The color will go with the question for the HW The Family Crucible: The Intense Experience of Family Therapy In The Family Crucible, a unique way of looking at family therapy is used. This approach probably would not be something that would be done by therapist now. The more that we study systemic approaches the less I believe that there are any individual problems. With that being said there is a long reach that effects of parenting has on a child. * . Describe how Carolyn and David fit in terms of authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive forms of parenting. * Authoritative parents set clear and consistent limits for children. They are flexible but firm, which leads to children who are responsible, cooperative, and self reliant. * There are almost as many parenting “styles” in the world as there are parents. However, most experts have classified parenting styles into three main categories: authoritarian, permissive and authoritative. If you are aiming to raise a self-reliant, pleasant, well-behaved child, the authoritative parent will generally have the most success. * What is Authoritative Parenting? * Authoritative parents exercise control over their children, without being controlling. They set rules and guidelines that they expect children to follow. But they also recognize that sometimes flexibility is called for. Authoritative parents often express love and affection to their children, without fear that such expressions of emotion may affect their ability to discipline. As their children get older, authoritative parents encourage more responsibility and freedom, within well-outlined rules. The American Academy of Pediatrics and other children’s health organizations state that children of authoritative parents usually grow up to be independent, socially successful, and respectful of authority. This style is sometimes also referred to as an indulgent or non-directive parenting style * The inconsistency of the permissive parenting style often leaves devoted parents grieving for their parenting mistakes. * Permissive parents have the belief that really showing their child love and feeling their love, in return, is their ultimate goal in parenting. * They do love their children and are highly bonded to them. But their relationship is one of equals rather than as parents to children. * To gain compliance from their children they will often resort to gift giving and even out right ribery, rather than setting boundaries and expecting obedience. * Permissive means to be lenient, liberal, lax and hands-off. During the 1960s, developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind described three different types of parenting styles based on her researcher with preschool-age children. One of the main parenting styles identified by Baumrind is known as the authoritarian parenting style. Authoritarian parents have high expectations of their children and have very strict rules that they expect to be followed unconditionally. According to Baumrind, these ...

1. The color will go with the question for the HW
The Family Crucible: The Intense Experience of Family
Therapy In The Family Crucible, a unique way of looking at
family therapy is used. This approach probably would not be
something that would be done by therapist now. The more that
we study systemic approaches the less I believe that there are
any individual problems. With that being said there is a long
reach that effects of parenting has on a child. * . Describe how
Carolyn and David fit in terms of authoritarian, authoritative,
and permissive forms of parenting. * Authoritative parents set
clear and consistent limits for children.
They are flexible but firm, which leads to children who are
responsible, cooperative, and self reliant. * There are almost as
many parenting “styles” in the world as there are parents.
However, most experts have classified parenting styles into
three main categories: authoritarian, permissive and
authoritative. If you are aiming to raise a self-reliant, pleasant,
well-behaved child, the authoritative parent will generally have
the most success. * What is Authoritative Parenting? *
Authoritative parents exercise control over their children,
without being controlling.
They set rules and guidelines that they expect children to
follow. But they also recognize that sometimes flexibility is
called for. Authoritative parents often express love and
affection to their children, without fear that such expressions of
emotion may affect their ability to discipline. As their children
get older, authoritative parents encourage more responsibility
and freedom, within well-outlined rules. The American
Academy of Pediatrics and other children’s health organizations
state that children of authoritative parents usually grow up to be
independent, socially successful, and respectful of authority.
This style is sometimes also referred to as an indulgent or non-
directive parenting style

2. * The inconsistency of the permissive parenting style often
leaves devoted parents grieving for their parenting mistakes. *
Permissive parents have the belief that really showing their
child love and feeling their love, in return, is their ultimate goal
in parenting.
* They do love their children and are highly bonded to them.
But their relationship is one of equals rather than as parents to
children. *
To gain compliance from their children they will often resort to
gift giving and even out right ribery, rather than setting
boundaries and expecting obedience.
* Permissive means to be lenient, liberal, lax and hands-off.
During the 1960s, developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind
described three different types of parenting styles based on her
researcher with preschool-age children. One of the main
parenting styles identified by Baumrind is known as the
authoritarian parenting style. Authoritarian parents have high
expectations of their children and have very strict rules that
they expect to be followed unconditionally.
According to Baumrind, these parents “are obedience- and
status-oriented, and expect their orders to be obeyed without
explanation. ” People with this parenting style often utilize
punishment rather than discipline, but are not willing or able to
explain the reasoning behind their rules. Characteristics of the
Authoritarian Parenting Style Authoritarian parents: * Have
strict rules and expectations. * Very demanding, but not
responsive. * Don’t express much warmth or nurturing. *
Utilize punishments with little or no explanation. Don’t give
children choices or options. The Effects of Authoritarian
Parenting Parenting styles have been associated with a variety
of child outcomes including social skills and academic
performance. The children of authoritarian parents: * Tend to
associate obedience and success with love. * Some children
display more aggressive behavior outside the home. * Others
may act fearful or overly shy around others. * Often have lower

3. self-esteem. * Have difficulty in social situations.
Understanding Authoritarian Parenting
Because authoritarian parents expect absolute obedience,
children raised in such settings are typically very good at
following rules. However, they may lack self-discipline. Unlike
children raised by authoritative parents, children raised by
authoritarian parents are not encouraged to explore and act
independently, so they never really learn how to set their own
limits and personal standards. While developmental experts
agree that rules and boundaries are important for children to
have, most believe that authoritarian parenting is too punitive
and lacks the warmth, unconditional love and nurturing that
children need.
An historical overview. Developmental Psychology, 28, 1006-
1017. Santrock, J. W. (2007). A topical approach to life-span
development, third Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. I believe the
authors’ were instrumental in providing a clear example of what
the family really needed and searched for. The family needed to
realize that in order for the family to make a real change they
need to utilize a structure that included the entire family. They
also needed to know that the therapists were completely serious
and in control. Their stance was something I could completely
agree upon. However, I do not agree that the family was trying
to question their authority or provide a strategy to defeat the
new system in which they were beginning to enter.
Barring this, the authors’ posed a series of questions that they
strongly believed the family was thinking. Did Don really
wonder “will the family undertake changing the whole family
without me? ” Therefore, I did not agree with the aspect of “we
know what you’re thinking”. I felt that this was too deep of an
approach. The basic underlining problem of the family was that
they did not know how to communicate and could not establish
their own structure to allow their family system to operate in
harmony.

4. Another aspect of the text that I thought was fundamental and
provided me with a different outlook on approaching a
perceived problem was the way in which the two therapists
began the therapy. The family entered into therapy by believing
that Claudia was their entire problem and that her actions alone
were the root of their dilemma. However, she was just the
perceived problem. And in order for the parents to see that
Claudia was only the perceived problem the therapists reversed
the blame that the parents had projected on to their daughter.
I believe this technique was most attractive. Through the art of
helping the family to view their situation differently, the
therapists initiated a second-order change allowing the family to
step outside their norm and see that their failure in marriage
was affecting their parenting. Thus, the therapists gave Claudia
meaning while reducing her feeling of failure and at the same
time proposed the more serious problem that the parents had
slowly began drifting away from each other and suffered the
impasse of a deadening marriage.
In my view, once the fundamental problem of the marriage was
introduced and the family began to realize that each had a role
in a family system that was failing, many changes began to take
place. Most importantly, I saw the problems associated with
scapegoating the children fall by the wayside that allowed the
parents to confront the hard issues they had so skillfully
avoided through the dynamics they developed among
themselves. It was good to see that confronting the parents with
their underlining problem helped to reduce the polarization
effect they were projecting on the family members around them.
Now, this is not to say that all the issues disappeared instantly.
There was still the fact that the parents triangulated the children
in order to get reacquainted with their true feeling about one
another. Likewise, a considerable amount of blame lingered
throughout the entire therapy. And when the therapists tried to

5. work the issues of blame, I had to disagree with there methods.
It seemed as if they were constantly trying to evoke a
confrontation between the two blaming individuals in order to
get the family to surface their real feelings and issues.
Consequently, when the confrontations turned into physical
fights the therapists seemed surprised that such emotional
distress took place. What more did they expect. I completely
understood what they were trying to accomplish, however, I had
a hard time understanding their methodology. As I look back
through my notes, I noticed many of the same underlining
factors that seemed to keep surfacing. First, both parents were
consumed in the self. The father was constantly consumed with
his work and the mother seemed completely bored with her life
and wanted a change.
Here is where I had difficulty in understanding the authors’
point of view. They thought that the parents were not consumed
in the self, but just had difficulty showing affection toward the
other. Now, I believe the there was a lack of affection, however,
if they were any more consumed in doing what the self wanted
this may lead to more difficulty when confronting the Other’s’
wishes and the Self’s wants. I really got lost with this aspect.
Another difficulty I have with the authors’ view on family
therapy is the fact that they seemed to think that every issue
was rooted in past family issues.
This is a great aspect to try and tackle. However, trying to find
out which issues in the past are the cause of the present
problems can be very time consuming and expensive. I agree
that this type of therapy can be revolutionary, but I do not
believe that family therapy would be for everyone.
Subsequently, I would also agree that this book did a great job
illustrating why sometimes family therapy and not individual
therapy can be the right solution. Maybe, this mixed message is
why I still have opposing emotions about this very intriguing
approach.

6. Developmental psychologists have long been interested in how
parents impact child development. However, finding actual
cause-and-effect links between specific actions of parents and
later behavior of children is very difficult. Some children raised
in dramatically different environments can later grow up to have
remarkably similar personalities. Conversely, children who
share a home and are raised in the same environment can grow
up to have astonishingly different personalities than one
another. Despite these challenges, researchers have uncovered
convincing links between parenting styles and the effects these
styles have on children.
During the early 1960s, psychologist Diana Baumrind conducted
a study on more than 100 preschool-age children (Baumrind,
1967). Using naturalistic observation, parental interviews and
other research methods, she identified four important
dimensions of parenting: * Disciplinary strategies * Warmth and
nurturance * Communication styles * Expectations of maturity
and control Based on these dimensions, Baumrind suggested
that the majority of parents display one of three different
parenting styles. Further research by also suggested the addition
of a fourth parenting style (Maccoby & Martin, 1983).
The Four Parenting Styles 1. Authoritarian Parenting In this
style of parenting, children are expected to follow the strict
rules established by the parents. Failure to follow such rules
usually results in punishment. Authoritarian parents fail to
explain the reasoning behind these rules. If asked to explain, the
parent might simply reply, “Because I said so. ” These parents
have high demands, but are not responsive to their children.
According to Baumrind, these parents “are obedience- and
status-oriented, and expect their orders to be obeyed without
explanation” (1991). 2. Authoritative Parenting
Like authoritarian parents, those with an authoritative parenting
style establish rules and guidelines that their children are
expected to follow. However, this parenting style is much more
democratic. Authoritative parents are responsive to their
children and willing to listen to questions. When children fail to

7. meet the expectations, these parents are more nurturing and
forgiving rather than punishing. Baumrind suggests that these
parents “monitor and impart clear standards for their children’s
conduct. They are assertive, but not intrusive and restrictive.
Their disciplinary methods are supportive, rather than punitive.
They want their children to be assertive as well as socially
responsible, and self-regulated as well as cooperative” (1991).
3. Permissive Parenting Permissive parents, sometimes referred
to as indulgent parents, have very few demands to make of their
children. These parents rarely discipline their children because
they have relatively low expectations of maturity and self-
control. According to Baumrind, permissive parents “are more
responsive than they are demanding. They are nontraditional
and lenient, do not require mature behavior, allow considerable
self-regulation, and avoid confrontation” (1991).
Permissive parents are generally nurturing and communicative
with their children, often taking on the status of a friend more
than that of a parent. 4. Uninvolved Parenting An uninvolved
parenting style is characterized by few demands, low
responsiveness and little communication. While these parents
fulfill the child’s basic needs, they are generally detached from
their child’s life. In extreme cases, these parents may even
reject or neglect the needs of their children. The Impact of
Parenting Styles What effect do these parenting styles have on
child development outcomes?
In addition to Baumrind’s initial study of 100 preschool
children, researchers have conducted numerous other studies
than have led to a number of conclusions about the impact of
parenting styles on children. * Authoritarian parenting styles
generally lead to children who are obedient and proficient, but
they rank lower in happiness, social competence and self-
esteem. * Authoritive parenting styles tend to result in children
who are happy, capable and successful (Maccoby, 1992). *

8. Permissive parenting often results in children who rank low in
happiness and self-regulation.
These children are more likely to experience problems with
authority and tend to perform poorly in school. * Uninvolved
parenting styles rank lowest across all life domains. These
children tend to lack self-control, have low self-esteem and are
less competent than their peers. Why Do Parenting Styles
Differ? After learning about the impact of parenting styles on
child development, you may wonder why all parents simply
don’t utilize an authoritative parenting style. After all, this
parenting style is the most likely to produce happy, confident
and capable children.
What are some reasons why parenting styles might vary? Some
potential causes of these differences include culture,
personality, family size, parental background, socioeconomic
status, educational level and religion. Of course, the parenting
styles of individual parents also combine to create a unique
blend in each and every family. For example, the mother may
display an authoritative style while the father favors a more
permissive approach. In order to create a cohesive approach to
parenting, it is essential that parents learn to cooperate as they
combine various elements of their unique parenting styles.
Markets and the Economics of the Public Sector Grading Guide
ECO/365 Version 10
3
Markets and the Economics of the Public Sector Grading Guide

9. ECO/365 Version 10
Principles of Microeconomics
Copyright
Copyright © 2016, 2015, 2014 by University of Phoenix. All
rights reserved.
University of Phoenix® is a registered trademark of Apollo
Group, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries.
Microsoft®, Windows®, and Windows NT® are registered
trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or
other countries. All other company and product names are
trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective
companies. Use of these marks is not intended to imply
endorsement, sponsorship, or affiliation.
Edited in accordance with University of Phoenix® editorial
standards and practices.
Individual Assignment: Markets and the Economics of the
Public SectorPurpose of Assignment
In Week 2, students will employ the supply and demand model
to develop consumer surplus and producer surplus as a measure
of welfare and market efficiency. Students learn about welfare
economics—the study of how the allocation of resources affects
economic well-being—and will discover that under most
circumstances, the equilibrium price and quantity is also the one
that maximizes welfare. Students will review different sources
of externalities and a variety of potential cures and will see that
while markets are usually a good way to organize economic
activity, governments can sometimes improve market outcomes.
Students will see how the U.S. government raises and spends

10. money and the difficulty of making a tax system both efficient
and equitable.Grading Guide
Content
Met
Partially Met
Not Met
Comments:
Students explained why equilibrium of supply and demand is
desirable.
Students explained the concepts of efficiency of markets, costs
of taxation, and benefits of international trade using the concept
of consumer and producer surplus.
Students discussed how externalities may prevent market
equilibrium and the various government policies used to remedy
the inefficiencies in markets caused by externalities.
Students analyzed the difference between the efficiency of a tax
system and the equity of a tax system as it refers to the costs
imposed on taxpayers using the benefits principles.
The student cited a minimum of three peer-reviewed sources,
not including the textbook.

11. The paper is 1,050 words in length.
Total Available
Total Earned
7
#/7
Writing Guidelines
Met
Partially Met
Not Met
Comments:
The paper—including tables and graphs, headings, title page,
and reference page—is consistent with APA formatting
guidelines and meets course-level requirements.
Intellectual property is recognized with in-text citations and a
reference page.

12. Paragraph and sentence transitions are present, logical, and
maintain the flow throughout the paper.
Sentences are complete, clear, and concise.
Rules of grammar and usage are followed including spelling and
punctuation.
Total Available
Total Earned
3
#/3
Assignment Total
#
10
#/10
Additional comments:

13. Brice Family – Systems Paper
Claudia Rangel
Brice Family – Systems Paper
MFCC 561
Mrs. Cindy Christiansen
March 7, 2018
Brice Family
This paper is about the Brice family and how the first and
second therapy sessions went. I will talk about what systems
approach to therapy was used for this family’s difficulties, and I
will also include how Napier and Whitaker conceptualized the
family’s struggles. I will talk about what specific interventions
they used to support their systemic understanding of this family.
I will also describe how this differs from an individual
understanding, and
First Session
The Brice family consist of five members. The mother
Carolyn and angry mother, the father David a VIP lawyer, they
also have a teenage daughter Claudia and enraged teenager,
Laura is the youngest who is six-years old and younger son Don
who is 11 and is the pacemaker. The family was referred to seek

14. therapy by a psychiatrist who Claudia had been seen for her
own personal problems. As her sessions progressed she felt that
her whole family would benefit from joining her in therapy
sessions. The entire family was included in the first session and
it was a challenge for the therapist to get a clear picture of the
family dynamics and the work that the individuals needed
through this process. When Don the youngest son did not show
up to the session with the family, Whitaker began to question
the family’s commitment to the therapeutic process. According
to Whitaker (1978, p. 6), “to start the process with one fifth of
the family absent would be unfair to Don and I think unfair to
you. He’s part of the family, and we need him here if the family
as a whole is going to change.”
Mrs. Caroline felt that the main issues was their teenage
daughter issues and did not believe that the whole family should
be there in therapy. Both the daughter and mother waked in the
room angry. The family were so angry that you felt the stressful
tension in the therapy room. Mr. David was respectful and
mentioned he was happy he was there, but his body posture and
language told the therapist he was not comfortable being there.
The youngest son Don did not show up for the first session.
Laura the youngest daughter seemed to be in a cheerful mood
with high energy. An argument broke out during the sessions
between the daughter and mother, The mother seems to think
they are in this therapy session to resolve Claudia’s issues that
have been affecting the entire family for months now, the
mother doesn’t think the family as a unit has a problem. The
two therapist in the session agreed that it would not be ideal to
start the family session without Don who is the youngest son
and did not show up to the session. Carol and David were not
happy with this choice and felt the longer they waited for their
daughter to get help the worst it would get. Carl the mother
explained how important it was to have Don at the first therapy
session, she also explained the dynamics of the family if they
wanted to be a part of the family’s sessions they had to call and
set up a time so that Don who is the youngest son would be

15. included in the next session.
Dave who is the father did not hesitate and made the family
next session appointment with the wife’s approval. Carolyn
agreed with her husband and towards the end of the session Carl
connected with her daughter Laura who is the youngest by
engaging her in dialog and asking what she thought about
everything that was going on in the family. Carl was able to
show the family how her children and husband all have a special
place in the sessions, and it is not just about one person but the
whole family.
Second Session
As the session continued, Whitaker (1978) explored the
family, trying to dig deeper and uncover the structure, and the
patterns in the family that needed more attention and were more
significant than Claudia’s problems. Some identified patterns
include triangulation between Claudia, David, and Carolyn, and
coalitions between David and Carolyn against Claudia, Carolyn
and Don against David, and David and Claudia against Carolyn
(Nichols, 2013, p. 78). The emotional divorce tone was also
identified between Carolyn and David with the
acknowledgement of the affair with work for David and the
affair with the mother for Carolyn (p. 18). Whitaker
conceptualized the affairs as a result of a fearfulness of
dependency for the couple and the feelings of entrapment
related to the old family of origin.
Whitaker and Napier conceptualized the family’s difficult times
as a whole problem. They did not see it stem form one family
member. They felt the family all had some issues as individuals
and as a couple for the parents that were not address when they
should have been. Because the issues were set aside they
resurfaced and intensified along with Claudia’s changing
attitude and miss behavior. This is one of the reasons both
parents seem to focus on Claudia and identified her as the main
cause of the family’s problems.

16. When using individual understanding of a family’s
problem each family member is seen separate. The family is not
taken in as a unit, but instead they work on the individual to be
able to create harmony in the family. Each member issue are
addressed individually and worked on without the rest of the
family having a part. When looked at as individual there is a
targeted behavior the individual is seeing as the problem not the
family unit as a whole.
Carl used the systemic family approach with the Brice
family, both therapist looked at the circular interaction of the
family problem, the family role of each family member and how
they fit in to contributing to the family dysfunction and made
sure the entire family was present for the first intervention.
Both therapist looked for positive contributions to the social
organization of the family that they could look back on to start
working with the family as one unit and not focus on one
member of the family to be the problem. One of the
interventions came by the simple sitting arrangement the family
had. The family in the beginning of the session unconsciously
sat according to the family structure and how they felt it was.
By having the therapist change the seating arrangements was a
symbolic change and shift in the family structure to what it
should be.
Specific Systemic Interventions
Employing the systemic approach, Napier and Whitaker
(1978) determine specific interventions designed to engage the
entire Brice family in the process of change. Using the
experiential premise that the root cause of family problems is
emotional expression, both therapists engage the family in
opportunities for emotional experiences (Nichols, 2013, p. 145).
This is evidenced in the first session when Whitaker stated to
Laura, “What do you think about all this crazy stuff?” (p. 11).
The emotional expression opportunities continued with
Whitaker pursuing emotional responses from all family
members in attempt to gauge the family temperature.
Whitaker (1981) also denoted “There is no such thing as

17. marriage, only two scapegoats sent out by their families to
perpetuate themselves” (as cited in Nichols, 2013, p. 147).
Accommodating this theoretical premise, Whitaker engaged in
interventions designed to reveal the parental subsystem
struggles as well as the dysfunctions in the marriage propagated
onto the children. This is exemplified when the children
identify the triangles in the family or the teams each member is
a part of (Napier & Whitaker, 1978, p. 19).
Conclusion
In conclusion, Whitaker and Napier (1978) provide insight
into this fragmented family system. Using the systemic
approach, they conceptualize the family’s difficulties and
employ experiential interventions in relation to their systemic
understanding. The application of theoretical principles to the
family as a whole sustains the family system and eliminates the
need for one person to be responsible for the whole unit.
References
Baines, J. (2012). Theoretical modalities and the Brice family.
Unpublished Manuscript, NV: University of Phoenix.
Napier, A. Y., & Whitaker, C. A. (1978). The family crucible:
The intense experience of family therapy. New York, NY:
Harper & Row.
Nichols, M. (2013). Family therapy concepts and methods (10th
Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

18. The Family Crucible: The Intense Experience of Family
Therapy
In The Family Crucible, a unique way of looking at family
therapy is used. This approach probably would not be something
that would be done by therapist now. The more that we study
systemic approaches the less I believe that there are any
individual problems. With that being said there is a long reach
that effects of parenting has on a child. * . Describe how
Carolyn and David fit in terms of authoritarian, authoritative,
and permissive forms of parenting. * Authoritative parents set
clear and consistent limits for children. They are flexible but
firm, whichs leads to children who are responsible, cooperative,
and self reliant. * There are almost as many parenting "styles"
in the world as there are parents. However, most experts have
classified parenting styles into three main categories:
authoritarian, permissive and authoritative. If you are aiming to
raise a self-reliant, pleasant, well-behaved child, the
authoritative parent will generally have the most success.
* What is Authoritative Parenting?
* Authoritative parents exercise control over their children,
without being controlling. They set rules and guidelines that
they expect children to follow. But they also recognize that
sometimes flexibility is called for. Authoritative parents often
express love and affection to their children, without fear that
such expressions of emotion may affect their ability to
discipline. As their children get older, authoritative parents
encourage more responsibility and freedom, within well-
outlined rules. The American Academy of Pediatrics and other
children's health organizations state that children of
authoritative parents usually grow up to be independent,
socially successful, and respectful of authority. * This style is
sometimes also referred to as an indulgent or non-directive
parenting style.
* The inconsistency of the permissive parenting style often

19. leaves devoted parents grieving for their parenting mistakes. *
Permissive parents have the belief that really showing their
child love and feeling their love, in return, is their ultimate goal
in parenting. * They do love their children and are highly
bonded to them. But their relationship is one of equals rather
than as parents to children. * To gain compliance from their
children they will often resort to gift giving and even out right
bribery, rather than setting boundaries and expecting obedience.
* Permissive means to be lenient, liberal, lax and hands-off.
During the 1960s, developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind
described three different types of parenting styles based on her
researcher with preschool-age children. One of the main
parenting styles identified by Baumrind is known as the
authoritarian parenting style. Authoritarian parents have high
expectations of their children and have very strict rules that
they expect to be followed unconditionally. According to
Baumrind, these parents "are obedience- and status-oriented,
and expect their orders to be obeyed without explanation."
People with this parenting style often utilize punishment rather
than discipline, but are not willing or able to explain the
reasoning behind their rules. Characteristics of the
Authoritarian Parenting Style
Authoritarian parents:
* Have strict rules and expectations.
* Very demanding, but not responsive.
* Don't express much warmth or nurturing.
* Utilize punishments with little or no explanation.
* Don't give children choices or options.
The Effects of Authoritarian Parenting
Parenting styles have been associated with a variety of child
outcomes including social skills and academic performance. The
children of authoritarian parents:

20. * Tend to associate obedience and success with love.
* Some children display more aggressive behavior outside the
home.
* Others may act fearful or overly shy around others.
* Often have lower self-esteem....
Parenting Dynamics - The Family Crucible - Brice Family
1,050- to 1,300-word paper describing the parenting dynamics
in the Brice family. Include the following information:
•Describe how Carolyn and David fit in terms of authoritarian,
authoritative, and permissive forms of parenting.
•Explain why you placed them in the category you did.
•Explain the attachment status of each member of the family as
you perceive them.
•Describe how these attachments affect their relationships with
other family members.
•Describe how parenting and attachment styles affect therapy.
•Determine what approach you would use as their therapist to
address the parenting issues