming “increasingly agreeable” (p. 154). Over the years, Larry was repeatedly socialized with threats and emotional withdrawal, and forbidden to close friendships with those his father perceived “marked” (p. 127) him. In regular conversations with his father, Larry encountered markedly class related comments intending to infuse beliefs which upheld Larry’s privileged status. Especially aimed to differentiate the boy from the migrant workers who produced the father’s wealth, Larry learned attributions regarding the reasons behind their social position, are that they are “lazy” (p. 138) and “too ignorant” (p. 126). Displeased at his son’s occupation of concern for the migrant workers’ oppressed status, Larry’s father ultimately approached Larry with the prospect of 43 inheriting his profitable business. Should the inheritance become a reality, he communicated, Larry would have to learn to keep to himself his young ponderings of the exploitation of the migrant workers. Holding in his mind his fathers accusations that he was a “spoiled rich kid” (p. 140) who had nothing better to occupy his time, Larry eventually learned well the conditions of his father’s love meant he must protect and maintain his father’s privileged status and silence his own convictions. Internalized Beliefs The internalization process reflects the higher-level thinking referred to in Vygotsky’s (1997) writings as distinguished from self-control in which the child is merely carrying out the wishes of the parent or caregiver (Diaz et al., 1990). A lack of control with regard to involvement and monitoring of children establishes effects in the child who has not internalized the values/goals necessary to make self- regulated choices determining his or her behavior. Too much or too little control given to the child hinders the child’s ability to construct the intrinsic values of their own rather than simply adopting parents’ values. As discussed earlier, when self- regulation and not merely self-control is the goal, higher order thinking requires a gradual and sensitive process of parental withdrawal (Diaz et al., 1990). In order to better understand this complex process of internalization, this section is augmented with social cognitive components as it allows for discussion that includes perceptions necessary in the construction of meaning. Eccles (2002) proposed that attachment is a precursor to parental level of control the mother employs. There is some indication the level of control varies according to the degree of attachment between the mother-child while involved in a 44 task as well as differences in how much spontaneous control the mother allows the child in problem solving (Meins, 1999). Meins found sensitivity of the mother to the child's ability was evident in children who performed better on a task. Less secure- attached dyads revealed more spontaneous intrusiveness from parent (unsolicited physical help to the child), more negative feedback, and less sensitivity of mother to child’s performance. Although the researcher in this study indicated these relationships were independent of socio-economic status, little attention was given to background of participants, income level, and cultural background, which might have influenced the above engagement patterns. Perceptions play an important role in the process of internalization and construction of meaning from the social environment. Interestingly researchers found that self-regulation was higher in children when accuracy of perception of the mothers’ goals was congruent to mothers’ goals (Rodrigo, Janssens, & Ceballos, 1999). Interestingly, greater uses of control and demandingness enhanced this effect. Further, accuracy of perceptions combined with positive attributions related to mothers’ intentions/goals, were identified as important to self-regulatory development in children. As children develop, their abilities and self-processes change as do their construction of the messages they understand from their parent’s verbal and non- verbal messages. Parents, as well, based on different ages, attend to and respond differently to cues in order to make sense of their children’s behavior (Amato, 1989; Pomerantz & Eaton, 2000). In one study, for example, parents’ perceptions of their child’s level of competence related to how they disciplined their child (Dix, Ruble, & 45 Zambarano, 1989). The researchers suggested these findings implied that childrearing values may influence how information regarding their child’s behavior is interpreted and acted upon. These researchers also found that parents relied on different techniques in different situations. Power assertion was a means of discipline when threat was higher and induction was utilized increasing with age. Different parents, at times according to values parents hold for their child, however, may interpret threat, differently. Dix and colleagues suggested parents make sense of their child’s behavior using theories and concepts that are largely left unknown. There is some evidence that inductive techniques are useful in assisting the child in the internalization process (Amato, 1989; Mackey, Arnold, & Pratt, 2001). One recent study (Mackey et al., 2001), utilized a narrative interview approach to explore adolescent’s voice used in decision-making. Assessing these adolescents responsiveness to parental influences was determined according to the score representing parent’s voice in their own representations regarding moral incidents. Adolescents’ perception of their parents’ authoritative parenting style, which included high demandingness and responsiveness to a child’s needs, corresponded to parent influence in their own decision-making. Researchers (Rudy & Grusec, 2001) suggest that communication of values in ways that are warm and benign have the greatest possibility of becoming internalized. Sense of Entitlement Important to this discussion of spoiling effects is the sense of entitlement that develops in the child (Hausner, 1990; Kindlon, 2001). Coles (1977) noted that in all of his work with children in the United States, no children had such preoccupation 46 about their “self” more than those raised in affluent homes. He discussed this issue and conceptualization was cultivated inevitably resulting from their experience of being a privileged member of society. While Coles (1977) noted there is an inevitable, normal, and realistic sense of entitlement that is part of the identity affluent children construct of themselves, he discussed the shift from healthy narcissism to pathological entitlement. For some children, Coles suggested the normal struggles and obligations are muted. What may develop is a high sense of class-connected attitude of an “us” versus “them” with regard to what one should expect and how one should be treated. Whether children are considered spoiled is with regard to the matter of degree, he wrote, and to the degree they are self-centered, petulant, and demanding. Coles (1977) discussed the danger that exists of forsaking involvement with people for a life of passionate occupation with objects and possessions. Further, the child considered spoiled does not suffer from grandiose illusions, as in pathological entitlement, but may be spoiled by the attitude behind the excess that is given the child. There are spoiled children who are also very poor (Coles, 1977). Emmons (1987) identified the component of exploitive/entitlement a component in narcissism. The danger of this component is degree to which it exists, he suggested, which marks narcissism to pathological extents. Emmons suggested that perhaps for those who have developed this sense of exploitive manipulation of others it is a defense in order to protect their sense of self-worth. Bishop and Lane (2002), concerned with the dangers of entitlement, also argued this stance may become a refuge and defense resulting from the experience of 47 hurt, shame, and fear associated with this elevated role of status. These researchers discussed the construction of meaning the child develops is shaped by constant interactions in an attempt to satisfy the parents own narcissistic needs, yet which are thwarted by the parents true unavailability. According to these researchers, a child who experiences this great pressure to conform adopts a “false self” in order to secure the relationship with the parent. Demands for compensation, devaluation of others, and exploitive relations reverse the original role of the experience of exploitation in the parent-child relationship. Underlying needs for the child are to fill this sense of helplessness with an enhanced sense of power (Bishop & Lane, 2002). Summary This section began with a discussion regarding the importance of the culturally situated goals that interplay within the parent- child interaction. The cultural experience in affluent culture may promote high value on the individualistic self, translating into materialism (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). Interactions with the parent, however, may leave the children in isolation, loneliness, anxiety, and depression. Underlying these interactions is evidence of parental control (Grolnick, 2003). Discussion took place on parental control in terms of behavioral and psychological control utilized by parents. Behavioral control, operationalized as monitoring, had supportive effects while psychological control resulted in internalizing and externalizing problems. Important to an understanding of the development of self-regulation was the process of internalization. Understanding how children and their parents construct meaning out of experiences through their culturally embedded beliefs and perceptions was discussed, as was the nature of 48 sense of entitlement. Although a sense of entitlement is thought to be a natural result of the actuality of the child’s experience, the more dangerous extreme is merely a gradual shift into the excessive preoccupation with self (Coles, 1977). Entitlement was identified as a defense stance the child takes and associated with the child’s own experience of exploitation of his/her authentic self in the parent-child relationship (Bishop & Lane, 2002). Bishop and Lane discussed underlying needs in the child are a sense of helplessness attempted to be satisfied with an enhanced sense of power. Conclusions Raising a child to become spoiled is a serious problem. Not only does the child become as unhappy within him or herself, depressed, and anxious, as the progression of sense of entitlement reaches dangerous levels, threat exists not only to the developing individual, but to society as well (Bishop & Lane, 2002; Lasch, 1979). The overarching question addressed in the literature was, why do parents spoiling their children? In order to address this question, one must consider the individual child’s and parent’s psychology, the interaction between them (the nature of the interactions) and the context (meaning of the interaction, cultural beliefs, goals, perceptions), in which the interaction takes place. While theories have been generated, little has been done in the area of considering how they are revealed in the context of a real life setting (Rogoff, 2003) and what spoiling means to families (Nelms, 1983; Wilson et al., 1981). Although several reasons have been attributed to why children are spoiled including the focus on failing to enforce limits (McIntosh, 1989; Wilson et al., 1981), indulgent parenting (Swain, 1985), and having too many material items 49 (Wilson et al., 1981), the underlying meaning behind the interactions with which the child constructs his/her sense of self and other has not been explored. Spoiling a child goes beyond the permissive and indulgent constructs while sharing characteristics with each. While the permissive style shares with spoiling in that there may exist lax discipline, spoiling diverges in the sense that there may exist high levels of control. While researchers suggested when perceived threat to the child is high and behavioral controls are increased, the converse may also apply. That is, when in the case of affluent communities, perceived threat to the child is low, lax monitoring may be a natural effect, and relate to some of the shared outcomes in terms of self-regulation. While indulgent parenting (Lamborn et al., 1991) may exist when excess is given to the child, shared effects are also revealed with problems in children considered spoiled. Research on psychological control taken together with the nature of the development of sense of entitlement indicates an important distinction, however. Importantly, permissive-indulgent parenting ideologies are based in democracy, trust, and indulgence (Lamborn et al., 1991), and grounded in the thinking that a child should be left on one’s own, free from imposition, as an alternative to being controlled by the adult (Baumrind, 1966). These conceptualizations are based on views of responsible childrearing and which may include goals on dimensions of relatedness with goals for children’s self-processes [see Grolnick (2003) and Rogoff (2003)]. Thus, there exist various cultural models for childrearing in cultures outside of European-American middle class and variations in the ways parents socialize their children toward culturally valued goals 50 (Chao, 1994; Harwood et al., 2002). Spoiling appears to reflect a lack of concern for the goals for development of self-processes and authentic interpersonal relatedness. Based on this review of the research, the construct of spoiling may differ qualitatively in that it reveals an attempt to exert psychological control over the child primarily in order to satisfy the needs of the parent. While internal and external needs exist on the part of the parent in terms of reasons behind control, given that spoiling reveals the existence of high psychological control, it stands to reason that the goals behind spoiling center around meeting the parent’s needs. While Swain (1985) and McIntosh (1989) were accurate in that spoiling is the parent’s attempt to satisfy the child, perhaps it would be more accurate to go beyond that to say parents gratify the child’s requests and demands in order to meet their own needs. The development of sense of entitlement further supports this reasoning. Actively shaping the excessively self-concerned child has then it’s base in the cultural values existent in affluent communities, yet within the context of certain parenting interactions, the sense of entitlement is established. Disconcerting is the increasingly perpetual nature of the interactions that maintain this cycle and may spiral it to dangerous levels for the individual and for society. When parents knowingly or unknowingly engage in silencing the child’s naturally entitled requests for time, involvement, and guidance, and substitute it with pressured lifestyles centered on pursuits of wealth, status, and power, the child’s natural defenses may invite his or her demise. Still, the question remains, why do parents in affluent communities engage in the spoiling of their child and what is the actual nature of this experience? 51 CHAPTER 3 METHOD This chapter presents the design of this investigation. In order to inquire into why parents spoil their children, this study concentrated on the examination of specific mother-child dyads utilizing a case-study design according to Creswell (1998). In focusing on a small number of nine cases, the goal was to uncover the depth of experience and detailed description of why parents spoil their children and the nature of these occurrences. Additionally, this research utilized grounded theory methods according to Charmaz (2003). That is, as findings emerged from interviews and other forms of data utilized, existent theory was informed. As appropriate to a study of an ecological niche or particular cultural community, a goal was to allow data to emerge toward a description of a cultural model (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001) of childrearing for individuals in this particular affluent community in which spoiling was an experience of each member. Based on Charmaz’s (2003) description of grounded theory, both interpretive and positivist elements were included in the design of this study. That is, not only was a systematic (positivist) technique employed in order to derive meaning from the transcriptions, themes were generated by my interpretation of the words of the mothers (interpretive). Important to my approach is an understanding that through this case-study approach, I am unable to arrive at broad generalizations, as this would be inappropriate (Polkinghorne, 2003b). According to Polkinghorne, however, my goal is not generalizability, but exemplarity. That is, parents rearing their children in a similar context might understand the occurrences of spoiling in their 52 own child through the rich descriptions of these cases. Further, that researchers exploring similar lines of inquiry might benefit in comparing different situations, contribution to the field is offered. Participants I selected nine specific mother-child dyads from one affluent community in Southern California. The chronological age range of the children was set at the ages of 7-10. Affluence was set at a minimum family income of $100,000 according to Kindlon’s (2001) observation that parents whose annual family income was more than $100,000 were more likely than others to rate their child as spoiled. The inclusion of mothers was based on their belief that their children were spoiled and on their reports of attitude of entitlement, unappreciative, demanding, and excessively self-centered behavior, temper outbursts, and/or tantrums. In an initial private interview with the children, they also admitted they were spoiled or believed they had more than most children in society. Inclusion in the investigation was also dependent on the willingness of both the parent and the child to describe their experience while being recorded on audiotape. Procedures Instrumentation The primary method of gathering information was the case study. Interviews conducted for the children and mothers were separate. Interviews consisted of three open-ended questions/discussion prompts posed to mothers and three separate, but related questions asked of each child. The interviews were semi-structured, meaning that I asked predetermined questions along several dimensions of parenting and 53 which included the daily routine and nature of their experience interacting with their child. The previous review of the research served as a basis for the development of the questions and takes the assumption that culture exists within the daily routines of the individual families (see Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Weisner, 2002; Whiting & Edwards, 1988). Additionally, personal communications with researchers, L. Hausner (January 18, 2005) and D. Kindlon (January 30, 2005) also assisted in the development of the questions posed to mothers and their children. The format utilized for the interview was conversational and questions served merely as a tool in order to reveal underlying beliefs parents hold that underlie their engagement in the process of spoiling. Mothers’ interviews consisted of the following questions: 1) What does spoiling mean to you? 2) What are goals you have for your child and how do you attempt to promote these goals? and 3) What are your regular and weekend routines and some of the challenges you confront in carrying out the day? The mothers’ interviews were approximately 90 minutes in length. In addition to participating in interviews, mothers maintained a journal for a period of one week (five to seven days). The mothers received instructions to maintain a brief (15-20 minute time allotment) journal of their daily parenting interactions with their children and on their thoughts about parenting, particularly as they related to spoiling. Children’s interviews consisted of the following questions/discussion prompts: 1) What do you think you ought to be able to have? 2) What do you have that your friends do not have? and 3) How do you get something you want? The children’s interviews averaged 45 minutes in length. 54 Validity According to Polkinghorne (2003a), knowledge claims are in accordance to the themes that emerged from the transcriptions and are reasoned as such in the next chapter. Although further generalization is not possible, nor is it desirable, I made an effort to obtain the most honest responses possible as well as to ensure the accuracy of the transcription. This was also in order that by offering a depth of understanding, useful representations of individual cases may add to the base of understanding for similar cases of parents with their-children. Further, authentic representations as discussed by Lincoln (2001) were the sought after goal. Importantly, as Lincoln suggested, I provided special attention to accurately portray the research process and document the methodological decisions made along the way. This process serves to present the findings as credible and trustworthy sources of information. Triangulation of methods also assisted in adding to the assurance that the clearest picture is represented by the data presented, thus reflecting valid results. Reliability Attention addressed the reliability as it pertained to the consistency of the data collected. As the primary instrument of data collection and analysis, I ensured the consistency and reliability by several strategies discussed by Merriam (2002). Overlapping in the assurance of validity, multiple methods of collecting data assisted in assuring that the data closely reflected the reality expressed by the participants, thereby contributing to the reliability of the study. In addition, I employed an audit trail in which I described in detail how data were collected, how coding and the development of themes emerged, and how decisions were made as the study 55 progressed. I conducted a running record of my interaction with the data in the form of a journal as I concurrently engaged in data collection and analysis. Further, the journal included questions, reflections, and decisions made regarding issues, ideas, and the problems I encountered in the data collection process. Data Analysis The design of this study was the case study according to Creswell (1998) with an integrated use of grounded theory methods according to Merriam (2002) and Charmaz (2003). The first step following the interviews was to transcribe the interviews at the semantic level, which included all of the words spoken, pauses, stops, starts, and particular non-verbal notation. The method of analysis incorporated a grounded theory approach according to Charmaz (2003). That is, findings informed existent theory through a systematic constant comparison of the findings with existent research as the findings developed. Interpretation of the meaning of the transcriptions included systematic techniques. That is, followed by verbatim transcription of the interviews, I analyzed the data by open coding all information at the semantic level, followed by axial coding of particular meaning units according to the language of the participants rather than by predetermined codes. Meaning units were assigned and constantly compared and contrasted, yielding complex, inclusive categories. At that time, I also engaged in writing analytic, self-reflective memos in order to document the analytic process. Next, a process of axial coding compared keywords within and between each interview at the child as well as separately at the parent level. Comparison of codes 56 within and between data resulted in an initial reduction of 197 codes to 65. Further reduction, clarification, and the emergence of more inclusive categories resulted by naming the code based on how it related to the existent literature. By means of a constant comparative analysis, categories emerged toward the development of a cultural model (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001) of childrearing for the individuals in this particular affluent community in which spoiling was an occurrence. The next chapter presents a discussion according to the findings of this study and presentation takes place according to the model that emerged. 57 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS This chapter presents the results of the investigation in four sections. The first section consists of a brief description of the background setting of the community and an introduction to each of the nine dyads. The portraits of the mother with the child highlight the unique characteristics of each pair as they related to spoiling as well as serve as a point of reference to latter sections of the chapter. The second section presents the results to the first interview question that pertained to the meaning of spoiling. The third section addresses the first research question, “Why do parents spoil their children?” Interview questions 2 (goals) and 3 (daily activity) became of importance in uncovering the reasons why the mothers engaged in spoiling. The third section includes a presentation and discussion of the model that emerged from analyses of the mothers’ discourse and explains three themes that emerged according to each of the three components identified in the model. Examples from the mothers’ interviews serve to assist in understanding the themes that developed and colored the various shades of meaning represented by the discourse. The fourth section addresses the second research question, “What is the nature of these occurrences [of spoiling]?” While engaging in the processes of interviewing, transcribing, and concurrent analyses of the data for this investigation, this question unfolded as it pertained considerably to child effects. Therefore, while the third section includes attention addressed to the nature of spoiling as it pertains to the mother, the fourth section centers on the outcome effects of spoiling on the child. 58 The results for this section rely on the child’s response to each of their three interview questions as well as include portions of the mothers’ discourse where appropriate. Background Context and Characteristics of Community Setting and Participants Context and Characteristics of the Community Setting and Participants The particular context in which this study took place is a small affluent community just outside a major metropolitan city in Southern California. This community prides itself as holding a collective “small-town community” feel while existing just outside the major city. There exists one high school, one middle school, and several elementary schools. The quality of the educational system is a prominent feature that attracts many to this town as well as its support of family and community events. Table 1 identifies additional characteristics of each of the nine cases (See Table 1). According to Table 1, most of the mothers interviewed stayed home during the day to care for their children and had at least one other child in addition to the one interviewed. More than half of the mothers interviewed also held a college degree or higher. Table 1. Background Characteristics of Participants. Mother’s Work Status – Stay-at- home mother? Mother’s Ethnicity Mother’s Education Level Child’s Age Child’s Gender Siblings (yes/no) Comments Yes Hispanic- American College Graduate 10 Female Yes 59 Table 1: Continued Yes European Graduate Degree 8 Male Yes Yes Not Known High School 10 Female Yes Self- employed; works from home Yes Hispanic- American College Graduate 9 Male Yes Yes Euro- American Not Known 7 Female Yes Yes Euro- American College Graduate 7 Female Yes No Euro- American Doctoral/ Post Doc 7 Female Yes Self- employed; private practice Yes Euro- American Not Known 7 Female Yes Mother Retired No Euro- American Not Known 7 Female Yes Nine Portraits Case 1- Renae 1 and Louisa (10 2 ). During my initial telephone interview with Renae, she revealed she is a stay at home mother. Her husband is a doctor, which allows her that freedom. Renae stated that her daughter, Louisa, and her brother were both “high maintenance” children, which required that she stay at home. Renae described Louisa as shy but bright, and somewhat of a “prima dona”. Renae conveyed they have a housekeeper who comes once a week. Her daughter has no specific chores, but is occasionally asked to perform household tasks. When Louisa resists, Renae does not require her do the task. Renae believes 1 All names represented are pseudonym names in order to protect the anonymity of the participants. 60 she needs to behave differently with her daughter. She explained that she needs to be firmer with Louisa, not allowing her do as she pleases all the time. Renae complained that her daughter is often off in her own world, which is frustrating to her mother who values social skills. Renae confided she has occasionally been embarrassed in public as Louisa has walked silently by adults and children on her way home from school, ignoring their salutations. During my interview with Louisa, she spent a considerable amount of time discussing her imaginary friends (she had up to 100), her involvement with internet games, and the manipulation of air particles. While Louisa came across as friendly, bright, and creative, she agreed with her mother’s assessment that she was spoiled. Case 2- Joanna and Jonathan (8). During our interview, Joanna confided she values the decision she made to be a stay at home mother, despite having earned a graduate degree. Joanna declared it a privilege to be available for her son Jonathan on a daily basis; yet, confessed she often spoils her child by doing things for him that he could probably do for himself. She explained that Jonathan also has developed an attitude of entitlement, believing “he has what he has and he expects to have more.” Comparing her own upbringing to his, Joanna believes she is raising Jonathan in a culture very different from the one she experienced growing up. Joanna explained that she was born and raised in Europe, experiencing a life that was not as much focused on material items. Joanna feels her struggle to instill core values of 2 The numerical value in the parentheses represents the ages of the children. 61 appreciation and social empathy within Jonathan is linked to the contemporary mindset that success is equated with material wealth. Jonathan acknowledged he has more than many children, but also affirmed he has about the same privileges and material advantages as other children in his community. Joanna conveyed that Jonathan's reaction to initially not receiving what he wants is to negotiate or to resort to persistent whining. Joanna admitted to usually "caving," succumbing to his persistence to make it easier on herself, to make her son happy, or to hold up appearances when they are in public. Reflecting on her actions with Jonathan when he persists in his demands, Joanna agreed that she does spoil her son. Case 3- Mary and Rebecca (10). In her interview, Mary expressed pride that, despite lacking a college education, her family’s income is greater than that of some of their friends who are doctors. Mary explained that her home-based business affords her children privileges she did not have as a youth as well as her physical presence when they return home from school. However, Mary admits her hectic life and work schedule prevent her from taking the time to teach personal little things to her children. Mary’s discourse revealed the demands on her time conflict with her desire to give her children the help they need to develop life skills. Mary stated she views Rebecca as a “good” child who makes few requests or demands. Rebecca confided she does desire things, but does not wish to burden her parents. Portraying herself as polite and amicable, Rebecca revealed she is concerned she does not help to alleviate the demands or conflicts experienced 62 within the family. This young girl admitted she is secretly saddened when the family argues but keeps much to herself in her attempt to promote peace in the home. In her journal, Mary revealed there are times she believes her children appear very spoiled. Mary described an incident when she became ill and had expected her children to perform some of the regular household chores. To her disappointment, the children were seemingly unable and/or unwilling to do these chores. Receiving this response prompted Mary to reassess how much they take for granted and the need to teach them more self-reliance skills. Although Mary expressed her wish that her children will not grow up to be spoiled young adults, she does plan to give each of them a house when they get older (“in order to make their life easier”). Rebecca understands she has privileges many children do not have; yet, she believes she is on a par with the children in her community. Rebecca admits she is spoiled. Case 4- Teresa and Michael (9). In her interview, Teresa disclosed she regrets that, in order to pursue her own sense of self-sufficiency when her son was a baby, she subjugated her maternal instincts and left the daily care-giving to a nanny. Teresa attributed the difficulty she experiences now in terms of assessing her son’s needs, to the lack of attention early on in developing a bond with him. Teresa admittedly pampers her son. The breakfast routine is a good example of this, she explained, where she prepares him special items when he refuses to eat what she prepares for the rest of the family because she wishes to meet “his needs.” Teresa expressed her concern over problems her son experiences in terms of self-regulation. At times, conveyed Teresa, Michael’s emotional outbursts are out-of- 63 control and he has resorted to breaking property and shouting out that he is a failure and a terrible person. Teresa also explained that Michael’s schoolwork suffers at times because he tends to put off his work until the last minute. Wishing to help him, Teresa admittedly has done more of his homework than his teacher has allowed. Teresa’s expressed desire is that her child would develop more confidence and would become able to plan and regulate tasks required by the teacher and at home. While Teresa’s attention in the interview addressed the child’s behavior, she revealed little in terms knowing how she might assist her son internalize important values and begin to take more responsibility toward his homework. According to Teresa, her husband agrees she spoils her son, doing too much for him that he should be able to do himself. Teresa supposes many of the mothers “are in the same boat, they’re doing it too.” Teresa’s expressed hope is that all will turn out well for her child and that the activities he is involved in now will be of importance as he matures. Case 5- Lisa and Courtney (7). Lisa, similar to several of the mothers I interviewed, stays home during the day to care for her children. Her husband is a successful business owner in the community, which affords her this privilege. Lisa considers that she, in addition to her daughter, is spoiled. They live in one of the nicer areas of the community in a home with a view, such as the one looking out into their courtyard pool and landscaped gardens. Extended family members live on the same property in the separate back house. Upon entering the home, I was graciously welcomed into the living room while the children performed cartwheels on the spacious wooden floors. 64 Lisa shared in our interview that, although she attended prestigious schools growing up, she never quite felt she fit in with the other girls according to their clothes. Lisa described the struggles she encountered with her own childhood insecurities are projected onto her daughter. In order to boost her child’s self-esteem, Lisa admits to buying her daughter expensive clothes Courtney refuses to wear. Lisa confessed that Courtney has developed a pattern of becoming obsessive over what she will wear to the point of having coordinated outfits all laid out a week in advance. Additionally, while Lisa reported the incidents are decreasing, she shared her concern over the times Courtney, disturbed at being interrupted at the family dinner table, for example, storms out of the room declaring she will not eat. Upon meeting Courtney, she came across as an introspective, articulate, sociable, and delightful child. Admittedly, Courtney believes she is spoiled, yet does not consider herself a spoiled brat. Case 6- Nicole and Rachael (7). Nicole, a college educated mother, gave up her teaching career to stay at home with her children. Nichole expressed pride in that in addition to having high social skills, Rachael is an avid reader as is she. In our interview, Nicole discussed that although Rachael is quite high functioning, Nicole does feel entitled to additional services for her daughter. Nichole explained that her daughter’s medical issues when she was born resulted in her eligibility to receive off campus workshops and services. Nicole conveyed she has never had to demand her way in order to receive services, but speculated she did not know how she might respond should she not receive the requests she makes amicably. As a former 65 teacher, Nicole believes she is lucky she knew what to look for and what services her daughter was entitled to receive. Nicole conveyed that Rachael gives up easily with her, requiring that Nicole often do for Rachel what she may be able to do on her own. Nicole does not require much of Rachael in the way of chores. Rachael agreed with her mother that the only real chore she has is putting her clothes in the hamper after she wears them. When asked, Rachael did not know how her room got clean or how it stayed that way, but surmised that her mother is the one responsible. Rachael came across in our meeting as a delightful and charming child with no worries and no responsibilities. Nicole suggested her daughter’s life is one perhaps insulated from the normal pressures in life. According to Nicole, it is important to her that she instills a sense of self- esteem in Rachael. Rachael’s room has a poster displaying the words, “All About me.” The pictures represented in the poster, expressed Rachael, remind her how she “was a Superstar.” Rachel conveyed she believes she is special and that she receives the privileges because knows how to be nice to people and that she is “good”. Both Nicole and Rachael expressed that Rachael wants for nothing and agree she is spoiled. Case 7- Justine and Lily (7). Both Justine and her husband are in the medical profession in private practice, providing a more than substantial income for her family. Brought up in a single parent household, Justine speculated that television might have provided her with a context on how parenting and family should look. Justine expressed she values the provisions her husband and she make through their 66 accomplishments, even though the sacrifice is a more hectic life and unlike her own, more relaxed, upbringing in the South. From a weekend trip to New Orleans for a special event, to regular stays at five star hotels, both Lily and her mother agreed that Lily’s is a privileged life. Lily conveyed she has everything material she could want. Her mother agreed, yet expressed she worries she does not spend enough time with Lily (“the thing I worry about more than what I’m giving them is what I’m not giving them and which I feel like is my time because I’m working…”). Justine admitted Lily spends much of her time with different nannies and babysitters, yet that it is important to her that the family regularly eat dinner together. Lily’s perception was that her mother “mostly goes out to dinner”. During our interview, Justine had been in the next room preparing to leave for the evening around dinnertime. Immediately following her mother’s departure, Lily’s affect changed considerably and she began speaking of depression while conveying a sudden sense of seriousness and sadness in her facial expression. Lily communicated several times that she "loves chocolate more than anything.” At times, she spoke of her love with chocolate in connection with her talk of depression. Justine also conveyed that her daughter, Lily, while improving when she was present, is frequently demanding and speaks disrespectfully to the nanny. In my interview with Lily, she came across as a talented, gifted, sociable, warm, and delightful child. Both Justine and Lily agreed that Lily is spoiled with privileges and material items not afforded other children. Justine, however, speculated that for some 67 in the community this is just the norm, and her daughter has no more than do other children. Case 8-Tammy and Shawna (7). Tammy conveyed in her interview that she is a retired mother who stays home with her children while her husband attends to business investments. Wrestling now with the effects of spoiling, Tammy discussed serious concerns she has of her child’s behavior and attitude. Tammy surmised that her child might have been better off having experienced the investment of toil and labor that went into providing the material comforts the family now enjoy. Tammy conveyed that she is particularly concerned with how her daughter treats her and behaves with her when they are together. Tammy attributed much of her daughter’s willful behavior to the child’s intelligence and expressed she believed early on that she would have trouble with Shawna. She recalled that until very recently (about a month prior to the interview) she let Shawna “get away with too much” and it has developed into her daughter’s current behavior of displaying frequent disrespectful outbursts, including kicking and shouting “I hate you” to her mother. When I spoke with Shawna, she confirmed this behavior, stating she thought her mother deserves this “torment” and conveyed she derives satisfaction in playing this kind of treatment out on her. Tammy discussed her method of discipline relies primarily on punishment, such as when the child is disrespectful to her, she would have her scrub the kitchen floor. Tammy values creativity, freedom, and independence as goals for her child. Shawna confirmed she does not have any chores and responsibilities other than to do her homework. Tammy added that she allows Shawna to put off her 68 homework until the last day, knowing that even if Shawna turns in work that she rushed through, she is still able to perform well on standardized tests. Upon interviewing Shawna, she came across as a likeable, sociable, articulate child. While able to articulate her thoughts of revenge and torment, Shawna also expressed her private wish that she could have individual time with her mother and apart from her fraternal twin sister. Although Tammy hopes that her child will not grow up to be spoiled, she plans to give income property to Shawna as a gift when she gets older. Case 9- Sandra and Mattie (7). In her interview, Sandra expressed gratefulness that her work as an executive in the entertainment industry, allows her husband the luxury of staying home to take care of the children. Compared to the community from which the family recently moved, Sandra conveyed pride that privileges afforded to their children are much greater now. Privileges she and her family enjoy such as regular travel with the family, Sandra speculated, are the norms for this community. Sandra believes one cannot spoil with attention and expressed that Mattie is “the star that shines in the family.” Sandra expressed she often feels guilty that her position at work requires her to be away from the children for much of the day; at times requiring her to work late into the night. Sandra explained the pressure of her work demands make it difficult to stay involved with the regular routine activities with her daughter. She discussed that she tries to make it a point to eat dinner on a regular basis with the family, take time to read stories with Mattie, give her a bath, and/or tuck her in the evening. Sandra, however, also stated she is regularly tired when she comes home from work and needs about an hour of time to wind down. Mattie, however, conveyed sadness 69 that her mother is not always home for dinner and there are times she arrives from work after she and her sister are already in bed and asleep; there are some days, she said, she does not see her mother. While Sandra shared that Mattie does not have tantrums and rarely gives her mother any “push back,” Mattie, conveyed in her interview, she has frequent headaches, experiences tantrums, and there are often times she feels sad and out of control. While Mattie conveyed she feels spoiled in comparison to others, there are also times she feels like she just does not have enough. Mattie confessed there are times her heart pounds and she cannot not stop crying. Mattie and her mother both revealed a difficulty Mattie experiences being in the presence of an unfamiliar adult. Mattie also shared of times it becomes so frustrating interpersonally at school, that she experiences the feeling of being out of control. Mattie’s private wish is that someone would be there to assist her in the way she is often able to assist others through their problems. Summary. Each of the nine mother-child dyads represented a unique situation in which spoiling was an issue. All of the mothers conveyed love for their children and the hope that the child would not turn out spoiled young adults. There were times, however, that each mother grappled with occurrences in which they considered their children spoiled. The meaning of spoiling emerged in different shades, forms, and degrees of severity. Detailed presentation and examination of particular discourse from each of the dyads takes place in more detail in the upcoming sections. The next section addresses the results according to the first interview question addressed to the meaning of spoiling a child. 70 Meaning of Spoiling According to Parents The first interview question posed to mothers served as a base to how these mothers understood spoiling. Each of the mothers responded to the question, “What does spoiling mean to you?” Analyses of the coded responses fell along two lines of thinking in which mothers addressed the meaning of spoiling. Mothers viewed the meaning of spoiling according to the process by which spoiling could occur and according to the outcome effects on the child (See Table 2). Table 2. Meaning of Spoiling According to Mothers Process/parent Type Sample quotation Indulging the child Material “. . . I think it’s mostly about material things” Privilege “I think price dictates a more affluent community . . . . more educated . . . expensive mortgage payments.” Attention “He’s used to having my attention most of the time” “I’m working so when I’m with them I feel. compelled to do whatever they want . . .” Freedom “too many choices” “if it’s really bad… I’ll do something about it, but…she wants to do her own thing.” 71 Table 2: Continued Lack of provision Limits on behavior “Influence her not being spoiled . . . is to limit what she gets” “I let her get away with too much” Outcome/Child Entitlement “and then it becomes an attitude of entitlement” Lack of appreciation/value “that leads me to believe she thinks money is endless” “they don’t place value on what you provide for them” Selfish/Demanding “she doesn’t share” “I told you, I don’t want a pear for a snack again!” Table 2 represents the meaning according to parents in response to interview question one, “What does spoiling mean to you?” According to Table 2, mothers revealed two general areas of attention with regard to the meaning of spoiling. The mothers believe spoiling develops by: indulging the child with privileges, material provision, freedom, and some believe, through attention; and by lack of provision, in terms of setting limits. Mothers also viewed spoiling in terms of the outcome effects on the child. That is, mothers depicted the spoiled child as one who conveys a sense of entitlement, demonstrates a lack of appreciation or gratitude, and behaves in a “selfish” and/or “demanding” manner. In terms of process, mothers believe spoiling may occur by indulging the child particularly as it pertained to material items such as toys or gifts. Some mothers 72 believe that offering too much in terms of privileges, whether in the form of opportunities or advantages others do not have, is spoiling a child. Mothers differed on whether they thought they could spoil with too much attention. Of the mothers who disbelieve spoiling could occur through excessive attention, mothers reported their husbands’ believe they did in fact spoil them with attention. Mothers also believe spoiling could occur through lack of provision in terms of setting limits on what their children receive or how they behave. That is, regardless of how mothers measured excess, they believe setting a limit on giving or how the child behaves prevents or impedes spoiling. Mothers also viewed spoiling in terms of outcome effects on the child. The mothers discussed the meaning of spoiling in terms of evidence of a child’s sense of entitlement, which conveyed an attitude of expectation to certain privileged treatment from others. Mothers conveyed they believe children who are spoiled tend to demonstrate a lack of appreciation or indicate they do not value what they have or what others give them. According to these mothers, children who also demonstrate selfish and/or demanding behaviors are spoiled. Thus, mothers discussed two means by which they believe spoiling could occur: indulging the child with privileges, material provision, freedom, and some believed, through attention; and lack of provision, in terms of setting limits. Mothers also viewed spoiling in terms of the outcome effects on the child. That is, mothers depicted the spoiled child as one who conveyed a sense of entitlement, demonstrated a lack of appreciation or gratitude, and behaved in a “selfish” and/or “demanding” 73 manner. The next section addresses the particular question, "Why do parents spoil their child?" Research Question One: Why Do Parents Spoil Their Children? Mothers’ interview questions two and three addressed the first research question, “Why do parents spoil their children?” Question two addressed goals mothers had for their children and how they promote those goals and question three probed the mothers’ discussion on their daily activities with and without their children. This section provides an explanation of the overarching theme that emerged from the analyses and the resulting model that illustrates this theme. Presentation of the results in this section includes examples from the mothers’ discourse offering clarification to the resulting theme and discussion according to that theme. Following the provision of an overview of the model, presentation takes place according to each of the three realms of influence identified in the model. Why Do Mothers Spoil Their Children?: Complex/Dynamic Influences and Pressures at Play. According to the mothers’ interviews, complex and dynamic influences and pressures were at play underlying their decision-making process. Analyses of the mothers’ discourse revealed three separate, yet overlapping realms of influence that resulted in spoiling: mothers’ own psychological processes, social-contextual influences, and the mothers’ cultural-historical background and experiences (See Figure 1). 74 Figure 1. The Model: Influences and Pressures Underlying Maternal Interactions in Cases of Spoiling. Figure 1 represents the resulting model that depicts the overarching theme that emerged addressed to the first question in this investigation, “Why do mothers spoil their children?” Analyses of the mothers’ discourse revealed there are influences and pressures that were at play underlying their decision-making process. The model depicts three dynamic realms of influences at play as mothers made decisions interacting with and on behalf of their child. Responses from mothers revealed the interplay of the maternal psychological processes, social-contextual, and the cultural-historical. While depicted in a linear manner, examination of the mothers’ discourse revealed that, oftentimes multiple influences were at play in a dynamic manner. That is, influences were reciprocal and changing. Influences also C. Cultural-historical • Cultural norms/values • Historical context-working mothers A. Maternal psychological processes • Beliefs/expectations • Perceptions • Goals/values B. Social-contextual • Parent-child interactions in activity 75 emerged to the extent that they become pressures and varied by case and experience. Interestingly, as codes assigned to the mothers’ discourse emerged resulting in more inclusive categories, the three realms of influence corresponded with the original realms of influence supposed at the onset of the study. That is, evidence of the individual, social, and the cultural realms emerged as important in understanding the reasons why mothers spoiled their children. The following offers further clarification of the three realms of influence and pressures. In the realm of mothers’ psychological processes, mothers of this community typically revealed they made decisions on what to purchase, give, or do with, or for their children based on particular beliefs and expectations they had pertaining to their child. For example, one mother, influenced by her own childhood fear of not fitting in, explained that she went to great extents to make sure her child did not experience the same fear. The ultimate result of the mother’s exerted effort contributed to the child’s inability to be pleased or satisfied: [C-5] 3 I think that one of the things I’ve come to realize over the past year or so is that I was trying, and I still do, I just cannot seem to help myself. I, growing up, never felt like I fit in, I never felt like I was dressed right and I always, you know, I just didn’t feel like I fit in. I went to private schools and …went to some schools where there were more affluent people… than we were. And my mom, God love her, knows nothing about fashion or how to help a girl feel like she looks pretty or fit in, okay? So it was painful for me. I still feel like that. I still have those little thirteen, sixteen, year old girl feelings . . . .I want to spare her those feelings....so you know, I would go and I would get her cute clothes so she would have choices ….. I just felt like….You 3 A number that corresponds with the case number assigned represents each case eg. [C-5] means case five. 76 know what? That’s her. I’m going to allow her to express herself within what’s appropriate (pause) and um, then I started to see her getting really upset that she had nothing to wear . . . and now, I should say in kindergarten I started seeing this behavior that, “I don’t have anything to wear” I don’t have any cute clothes”, “I don’t have any cool clothes.” Other individual psychological processes included, for example, the mothers’ own perception of stress that determined how they interacted to and responded to their children. For example, one parent, speculated on the culprit that required she obtain some assistance with her child’s behaviors she deemed out-of-control. The anticipation of stress she had of her child’s response to correction made it easier for her to let the child’s behavior slide. The mother said: [C-8] I think it’s really, mainly, just being miserable, realizing she’s out of control…It was obvious there was something wrong. She was getting away with way, too much. Attitude and behavior. Um (pause). It’s almost like I was afraid to punish her because she was so (pause) then she was so, then she would make me so miserable . . . . She was controlling me rather than the opposite and there’s still an element of that. A second type of influence that emerged from the findings was the social- contextual. In addition to cultural-historical influences, the nature of mothers’ interaction with their children while engaging in everyday activities often played a role of influence for the mother. The following is one mother’s account of succumbing to the child’s pressuring, even when it conflicted with her values. [C-2] There’s a sort of gradual process of giving in almost before you know it, when you’ve rationalized it. Like now, I’m at the point now where he has a couple of nerf guns which I was really adamantly against before. I’ve justified in my own mind, “Well, you know, they’re “nerf,” and he’s not allowed to point them at people’s heads or people, period (chuckles). I’ve been giving him something I’m against on by principal. 77 Another example of influence at the social-contextual level was evident as one parent discussed the difficulty she had enforcing limits with her child when requiring the child to do her homework. The dynamic with the child, she explained, created a painful interaction. The following is an example of this interplay in which the child manipulated her way out of doing homework, creating an unbearable situation for the mother. The mother’s concluding thought on the circumstance left her in a quandary, as she was unable to “prove” the child was not simply maneuvering her way out of having to do her homework. [C-5] I’ll say, “Okay, you’ve had play dates Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. It’s Thursday, your homework’s due tomorrow so you’re not gonna do anything else until you finish your homework.” Well, she’ll say, “I gotta go to the bathroom” Well, 15 minutes later she’ll come back. I have another child and a dog, and things to do (said groaning) so, by the time I figure out she’s been gone for 15 minutes….Well, you know, she’s been playing in the bathroom for 15 minutes. But, so that’s why it’s painful.…. [I have to keep asking her] over and over and over again! . . . . I think I should have been stricter, like, okay she’s been gone in the bathroom for, (pause) (reflectively) well, maybe that’s not true because it’s hard to prove what she’s been doing in the bathroom. A third realm of influences that emerged from the mothers’ responses was that of the cultural-historical. Mothers compared their parenting with their own upbringing, relating it to the current norms and values existent in the community and wider society. Mothers also discussed spoiling in relation to a parent’s family or cultural background and the time-period in which they grew up. For example, one parent discussed her upbringing in Europe promoted values that were in conflict with those she perceived are prominent in the culture she now raises her son: [C-2] I’d like them to feel uh, I’d like them to grow up being, empathic, which is difficult, but it’s very difficult ‘cause it’s not uh, 78 uh, because it’s not in the culture, uh, to feel empathy for others. It’s a very, selfish culture and uh, this is one area where I feel like I should do more in getting them more involved you know, with people who have less, uh, somehow; part of my plan to help avoid the spoiling. Another example of the influence on the cultural-historical realm emerged in one mother’s discussion on the expanded opportunities now offered women and the pressure that exists for women to work outside of the home. She explained that rather than the promotion of the opportunity to maternally bond with their children, she believes there is pressure for mothers to believe work outside of the home is more important. The pressure this mother felt having to work when her son was young in order to become self-sufficient and independent were values that her own upbringing supported, which led to earlier experiences with her child in which she provided materially for her child, while neglecting attention to his early emotional needs. This mother reflected on the difficulty she experiences now understanding her son’s needs may relate to the early sense of bonding that was lacking in their relationship. The mother described her experience of detaching from the child in order to pursue values promoted in her upbringing. The following is an excerpt from the mother’s discourse on the pressure and conflict she experienced: [C-4] …obviously, I didn’t know about all the nurturing that happens between a mother and a child who doesn’t go to work…. The, you know, the diaper, there’s still a bond there, which I didn’t realize because to me I saw it as a chore; not talking to the child while you’re cleaning, I didn’t feel that was the time to do that, that that was another opportunity to bond with the child. I just saw it as, “dirty diaper” <sigh> so I saw that type of work, “oh, anybody can do this” “I got my degree, that’s why I went to school, you know. My mom told me that I should be self-sufficient and independent and I just felt that that’s what I was meant to be and doing was to work, not to be a stay-at-home mother. And so when I would drop them off…. I’d detach and boom I’d just get into work mode. I don’t even think about them and then I’d get home and they’d already had dinner; they’d 79 been bathed; and I’d have time to eat for a little bit and then the nanny would leave and then I would have them until my husband would get home. I’m thinking, how much can you really bond with your child when you’ve got only two hour, an hour and a half with them every day during the week and … two days over the weekend? Thus, analyses of the mothers’ interviews revealed there is an overarching theme that indicates there are complex and dynamic influences and pressures at play underlying mothers’ engagement in the process of spoiling. Consistent to the view presented at the onset of this study that influences would be evident in the individual, the social, and the cultural realm, results of this study indicate these same realms of influence at play. That is, mothers’ discourse on pertaining to spoiling revealed three separate, yet overlapping realms of influence: Maternal psychological processes, the cultural-historical realm of influence, and the social-contextual realm. While mothers’ psychological processes included mothers’ own perception of stress that influenced the parent-child interaction, a second, often overlapping influence represented in the discourse was the cultural-historical. Cultural-historical influences included the influence of family pressures; for example, that conflicted with decisions the mother made which the mother believes affected the experience she had in forming an early strong bond with her own child. These early experiences, the mother explained, may have influenced how she currently understands her child’s actual needs on an everyday basis. This finding supports Eccles’ (2002) supposition that level of attachment is a precursor to later maternal interactions with their children. Adding to the complexity of the influence, and oftentimes-surmounting pressures mothers expressed, was the context of the actual interplay between the 80 mother and her child. Regardless of the activity in which the mother and child interacted, there is evidence that both the mother and her child influenced each other reciprocally; and in some cases, pressured the interaction in cases of spoiling. The following is a more in depth look into the findings revealed according to the themes that emerged from the analyses from each realm of influence, as it addressed the first part of the research question, “Why do parents spoil their children?” Maternal Psychological Processes: Mother’s Achievement/ Performance Goal Orientation The second set of interview questions addressed to mothers was, “What are the goals and values you have for your children and how do you promote those goals?” Analyses of the mothers’ discourse addressed to these questions revealed: 1) four major types of goals of importance they held for their children and 2) uncovered a major theme according to this realm of influence. This section addresses the types of goals mothers discussed, followed by and discussion of the underlying theme that emerged from the analyses. The four major types of goals were: (a) Child Happiness/Well-being, (b) Achievement Goals, (c) Performance Goals, and (d) Social Goals (see Table 3). 81 Table 3. Goals and Values Parents Reported They Hold for Their Children Goals and/or value Sample quotation Child happiness/well-being • Self-esteem (v. sense of self- worth) • Ease of life • Freedom and choice “Self-esteem is very important to me” “I want to give each of my kids a house. I want it paid off…just to make their life a little bit easier.” “To me it’s just a freedom issue . . . within reason . . . they run, they jump and they scream and I feel comfortable with that . . . other parents, it makes them uncomfortable.” Achievement goals • Self-discipline • Sense of responsibility • Work ethic “They can’t even get their own cereal . . . I think that is one of the ways I’m probably failing my kid’s is independence” “I do believe everybody needs to work hard for what they get as well” “I also want to him to have a sense of . . . that you’ve gotta work for things.” Performance goals • Presentation/performance • Education/to do well in school • Success “Well, this will help give her the idea of, that there’s a reward for coming in, being on time and ready.” “I’ve talked to a couple of parents and they said when they get their report card they’ll reward them or buy ‘em a little toy or material reward.” “Here in the U.S. it’s all about success; success is defined as material wealth.” 82 Table 3: Continued Social goals • Respect others • Ethics/morality • Social competence “I want him to be kind” “to respect others” “I‘d like them to grow up being, empathic, but it’s difficult . . . because it’s not in the culture.” “You need to know how to have good relationships with people.” According to Table 3, goals mothers expressed they have for their children centered on the child’s happiness/well-being, achievement, performance, and the child’s social ability with others. Mothers revealed they hold multiple goals as important for their children for decisions made on an everyday basis. The first type of goals represented the importance placed on the child’s happiness/well-being. This was evident in mothers’ remarks that centered on their children’s self-esteem, which mothers discussed meant the importance of their children feeling good about themselves and having a life of relative ease. Mothers discussed ease of life in terms of immediate as well as long-term satisfaction. For example, ease of life oftentimes meant parents did and planned in the future to provide children with material comforts without the child having to earn those comforts as did the parents. Freedom and choice also typified the responses that revealed an emphasis on child happiness and well-being. A second type of goals of importance to mothers were centered on achievement in that they represented mention of goals for self-discipline, sense of responsibility, and work ethic, each representing a focus on developing one’s 83 competence. Third, performance goals also typified mothers’ discussion on goals in which they centered on presentation/performance, education/to do well in school, and success in general. Fourth, social goals included the importance mothers placed on their children demonstrating respect for others, ethical behavior, and social interaction skills. A tacit finding was that there are the goals that did not so readily emerge, such as the goal of learning for intrinsic value. Thus, the emphasis on the goals of performance, achievement, and demonstration of social-emotional skills were prominent, yet attention to what is intrinsically valuable was under-addressed. For example, the goal of child happiness/well-being emerged more in the context of performance as the outcome rather than focusing on the concurrent evidence of developing along the lines of self-efficacy and self-worth. The theme that emerged according to the individual psychological processes was the prominence of the mothers’ achievement/performance goal orientation. Mothers tended to have an achievement /performance goal orientation, even as it pertained to the social realm for their children. The mothers frequently discussed the importance placed on their children representing themselves socially competent in a given situation. As an example, the following is an excerpt from an interview with one mother who expressed a concern that her child was spoiled when she demonstrated a lack of appreciation when receiving gifts from others. The child would simply toss the unwanted gift on the floor upon receiving it. The mother, embarrassed over her daughter’s behavior, expressed more of a concern that her 84 child demonstrate the social grace rather than that she internalize the value of gratefulness. [C-5] [P] 4 My mother-in-law has gone on trips and she’s come back, and she’s brought them things; and my daughter, if she didn’t like it, she would just take it out of the package and throw it on the floor. I was so embarrassed! ….You know, I’ve told them now, that you know, when people come, you don’t say, ‘Where’s my present, where’s my present!’ They used to do that and um, we’ve talked about appreciating the fact that someone even thought* 5 of you and if you don’t like it, you don’t say* you don’t like it or even act like you don’t like it. You just say, ‘Thank you. Thank you for thinking of me….some of the behaviors that I was seeing were just really bad . . . . I told her that it was rude and that it hurt Grandma’s feelings and Grandma thought of you and she wanted to get you something. She went to the effort of buying something and she spent her money on you, and you need to express your appreciation for that . . . . Then we talked about birthday parties, and people bringing presents and you just say thank you, you don’t act like you don’t like a gift. [I]….you’re looking at how it appears to other people, right?…. [P] It’s embarrassing! It is! …. She’s got the spoiled behavior! …. someone acting they don’t like a gift someone has given them, in front of the person who’s given it to them, is a spoiled behavior. Thus, mothers tended to have an achievement/performance goal orientation, even as it pertained to the social realm for their children. The mothers frequently discussed the importance placed on their children representing themselves socially competent in a given situation. Ideologically, mothers predominantly expressed they valued goals that centered on their children’s happiness/well-being, achievement, performance, and social skills. More obscured was discussion on goals that centered on importance placed on the development of goals of intrinsic value and those that would promote the child’s sense of self-worth. The next section centers the second 4 An [I] and [P] indicate interviewer and participant, respectively. 5 An asterisk (*) denotes emphasis in the individual’s voice. 85 realm of influence, the social-contextual realm, in the process of decision-making on an everyday basis, and a theme that emerged according to this realm of influence. Social-Contextual: Parent Goals and Needs Circumvented the Child’s Needs for the Development of Internal Processes Social-contextual influences emerged as mothers responded to question three of the interview questions, “What are your regular and weekend routines and some of the challenges you confront in carrying out the day?” An important finding was the complex and obscured dynamic that emerged as the mothers discussed their reasoning and interpretation behind their decision-making on an everyday basis. That is, while other pressures and influences were evidently at play, mothers’ discourse revealed the theme of often overlapping needs/goals addressed as they fluctuated between centering on the mother’s own needs, the child’s needs, and as an attempt to meet both. Figure 2 represents the two, often overlapping and competing needs/goals mothers revealed within the specific context of the activity in which they engage in decision-making on an everyday basis. Figure 2. Parent Motivation: Self- and Child Centered Centered on Self Centered on Child Context of the Activity 86 Figure 2 depicts the emergence of two separate, yet often overlapping sets of needs mothers attempted to meet on an everyday basis. Analyses of the mothers’ discourse indicated their decisions often centered on meeting their own needs, the child’s, and the needs of both within the context of the activity in which they were involved. Further, an important finding indicated the mothers’ goals and needs circumvented the children’s needs for the development of child processes in occurrences of spoiling. For example, one mother expressed she was a “control freak” about keeping the house clean and employed a housekeeper to attend to those needs. When asked, the child did not know how her room got clean or how it stayed that way, but surmised that her mother was the one responsible. Hiring a housekeeper addressed the mother’s need of having a clean house. However, by not involving the child in taking responsibility at the level at which she was capable, the child’s actual need was unmet. Spoiling occurred in the sense that the mother was doing for her child what the child could have been doing in terms of developing a sense of responsibility and competence. Another example was one in which the mother shared regarding the morning breakfast routine and the dilemma she often experienced The mother explained that she prepared special foods for her son to meet his needs. The following is an excerpt from the mother’s interview where she explains the importance of raising a child who is able to adjust to change in life, while at the same time, explained she makes her son a specialized meal. That is, this mother, in catering to her son’s limited food preferences, does not allow the child to learn how to become increasingly more adaptable, and gradually become accustomed to different tastes, textures, and the 87 possibility of developing new preferences. The mother in this example is successful in meeting the child’s immediate goal for happiness, however not successful in terms of developmental needs of the child. Further, the mother is successful in meeting her own goal of appeasing her fear that he will not eat if she does not provide a special meal. The following is this mother’s discourse from her interview on this topic. [C-4] [P]He has a hard time with adjusting, so I think he’s going to have a harder time in life as a whole because …. he has a hard time with change. He has to eat the same foods. I can’t like add a spice or something different, he’ll detect it. He won’t like it. It has to be the same kind of mashed potatoes, the same beans, the same kind of meat, but meat cannot have uh, like Hamburger Helper or those breadcrumbs because there’s too much flavor ….[I] So ….. do you make separate food for him? [P] Yeah (laughs) I do because he won’t eat! ….[P] That is spoiling because I’m giving in to him, “Well okay- -well,” but I try to justify it. ….. I know my husband doesn’t like it. [I] does he say? ….you’re spoiling him? [P] Yeah . . . because it’s easier for me. In the context of everyday life, discourse from the mothers represented the complexity of the decision-making process. Although, at times, the mothers attempted to meet the needs of their children, their own needs took precedence at times as well. At other times, within the context of the dictates of time or convenience influenced the actual decisions mothers made on a moment-by-moment basis on behalf of their children. Additionally, mothers also reported the ambiguity of the decision-making processes. For example, one mother described the ambiguity that occurs in the daily emersion of the day and surmises her reasoning behind her decisions: [C-7] You don’t really, have like a reason for half the things that you would do. I mean, the things, the things, the ma(in) that I told you that drive my (pause) that drive (pause) the big decisions that I do make are, you know, trying to make them not ever feel that they don’t have 88 something that somebody else has (pause) but without giving them too much of, that they don’t need. And, you know, emphasizing how, how lucky they are to have a dad, and to be in a family situation, and where everybody’s working together and that kind of thing. Apart from that, you know, I don’t know why I do half the stuff I do, or and, and my life is so crazy. I mean, half the time I’m up for 2- or 3 hours in the middle of the night and so I sleep maybe 4 hours, broken up 2 hours here, 2 hours there, and so I’m tired! Sometimes I don’t get up and get ‘em dressed because I’m too tired you know! It’s like 7:30 in the morning augh (nanny) here you take ‘em to school. But, ah ah (pause). It’s like you kinda learn go along and you kinda hope …. A lot of it is just like, you know, I mean, honestly, it could be, you know. Ok, well that family (pause) when I, I watched the Brady Bunch on TV when I was growing up and they seemed to be doing things, you know. I’m, then I’m gonna try to do it the way the Brady Bunch did it, you know! Thus, analyses of the mothers’ discourse indicated that on the social- contextual realm, mothers often fluctuated between meeting their needs, their children’s needs, and the demands of the situation. A theme that arose was that in cases of spoiling, the mother’s goals and needs circumvented the child’s needs for development of internal processes. Parent needs surrounding spoiling included convenience, easing a painful interaction, and/or relieving stress or guilt. Mothers’ attention to the needs of their children centered on the children’s happiness and emphasized performance and achievement. Cultural-Historical: Time/Change Related to Norms/Values A third realm of influences that emerged from the mothers’ responses was that of the cultural-historical. Embedded in the conversations were mothers’ references to their own backgrounds and the contrast of their own upbringings, although mothers were not specifically posed questions pertaining to their cultural backgrounds. Mothers compared their parenting with their own upbringing as a 89 reference point to spoiling, relating it to the current norms and values existent in the community and wider society. A theme emerged according to this realm of influence, which was the importance of time and change related to the norms and values. For example, mothers discussed the rapid changes in technology require that parents and their children continually keep up with their friends, according to new advancements. [C-2] um, he expects that he should, because his friends have the newest electronics that he should be getting that as well and he doesn’t understand that if has one, why shouldn’t he have the next one? And I just try to explain to him that, you know, “you have a lot” you have a Game Boy, let’s say….we don’t feel he needs to have a Game Boy or an X-Box, or whatever it is ‘cause it’s a whole disposable electronic thing…. get rid of the old one ‘cause the newest one’s come out. We don’t believe in that so we don’t feel like we should just go out and buy the newest thing. We feel like he has enough. To him though ….he sees his friends who get the newest things all the time and he feels deprived. In addition, the types of games with which children became involved, promoted a competitive, performance/achievement orientation, in addition to immersing them into materialism. For example, a prominent occupation of one child’s conversation centered on what she had in terms of status and control of computer game points. The child conveyed, “I’m pretty rich in my games.” The young girl went on to describe the money system in terms of “Neopoints” and explained, “You’re supposed to like, um, shoot these “schlhargs.” They’re like a slimy slug or something,” and “You can get your own bank account with your neopet.” Interestingly, one researcher, (Seiter, 2005) discussed the phenomenon of games such as these, as “immersive advertising,” as parents and children are 90 unaware of the influence that exposure to a myriad of commercialized products has in “rewarding tinkering, strategizing, obsessive play, and absorption” (p. 99). Thus, analyses of the mothers’ discourse revealed that the wider cultural context plays a role in promoting spoiling. Mothers indicated that compared with their own upbringing, society influences the children in a manner they did not experience when they were young. For example, through games and the technology, a prominent occupation in the interviews for several of the children became competition and a promotion of materialism. Interestingly, mothers were often unaware of the manner of involvement required in the games their children played and the extent to which the games promoted values of which they did not necessarily support. Summary Analyses of the interviews and mothers’ journals indicate several complex processes at play pertaining to the reasons why mothers engage in the process of spoiling their children. Analyses of the mothers’ interviews and journal entries reveal the overarching theme that indicates there are influences and pressures underlying mothers’ decision-making on three separate and overlapping realms: maternal psychological processes, social-contextual, and the cultural-historical realms. Themes emerged along each of the three realms of influence. On the individual, maternal psychological processes realm, mothers promoted goals of child happiness/well-being, achievement, performance, and social goals, yet indicated a prominence of goals centering on performance and achievement even into the social realm. 91 On the social-contextual realm, the daily routine reflected decision-making that fluctuated between meeting moment-by-moment of the mother, the child, and the demands of both, in the context of the activity, and did not necessarily coincide with mothers’ stated goals they hoped to address for their child in the long-term. The theme in this realm, in instances of spoiling, was that mothers’ goals often circumvented the child’s needs for the development of internal processes. Mothers indicated that spoiling was promoted on a wider cultural context. On the realm of the cultural-historical, mothers compared their parenting with their own upbringing and believe spoiling is more prevalent, relative in the sense, to the historical period in which these children are reared. As an example, mothers discussed that not only are rapid changes occurring in society through technology, but are promoting a competitive, performance/achievement orientation, and an immersion is taking place of children into materialism. The next section addresses the second question under investigation, “What is the nature of the occurrences of spoiling?” This section focuses on the effects of spoiling on the child. Research Question Two: What is the Nature of the Occurrences of Spoiling? A Focus on Child Effects The second research question addressed the question, “What is the nature of the occurrences [of spoiling]?” During the interviews and continuing through the process of data analyses, it became apparent that in addressing this question, the importance of occurrences related to the effects of the child. This section relates specifically to mothers’ and the children’s reports as related to child effects. Included 92 in the analyses for this section are the children’s responses to discussion questions and discussion prompts: 1)What do you think you ought to be able to have? 2) What do you have that your friends do not have? 3) How do you get something you want? It is important to preface this section by stating that because the nature of development for the child is complex, making any determination with regard to causal effects of spoiling is not possible. Analyses of the interviews however, indicated that in cases in which spoiling was an issue, effects for the children related to their self-regulation and sense of entitlement. This section presents first the results according to effects with regard to self-regulation: behavioral, followed by social- emotional realms for the child. Second, presentation takes place of the results according to the child’s sense of entitlement: bringing up issues of sense of self, the comparative norm, and the issue of control. Self-Regulation Grolnick and Farkas (2002), defined self-regulation as “actions that are initiated by the self and thus experienced as choiceful or autonomous” (p. 90). According to researchers (Diaz, Neal, Amaya-Williams, 1990), self-regulatory development requires the sensitive attention of the parent in order to facilitate the process of higher order development in the child as it emerges. Thus, self-regulatory development in the child requires the gradual transfer of responsibility from the parent to the child. Throughout the mothers’ and the children’s interviews, the issue of self-regulation emerged as salient in the discourse. In one respect, self-regulation on the behavioral realm pertained to the willingness and/ability of some children to exert independent effort on behalf of a desired outcome. In another respect, a pattern 93 emerged of difficulty for some of the children in the area of emotional regulation. This section begins with the results presented of self-regulation in the behavioral realm for the child. According to the interviews, children reportedly exhibited relatively low willingness and effort in the realm of behavioral self-regulation. Mothers believe they should require more from their children. However, terms that mothers used to describe their children included, “lackadaisical” and “uninterested.” Typically, mothers shared that while their children were very bright, they exerted little effort when it came to helping with household chores, choosing their own clothes, and making breakfast. A mother of a 7-year-old still brushes her child’s teeth. The following is one mother’s description of an interaction she had with her child in which she found herself catering to him in a way that frustrated her and where the idea of spoiling her child became an issue: [C-2] I’ve made breakfast a lot of time(s), and then sometimes when I get busy, he does have to get his own. He balks at that . . . . If I’m fixing, busy fixing lunches and I can’t get to his breakfast right away, he needs to get his own or he needs to wait. Basically, I’ll tell him that, “I’m busy right now. If you need your breakfast right now, you need to get it.” And sometimes he’ll be stubborn and he’ll just sit there. He won’t--he’ll wait. That’s when I feel like, “I’m not a waitress” you know, “It’s not like I’m sitting here doing nothing. I’m fixing your lunch. You need to get up and make your own breakfast right now.” But you know, he’ll slam the cupboard door, and slams down the–no questions asked! And, uh, those, those are the moments when I feel, “God, you know, I really have spoiled those kids!” When it came to homework, most of the children did not have difficulty getting the work completed, but according to the mothers, it was not to the children’s level of capability that was an issue. Mothers reported such difficulties as 94 procrastination for school related projects. To cope with this problem, mothers discussed strategies that related more to their own responsibility and effort, such as checking their child’s backpack more frequently. One mother discussed her role in the child’s homework. In the following excerpt from this mother’s interview, while she discussed she assists him with editing and revisions at a later point in the interview she admitted to typing the report for the child as well when he began too late to finish on time without her assistance. [C-4] it is expected to, well, two ways, that he has to um, start his job um, as soon as they give it to him, even though there’s a May, you know, a month uh, they give you a month to complete the project or whatever it is, to start right away. Don’t wait at the last minute ….[I]have to look at his backpack. I’ll be more, I* have to be more um, what’s the word, just more on top of it, I guess, for lack of a better word, um [I] but is that your responsibility? [P] part of it <sigh> I think, I think so because a lot of the parents are in the same boat, they’re doing it too. [I] …. it sounds like there’s a conflict of who, the responsibility [P] (overlap) well, ultimately it is* absolutely their responsibility because they’re giving …. projects to children, thinking that the parents are going to be there supporting, working with them, [I] going back the responsibility….[P] it’s, when you do projects like that it’s fifty percent child and fifty percent parent. I mean, they say the child should do it all, but it’s impossible.…in order for him to do it completely? He has to start right away... In another respect self-regulation pertained to the social-emotional realm. The children as a group came across highly sociable, likeable, and highly confident with me in their interviews. Interestingly, however, as one mother privately relayed and several of the children revealed in their private individual interviews, they struggled emotionally even to the point of feeling “out of control.” For example, children’s discourse included talk of depression, anxiety, sadness, and unexplained headaches, and some mothers reported their child’s tantrums. This section 95 illuminates the realm of social-emotional regulation in which several of the children discussed they encountered difficulties. One child who described with animation the elaborate vacations she experienced, including regular stays at 5-star hotels and weekend trips to New Orleans for a special weekend event, also brought up the topic of depression, her love of chocolate, and tantrums. The following is an excerpt from her interview where she discussed her depression and an experience with a tantrum. [P] Depression. It really hurts--it’s not emotion-- real! It really hurts. [I] Do you feel like you really get feelings like that? [P] Depression-- [I] about what? [P] (Pause). A lot. [I] Like what? You have everything you want, don’t you? [P] Uh, not everything.[I] No? [P] I don’t really get chocolate so often, but I really like chocolate so often. [I] And how do you act when you get depressed? [P] Sad ... I throw myself on the couch and I fall asleep… When I don’t get my, (pause) my way, often… I throw myself on the couch and fall asleep [I] Uh huh--you just go to sleep. Um, [then] I wake up and I go over to Mama and I say, “Ok, what happened?” (In a more childish voice). And she say, “You fell asleep.” And I say, “What before that?” And she says, “Forget about it” and I say, “Okay” and then went back to sleep. Another child, who portrayed herself in a charming manner in her encounter with me, also shared her encounters with difficult emotions. In her mother’s estimation, “She is the little counselor for her friends.” Privately the child expressed frequent feelings of anxiety, “pounding to my heart,” similar to when she had been unable to locate her father on an occasion and thought she had been left. Based on the mother’s report, this child did not exhibit any difficulties, but interestingly during the child spoke candidly of her private struggles. The child expressed that when she encountered difficult emotions interacting with others at school, she wished there might have been someone who could have helped her regulate her own emotions, as 96 she had frequently intervened on behalf of others. Following is an excerpt from the child’s interview: Sometimes, I have tantrums…. [I] Can you describe it and what happens to you, your body, and what you’re thinking?[P] (sigh) I’m thinking. (Sigh) Well, sometimes at school my friends, um not my friends, but these people they bother me, I’m just, I’m really just getting my punching like that, I just want to fight with them, “pow, pow,” [cause] I know a lot of karate.…. Sometimes when they bother me too much, I feel like I want to fight with them (laughs in a quiet sigh)….[I]…does it feel uncontrollable at times? [P] yeah. Yeah, I feel like I’m just getting out of control, getting coo-cooer and just ready to go, “pow!”….It, sometimes I just get--I have to like go somewhere else-- go into the girls’ bathroom like, like plug it, and then like stick [said with emphasis] my face in the water sometimes…. I just got really frustrated a[nd], I [did]n’t know what to do. I just feel like I want to tear[said with emphasis] myself apart so I don’t even hear.[I] and ho[w], do you calm yourself pretty quickly or is it hard to calm yourself down? Or do you need someone else to help you?[P] I just need someone else to help me (said softly). I just want them, I just want peace and quiet sometimes, when I [I] what does that mean?[P] (pause) it means I just wanna be alone sometimes and (pause) and do my own thing (pause), be alone and have quiet ….I’m a great Solver-Outer…. I can do it myself; but what if I get really frustrated, I get out-o(f) control and no one can help me… This same child articulately explored the anxiety she experiences when her assessment of not having enough materially is linked with the feeling she is not receiving enough attention. The following is a portion of the interview in which the child discusses the feelings she experiences: I, I get really frustrated so I don’t feel like I, I just feel like um (pause), don’t feel like. I just don’t feel like I get any, enough [a]ttention, so ([I] umm), so--and that’s when I don’t think I have much clothes. And then when I’m happy [like] right now, I think I have a lot of clothes (quietly sigh with smile) . . . . [I] and when you feel, can we talk a little bit about when you’re feeling like you don’t have enough? ([P] Yeah) or you’re sad, what does that feel like? [P] (pause) It just feels like I’m sad and I don’t have enough attention, and [my] heart’s pounding really hard, and …sometimes I get, when I get really scared. 97 In addition to reports from the children themselves, regarding difficulty they had at times with emotional self-regulation, one mother candidly shared a troubling experience in which her child expressed an emotional outburst she deemed out-of- control. The mother discussed her alarm at the child’s emotional outburst, paired with her assessment of his alarming low sense of self-worth. [C-4] I got really scared. . . . it got me nervous that he got so negative on himself. It must have been something that he didn’t finish, because they’re really getting him to do a lot of reports and it’s like pulling teeth.…I remember getting a little nervous about it because I just saw how angry he was, and how he threw himself around. And then he went to his room . . . and uh, ‘cause I told him to go to his room ‘cause he started having a tantrum. And he started his stuff around here ….then I heard something he said, and sure enough, he had broken one of the drawers … in his room….But then he realized that it wasn’t his drawer--that it was his brother’s--and he got real upset …. “Oh, now he won’t be able to open it!” ….He lost his temper and it affected his brother and then he “[I’m] such a bad person” and he, I don’t know. “I’m--and I’m terrible,” and then …I said, “Oh my God” you know, “this is even worse.” So how was I going to get on him when he was already punishing himself? . . . and he goes, “I can’t help it. I just get so angry and I lose it.” “I just get so upset” and so then he calms down…. He, he gets very emotional and he can, oh he’ll start to lash. Yeah, one time what got me really nervous is uh, he, he went off on my neighbor’s daughter. You know, went for the neck and I was like, “OH (gasp).” That was horrific! It was part of the anger--him not being able to control it, you know. She was [just] teasing him. While her mother described her as not posing any problems and requiring little in the way of discipline, a different child conveyed in her interview of the private sense of sadness she experiences, and the care she takes in serving as peacekeeper in the family. As the child expressed, she infrequently asks for things, not wishing not to “cause any waves.” Further, the child expressed a private wish that her mother did not have to work so hard, and that while she appreciates that her 98 family was able to recently provide each of the children their own rooms, she conveyed she often misses the relationship she had with her sister when they shared a room. The following is an excerpt from her interview in which, while revealing herself as an intelligent, social, and popular child to others, conveyed privately of the sadness, perhaps sense of loneliness and guilt she experiences at times as well. I try ‘n, I try to be, um, I don’t know how to say it, I try to be more on the good side to make my parents happy and (pause) so that’s what I’m trying, that’s my goal practically? . . . . because they’re always working for me and my sisters. I try and get better grades to make them happy. Um, like sometimes I draw pictures for them and sometimes it make them better, hap[py], like in a better mood. Um, I ask them how I can help (pause)…. I try and make my parents happy, but sometimes they can be pretty mad, like about work. Like sometimes I don’t think it’s my fault but (sigh) like, if they get in a fight, I try and like, comfort them …. If they’re really angry with each other, then I try to help with the situation and so, and make them happy again [voice during this portion of interview is very melancholy, low, and reflective]. Like one time we went somewhere and um, we all got mad at each other and they said um, (sniff) and I said to myself, ‘We came here for fun and now we’re leaving all mad at each other’ because (sniff), I’ve been wanting to go there so we all went all happy. And then, I don’t know how the fight started, but um, we just all got in a fight and like, because of the fight we all just left and went home . . . . I try and just keep quiet, not to say anything, but I do get kind of mad that this whole fight started… Thus, one outcome of spoiling is difficulty in the area of self-regulation. In one respect, issues of self-regulation pertained to some children’s willingness and/or ability to exert effort on behalf of a desired outcome, such as a homework project. In another respect, a pattern emerged of difficulty for some of the children in the area of emotional regulation. Thus, while these children were able to represent themselves strong, sociable, and competent in some contexts, privately, some of the children discussed they had difficulty with emotions such as depression and anxiety, at times. 99 Sense of Entitlement A separate area of effect that emerged from analyses of the interviews centered on the child’s sense of entitlement. Each of the children, at some level, held a sense of entitlement. Consistent with Coles (1977) discussion on entitlement, analyses of these interviews indicated the children’s sense of entitlement resulted from their norm of experience. Beliefs included those that centered on children’s expectation of privileges and special treatment. This section presents first, issues related to a general sense of experience the children shared and second, the more problematic attitude and behaviors associated with entitlement resulting when some children experienced a deprivation of their norm of expected treatment. The children’s sense of entitlement appears to have resulted from their norm of experience. Children seemed to sense an implicit norm, from which they came to base their expectation or beliefs. The children interviewed believe they have the same or more than most of the children in the community. Analyses of the interviews indicated the children held an implicit understanding regarding what they expected based in their experience of “never want[ing] for anything” as one mother commented. Two mothers, for example, expressed their plan to give a house to their children. One mother stated, “I want to give each of my kids a house; I want it paid off and I want them to have a house….just to be nice to make their life a little bit easier.” Further, when some of children attempted to project into the future in anticipation that they might want for something, it became difficult, as their expectation of the provision came with little or no effort on the part of the child. For example, one child’s experience with provision not only did not include the 100 possibility he might have to walk to school on a school day, the child anticipated his future would include entitlement to his Dad’s BMW when he became able to drive. The child’s awareness of his parents’ expected resources that would in time become available to him was the basis of his entitlement beliefs. The following is the child’s reasoning based in his experience of entitlement to family resources. [I] So, what if you didn’t get* the ride on Friday, what if your car broke down or something, then what? [P] We would use our second car[I] ….What if the second car wasn’t working either? [P] Then I would use my third car. [I] you have a third car too? (responses verbally to child‘s nod) uh huh. There’s really now way* you don’t have to drive, right? [P] um hmm [I] okay [P] I have three* cars, [I] alright. So we can’t imagine that three cars are broken down, right? [P] um hmm [I] alright, so you uh, when you, when you get older, do you think you’re going to have one of those cars? [P] yeah, I know my sister’s going to have the old beaten up car [I] okay, cause she’s first, right? [P] yeah and my dad might give me my BMW, his* (corrects himself) BMW. Other children’s experience led them to reason they were entitled because they “know how to be good.” When some children were probed further into the question why others do not have the same privileges as do they, in some sense some children believe they could control it by being “good” and/or “nice” and reasoned likewise that others who were less fortunate had been “bad”. For example, one child reasoned she had the material provisions she did in comparison to another child who had much less, because she knew how to behave well, whereas other children who “weren’t nice to their parents . . . . didn’t have a lot of toys.” Continuing the explanation, this child explained, “Their [the aforementioned child’s] mom said, ‘No way ‘cause you were being mean to us,’ so they didn’t deserve it.” Another child 101 held a similar reasoning that he received good things because he was good and others then must be bad because they do not have as much. Several of the mothers discussed the difficulty of communicating the privileges their children experienced in relation to the norm of the community. The following is one mother’s attempt to communicate the differences to her child: [C-8] I don’t expect her to have that appreciation at this age. Because, I don’t think she really knows (pause) the difference. I mean, like my husband would say, ‘Do you realize,’ uh, ‘most people,’ not, probably not most people from [Small Town, CA]--but most kids don’t get to go to a nice hotel and um (pause) that sort of thing; or go on all these nice vacations, and stuff like that.[I] And, how does she respond? [P] She doesn’t rea(lly). She doesn’t understand (pause). And I understand that because…. she doesn’t know anything different….This is the norm. Another aspect of entitlement related to some children’s experience of relative deprivation. This finding related to the problematic aspect of sense of entitlement that emerged in which some children came to expect a particular special treatment and did not receive it. When deprived of the treatment they expected they behaved with a demanding attitude and/or treated others differentially according to a perceived status role. For example, according to one mother, the child, who was accustomed to overhearing her parents give orders in their professional life, dictated her own demands to the nanny. The mother, while not approving of the child’s attitude and behavior, attributed it to the fault of the nanny, whom she said allowed the child to speak to her in that manner. The mother conveyed she is at a loss as to why the child behaves in this manner toward the nanny, while she is otherwise respectful to others. The following quotation illustrates this sense of status related attitude of entitlement demonstrated in the mother’s report of the child’s interaction 102 with one of her nannies. In her discussion, the mother also reflected on the origin of this attitude. [C-7] If they’re totally like being (pause) snippy and rude (pause) to the nanny. I mean, it happens every day. I’ll be in one room and I’ll hear them in the other room talking to the nanny and I’m like, I’ll (laughs) yell through the house, “Watch your tone of voice! Who’re you talking to?”….Like, um, ‘I told you I don’t want a pear for a snack again!!’[I] Hmm. It sounds a little spoiled (pause--chuckles). [P] It does! It’s horrible! They would never talk to me like that!.... maybe not 24/7, but it’s, yeah! (pause). And it’s not to other people. It is to Nanny! I don’t know! I, eh….some of it must be (pause) emulating my behavior, but I mean (pause) I don’t think I’m like that (pause)! Unless, um, (pause) I mean, you know, and then, like I, i[t], there’s the nature of my role as what I do! You know! I am a doctor who tells people what to do all the time. I have staff and I tell ‘em what to do. I have staff at home, and I tell ‘em what to do. I have patients, I tell (laughs) ‘em what to do. I mean, that’s what I do is tell people what to do. So, certainly (pause), there’s gonna be some of that! Another example of the problematic aspect of sense of entitlement in which the child’s attribution indicates the child may have experienced a sense of deprivation of the expected preferential treatment. For example, one mother recalled the family evening routine of dinnertime in which the child, seemingly disturbed at being interrupted, left the table and declared she would not eat. She withdraws (pause). She says, ‘I, well, she won’t eat….She would get upset about a behavior at the table, either my husband . . . either my husband interrupted her, yeah, either, because it wouldn’t be just him just being interrupted um, her wanting to say something and not being able to say it. People not being patient with her and letting her get it out, because you know, at a certain age it’s hard for them to express themselves, and it takes time and then adults want to try to help them and give them the words. She wouldn’t like them, she would get really upset, she would get angry or someone would um try to help her with her food and they didn’t do it the way she liked it she would get upset very easily the wrong way. The problem is that they are so conditioned to my way of doing things, that when other people try to help [phone sounds] most of the time it’s different. I would just, 103 for instance, when I make them poached eggs I cut the egg. It’s on the toast and I cut it in a good pattern three ways this way, three ways that way. That’s just the way I do it. I do it that way every time, and we’re all . . . my husband would come, and he would cut it in like pie shapes and it would just--it freaks them out. She would just get up and leave! Upon reflecting on this interaction, the mother evaluated it was the father’s behavior at the dinner table that influenced the child. This mother conveyed that at times, her husband had strongly protested if she had not provided the correct silverware for him. Thus, there is indication the child’s experience was that when one does not receive the treatment to which the child believes s/he is entitled, it is perfectly acceptable to protest and/or storm off. Interestingly, the child responded she was “unsure” with regard to whether her behavior in that instance was appropriate. To a greater degree, deprivation of certain expected treatment emerged in the sense of underlying spoiled effects in one child in terms of a child exhibiting retaliatory behavior. One child’s sense of entitlement revealed a disturbing and destructive interaction between a mother and child. From the mother’s perspective, the child regularly behaved disrespectfully to her mother. The mother explained: She used to hit me and I would say, “that’s wrong,” but she really would not have any good consequence for it. So . . . or say, “I hate you!” And so I thought, that was just like a normal reaction . . . . But I didn’t realize that that was (pause) teaching her disrespect! That I-- (pause) so now I realize that she needs to, (pause) that that was a sign of disrespect! The mother’s response to what she considered “rude” and “disrespectful was punishment. For example, if the interaction took place at home, the mother required the child to scrub the floor because, “It really needs scrubbing and I don’t want to do 104 it,” she explained. “So that seems to have an effect,” the mother conveyed. The mother explained, “Or choosing really nasty tasks like, since we’ve been on vacation, she’s been disrespectful to me, then (pause) I’ll make her (pause) carry my luggage up to the hotel room. Such an illustration described here in an excerpt from the mother’s interview depicts an interaction while she is on vacation with the child. Well, just a couple of days ago….. She wanted me to die, and um, you know. So here we are, we’re sitting at (pause) um, the Hilton at a Waterpark! You know, and I’m like (pause) and she’s telling me she wants me to die, and I’m like (pause) [attitude] “Okay!” And, it ticks me off! I, we were telling her, “We never got to go to a, (pause)” I’m like (pause) [attitude]. “Okay! You either stop the behavior . . . saying, ‘I want you to die!” You know, now I’m trying to think what precipitated that! Because, I can’t remember what it was that she was doing that, uh (pause). Well, it was obviously something that she wanted to do. Because I know that at some point, she wanted-- she loves TV--and so she wanted to go back to the room and watch TV. Um. ‘Cause periodically, she would get bored with--and you know . . . I understand that. But, whatever it was she didn’t like, maybe she wanted to go, (pause) for instance, she wanted to go out to breakfast. Um (pause). And we were trying to save (pause) some money by, we bought bagels and milk, and put ‘em in the cooler, but she wanted to go out to breakfast. So we would say ‘no.’ And so maybe she would say, “Well, I hate you!” you know, “I want you to die!” …. So she would have to (pause) go to the room, where we were, um, and just sit there. Um, or like I said, she would have to (pause) carry all the, that was (pause) that miserable punishment I could think of, was, carry out the lugga[ge]. Nothing was really heavy. It was just that you had to make a lot of trips with a lot of small bags. She would have to carry all the luggage out (pause) to the car for us. That was her way of making it right, with us. From this child’s perspective, she knowingly “torments” her mother, likening the treatment to an old time torture chamber, and claimed the mother is deserving of this kind of treatment. The child’s explanation is as follows: [P] I try to torture my mom. [I] Hmm, what does that mean? [P](Sigh) Like torture her. Like if someone, like in the olden days--like if 105 someone was like, you know when they have those things, if you’re bad, like in England, they used to do this. You, they would put the sword thing on your neck [I] um hmm [P] like this (gestures). [I] Oh [P] yeah, and the people will shoot at your face.[I] Oh [P] Like that’s torturing. [I] Oh, I see. [P] Like I try to do something really mean to her.….Because she doesn’t really listen to me and she, and she’s always mean to me. [I] So you feel that because she’s not giving you what you want at that moment that, that’s what she deserves. [P] [Non-verbal response]. [I] You’re shaking your head yes, and do you believe that? Or are you just playing? Or do you really, think so? [P] (Pause) I really think so. [I] You really do think so. And so, do you think, when you want something, you should be able to have it? [P] Sometimes.…Well, here’s another thing that I do. If she doesn’t, if she doesn’t. When she didn’t let me have any chocolate candy. Um, I went into her room when she was sleeping and I went under her bed and ….so I opened the guitar case and I did the guitar real, real, really, loud (pleasure sigh)--([I] um hmm) and it woke her up. And you did that because, [P] because (sigh with a grin) she didn’t let me have any candy for a week…. [P] (giggle) Revenge. Underlying this particular child’s discourse is the child’s sense that she was entitled to receive whatever it was she wanted. When the child did not receive what she requested, the child proceeded to retaliate and seek “revenge” on her mother. The child’s experience with the mother was not much different as the mother employed a form of psychological control on the child by initiating retaliation rather than offering guidance and setting clear limits on the child’s behavior. Although this child was very young and it would be incorrect to project any conclusion on the outcome effect for this or any of the children, the retaliatory interplays that exist in this mother-child dyad could lead to more dangerous levels as the child develops. The dynamics that existed in this mother-child pair most closely related to a disturbing pattern of reciprocal psychological control and manipulative interplays between both the mother and her child. The result in this instance may have been the child’s desire to reverse the exploitive retaliatory behavior she had experienced with the mother, 106 similar to the occurrence existent with the component of entitlement related to narcissism as discussed by researchers, Bishop and Lane (2002). Interestingly, at the conclusion of the interview, the child expressed she privately wished she could spend some individual time with just the mother alone, without any intrusions from the fraternal twin sister. Thus, each of the children revealed some sense of entitlement. Children and their experiences differed resulting in different effects according to the child. Entitlement beliefs related to a general sense of experience the children shared and the more problematic attitude and behaviors associated when some children experienced a deprivation of their norm of expected treatment or privileges. The implicit norm the children experienced translated into a sense of confidence they conveyed and a belief they would, for the most part receive what they expected. Some children centered their reasoning that they are good and know how to behave in order to receive good things, whereas others are bad to which they do not receive the same privileges. Other children came to form an expectancy belief based on family entitlement, and/or based on the comparative norms of privilege from the community. Based in their entitlement beliefs, when a minority of the children experienced a deprivation of the privileges or treatment there is evidence children came to treat others differentially according to their perceived status role. Sense of entitlement was evident in one child to the extent that the child reportedly exhibited retaliatory behavior when deprived of what she believes she is entitled. While each mother-child pair was unique in their interactions, effects were evident through the 107 discourse that varied in measures and degrees on entitlement. Entitlement emerged as an important effectual area for the child whether it was characterized by seemingly benign interactions or interplays that revealed disturbing patterns developing of retaliation and of seeking revenge. Summary Based on my analysis of the mothers and their children’s discourse, two effectual areas emerged as salient in the discourse related to the child. Issues related to self-regulation and the child’s sense of entitlement each emerged from the findings as they related to child effects. Self-regulation was one area that emerged with different degrees of effect. In one respect, issues of self-regulation pertained to some children’s willingness and/or ability to exert effort on behalf of a desired outcome, such as a homework project. In another respect, a pattern emerged of difficulty for some of the children in the area of emotional regulation. Thus, while these children were able to represent themselves strong, sociable, and competent in some contexts, privately, some of the children discussed difficult encounters that included depression, anxiety and in managing or regulating their own emotions at times. A second effectual area for the child was sense of entitlement. Entitlement beliefs related to a general sense of experience the children shared and the more problematic attitude and behaviors associated when some children experienced a deprivation of their norm of expected treatment or privileges. The implicit norm the children experienced translated into a sense of confidence they conveyed and a belief they would, for the most part receive what they expected. Based in their entitlement beliefs, when a minority of the children experienced a deprivation of the privileges 108 or treatment there is evidence of preferential status treatment and was evident in one child to the extent that the child reportedly exhibited retaliatory behavior when deprived of what she believes she is entitled. Chapter Summary To summarize, this chapter centered on a presentation of the results addressed to the questions, “Why do parents spoil their children, and what is the nature of these occurrences?” In addressing the question of the meaning of spoiling, mothers do not set out to spoil their children and often do not even realize they are doing it. However, an incomplete understanding of what spoiling is and how it occurs contributes to the process of spoiling taking place. Mothers discussed two means by which they believe spoiling could occur: indulging the child with privileges, material provision, freedom, and some believed, through attention; and lack of provision, in terms of setting limits. Mothers also viewed spoiling in terms of the outcome effects on the child. That is, mothers depicted the spoiled child as one who conveyed a sense of entitlement, demonstrated a lack of appreciation or gratitude, and behaved in a “selfish” and/or “demanding” manner. According to the first question, “Why do mothers spoil?, analyses of the interview transcripts and journal documents revealed there were complex and dynamic influences and pressures at play underlying their decision-making process. Analyses of the mothers’ discourse revealed three separate, yet overlapping domains of influence that resulted in spoiling: mothers’ own psychological processes, social- 109 contextual influences, and the mothers’ cultural-historical background and experiences. On the first realm of influence, a theme emerged identifying that according to the mothers’ psychological processes, mothers tended to have an achievement/performance goal orientation, even as it pertained to the social realm for their children. The mothers frequently discussed the importance placed on their children representing themselves socially competent in a given situation. For example, one mother expressed a concern over spoiling her child as evidenced by the child’s lack of appreciation she demonstrated when receiving gifts from others. The child would simply toss the unwanted gift on the floor upon receiving it. The mother, embarrassed over her daughter’s behavior, expressed more of a concern that her child demonstrate the social grace rather than that she internalize the value of gratefulness. According to the second realm of influence, a theme emerged indicating that according to the social-contextual realm, parent goals and needs circumvented the child’s needs for development of internal processes. Analyses of the mothers’ discourse indicated that they often fluctuated between meeting their needs and their child’s needs, within the context of the activity. Parent needs surrounding spoiling included convenience, easing a painful interaction, and/or relieving stress or guilt. Mothers’ attention to the needs of the child centered on the child’s happiness and emphasized performance and achievement. For example, one mother expressed she was a “control freak” about keeping the house clean and employed a housekeeper to attend to those needs. The mother required little of her child in terms of chores or 110 keeping her own room clean. When asked, the child did not know how her room got clean or how it stayed that way, but surmised that her mother is the one responsible. Hiring a housekeeper addressed the mother’s need of having a clean house. However, by not involving the child in taking responsibility at the level at which she was capable; the child’s actual need was unmet. Spoiling occurred in the sense that the mother was doing for her child what the child could have been doing in terms of developing a sense of responsibility and competence. Numerous examples of this type were reported in the interviews. Along the lines of the third realm of influence, the cultural-historical, the theme that arose related to time and change in relation to the norms and values. Mothers compared their parenting with own upbringing, relating it to the current norms and values existent in the community and wider society. For example, mothers discussed the rapid changes in technology require that parents and their children continually keep up with their friends, according to new advancements. In addition, the types of games with which children become involved, promote a competitive, performance/achievement orientation, in addition to immersing them into materialism. Thus, spoiling is promoted on a wider cultural context. The second research question, “what are the nature of the occurrences of spoiling” was addressed as spoiling resulted in child effects. The interviews disclosed two major child outcomes of maternal spoiling: lack of self-regulation and the sense of entitlement by the child. One outcome of spoiling is difficulty in the area of self-regulation. In one respect, issues of self-regulation pertained to some children’s willingness and/or 111 ability to exert independent effort on behalf of a desired outcome, such as a homework project. In another respect, a pattern emerged of difficulty for some of the children in the area of emotional regulation. Thus, while these children were able to represent themselves strong, sociable, and competent in some contexts, privately some of these children revealed difficulties they had at times in managing or regulating their own emotions. A second area of effect for the child was sense of entitlement. Each of the children, at some level, held a sense of entitlement. This expectation to receive what was what was expected emerged from their experience. Some of the children believe they deserve what they receive based on knowing how to behave well, which is also aligned with a performance/achievement orientation. Other children expected certain privileges or material items based on their awareness of the parents’ ability to provide. Some children demanded and/or retaliated when they sensed a deprivation of the expected treatment or withheld privileges. A small number of children, at times, revealed preferential status treatment and devaluation of individuals according to their perceived status roles. The next chapter presents an analysis of the results in terms of current research. In addition, discussion takes place on the implications and recommendations are made for future research. 112 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION This chapter consists of three main sections: (a) summary and context of the study, (b) discussion of the findings, and (c) limitations, implications, and suggestions for future research. Summary Families from all cultures are increasingly able to raise their children with luxuries and pleasures not previously afforded in earlier times (Goff & Fleisher, 1999), yet the psychological costs to affluence for many may go largely undetected (Luthar, 2003; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). Although developmental psychologists and counselors are concerned about identifying parental behaviors that place children at risk, they have not focused on problems that exist for children raised in affluent homes (Goff & Fleisher, 1999; Luther, 2003). Although over fifteen years since the “spoiled child syndrome” was defined (McIntosh, 1989), the problem persists (Kindlon, 2001). Many parents consider that children today are more spoiled than they were when they were young. In a recent survey of parents conducted in the United States, 60% of parents reported they spoil their own children (Washington-Reuters, 2001). The problem, extending itself to classrooms and the larger society is hardly something to be ignored (Goff & Fleisher, 1999; Goodman & Goodman, 1999). The current discussion that exists among the popular press has centered on the problem of parents spoiling their children (e.g. Birnbach, 2002; Dickinson, 2000; Gibbs, 2001). However, researchers have not explored, in depth, the term: the 113 “spoiled child syndrome.” Not only have they failed to agree on the nature of spoiling, but also they have not explored the reasons for spoiling children. We know that spoiled children are likely to face problems in school and in the family, unless parents understand how their behaviors influence their children and take steps to modify their parent-child interactions. This study explored the nature of parenting in affluent families as it relates to spoiling children. The research addressed in this study centered on two questions: “Why do parents spoil their children and what is the nature of these occurrences?” This chapter first provides a discussion of the conclusions to this research as it addresses spoiling a child. Second, a discussion takes place of the study’s limitations, followed by some of the suggested implications of the conclusions presented. Conclusions This section presents a discussion of the conclusions revealed by this research. Discussion takes place in each of the following areas as it pertains to the results: the meaning of spoiling; clarification to why maternal spoiling occurs; the effects of spoiling on the children. Each subsection begins with an observational statement offered that may assist in the development of programs and interventions addressed to parents and children in similar contexts. 114 Observation #1: Mothers tend only to superficially understand their children’s spoiled behavior and lack a clear understanding of the underlying self-processes affected by spoiling. In order to ascertain why mothers spoil their children it is important to understand that mothers hold an incomplete understanding of the meaning of spoiling a child. Mothers, while holding a conception of spoiling, were unable to articulate a complete understanding of: 1) a clarified meaning of spoiling, 2) how they were themselves spoiling their children, and 2) the outcomes as it pertained to the children. That is, mothers tended to hold a superficial and relative assessment of the meaning of spoiling. They also had difficulty identifying how they were in fact spoiling their own children. Importantly, they also tended to be unaware of the some of effects the children expressed they had encountered. Mothers’ typical understanding of spoiling consisted of two primary means by which spoiling occurs: indulging the child and a failure to provide limits. Indulging meant through privileges, material, freedom, and some believed, through excessive attention. Mothers also tended to believe that by not setting limits they could spoil their children. The understanding these mothers held is consistent with early definitions (McIntosh, 1989; Swain, 1985) of the spoiled child syndrome. Mothers failed to identify that lack of requirement of responsibility is also a means by which they can spoil their children. This research revealed that in practice when mothers provide more assistance for their children than their children require this may also contribute to spoiled effects for the child. That is, not only may a failure to provide limits contribute to spoiled effects in children, but when parents 115 fail to provide a context in which the child may develop self-processes, this may also spoil children. Typically, in speaking of the meaning of spoiling, mothers also focused attention on the outcome effects for the child. The effects that mothers typically discussed were: (a) entitlement, (b) lack of appreciation/value, and (c) selfish and demanding behavior. Interestingly, the children revealed difficulty with underlying self-regulatory processes, which indicates spoiling affects children’s developing self- processes in ways in which mothers are often unaware. Observation #2: Mothers may not be cognizant of the influences, pressures, and processes that interplay with and influence their everyday decisions, which may contribute to why mothers may be unable to determine the outcome effect of spoiling on their children. The first question addressed in this research was, why do mothers spoil their children? This research indicates the reasons behind maternal spoiling are complex. The findings of this research are consistent with Grolnick’s (2003) suggestion that parents may become so involved in their cultural surroundings that they may be unaware of the shaping that is taking place through the translation of culture into their own behavior. Consistent with a view that development occurs as a result of individual, social, and cultural influences, this research reveals evidence of three realms of influence that address why mothers spoil their children: 1) maternal psychological processes, 2) social-contextual processes, and 3) cultural-historical processes. These three realms of influence were evident in the mothers’ explanation of the goals they 116 have for their children (revealing their own goal orientation) and their elaboration of the challenges they experience in carrying out everyday activities. Results of this study revealed that this group of mothers held a similar orientation to each other, while also revealing individual variations in each mother- child dyad. Mothers’ own goals tended to reflect an achievement/performance orientation, which translated to their emphasis on their everyday activities that reflected an achievement/performance approach, even as it pertained to the social realm for their children. This research reveals this expectancy orientation, while corresponding to strong academic achievement and performance outcomes, also corresponded with stress and anxiety for some children. Coupled with this achievement/performance orientation was an interplay in the parent-child social/contextual realm which further exacerbated the spoiling effect at different levels for these children. That is, spoiling occurred within the dynamics existent in the parent-child interaction. As an example, this research indicates that maternal stress, guilt, and desire to ease an otherwise painful interaction, promoted spoiling on the social-contextual level. Further, as a result of playing out the performance/achievement goals in the dyads, there was evidence that maternal goals and needs circumvented the child’s internal needs of development of self-regulatory processes. A third realm of important influence was that of the cultural-historical. From the mothers’ standpoint, there was evidence of influences at play seemingly beyond the scope of the mothers’ everyday influences inadvertently affecting the mothers actions related to spoiling their children. Each of the mothers conveyed that in some 117 manner, their upbringing was different from that of their children. While each of the mothers attempted to bring into their child’s experience that which they valued from their own upbringing, there were things several mothers discussed that contrasted with their own upbringing. For example, mothers discussed the rapid changes in technology require that families continually keep up with their neighbors, according to new advancements. Further, some mothers discussed the types of games in which their children became involved which seem to promote a more competitive, performance/achievement orientation, in addition to immersing them into materialism. Interestingly, as some mothers explored their reasoning with regard to why they purchased these games for their children, while mothers themselves did not necessarily promote the corresponding values they reasoned that they did not wish to deprive their children and that their children had already been exposed to the games by friends. Of the mothers whose children were playing video and games of other formats (board or pretend play), several of the mothers were unaware their children were involving themselves in these types of games. Mothers, then, were largely unaware of how and why they were spoiling their children. While each of the mothers interviewed were aware that spoiling was occurring at some level, they were unaware of the complexity of the actual influences. Mothers’ immersion in their everyday activities often left them little if any time to reflect on why they had made the decisions or behaved in the ways in which they did. 118 Observation #3: Child effects manifested as demanding and/or selfish attitudes or behavior, sense of entitlement, and/or lack of appreciation or gratitude, may indicate the necessity of attention addressed to underlying difficulties in terms of self- processes, particularly self-regulation and as it relates to the child’s sense of self- worth. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, mothers’ report of immediate engagements with their children reflected inconsistencies with the long term hopes mothers had for their children’s inherent sense of happiness, self-worth, self-efficacy, and competence. For example, children’s happiness-well being was important to mothers, as was their child’s self-esteem, that their child live with relative ease, and that their children have choices the mothers themselves often did not have when they were children. Some of these children however, while very sociable, articulate, and bright discussed in their interviews they privately longed for more attention. These children also discussed in their interviews the difficulties they experienced at times with depression, headaches, anxiety, and/or feelings of being out-of-control. Additionally, although a sense of entitlement to the privileges and resources available to the children may have been a natural result of the experience of an upbringing in affluence, this study indicates problems may not reveal themselves until the relative life of ease and privileged treatment is threatened. Attitudes and behaviors may emerge at the point in which the child senses deprivation and may serve as an attempt to restore the child’s sense of worth that has become equated with his or her privileged treatment. As the child develops, these attitudes may become more problematic. 119 This study indicates children as young as age 7-10 may be already developing problem effects. Thus, an important element underlying the corresponding effect of spoiling – a sense of entitlement - for some children may pertain to the child’s development of self-worth. That is, perhaps, when the prominent focus for the child, on several realms of influence, is on demonstrating competence with the promotion of a strong performance/achievement orientation, the child may in fact learn to equate his/her self-worth with how s/he performs and achieves. Perhaps when the early promotion of value is to demonstrate performance or achievement competencies as a substitute for the investment of authentic maternal (or surrogate) attachment relationship, children may come to equate this competence with their sense of value and/or worth. This could explain why some children develop more severe types of controlling and manipulating relationships as they serve to validate their sense of worth as an individual. This explanation would be consistent with suggestions by earlier researchers (Bishop & Lane, 2002; Emmons, 1987) pertaining to the dangers of entitlement, its relation to narcissism, and the suggested relation to sense of self-worth. Displays of entitlement in a child may indicate necessary attention addressed to a sense of self-worth attained through relationships established through interactions based in authentic interactions and based in values of importance to the child, resulting in a child’s true sense of happiness and well-being. Limitations Several issues should be addressed with regard to future research and regarding limitations and generalization of this study. First, results of this study 120 should not be over-generalized. Importantly, not all of the issues were of concern for each child. While a natural sense of entitlement emerged for each of the children, different children also varied in degree and effect. The limits set on the study from the onset, in themselves, provided for an inquiry into only one community in the Southern California region of the United States. I set the limit of income at or above $100,000 for two parent families. I did not interview single parents nor did I interview fathers, which might have revealed considerable insight into the topic of spoiling. Additionally, I set the age category for children between ages 7-10, further narrowing the population examined. Future studies could explore the reasons and effects of spoiling in different contexts. Second, even within the limits set on the study, there was considerable variation between each parent and her child with regard to family background. Biological and developmental differences may have accounted for an unexplained number of variations each child experienced with regard to spoiling. In addition, the extent to which spoiling alone had on the effects of the children is difficult to determine. For example, some children were only-children while others had older and younger siblings. One child was a fraternal twin, and while the mother conveyed she went through considerable effort to provide that each child developed a separate identity, that factor may have contributed to the experience one child had, related to spoiling. Whether a child was a male or female may also have contributed to responses children gave during their interviews and on the effect of spoiling in each case. 121 Third, variation also existed with regard to care-giving situations that may have accounted for some of the differences. Some mothers stayed home with their children and others worked outside of the home. Of the mothers who worked outside of the home, one father stayed home during the day to care for the children while others had nannies or sitters. One mother worked at home which may have added to the variation in the quality of experiences shared by the mother and her child. Further studies should address these factors. With regard to the process of analyses of the data, there are at least a couple of factors to mention. First, as the primary instrument of data collection and analyses, my own interpretation was at play. That is, given a different study with a number of researchers examining the data, different shades of meaning lending to additional themes might have been identified. The role of the researcher in a qualitative study is that the researcher becomes the tool of analysis. This not only lends the study results to individual interpretation, but also may present bias. I suggest that the bias I hold is a commitment to understanding both the mother and the child. Conducting this study from the standpoint that I am a parent myself who grew up in the same community, I was able to better understand some of the sub- context and nuances from more of an emic perspective. Raising my own child in the same community offered an insight into the mother’s perspective as well. Implications and Suggestions for Future Research The results of this study warrant serious attention. Whether the spoiling effect seems apparently benign, in progressive stages, or whether the effects of spoiling are well on their way of establishing significant problems for the child in and out of 122 social situations, this issue warrants important consideration. There are several issues at play. Each area is important. First, the influence of the mother, herself, is important. While this study revealed both the mothers’ needs and the mothers’ attempt to meet the children’s needs, the mother must assume the responsibility in order to address the children’s real needs. Because of pressures and influences of the different realms as discussed, this is often difficult. This is something with which parents must grapple. If, for example, the mother must work long hours and is tired when she returns home from work outside the home, it may pose challenges to addressing the child’s need for the mother’s attachment, as one mother noted. Mothers must be educated on the importance of attachment and how it develops. Furthermore, as one mother explained, there was a time she was in survival mode, not taking an authentic assessment of what was occurring in her child’s development. Time constraints, mothers’ own quest for achievement, societal expectations, and mothers’ own psychological processes may all distract from taking the time out of life to simply be with and form an authentic relationship with the child. The results of this study indicate a need for research addressed to the issue of attachment that pertains to its effect on how mothers understand and interpret the children’s needs at different ages. Attention should also address parent educators and mothers on the importance and development of self-regulation. Contributing to one’s sense of value, an individual’s sense of self-worth does come by developing as a responsible, free, yet self-disciplined individual, capable of exerting effort toward meaningful goals. Pressley (1995) described self-regulation as the slow, gradual, long-term 123 development requiring the gradual relinquishment of control from the adult caregiver to the child. Having invested his/her own expenditure of effort, the child’s internal sense of accomplishment and an internalization of a sense of appreciation for what was achieved may be attained. Research should address the issue of development of self-regulation in non-formal settings such as the context of the home. When families learn how they may assist their children in the development of self-regulation skills inside of the home, there is better opportunity for transfer to other important contexts such as the school setting. Related to self-regulation is the issue of control. It became evident from the mothers’ discourse examined that mothers’ form of discipline, while there was some variation, relied largely on an external/behavioral understanding of motivation. The exercise of control must ultimately become an individualized, internalized process (Bandura, 1997). This study indicates mothers may tend to rely on external motivators for their children and as children develop, may neglect to address the internal issues that may warrant concern. Further, a predominant view mothers held was on the promotion of performance and achievement as defined by the external rather than in terms of considering more internal measures of success. For example, as discussed, several mothers discussed the importance of the children’s social outcomes, while they failed to realize the influences existent in the games the children played that promoted power, control, and materialism. Mothers tended to focus on what they could measure by observation; it was more difficult to determine internalization of values and other internal processes. An important issue then is that internal measures 124 of success must also be promoted in society and indicators of this success be offered to parents. Furthermore, while it could be assumed that parents influence their children to measure success by external means by spoiling them, this study indicates it is likely that cultural influences are, in large, also responsible for also effecting an emphasis on the external measures of success. Change can take place by enacting policies that promote time spent with family and by promotion of education that may assist parents in the internalization of values that are of importance to the family. Additionally, parents must learn more regarding the process of motivation and of how they implicitly and explicitly influence the development of important values in their children. Regular family activities, such as family mealtime, that promote verbal interaction and the opportunity for children to internalize values through verbal give and take, might be one way families may successfully develop important values as well as through social modeling. Finally, this study indicates the need for parents to be educated with regard to the difference of developing a sense of self worth in their children as opposed to an emphasis on self-esteem. Mothers interviewed, while interested in children feeling good and presenting themselves competent, revealed little with regard to their understanding of how they may contribute toward an internalized sense of competence and self-worth in their children. Research (Heatherton & Vohs, 2000) reveals that perceived threat to individuals with high self-esteem may result in retaliatory measures. High self-esteem may have been a factor in one of the more severe cases in which the child resorted to revenge tactics toward the mother. 125 Interestingly, that child expressed the longing she had to spend time alone with her mother. Research must address how parents may instill in their child a sense of self- worth, while developing an internalized sense of respect for others. The issue of parenting and self-efficacy development in children warrants further attention. Concluding then, why do mothers spoil? Mothers do not set out to spoil their children and often do not even realize they are doing it. However, an incomplete understanding of what spoiling is and how it occurs contributes to the process of spoiling taking place. The spoiling effect is a result of complex influences and pressures in a variety of contexts. Ultimately, the mother must be the one to initiate in terms of taking responsibility and effecting change. When mothers attempt to meet their own needs, they may not be addressing their children’s real needs, including needs for the development of self-processes and relations based on authentic interactions. Is it then a matter of fact that because a child grows up in affluence, they will ultimately become spoiled? No, simply growing up in affluence does not make a child spoiled, but much privilege and resources paired with little responsibility, investment, and involvement in what is received, may lead to spoiled effects in some children. This study indicates that a child’s true sense of self-worth is not achieved through material means; appreciation in what is given, however, may come as a gradual sense as self-worth is concurrently developed. The child must learn through experience that one is an active, free agent, capable of expending effort on behalf of attaining the things one desires, while in relationship with others in authentic, mutually respectful, and meaningful ways. That is, as this research indicates, one’s 126 own “pursuit of happiness” cannot become exclusive from the investment in an authentic and meaningful relationship with one’s child without serious cost to the child. 127 REFERENCES Amato, P.R. (1989). Family processes and the competence of adolescents and primary school children. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 18(1), 39-53. Bandura, Albert (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. Barber, B.K. & Harmon, E.L. (2002). Violating the self: Parental psychological control of children and adolescents. In Barber (Ed.), Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents (pp.15-52). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Barber, B.K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development 67, 3296-3319. Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development 37, 887-907. Birnbach, L. (2002). Are you spoiling your child? How to prevent your child from being spoiled. CBS News, Retrieved July 27, 2007, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/01/earlyshow/contributors/earlysho w/contributors/lisabirnbach/main523920.shtml?source=RSS&attr=_523920 Bishop, J. & Lane, R. (2002). The dynamics and dangers of entitlement. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 19(4), 739-758. Bredehoft, D., Clarke, J., & Dawson, C. (2002). Relationships between childhood overindulgence and parenting attributes: Implications for family life educators. Paper presented at the National Council on Family Relations Annual Meeting. Accessed on 4/11/04. www.overindulgence.info/Web_documents/NCFR. Bredehoft, D., Mennicke, S., Potter, A., & Clarke, J. (1998). Perceptions attributed by adults to parental overindulgence during childhood. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education 16(2), 1-15. Brody, G. & Flor, D. (1998). Maternal resources, parenting practices, and child competence in rural, single parent African American families. Child Development 69(3), 803-816. Brook, U., Watemberg, N. & Geva, D. (2000). Attitude and knowledge of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disability among high school teachers. Patient Education and Counseling 40, 247-242. 128 Chao, R. (2000). The parenting of immigrant Chinese and European American mothers: Relations between parenting styles, socialization, goals, and parental practices. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 21(2), 233- 248. Chao, R.K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: Understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child Development 65, 1111-1119. Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded theory. In J.A. Smith (Eds.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods, (81-110). London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications Chen, X., Liu, M. & Li, D. (2000). Parental warmth, control, and indulgence and their relations to adjustment in Chinese children: A longitudinal study. Journal of Family Psychology 14(3), 401-419. Coles, R. (1977). Privileged ones: The well-off and the rich in America: Volume V of Children of crisis. Boston; Toronto: Little, Brown, and Company. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). If we are so rich, why aren’t we happy? American Psychologist 54(10), 821-827. Cummings, E.M. & Cummings, J.S. (2002). Parenting and attachment. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting, Vol. IV (pp.35-58). London Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. DeVries, R., Hildebrandt, C., & Zan, B. (2000). Constructivist early education for moral development. Early Education & Development 11(1), 9-35. Diaz, R.M., Neal, C.J., Amaya-Williams, M. (1990). Social origins of self- regulation. In Moll. L.C. (Ed.). In Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 127-154). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Dickinson, A. (2000). Spoiling our kids. Time, Retrieved July 27, 2007, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,995907,00.html Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist 55(1), 34-43. Dix, T., Ruble, D.N., & Zambarano, R.J. (1989). Mothers’ implicit theories of discipline: Child effects, parent effects, and the attribution process. Child Development 60, 1373-1391. 129 Eccles, J.S. (2002). Forward. In Barber (Ed.), Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents (xi-xv). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Ehrensaft, D. (1997). Spoiling childhood: How well-meaning parents are giving children too much- but not what they need. New York; London: The Guilford Press. Emmons, R. (1987). Narcissism: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52(1), 11-17. Fiske, A.P. (2002). Using individualism and collectivism to compare cultures – a critique of the validity and measurement of the constructs: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002). Psychological Bulletin 128(1), 78-88. Fong, V.L. (2004). Only Hope: Coming of Age under China’s One-Child Policy. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Galambos, N.L., Barker, E.T., & Almeida, D.M. (2003). Parents do matter: Trajectories of change in externalizing and internalizing problems in early adolescence. Child Development 74(2), 578-595. Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56. Garner, P.W. (1996). Does hearing a lecture on attachment affect students: attitudes about “spoiling” infants? College Student Journal, 30(2), 168-172. Gibbs, N. (2001). Who’s in charge here? Do kids have too much power? Time.com Retrieved July 27, 2007, http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101010806/cover.html Goff , B. & Fleisher, A. (1999). Spoiled rotten: Affluence, anxiety, and social decay in America. Boulder, Colorado; United Kingdom: Westview Press. Goodman, R. & Goodman, B. (1999). The lost children of Rockdale County. Boston: WGBH Educational Foundation, PBS Frontline. Goodnow, J.J. (2002). Adding culture to studies of development: Toward changes in procedure and theory. Human Development, 45, 237-245. Grolnick, W. & Farkas, M. (2002). Parenting and the development of children’s self- regulation. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 5: Practical issues in parenting (pp.89-110). Mahwah, N.J. U.S.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 130 Grolnick, W.S. (2003). The psychology of parental control: How well-meant parenting backfires. Mahwah, New Jersey; London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Grusec, J. (2002). Parental socialization and children’s acquisition of values. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting, Vol. V: Practical issues in parenting (pp.143-167). London Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Harwood, R., Leyendecker, B., Carlson, V., Asencio, M., Miller, M. (2002). Parenting among Latino families in the U.S. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting. Vol. I: children and parenting (pp.21-46). London Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Hausner, L. (1990). Children of paradise: Successful parenting for prosperous families. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc. Hesketh, T. & Zhu, W.H. (1997). The one child family policy: The good, the bad, and the ugly. British Medical Journal. 1685-1687. Heatherington, Todd F. & Vohs, Kathleen D., (2000). Interpersonal evaluations following threats to self: role of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78( 4), 725-736. Hyesoo, K. & Chung, R.H.G. (2003). Relationship of recalled parenting style to self- perception in Korean American college students. Journal of Genetic Psychology 164(4), 481-493. Hymowitz, K. (2001). Parenting: The lost art. American Educator 25(1), 4-9. Ispa, J.M. (1995). Ideas about infant and toddler care among Russian child care teachers, mothers, and university students. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10(3): 359-379. Jewell, E.J., Lindberg, C.A., & Thompson, S.E. (2001). The Oxford: American Desk Dictionary and Thesaurus (2 nd ed.). New York: New York. Kindlon, D. (2001). Too much of a good thing: Raising children of character in an indulgent age. New York: Hyperion. Lamborn, S.D. (with Mounts, N. S.), Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S.M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development 62, 1049-1065. Lasch, C. (1979). The culture of narcissism: American life in the age of diminishing expectations. New York: Norton. 131 Lincoln, Y. S. (2001). Varieties of validity: Quality in qualitative research. In J. C. Smart & W. G. Tierney (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, volume XVI , 25-72. New York: Agathon Press. Luthar, S. (2003). The culture of affluence: Psychological costs of material wealth. Child Development 74(6), 1581-1593. Luthar, S. & Latendresse, S. (2005). Children of the affluent: Challenges to well- being. Current Directions in Psychological Science 14(1), 49-53 Mackey, K., Arnold, M., Pratt, M. (2001). Adolescents’ stories of decision making in more and less authoritative families: Representing the voices of parents in the narrative. Journal of Adolescent Research 16(3), 243-268. McIntosh, B. (1989). Special article: Spoiled child syndrome. Pediatrics 83(1), 108- 115. Meins, E. (1999). Security of attachment and maternal tutoring strategies: interaction within the zone of proximal development. In Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments Vol. III (pp.113-129). London and New York: Routledge. Merriam, S. B. (2002).Assessing and evaluating qualitative research. In S.B. Merriam and Associates (Eds.), Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis,(pp.18-33). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Mosier, C. & Rogoff , B.(2003). Privileged treatment of toddlers: cultural aspects of individual choice and responsibility. Developmental Psychology 39(6), 1047- 1060. Murry, V., & Brody, G. (1999). Self-regulation and self-worth of black children in economically stressed, rural, single mother-headed families. Journal of Family studies 20(4), 458-484. Neff, K. (2003). Understanding how universal goals of independence and interdependence are manifested within particular cultural contexts. Human Development 46(5), 312-318. Nelms, B.C. (1983). Attachment versus spoiling. Pediatric Nursing, 49-51. Oyserman, D., Coon, H.M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin 128(1), 3-72. Paradise, R. (2002). Finding ways to study culture in context. Human Development 45, 229-236. 132 Patak-Peckham, J., Cheong, J., Bathorn, M., & Nagoshi, C. (2001). A social learning perspective: A model of parenting styles, self-regulation, perceived drinking control, and alcohol use and problems. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research 25(9), 1284-1292. Patrick, H. (1997). Social self-regulation: Exploring the relations between children’s social relationships, academic self-regulation, and school performance. Educational Psychologist 32(4), 209-220. Patterson, G.R. & Fisher, P.A. (2002). Recent developments in our understanding of parenting; bidirectional effects, causal models, and the search for parsimony. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting, Vol. V: Practical issues in parenting (pp.59-88). London Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Patterson, G.R., DeBaryshe, B.D., & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. American Psychologist, 44, 329-335. Pettit, G.S. and Laird, R.D. (2003). Psychological control and monitoring in early adolescence: The role of parental involvement and earlier child adjustment. In Barber (Ed.), Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents (97-123). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Phinney, J., Ong, A., & Madden, T. (2000). Cultural values and intergenerational value discrepancies in immigrant and non-immigrant families. Child Development 71(2), 528-539. Polkinghorne, D. E. (2003a). Validaton in physical, organic, and human realms. In J. Lindén & P. Szybek (Eds.). Validation of knowledge claims in human science (11-24): Lyon: L’Interdisciplinaire. Polkinghorne, D. E. (2003b). Generalization in human science: Issues of external validity. In J. Lindén & P. Szybek (Eds.). Validation of knowledge claims in human science (121-149): Lyon: L’Interdisciplinaire. Pomerantz, E.M. & Eaton, M.M. (2000). Developmental differences in children’s conceptions of parental control: “They love me, but they make me feel incompetent.” Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 46(1), 140-167. Pressley, M. (1995). More about the development of self-regulation: Complex, long- term, and thoroughly social. Educational Psychologist 30(4), 207-212. Raeff, C. (1997). Individuals in relationships: Cultural values, children’s social interactions, and the development of an American individualistic self. Developmental Review 17, 205-238. 133 Robinson, P.A. (1978). Parents of beyond control adolescents. Adolescence 13, 109- 119. Rodrigo, M., Janssens, J. & Ceballos, E. (1999). Do children’s perceptions and attributions mediate the effects of mothers’ rearing? Journal of Family Psychology 13(4), 508-522. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press. Rosenblum, K.L., McDonough, M., Muzik, M., Miller, A., Sameroff, A. (2002). Maternal representations of the infant: Associations with infant response to still face. Child Development 73(4), 999-1015. Rudy, D. & Grusec, J. (2001). Correlates of authoritarian parenting in individualist and collectivist cultures and implications for understanding the transmission of values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32(2), 202-212. Rueda, R. & Dembo, M.H. (1995). Motivational processes in learning: A comparative analysis of cognitive and sociocultural frameworks. In M. Maehr and Pintrich (Eds.) Advances in motivation and achievement: Culture, motivation, and achievement Vol. 9, (pp.255-289). Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press. Seiter, Ellen. (2005). The Internet Playground: Children’s Access, Entertainment, and Mis-Education. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Shaw, R. (2003). The epidemic: The rot of American culture, absentee and permissive parenting, and the resultant plague of joyless, selfish children. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc. Skinner, B.F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Smetana, J.G. & Daddis, C. (2002). Domain-specific antecedents of parental psychological control and monitoring: the role of parenting beliefs and practices. Child Development 73(2), 563-581. Solomon, R., Martin, K., & Cottington, E. (1993). Spoiling an infant: Further support for the construct. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education: Issues Related to “At-Risk” 13(2), 175-183. Sprott, J.E. (1994). One person’s ‘spoiling’ is another’s freedom to become: Overcoming ethnocentric views about parental control. Social Science and Medicine 38(8), 1111-1124. 134 Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, (2 nd ed.), (pp.435-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Steidel, A. G. & Contreras (2003). A new familism scale for use with Latino populations. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 25(3), 312-330. Strange, A. (1998). Family context variables and the development of self-regulation in college students. Adolescence 33(129), 17-31. Swain, D.W. (1985). The spoiled child syndrome. In P.Houston; G.K. Leigh; I.R. Loewin & D.M. McNulty (Eds.,), Changing family conference XIV proceedings (pp.67-71). Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa. Tharp, R.G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). A theory of teaching as assisted performance Chp.2. In R.G. Tharp & R. Gallimore, Rousing Minds To Life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. (pp. 27-43). New York: Cambridge. Vygotsky, Lev. (1997). The collected works of L.S.Vygotsky: Volume 4. The history of the development of higher mental functions. Edited by Robert W. Rieber. Plenium Press, New York. Washington (Reuters). CNN.com/U.S. Poll finds U.S. kids more spoiled. http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/7/29/children.spoiled.reut/index.html. Retrieved 7/29/2001. Weisner, T.S. (2002). Ecocultural understanding of children’s developmental pathways. Human Development 45, 275-281. Weisner, T.S., Bernheimer, L., & Coots, J. (1997). The ecocultural family interview manual. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Culture and Health. Wertsch, J.V. (1991). A sociocultural approach to mind. In J. Wertsch, Voices of the mind (pp. 18-43). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wertsch, J.V., McNamee, G.D., McLane, J.B., & Budwig, N.A.(1999). The adult- child dyad as a problem-solving system. In Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments Vol. III (pp.101-111). London and New York: Routledge. Whiting, B.B. & Edwards, C.P. (1988). Children of different worlds: The formation of social behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wilson, A.L., Witzke, D.B., & Volin, A. (1981). What it means to “spoil” a baby. Clinical Pediatrics 20, 728-802. 135 Wright, D. & Pemberton, M. (2004). Risk and Protective Factors for Adolescent Drug Use: Findings from the 1999 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. (DHHS Publication No. SMA 04-3874, Analytic Series A-19). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies. 136 APPENDICES 137 APPENDIX I: Spoiled Child Syndrome [adapted from McIntosh (1989) and Swain (1985)] May be identified in terms of the following variables: Culture Self / other Social Parent-child interaction Individual Psychology of Child Self-regulation Difficulty delaying gratification Does not remain satisfied long Prone to temper outbursts Psychological control Intrusive behavior Obstructive behavior Manipulative behavior Demands to have their own way Parent beliefs Excessively immature behavior Lack of consideration for others Excessively self-centered behavior Role reversal of parent and child Self/other boundaries lack distinction in terms of power and authority CHARACTERISTICS Parent affective Unpleasant to be around Parenting Style Indulgent parenting Permissive – failure to enforce consistent age- appropriate limits Family life centered around child’s real and imagined needs CAUSES Confuses love with spoiling 138 APPENDIX II: Construct of Spoiling Domain Construct Culture Self / Other Social Parent-child interaction Individual Psychology Self-regulation Low provision of guidance and requires little, if any, in the area of development of responsibility May express or exhibit problems with addictions Control High Psychological Control, i.e. Babying, excessively gratifying, Deifying and Behavioral Control in the Psychological Realm Indulgent Does not require concern for others or self-control. External rewards favored over intrinsic needs; yields to child’s demands, lax discipline, low demandingness, high emotional responsiveness Permissive Seldom places limits on behavior or Behavioral Control: monitoring; Permits freedom without restraint. PARENT Beliefs / Values/ Goals & Attitude Success, power, achieve and/or maintain status, materialistic, competitive orientation Hold’s distorted representations of child’s needs Beliefs center on the needs of the parent; Self-serving needs Self-regulation Behavioral (Externalizing Problems) Difficulty delaying gratification, temper outbursts not typical of age; Bulimia, and/or Anorexia; Drug &/or alcohol use, self-destructive, reckless, (adolescence). Emotional (Internalizing Problems) Depression, Anxiety Control Intrusive, Demanding, Obnoxious, Obstructive, and/or Manipulative CHILD Beliefs/ Values / Goals / Attitude Self needs valued over others; materialistic Loneliness; Achievement pressures Sense of Entitlement

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to explore the reasons why parents spoil their children. Analyses of interviews from nine mother-child dyads indicated different factors influencing behavior. Mothers' own achievement pressures, time constraints, and desire to ease a painful interaction were among reasons mothers gave for spoiling their children. At times, inappropriate parenting occurred because of a conflict between mothers' attempts to meet their own needs and their children's development of self-regulation and self-worth. The interview data illustrate how spoiling leads tochildren's sense of entitlement.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Latino parental aspirations and literacy practices related to children's reading engagement

PDF

Motivational, parental, and cultural influences on achievement and persistence in basic skills mathematics at the community college

PDF

The relationship between parenting styles, career decision self-efficacy, and career maturity of Asian American college students

PDF

The information needs of parents raising children between the ages of three and five

PDF

Factors that promote or inhibit the involvement of African American parents in a community college early childhood education program

PDF

The role of parenting style, ethnicity, and identity style on identity commitment and career decision self-efficacy

PDF

The relationship between student perceptions of parental expectations, utility value, aptitude and English achievement among Asian American high school students

PDF

Assessing parental needs in parent education programs: parents of toddlers between the ages of 1-3

PDF

The relationship of teachers' parenting styles and Asian American students' reading motivation

PDF

Do the perceptions of the usefulness of academic support services influence ethnically diverse students' help-seeking attitudes and behaviors?

PDF

Factors influencing student achievement in advanced placement and honors

PDF

A dialogic reading intervention for parents of children with Down syndrome

PDF

Gender, parental expectations, socioeconomic status, occupation and choice and attitude toward private vs. public colleges and universities

PDF

The parent voice: an exploratory study to understand Latino parent involvement in schools

PDF

Factors that contribute to high and low performing Vietnamese American high school students

PDF

The impact of parental involvement on student achievement

PDF

The relationship of parental involvement to student academic achievement in Latino middle school students

PDF

Motivation, language learning beliefs, self-efficacy, and acculturation patterns among two groups of English learners

PDF

The effects of a series of after school family writing workshops on students' writing achievement and attitudes

PDF

A qualitative analysis on Latino parents' beliefs regarding their middle school child's motivation

Asset Metadata

Creator Foulk, Susanne Michelle (author)

Core Title Parenting children of affluence

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 12/01/2007

Defense Date 10/29/2007

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag affluence,Children,entitlement,maternal spoiling,OAI-PMH Harvest,Parenting,self-regulation,self-worth,spoil,spoiling

Language English

Advisor Dembo, Myron H. (committee chair), Chung, Ruth (committee member), Rueda, Robert S. (committee member)

Creator Email foulk@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m961

Unique identifier UC1298395

Identifier etd-Foulk-20071201 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-596916 (legacy record id),usctheses-m961 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Foulk-20071201.pdf

Dmrecord 596916

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Foulk, Susanne Michelle

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu