I would like people's imput as to what rational arguments you could give against the two following ideas about child/youth psychology (for the purpose of defending the idea that parents should not force their children to obey their rules). These are two common statements one hears in relation to this subject:
1. "Of course teens should have to obey parental limits. They lack the mental capacity to think rationally at their age. In fact, they won't have it until they are in their 20s. Perhaps we should hike the age of majority back to 21".
2. "Whatever they say, kids really want rules. They are craving them. Parents enforcing limits makes kids feel secure."
How would you argue against these premises?
Colonel John Doe
Commanding Officer, the Cameron Highlanders Militia for Freedom and Democracy


Reply With Quote




Bookmarks