Diana Baumrind was a clinical and developmental psychologist known for her research on parenting styles, specifically four main types: authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved parenting. Each style has distinct characteristics and effects on children, with authoritative parenting linked to positive outcomes while uninvolved parenting leads to negative consequences. Baumrind's work also touched on corporal punishment, suggesting mild spanking within an authoritative context may not be harmful if controlled for socioeconomic factors, though this view has faced criticism.

1. BAUMRIND’S
CAREGIVING
STYLE

2. DIANA BLUMBERG BAUMRIND
(August 23, 1927 – September 13, 2018)
She was a clinical and developmental
psychologist known for her research on parenting
styles. After being awarded her
doctorate she served as a staff
psychologist at Cowell Memorial
Hospital in Berkeley. She was
also director of two U. S. Public
Health Service projects and a
consultant on a California state
project. From 1958-1960 she
also had a private practice in
Berkeley.

4. 1.Authoritative Parenting:
A. Authoritative parents are both highly responsive
and highly demanding. They set clear rules and
expectations for their children's behavior but also
provide warmth, support, and responsiveness to
their children's needs.
B. They encourage independence while maintaining
appropriate boundaries and guidance.
Authoritative parents are nurturing and
supportive while also fostering autonomy and
self-discipline in their children.
C. This parenting style is associated with positive
outcomes for children, including higher self-
esteem, better social skills, and higher academic
achievement.

5. 2. Authoritarian Parenting:
A. Authoritarian parents are highly demanding
but low in responsiveness. They have strict
rules and high expectations for their
children's behavior but provide little
warmth or emotional support.
B. Authoritarian parents often rely on
punishment and control to enforce
obedience and may prioritize discipline over
nurturing relationships with their children.
C. Children raised by authoritarian parents may
struggle with low self-esteem, anxiety, and
difficulty in social relationships.

6. 3. Permissive Parenting:
A.Permissive parents are highly responsive but
low in demandingness. They are warm and
affectionate towards their children but have
few rules or expectations for their behavior.
B.Permissive parents may avoid conflict and
confrontation, allowing their children
considerable freedom and autonomy in
decision-making.
C.Children raised by permissive parents may
lack self-discipline and struggle with
boundaries, which can lead to behavioral
problems and academic underachievement.

7. 4. Uninvolved/Neglectful Parenting:
A.Uninvolved parents are low in both responsiveness
and demandingness. They provide little emotional
support, guidance, or supervision to their children.
B. Uninvolved parents may be emotionally detached,
preoccupied with their own concerns, or unable to
meet their children's needs due to various factors
such as substance abuse, mental illness, or extreme
work schedules.
C. Children raised by uninvolved parents may
experience neglect, lack of emotional support, and
inadequate supervision, which can lead to a range
of negative outcomes including poor academic
performance, low self-esteem, and behavioral
problems.

9. 5. Over-involved Parents (often
referred to as "helicopter parents" or
"lawnmower parents)
- these are the parents who
excessively intervene in their
children's lives, attempting to
control various aspects such as
academics, extracurricular activities,
social interactions, and decision-
making processes.

10. Over-Involved Parents

11. Over-Involved Parents

12. Over-involved parents, often referred to as "helicopter parents" or "lawnmower
parents," are parents who excessively intervene in their children's lives, attempting
to control various aspects such as academics, extracurricular activities, social
interactions, and decision-making processes.
Scenario example:
Imagine a high school student, Alex, who has a mother named Lisa, who is
overly involved in his academic life. Lisa closely monitors Alex's grades, constantly
checks his homework, and communicates with his teachers to ensure he is meeting
her expectations. Whenever Alex faces a challenge or setback, Lisa immediately
steps in to solve the problem for him, often without giving him the chance to try to
resolve it himself. She also pressures Alex to enroll in advanced classes and
participate in numerous extracurricular activities, believing that this will enhance his
college prospects.
As a result of Lisa's over-involvement, Alex feels suffocated and lacks
autonomy in his own life. He becomes reliant on his parent to navigate his academic
and personal challenges, which hinders his ability to develop important life skills
such as problem-solving, resilience, and independence. Additionally, Alex may
experience increased stress and anxiety due to the pressure placed on him by his
parent's high expectations.

13. Baumrind studied the effects of corporal
punishment on children, and concluded that mild
spanking, in the context of an authoritative
(not authoritarian) parenting style, is unlikely to
have a significant
detrimental
effect, if one is
careful to control
for other
variables such as
socioeconomic
status.

14. She observed that previous studies demonstrating a correlation between
corporal punishment and bad outcomes failed to control for variables such
as socioeconomic status. Low-income families are more likely to employ
corporal punishment compared with affluent families. Children from low-
income neighborhoods are more likely to commit violent crimes compared
with children from affluent neighborhoods. But Baumrind believed that
when appropriate controls are made for family income and other
independent variables, mild corporal punishment per se does not increase
the likelihood of bad outcomes.
This assertion
has in turn attracted
criticism and
counterpoints from
other researchers in the
same publication,
for example:
Whether harmful or not,
there is still no consistent
evidence of beneficial
effects.