The parenting pendulum has swung from authoritarian to empathetic, but has it swung too far?
A new philosophy of child-rearing, known as “gentle” or “respectful” parenting, has taken hold among Millennial and Gen Z parents. This approach rejects the fear-based, authoritarian tactics of the past in favor of a model built on empathy, communication, and recognizing a child’s feelings. It is a thoughtful and compassionate reaction to the “because I said so” style of previous generations.
But as this approach becomes more mainstream, it has been met with a growing chorus of criticism, with many asking if this new style is actually creating a generation of undisciplined and entitled children.
1. Pro: It builds a child’s emotional intelligence.
The core of gentle parenting is the idea of validating a child’s feelings, even when you have to correct their behavior. Instead of saying “stop crying,” a gentle parent might say, “I see you’re very sad that we have to leave the park, and it’s okay to be sad.” This approach teaches children to recognize and name their own emotions from a very young age.
This is a powerful way to build emotional intelligence (EQ). It helps children develop empathy and gives them the tools to manage their feelings in a healthy way, rather than suppressing them, a skill that is crucial for their long-term mental health.
2. Con: Critics claim it fails to teach resilience.
The world outside of their loving home is not always going to be gentle, empathetic, or validating. A major criticism of this parenting style is that it may fail to adequately prepare children for the harsh realities of a world that is often unfair and does not care about their feelings. A future boss is not going to validate their sadness about a deadline.
Critics argue that by shielding children from frustration and by not allowing them to “cry it out,” gentle parenting may be inadvertently creating a generation of young adults who lack resilience and are unable to cope with the normal stresses and disappointments of adult life.
3. Pro: It fosters a relationship built on trust, not fear.
Traditional, authoritarian parenting is often based on a power dynamic where children obey their parents out of fear of punishment. Gentle parenting, on the other hand, seeks to build a relationship based on mutual trust and respect. The goal is to have a child who chooses to cooperate because they trust their parent and feel connected to them, not because they are afraid of them.
Proponents argue that this creates a much stronger and healthier long-term bond. A child who feels respected and heard is more likely to come to their parent with a problem, creating a foundation of open communication that will last a lifetime.
4. Con: It can lead to a lack of clear boundaries.
The most common criticism of gentle parenting is that it is permissive and fails to set firm boundaries. The focus on validating feelings can be misinterpreted as a reluctance to say “no” or to enforce consequences for bad behavior. Critics argue that this can lead to children who are entitled, have no respect for authority, and are unable to handle the word “no.”
They believe that by not using traditional disciplinary tools like timeouts or punishments, gentle parents are failing to teach their children that actions have consequences, which can lead to significant behavioral problems in the future.
5. Pro: It can help to break cycles of generational trauma.
Many parents who adopt the gentle parenting style are doing so as a conscious reaction to their own upbringing. They may have been raised in a household where their feelings were dismissed, where they were spanked, or where their parents were emotionally distant. They are making a deliberate choice to not pass that trauma on to their own children.
By choosing empathy over fear and connection over control, they are attempting to break a cycle of generational trauma. It is a deeply healing and intentional act, an attempt to give their children the emotionally secure childhood that they may not have had themselves.
6. Con: It is incredibly exhausting for the parents.
Gentle parenting is not the easy way out; it is incredibly demanding work. It requires a parent to be a model of emotional regulation, even when they are tired, stressed, and being pushed to their limits by a screaming toddler. It requires long, patient conversations, a deep understanding of child development, and the energy to constantly be a calm, empathetic presence.
Critics, and even many proponents, admit that this is an almost impossibly high standard to maintain 24/7. This can lead to parental burnout and a feeling of failure when they inevitably lose their patience and snap, a feeling of guilt that can be very damaging.
7. The verdict: The philosophy is sound, but the execution is everything.
Ultimately, the debate over gentle parenting may be a false one. The principles of respecting a child and validating their feelings are not mutually exclusive with the need to set firm, consistent boundaries and to teach resilience. The problem is not the philosophy itself, but its potential for misapplication, where parents become so focused on the “gentle” part that they forget the “parenting” part.
The most effective approach likely lies in a balance: a parenting style that is built on a foundation of empathy and connection but is not afraid to enforce clear rules and consequences when necessary.