1. On Saturday morning mom called the police when her 15 year old son took off without
permission. Mom and son have been through this before on several occasions. She has not been
bery successful in disciplining her son and is asking for help. Do police get involved in such
situations? Why/why not? Will the 15 year old ‘learn a lesson’and listen to his mom in the future?
Legal system may get involved when children misbehave even if this does not constitute an actual crime. Ie.
Parents want child to be home on time but child never shows up.Arrangement with the police can be set up so
that the police will escort child back to his home and will watch the front if child sneaks out again. The police
can also bring the child into a jail cell to see how it feels. Police can also give a warning. The son may not learn
his lesson because he may feel like the parent has betrayed him. Child may put blame on parents for putting him
through a terrible experience with the police. The son will become less compliant, lose faith and trust he had
for his mom of the betrayal because he doesn’t understand the moms reasons for taking those actions.
2. What is the relationship between public policy, parenting, and family planning? Utilize the
examples discussed in class. Define and utilize the concepts of active and passive prevention of risk
to explain why correlations between measures of parental income or SES and child outcomes are
often higher in some societies than in others. (Repeat x3)
The quality and character of parenting results in part from the social context in which families operate.
Public policy operates on parent like by determining how many taxes they have to pay, determine whether they
will pay for jk/sk depending on which government gets elected. Public policy effects child development through
its effect on parenting. Public policy has a marked effect on parenthood and in turn on child development by
family planning. Policies can offer financial incentives for large families.
• financial incentives for large families, ie/ quebec in catholic, traditional times, government
encourage to have large families, consistent with French quebec to stay French, consistent what
Quebec wanted. Families got baby bonus in additional support, with two get double and tripling. 7
kids, free money would be same as working a job, exponential relationship not linear. Ie/family of 7
would be different then family of 3. big families-older ones will have responsibility of looking at
younger kids. Fewer resources to go around in terms of sharing living space. Determines time each
parent spend with child, collectivistic, social support often and kids don’t get to do what they always
want. Small-individualist, do what they want but not always the same support.
• Punishment for large families- punished for having more than one child will have to pay a heavy
duty tax. Families that want a son would kill the girl at birth. No extended family, different in
collectivistic culture would become individualistic. Child did not have siblings, cousins. Different
order system in china and the concenteration parents provided in raising child.
• Policies about abortion and contraception: legal and available or not. Moral and ethical decision.
Whats the impact of these. General in the west, a million unwanted kids, past 20 years, become safer
cities. Since the 70s policies allowed abortion have eliminated the birth of many unwanted children
and fewer kids who grew up to crime. In China, families have to pay fines for the second child.
• Policies about funding for abortion- country where abortion is legal but not funded compared to
a country where it is paid for. Low SES families would not afford abortion and have the child, high
likely of being born unwanted. High SES can afford it and rich parents will help support. Unwanted
kids born to parents who are least capable of supporting
2. Active vs passive prevention- require no effort or action on part of parent to protect children. Waste
disposal and drinking water are passive because no effort on parent. Know kid can drink anywhere at the
park, school don’t have to worry about it, not an issue to rich or poor parents where rich will always
have safe water and stay healthy where as poor health in poor families so regardless of parental income,
everyone has safe drinking water due to passive methods of risk
Active-parents have to do something in order to prevent risk in child's life. Ie. Immunization: kids when
young receive this to prevent them from diseases. if parents provide to everyone is passive but becomes
active when parents have to do something to get it. In ontario- OHIP pays so is passive method because
everyone gets it. IT is not passive, if parents have to take them to get them immunized, have a family
doctor, have a car, can get a day off-middle class, will have a hard time getting it immunized then a
combination of passive and active. Canada, low rate of not immunized, public health will take over, if nurse goes to child's home. If government doesn’t provide then rich will get it and poor will have low
health. Parental responsibility to get kid immunized based on what they can afford. When parents are
active- see variations for parenting styles.
Ie/ viewing T.V- it is not regulated: active method of risk because parents have to be active in the prevention
method. Other countries will say no sex on T.V, religious, homogeneous, they are taking responsibility of
raising children by not displaying over sexuality on tv so parents don’t. ratings on tv is a guide for parents to
One area where state takes little responsibility is age related until they reach school age. The public takes no
responsibility up to parents. State is not involved at all until kids are sent to school grade 1. licensed and
admissioned test, insured every year.
3. Describe four parenting style according to Baumrind. What types of children are produced in each
case? (Repeat x3)
Authoritarian: high expectations, little support. Rebellious child and nonconformant, have to defend them to
themselves, not likely to succeed, low self-confidence, dependent, socially incompetent especially anxious and
insecure. Parents not supportive. Low self-esteem due to never being able to fulfil expectations. High stress
levels thinking that “I have to achieve”. Not able to form good quality relationships. Children feel like failures
even if they are doing well because they don’t often receive the support they need from their parents. “Do as I
say”, “good but not good enough”. If child is resilient then they may become successful and independent which
will depend on genetic factors like temperament and outside support like teachers. This is not considered a good
strategy in west but some authoritarian societies its considered best. Ie/disability child- will be brought up
thinking as a failure, grows up to be social incompetent, low self-esteem, low self-confidence,
Permissive-low expectations, high support. Parent satisfied as long as child tries, emotional focus, children are
different from each other and excel in different ways. Little direction, few goals, spend half of their life looking
for what they want to do, not assertive, low achievement motivation. Parents care about their children but don’t
want to put them under any stress. Children end up low achievers and impulsive. Every hassle becomes a
problem for them because they don’t know how to handle it. Often hurts parents. They can’t retire because they
have to take care of children. Often have children as their best friend.
Authoritative: high expectations, high support. Parents are warm and restrictive and help their kids achieve
success. Considered the right and ‘good’type of parenting. You need top grades, we can get a tutor I can talk to
teacher. Will achieve success at the end. Parents were busy but they cared. High self esteem, high success lots of
support. Is associated with most well adjusted kids, not causal. Have goals, confident, assertive, smart,
responsible, do well in school and high self esteem because the children know their parents care about them.
They have learned and successfully overcome problems. Considered the best or most productive style. Can be
difficult for parents to accomplish, they must be invested. If one parent is permissive and the other is
athoritative, the permissive parent may undo all the work of the authoritative parent. Here parent don’t shield
children from pressures of life. Stress has to be apart of the childhood because the child must learn to cope.
Ie/kid goes to school, gets a job, lives up to societies standards, gets married, gets mortgage.
Rejecting/Neglecting- low expectations, low support. Parents don’t want to be involved and don’t care. Its kid's
life, if you want to fail its up to you whatever you want to do with your life, don't bother me. Families like this
parents may have low income, difficult upbringings, abuse in family, difficult children, live in bad
neighbourhoods with crime, parents fed up. Child grows up in this environment wont grow upto a lot of
successes because low expectations, family with no support-not a lot of opportunities to develop high self
esteem, cognitively immature, hard time getting through life. Kids do not achieve highly scholastically and not
well adjusted. Rejecting is hostile, neglecting is not hostile. Child will not be a high achiever, never challenged.
Immature cognitively, lacking social skills. Learns that relationships are something you don’t have to invest in.
no opportunity for scaffolding and thus no emotional coaching to help child develop social skills. Children may
have protective factors like good teachers and grandparents. 4. Acompliant child is a ‘good’child. Right or wrong? Explain. (Repeat x3)
Wrong. If noncompliance is absolutely adaptive, a child who was too compliant, never disagree we would be
worried about abuse in the home, child can be fearful of parents because of consequences. To watch for these
signs can look at startled response, where child will quickly defend themselves.
In the short run compliance is important while noncompliance can be an early indication for long lasting
behavioural/psychological problems. Noncompliance occurs frequently to a greater extent is an indication for
behavioural problems. Ie/young kids cant stay at a table for a long time thenADHD, various different problems
raising that child. Nevertheless, virtually all children do not comply to every single request made by parents and
to a certain extent this is tolerated.
In the long run noncompliance can serve important developmental functions:
-Children learn to assert themselves and become independent of others. Ie/become independent instead of an
extended arm originating from someone else.Assert themselves at home with their parents and siblings. Parents
provide unconditional love unlike people from outside the community. So non compliance functional in the
home. If need a test remarked, noncompliant be a good thing because will have the courage to assert themselves
in fair grading.
-Noncompliance can be channeled to provide an opportunity for children to learn appropriate ways of
expressing their opinions and opposition to others and learn to resolve conflicts and problems in a positive
manner.ie/parents teach child to assert themselves appropriately and positive. If child doesn't learn this and turn
into an adult don’t learn in appropriate way. Ie/t.a makes an error with marking, must know how to be assertive
to get it remarked, if done it inappropriately will go wrong. Often kids do this at the dinner table, throws a
temper tantrum, this wont work in society so instead of a power struggle, parent teaches into an opportunity for
an alternative. Parent isnt controlling, being flexible, great opportunity for child to assert themselves in a
meaning and positive way.
5. Describe the Behavioural Profile of Rejected Children.
Behavioural profile of Popular Children
• Positive, happy dispositions
• Physically attractive- are more popular
• Lots of dyadic interaction- takes a skill. Can sustain it.
High levels of cooperative play- and show leaderships but wont get into fights.
• Willing to share- being kind, altrusitic and generous without being a pushover.
• Able to sustain an interaction. Takes a lot of confidence. One way questions wont work, conversations
must be mutual, and conversational.
• Seen as good leaders- earned popularity by merit.
Behavioural profile of rejected children
• Much disruptive behaviour
• Argumentative and antisocial.
• Extremely active. Cant sit still. Many of them areAdhd
• Frequent attempts at social approaches. Demands for social interactions.
• Much solitary activity
• Inappropriate behaviour
• They have much disruptive behavior. They are argumentative and antisocial. They are extremely active
ie/kids withADHD are very active and tend to be more disruptive. They are talkative ie/ people who talk
non-stop get annoying. They try frequent attempts at social approaches ie.they always try to join the
group without understanding the situation and how to act in the situation which can get very annoying.
They part-take in little cooperative play, and are unwilling to share. They have much solitary activity.
They often have inappropriate behaviour ie. When a child isn't being accepted into a group, they might
end up bullying their way into the group. Behavioural Profile of Neglected Children
• Rarely aggressive, withdraw in face of others' aggression. Temperamental reasons or are overprotective
at home, not prepared to expose enough to other kids
• Little antisocial behaviour
• Lots of solitary activity
• Avoid dyadic interaction, more time with larger groups.
6. Comment on the long term implications of sociometric status to future social problems. Base your
answer on research by Kupersmidt, 1990. (Repeat x3)
SociometricApproach- Popular, Rejected and neglected children
• Large implications for an individual's well-being at the time and in the long run. Child may act out, be
• Peer popularity is based on peer nominations and ratings. Which ones are neglected and rejected. List
top five friends. Peer ratings how likable kids are. This problematic ethically because children should not
be harmed by the researcher. Damage self esteem, how they would be identified because of
confidentiality. They will talk afterwards about ranking, and rumors will spread.
• Children can belong to one of the above or be 'controversial" (liked by some and disliked by others)
Other categories exist ( rejected-aggressive and rejected-withdrawn).
Their research looked at sociometric status groups ie/popular, average, neglected and rejected kids and
compares it to the percentage of future social problems kids in theses groups showed (looking at dropout rates
in groups, involvement with the police, suspension from school etc.) In general rejected kids are more
problematic in the long run when looking at clear and subjective statuses. Popular kids show the least amount of
future problems. Often neglected kids are very smart and show fewer problems in the future compared to
popular and average kids. They build good relationships and career. This is because neglected kids often don't
get diverted into the 'wrong' things (e.g. drinking, drugs, partying etc.) unlike popular kids often end up ruining
their future. So kids don't always fit nicely into the sociometric status and we cannot predict outcomes of ho
wkids in each of these groups will turn out. The overall picture is that rejected kids far have the greatest
percentage encountering all types of social problems. Rejected kids are a major social risk facotr for society.
They don’t have friends and develop inappropriate social skills. Popular children and neglected children are
about the same. Neglected children in high school have the potential to do really in the long run. They often
aren't into partying and drinking so they focus on studying. Something I found interesting was the neglecting
children had about 0% for dropping out of school and popular children had about 0% for suspended and police
problems.Average children were similar to popular and neglected children with slightly higher percentages.
7. What determines whether a child will be resilient or vulnerable to stress. Explain. (Repeat x3)
• Risk factors are factors that increase the probability of undesirable outcomes as a result of exposure to
stress.All kids will be exposed to stress, minimum amount of parents parent to shield the child away from
harm. Undesirable long term outcomes from this stress, then yes more undesirable outcomes are likely. If
fewer risk than lower likelihood of outcome.
• Protective factors have the opposite effect by protecting children against undesirable outcomes. Will
reduce stress. With few risk factors, lots of protective factors fewer stress.
• The combination of these factors will determine where on a continuum ranging from resilient to
vulnerable a child may reside. Normal stress will produce negative likelihood. Combinations are negative
effect. Protective factors can reduce risk factors so then positive outcomes. Thus depends on the
continuum not a dichotomy.
-good public policy, good schooling, lack of poverty are many factors among others for resilience. • Important factors are: sex, temperament, intelligence, birth condition- born maturely and healthy, family
harmony-stress free, close attachments, parental caregiving styles, availability of substitute caregivers,
separation, number and spacing of children in the family, parental psychopathology, and poverty.