EXPRESSED LOVE

In his book, The Six Pillars of Self-esteem, Nathaniel Branden, Ph.D., profoundly illustrates the challenge of fulfilling our children's developmental needs as they move through the oftentimes difficult maturation process:

To evolve into selfhood is the primary human task. It is also the primary human challenge, because success is not guaranteed.

The issue of self-esteem in human beings is a complex and hotly debated topic within the child development community. A number of well-known authors, for example, write that the attainment of high self-esteem is primarily a byproduct of capable performance at the tasks in our lives. This theory says that every time we succeed at something, our self-confidence is bolstered just a little more each time. And it implies that the end emotional result of our numerous successes in life will be internal feelings of self-value. This sounds reasonable enough, at first glance. But upon deeper reflection, a fatal flaw in this viewpoint becomes apparent. The theory postulates that the satisfaction we feel after achievement directly influences our deeper feelings of self-value. And that learning certain abilities, even challenging ones that may take decades to fully master, is the primary catalyst for increasing our feelings of self-worth. To some degree, that is true. However, this idea represents only one piece of the self-esteem puzzle.

The journey to high self-esteem is a far more complicated undertaking than merely "doing a good job" at our life tasks, or even achieving impressive accomplishments in the "exterior world of things." Philosopher Ken Wilber, who has immersed himself in both Eastern and Western philosophical thought for the past several decades, calls the material world we live in the "it" world: the world of objects (including our physical bodies, as opposed to our minds or true human essence). He postulates that the major failing of modern Western thought is our hyper-focus on and emotional over-involvement in our observable, quantifiable, outer material world - at the expense of our inner lives! Eastern religious and philosophical thought, by contrast, has been keenly focused on the inner lives of human beings for millennia, with the outer world being viewed as more of a backdrop in our quest to perfect our souls. This focus is what sparked the development of the multitude of practices in the East designed to elevate one's "self" to a more compassionate, altruistic level of being that focuses primarily on the divine spirit within all people (and all living things), as opposed to the outer world of objects. (Of course, it was mostly the philosophers, religious adherents, and the common man who held these views. As usual, many of the rulers and conquerors were interested in their bloody wars, just as in the West.)

In comparison to the East, Western thought has traditionally been more concerned with understanding and mastering the material world - because we have been "given dominion over it by God" - than in ways to perfect the human soul. Although, in fairness, there has been some delving into this area, as well, by the great Western philosophers (and religious thinkers), most notably the Greeks. Yet, in the West, it has not been until the recent advent of modern psychological thought that we have begun to study the inner workings of the human mind and spirit in earnest.

Ken Wilber warns that the influence of the "realist school" of modern scientific thought has caused many of us to believe that if something cannot be measured and then have some sort of quantitative value assigned to it, somehow it does not exist; it is not real. Mr. Wilber might ask, however, that just because our feelings of love for our children or the pain associated with a loved one's passing cannot be measured, does that mean they are not real? Anyone who has experienced either of these powerful emotions will tell you that their effects on our day to day lives, as well as our larger life goals, are very real. Or, for another example, just because we have no way to quantify a developing child's need for expressed love, praise, recognition, approval, and even admiration from his parents or other caregivers, does it mean that he does not need these "emotional nutrients" in order to thrive internally? We have all witnessed the devastating effects in the lives of adults who were not cherished in their precious childhood years. To be sure, our jails are filled largely with the most severely abused and neglected individuals among us - which is the primary reason for many of their less than compassionate acts toward their fellow man, and has caused them to end up where they are. Study after study shows this to be true!

The inner lives of we humans are as real as anything out there in the world of cold, hard things - more real, I would argue. Human emotions are responsible for the motivations behind all of mankind's most noble achievements (and, at the same, our most shameful, inhumane acts). In fact, all of our greatest accomplishments in the "it" world started, first, with an idea, and were then followed through to fruition with the passion that moves us to action. And ideas and passion exist entirely within. Indeed, the invisible reality of our powerful human essence - and our feelings of compassion for one another and their manifestation in the "real world" as acts and expressions of love - is the only thing that makes this often harsh and unforgiving material world truly inhabitable for us. All of which causes me to believe that trying to find feelings of well-being and self-value exclusively in the world of things is a lost cause.

Achievement is an important part of the self-esteem picture, no doubt, but it does not represent the complete picture. In their moments of honest reflection, for instance, how many times have we heard entertainers say that they actually need the attention and applause they receive in order to feel good inside? And that, when their careers come to an end, many become melancholy, often seeking out lesser (some would say humiliating) venues in which to perform in order to get the attention they crave. I would ask, could some need have been better fulfilled within the lives of these individuals in childhood, so that they could become entertainers out of a love to entertain and bring joy to the lives of others, as opposed to a need for attention? Or, have you ever heard successful people lament that, after they have attained their major life goals - fame, fortune, and accolades from others in their field - that they are left with a kind of emptiness inside? This is a relatively common human reaction to attaining a big goal: "Is this it? Is this all there is?" we ask. When I used to hear about the suicide deaths of rich and famous people, such as Freddy Prinze of Chico and the Man fame or Terry Kath, lead guitarist of the rock group Chicago, I just couldn't believe it. "These guys have made it! They have it all!" I thought. "How could they do such a thing?" Now I understand that the "everything" they had was outside of themselves. On the inside, where it really counts, they were starving to death.

It is clear to most of us that our mastery of the physical world has only a partial impact on our feelings of self-value. Even the achievement of altruistic goals, such as, inventing cures for diseases or building shelters for the homeless cannot always eradicate one's feelings of melancholy from not feeling like we are "enough." A number of years ago, many of his devoted friends and coworkers were stunned, for example, when tireless fighter for the poor and homeless in Washington DC, Mitch McConnell, killed himself because he was depressed - leaving much of his work unfinished. Could it be that some of us pursue compassionate causes for our own emotional purposes in order to help us feel good inside? Although a great deal of good may come out of such deeds, wouldn't our compassion be more meaningful if we already carried plenty of love within us, then worked for our causes as an extension of that love? I believe that the concepts of mastery, achievement, and even altruism indeed comprise a part of the self-esteem equation, but that the aforementioned limited view fails to take into account the large number of high-achievers who also possess chronic low self-esteem.

There are millions of outwardly self-confident people who are adept at getting things done, and who are succeeding quite handily out in the world of "doing." Many of these same people, however, find that their troubles set in the minute they stop "doing," and just sit quietly and still, all alone with their thoughts. Some "workaholics" provide us with one example of what it means to tie our feelings of self-worth to our achievements. (A useful definition for a "workaholic" is someone who works excessively as a way to feel worthwhile and useful, to "mood-alter" away discomforting feelings about oneself or one's life, or to avoid intimacy with friends and family.) When our personal feelings of self-value are inexorably linked to our accomplishments, say, if we experience a big setback in our lives, we run the risk of feeling as though we are human failures, instead of valuable, caring people who are facing temporary external obstacles. The phenomenon of Wall Street bankers and traders jumping from high-rise windows after the Crash of 1929 tends to bear this out: "If my money is gone," some likely believed, "then I must have no worth!" And what about those people who just aren't good at many things? Would these theorists condemn such individuals to lives of low self-esteem simply because they are not skillful? Teaching kids to link their feelings of self-worth with their ability to achieve is a risky and ultimately destructive child rearing philosophy.

There are other child growth and development specialists who support programs that are designed to make children feel good directly. They create positive thinking exercises about the "self" in children's songs, stories, games, and so forth. These activities are intended to help children feel good about themselves through the use of repetitive affirmations. I'm talking about all the currently popular "I'm So Special" programs that have been instituted in many school systems and day care centers throughout the country. There is undoubtedly some good that comes out of these programs. To say the least, it's a vast improvement over the harsh knuckle-rapping, bottom paddling days of our not too distant past. But, again, do these direct "feel good" activities fully address our children's self-esteem needs? What about the child who practices affirmation exercises in school, only to return to an unhealthy home environment each day? Can these positive reinforcement activities make up for the abuse or neglect that he experiences in the home? The answer to that is: Probably not. We have to give our society and our school systems a great deal of credit, however, for courageously uplifting as many children as they can in that face of the negative environments from which many children emerge. And I hope they keep it up, all the while continually fine-tuning their methods as new insights are gleaned from ongoing studies.

There are many child development specialists who would argue that a number of these programs are being pushed to the point of absurdity. In some school districts, for example, they have gone so far as the elimination of score-keeping during soccer games - because losing makes children "feel bad!" Many opponents to programs of this sort strongly assert that not allowing children to learn the valuable coping skills of dealing with loss and disappointment ill prepares them for the real world, and is actually disruptive to the formation of a healthy self-image. Besides, all the kids, coaches and parents are keeping score in their heads in these "no score competitions" anyway. Everyone knows who wins and looses, so what's the point?

The development of high self-esteem in children has many factors. There is, however, one key element in its formation: the consistent high regard with which a child's feelings are treated within the family unit over the long term. Beyond the feeling good vs. doing well debate, one thing is for certain. The need for appreciation, encouragement, emotional support, and respect for our feelings is an intrinsic part of our human psychological makeup because this essential input tells us that we MATTER to those we love. When we as parents or other caregivers treat our children's feelings with the utmost care, and when we fulfill their needs for attention, understanding, validation, expressed love, emotional support, and discipline them with compassion, we are demonstrating how valuable they are to us on a daily basis. We are showing them that they and their feelings MATTER to us deeply, and that we will try out best not to hurt their feelings, which we all know hurts them. Sadly, when children feel as if they DON'T MATTER as much as they should (whether real or perceived), the formation of a healthy self-concept becomes all but impossible.

The reason that treating children with patience and understanding - even when they act up - is so beneficial for the formation of healthy self-esteem is that all children go through a normal developmental stage of egocentrism. And they interpret their good treatment as something for which they, themselves, are responsible - rather than the fact that they are blessed with caregivers who are excellent nurturers! In other words, if a child is parented with patience, understanding, affection, and respect, he or she will adopt the unconscious attitude that "I must be a pretty great kid if I am being treated so well!" Conversely, children who are parented with less compassion and harsher discipline, especially when there is an abundance of shaming, blaming, hitting and yelling going on, often feel as though they must have little value, if they are being treated so poorly. Indeed, there are no "bad" kids. Some are more challenging than others are, to be sure. But all respond most favorably to compassion and respect for their feelings.

And that is where the value of sincere, heart felt, expressed love comes into play, as well as praise and appreciation for all our children's efforts. In conjunction with the fulfillment of all their other developmental needs, a consistent flow of expressed love, praise, and appreciation is to a child's psyche what sunshine, water, and rich soil are to a flower. Fail to provide them in abundant amounts, and like the deformed plant that struggles to grow because of poor nutritional elements, our children will also stumble, internally, as they try in vain to extract from us the "nourishment" that is not forthcoming. With the result being that they will not develop as they would if their human warmth needs were being met.

In her book, Dr. Sylvia Rimm's Smart Parenting, NBC Today Show resident child development expert Dr. Rimm writes:

Children thrive in an environment of being valued and loved.

This simple statement about how to best ensure that our children thrive, emotionally, is one for we parents to live by. I would only add that the way to value a child is by valuing and respecting his or her feelings to the best of our ability. And because our children base their self-concept, in large measure, on how they perceive our feelings about them, it is not enough for parents to simply have feelings of love, admiration, and appreciation for their children. If we do not regularly tell our children how we feel about them, and by our actions also demonstrate how dear they are to us, our children may harbor some doubts about our love for them, and by extension, their own self-worth.

In The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem, Nathaniel Brandon describes the principal benefit for children who are blessed with emotionally demonstrative parents - the reinforcement of their ability and natural desire to love themselves:

A child who is treated with love tends to internalize the feeling and to experience him- or herself as lovable. Love is conveyed by verbal expressions, nurturing actions, and the joy and pleasure we show in the sheer fact of the child's being.

And to drive home the point, the reverse could be added: Our children will not thrive in an environment where they are being devalued through yelling, hitting, harsh scolding, sarcasm, the neglect of their developmental needs, or in any way that demonstrates disrespect of their inner "self" and their value as a human being.

As a first step in emotionally nourishing our young children, Nathaniel Branden discusses the crucial nature of touch in their young lives. He writes:

Today we know that touch is essential for a child's healthy development. In its absence, children can even die, even when other needs are met.

Through touch we send sensory stimulation that helps the infant's brain to develop. Through touch we convey love, caring, comfort, support, nurturing . . .

Children who grow up with little experience of being touched often carry an ache deep within them that never entirely vanishes. There is a hole in their self-regard.

This idea of a "hole in one's self-regard," as Dr. Brandon puts it, is no idle musing by some out-of-touch clinician trapped within the halls of academia. And this internal void does not develop only because a lack of touch in a child's life, although a lack of touch and a lack of expressions of love for children tend to go hand and hand in the lives of emotionally repressed parents. I have read about this same inner human turmoil in numerous psychology books, and have witnessed this phenomenon in many insightful adults who recognize how their emotionally deprived childhood negatively affect their adult lives. Moreover, I have felt the pain of this "hole in my self-regard" or "hole in my soul" for all of my life - that was caused from feeling very little love from my parents. It was a great deal stronger when I was a younger man, but it remains with me to this day.

In his book, Fathering: Strengthening Your Connection with your Children no matter Where You Are, Will Glennon quotes a man who speaks of the pain that he has carried within him for a lifetime because of his father's inability to express love to him. It is just one example among millions, but I found it particularly touching. It reads:

My father was a very serious man. I used to make up all kinds of explanations, excuses really, for why he was the way he was. The truth is I don't care about the reasons anymore. He died without ever telling me he loved me, without ever hugging me, without ever saying he was proud of me. I still don't understand it. It's like there is this giant hole inside of me that can never be filled.

Another area concerning the expression of love for our children is the idea that all children are unique, and that they cannot be expected to fit neatly into our expectations of them. In other words, we must be ever vigilant to appreciate our children for who they are, and not try to mold them into something that they are not. Every person is as unique as a fingerprint; we couldn't duplicate our desires and views on life in our children, even if we wanted to. I'm not talking about family rules and guidelines about scheduling, cleanliness, or other utilitarian expectations we have for our children. Of course, we all have to learn the rules and then live by them. I'm talking about such things as expecting a young boy to enjoy sports when he does not, and then getting mad at him for that reason; expecting a young girl to enjoy wearing dresses, when she is clearly more comfortable being a tomboy; or when they get older, expecting our children to hold the same beliefs that we do - political, religious, racial, sexual, socio-economic, career options, etc. - then making them feel inferior or rejecting them because their ideas do not correspond with ours. And the list goes on, particularly in the area of gender-based emotionally acceptable behavior for young children: little boys shouldn't cry and want comfort from their mothers when they are scared or hurt (yet this behavior is accepted in girls); or, it is not "ladylike" for little girls to "rough-house" or throw tantrums (behavior that is more acceptable in little boys).

The prime casualty for children who are being raised in emotionally repressive environments of this sort is the eroding away of all their good feelings about themselves. When children are not loved, nurtured, and accepted for the unique, autonomous beings they are, and instead are expected to fit into rigid family system roles - only accepted when they think family approved ideas and behave in family approved ways - they usually come to believe that they are not worth very much because they are always being "shamed" for their differences. With words like: "Where did you get an idea like that? You're just a kid! What do you know?" Or "You do it because I said so! I'm the parent and I know best!" (without explaining why), many parents unwittingly begin the process of killing their children's feelings of self-value, individuality, and spirit of self-motivated achievement. Such words and treatment make children feel worthless and stupid, with devastating effects to their self-image.

Nathaniel Branden warns of the pitfalls of not loving our children unconditionally:

Love is not felt to be real when it is tied to performance, tied to living up to Mother's or Father's expectations, and is withdrawn from time to time as a means of manipulating obedience and conformity. Love is not felt to be real when the child receives subtle or unsubtle messages to the effect, 'You are not enough.'

Unfortunately, many of us received such messages. You may have potential, but you are unacceptable as you are. You need to be fixed. One day you may be enough but not now. You will be enough only if you fulfill our expectations.

An effective parent can convey anger or disappointment without signaling withdrawal of love. An effective parent can teach without resorting to rejection. The value of the child as a human being is not on trial.

I have a second challenge for you that involves the bookstore. Again, go to the parenting section and investigate the indexed references on "love" and "affection." I believe that you will be as amazed as I was about the kinds of discussions you will find there, that is, in the books that even cover the subject in more than a passing fashion. "Parenting books that do not contain at least part of a chapter on the importance of expressing love to our children," you say? Sadly, I must answer with a resounding yes! As I look through the parenting books there, I often think, "What is wrong with our culture?" Isn't the Judeo-Christian ethic on which this country was founded based upon the principle of love? Well yes, and no. For some of us, like our inability to freely and abundantly express our love for our children, it can often be abstract or intellectualized - good in theory but cold in practice.

Few people would argue that there is major blockage in the ability to express loving emotions within many individuals in our society. For some, the fear of saying "I love you" is far greater than the fear of saying "I'm angry with you" or "You're a jerk!" (and worse). If we will look at the history of emotional expression in our culture, it will help us to better understand from where this blockage came. Some of the earliest European settlers in America, for example, related to one another as husband and wife or as parents and children in ways that, by today's standards, would seem extremely odd. Their conversations were highly formalized and the expression of their emotions rigidly structured. Ranging from affection to rage, one's emotions were expected to be held largely in check at all times in order to maintain a certain civility in one's relationships and a humility toward God.

With their eyes set firmly on the past, closed religious societies of today, such as the Amish, would more closely represent the ways in which early American Puritans related to one another. It is amazing to think that a group of Americans has managed to maintain this kind of "timeless" society, relatively unchanged throughout the centuries, while much of the rest of the western world has been expanding and growing, both technologically and in the area of our emotional understanding. I used to hold a higher view toward this and other cultures that aspired to a simpler and nobler life. From the outside, it always looked as though they were accomplishing these goals. Certain facts about Amish life that have been revealed in several recent exposés, however, have made it clear that their segregation from the rest of society and thus their secrecy has allowed them to hide the insidious and dehumanizing realities of what can happen to people with less power (women and children) when they are trapped in these closed societies.

In order to ensure that their children learned the emotional rules of their rigid social system, the Puritans went to great lengths to subdue each child's natural expression of his or her autonomous self. Puritan settler John Robinson's extant writings tell us that he believed the first strivings of a child to exert his autonomous "self" to be evidence of mankind's original sin. He called this normal developmental stage that every healthy child goes through the "fruit of natural corruption and root of actual rebellion against God and man." And he espoused the benefits of stern discipline for thwarting a child's inclination toward self-assertion and self-expression, with particular emphasis on the use of corporal punishment and shaming.

In his book, A little Commonwealth: Family Life in the Plymouth Colony, John Demos quotes John Robinson:

'And surely there is in all children . . . a stubbornness and stoutness of mind arising from natural pride, which must, in the first place, be broken and beaten down . . . Children should not know, if it could be kept from them, that they have a will of their own.'

And John Demos' critique of this child rearing strategy:

Translated into the language of modern psychology, this statement amounts to a blanket indictment of the child's strivings toward self-assertion . . . The terms 'break' and 'beat down' ('destroy' is also used further on) seem to admit of no qualification.

In his book Identity and the Life cycle, Erik Erikson cites quotes attributed to Puritan John Ward in Cotton Mather's Magnalia Christi Americana. One of those citations reads:

'Whatever you do, be sure to maintain shame in them; for if that be gone, there is no hope they'll ever come to good.'

It's not too difficult to see how these highly rigid adults in Puritan society came into being when we look at their oppressive child rearing practices. Yet, it seems rather a contradiction to me, in a religious sense, and I just don't understand how they managed to justify this contradiction in their minds. They are taking one of God's greatest gifts to mankind, according to Judeo-Christian scripture anyway - free will - and turning it on its head by trying to destroy the free will in their own children's minds.

For most of us, just as mankind has been on a journey to open and expand his "thinking brain" through scientific discoveries and observations in order to better understand his outer world, so we have been on a similar journey to wake up our "emotional brain" in order to better understand our inner world. And that is exactly what has been happening in western culture, except for pockets of religious sects, like the Amish, and certain individuals who deliberately remain oppressed by their overzealous interpretations of bible text. Over the years, we have steadily progressed out of the "dark ages" of emotional thought, and have freed ourselves enough to be able to more fully accept and express our healthy human emotions. For example, we no longer have our marriages arranged for us and are instead free to follow our hearts, trying to find someone with whom we are compatible and who can fulfill our needs - in harmony with our fulfilling theirs. We are also freer to choose our life's calling than at any time in human history. By and large, we are encouraged to think for ourselves and to emotionally experience all that life has to offer us. And of supreme importance, we have come to understand that we all thrive in an environment of being valued and loved, as Dr. Sylvia Rimm observes about our children! And still, many of us retain a certain emotional repression in regard to the expression our loving emotions for our children, spouses, parents and friends (especially us men), as remnants of the family system from which we emerged. And many even fall into, shall we say, less than empathetic disciplinary methods that are also reminiscent of our not too distant past.

My Great, Great Grandfather was a German minister who came to this land in the 19th century. I have seen a faded old photograph of him dressed in his clerical garb, and standing next to a large organ that he brought with him to the New World. It is an eerie photograph for me to look at because I always envision the stark contrast of the hopes and dreams with which he must have arrived in the New World, and the evidence of the severely dysfunctional legacy that has come down through him on my father's side of the family. Parental expressions of love and emotional support are all but nonexistent in my father's family of origin. And because of my own father's inability to express his love and emotional support for his children, it has greatly harmed his relationships with my brothers and me.

Along with the intimacy dysfunction that has been his legacy, the disciplinary methods with which my Great, Great Grandfather was likely raised are expressed in the following passages from Alice Miller's book, For Your Own Good: Hidden Cruelties in Child Rearing and the Roots of Violence. In it she quotes a mid-19th-century German parenting "expert" who advises:

With the most forceful form of punishment, corporal chastisement, we come to the ultimate punishment . . . It is an age-old 'indirect way of speaking from the soul,' common to all nations. What can be more obvious than the rule, 'He who won't hear must be made to feel . . . Blows provide forceful accompaniment to words and intensify their effect. The most direct and natural way of administering them is by that box on the ears, preceded by a strong pulling of the ear, which we still remember from our youth . . . It obviously has symbolic significance as does a slap on the mouth, which is a reminder that there is an organ and a warning to put it to better use . . . The tried and true blow to the head and hair-pulling still convey a certain symbolism, too . . . It is exactly the proper punishment for certain kinds of delinquency: it humiliates and upsets the child, affirms the necessity of bowing to a higher order and at the same time reveals paternal love in all its vigor . . . The childish heart as a rule understands this love, even if not always at the moment.

"But that was over a hundred years ago!" some of you may be thinking. "We're different now." That's true. They'd put us in jail now for physically assaulting our children in this manner, and so they should. But it is still a common cultural belief that "blows provide forceful accompaniment to words and intensify their effect" in disciplining children. And though most "physical discipliners" do not box their children's ears, the idea that it is a good thing to inflict physical pain upon a child in order to curb negative behavior remains unchanged. And we all know that there are many in our culture who still use belts and anything else they can get their hands on when they become enraged at their child's disobedience as a means of discipline. It goes without saying that the damage that this cruelty causes to the parent/child bond is immeasurable. How can genuine love exist between two people when one is regularly assaulting the other?

Alas, "Spare the rod; spoil the child" is still alive and well in many family systems today. The bible passage from which this primitive parenting admonition derives is this: "Thou shalt beat him [the child] with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell" (Proverbs 23:14). I recently saw a southern Reverend on television quoting this very passage as he tried to defend his cruelty in his "disciplinary" methods. He was being prosecuted for child abuse for beating his teenage son with a belt. I would like to ask this man that if the inflicting of physical pain is so effective for disciplining children, why don't we take up the practice of "caning" adults for societal infractions? (Actually, I'm afraid he might think that it was a good idea.) Run a red light: four lashes. Neglect paying your taxes: twenty lashes. Hey, we'd have an obedient society, just like they do in Singapore, where they still cane people legally. But, thankfully, our society has decided that it's just not humane to punish adults with physical violence. Slowly, but surely, we are understanding that its most vulnerable members deserve the same consideration.

EMPOWERED PARENTING PRINCIPLE # 3 - Expressed Love

Particularly young boys in our society are the ones who have traditionally been taught that expressions of love are weak or embarrassing and should therefore be stifled. So it's no great surprise that it is usually the father in a family who has the hardest time expressing love to his children, especially his sons. He was likely never encouraged to express his healthy loving emotions in childhood. And he was rarely if ever given verbal admonitions of love by his own father, which if he had, would have taught him by example that it is okay for men to do this. As a result, in most cases a male child's ability to express his loving emotions simply does not develop as well as in his female counterparts.

In his fathering book, Will Glennon reports on this widespread problem:

The vast majority of men in this country are emotionally distant, disconnected from their closest male relatives . . . To cite just one of myriad of statistics indicating the problem, a recent study found that only 20 percent of the fathers surveyed felt that they had a close emotional relationship with either their fathers or their sons . . . among those fathers who do live with their children, the average amount of time spent with them is twelve minutes per day.

If this isn't a crisis of serious magnitude, then someone needs to redefine the word crisis for me. Discovering just how emotionally (and physically) "father-starved" we are as a nation really explains a lot to me about the emotional and even criminal problems many of our young men are experiencing at this juncture in our history. Up until recently, we thought that young male violence was primarily an urban problem, where poverty and fatherless homes in the minority communities that live there are common. But with the recent rash of school shootings and bombings in the more affluent, predominantly Caucasian suburbs (and rural areas, too), it's clear that the problem of young men feeling alienated from their parents, particularly their fathers, permeates the nation. How could a teenager reach the point where he has lost all hope for his future, plan and murder innocent classmates out of anger and revenge, then put a gun in his mouth and pull the trigger unless he feels alienated from his parents and the rest of "functional society." I believe that it is the pain, emptiness, confusion and hopelessness that so many young men carry from growing up "father-starved" that is largely responsible for these tragedies. If we as a nation do not dramatically strengthen our resolve to emotionally connect with our children in more significant ways, the most seriously "wounded" young males among us, because of their internalized rage and emotional turmoil, will continue to take out their revenge upon the rest of society. They will be acting out their rage for not feeling loved and cherished for the unique and precious people they are.

Will Glennon writes:

In retrospect, it is astounding that we could have allowed things to deteriorate so dramatically without noticing. As painful as it might be to admit, sometimes life must deliver us a solid blow to the solar plexus before we get the point . . . We have allowed ourselves and our children to drift, like unteathered astronauts, farther and farther away from the heartbeat of humanity. We have sentenced our children to the bewildering experience of growing up with a desperate need to feel loved by a father who all too often is simply not there, either physically or emotionally.

It is usually the mother in the family who "saves" children from being raised in a "love vacuum" or an "emotional wasteland." She is often the one who provides most of the expressed love and emotional support for the children. Unfortunately, even the most nurturing mother can never completely eradicate the wound caused by a distant or abusive father. Moreover, in some families, like mine, neither of my parents is functionally active in expressing their loving emotions to their children. This type of emotional repression goes back many generations on my mother's side of the family, as well, with the strong matriarchs behaving like men quite a number of ways.

The modern psychological theory of "displacement" tells us that even our repressed emotions have to go somewhere. But the process of repressing our healthy emotions usually causes them to come out in altered or exaggerated form, if and when they are eventually expressed. For example, we have probably all been guilty at one time or another of taking out our displaced anger on the "wrong person." We are really mad at someone or something else - and failed to confront the situation directly - when this unsuspecting person happens upon us at the "wrong time." In my mom's case, understandably, she has a real need to express her loving emotions; they are indeed in there, and they long to be released. But since she is not comfortable expressing love to her children (or to people in general), she instead expresses it quite freely to her pets. To me, this is one strange phenomenon. But psychologically, it does make some kind of sense. She "displaces" her repressed emotions for her children onto something she feels comfortable expressing them to, in this case, her pets. Many times growing up I wished that I was one of our cats so that I could feel the warmth of my mother's expressed love. It's sad to say, but my older brother behaves in a similar fashion toward his children and his animals - learned behavior from my mother, no doubt. In my entire lifetime, I have never heard him speak one loving word to any of his three beautiful children. But he expresses his love for his parrot quite freely, almost like she is his lover - kissing her on the beak, cooing in baby talk, and so on. I think it's great that he loves his parrot so much, and I know for a fact that he loves his children deeply. But I wouldn't be surprised if, just sometimes, his children wished they were his parrot "Punkin" so they could feel the warmth of their father's expressed love.

As someone who grew up severely love-starved and has long suffered the harsh consequences of this depravation, and witnessed the devastation in the lives of my two brothers as well, I say:

Express your feelings of love for your children, and express them abundantly! Express praise for their efforts in achieving their personal goals. Express appreciation for their efforts to please you. And express admiration for them when they share and give love to others. Our children base their self-concept on their perceptions of our love for them. So demonstrate your love for your child. And do it often. I have never heard an adult complain of an unhappy childhood by saying, "My parents gave me too much love, appreciation, admiration, and praise. Those bastards! I hate them!" Invariably, it is the lack of expressed love, empathetic understanding, and emotional support in childhood that causes adults to experience inner emptiness and pain, as well as a displeasure with their parents for not showing them unconditional love.

Another example of the fear of expressing our caring, supportive emotions in this culture comes from an old acquaintance of mine, who is also a parent. As in the case of my family, both his mother and father possess an extremely low degree of functionality with their loving emotions. In the case of his father, the best that he can muster in his conversations with his son, and this is an exact quote, is "So how's your car running?" and other such non-emotional subjects. "How's my car running?" the son wonders in disbelief. "Why don't you ask me how I'm 'running?' How I'm really doing inside? How my love life is going (he's divorced)? What my hopes and dreams are?" And his mom is so intimacy dysfunctional that it even makes her uncomfortable when her son strokes her granddaughter's hair in front of her. But there is even a deeper problem in this family system than the inability of the parents to express love to their children: they expect their adult children to play the same denial game about the realities of what's going on in their family system, and to fit in exactly with the lives that the parents have mapped out for them. When the man tries to share his deeper feelings with his parents, for instance, as well as his hopes and aspirations, they jump down his throat, saying that he's sentimental and that he's a "dreamer" (dreamers who back up their visions with action are the ones who accomplish the greatest things in life).

The funny thing is, if you met this family, you would almost think that they are from a 1950's television sitcom, they present such a good public image. And that is why it is so difficult for many of us to see and understand the level of intimacy dysfunction that permeates our society - because it is hidden from view! Of course, the man's parents don't like any talk about "dysfunctional families" or "emotional recovery." "There's nothing dysfunctional about our family," they say. Which shows me that the true nature of their family system is even hidden from them. They simply cannot (or will not) see their dysfunctions for what they are. One day, the mother visited her son and discovered the "emotion flash cards" that he had purchased for he and his daughter. (They are the same kind of emotional teaching aids that you will find in books and on posters and flash cards in pre-schools and kindergarten's across America.) As she looked them over, she quickly and vehemently shamed her then 35-year-old son for buying and using them with his daughter, calling them "ridiculous." How can someone be so terrified of emotions? And surely she has not internalized the fact that her son is a separate and complete individual, but rather, sees him as an extension of her "self" and views his purpose in life as helping to complete her picture of the perfect family. But the fact is, emotionally, because of all the game-playing, "hiding", and severe dysfunctionality, that her family is in shambles. In order to heal, "we must be willing to come out of hiding!"

So you see, our emotions - that mysterious "energy in motion" - can work for us or against us. They can either bond us together, when they are functioning properly, or drive us apart, when they are not. In this case, since the mother does not bring much love, validation, and praise to this parent/child relationship, and instead offers mostly negativity, she has left her son little choice but to protect himself from her harmful input that is destructive to his self-esteem. The mother's continual shaming has caused her son to wall himself off from all her criticisms, maintaining only minimal contact with her and remaining highly guarded in their dwindling relationship.

Praising our children in realistic ways for their accomplishments is another way for we parents to express our love and acknowledgement of our children's inner lives. It is normal for people to want to feel appreciated and valued for their efforts by the ones they love. And the use of verbal praise is key in accomplishing that goal. Of course, we will do most of our praising in our children's younger years. And as they grow in autonomy and confidence, they will naturally need less of our praise, and we can save our "I'm so proud of you's" for those really important occasions. Although, I believe that most human beings like to hear that they "did a good job" and other such acknowledgements throughout their lives when they have worked hard to accomplish something.

Praise is also an effective and gentle shaper of our children's attitudes: an encouraging, positive reinforcer of their "good" behavior. In his book, The Case Against Spanking, Irwin A. Hyman writes:

A positive reinforcement or reward is something you say, do, or give to a child following a particular behavior. Your goal should always be to 'catch kids being good' . . . I believe that verbal praise is one of the most important types of [social] reinforcers . . . Social reinforcers include positive statements, words and looks of approval, smiles, and laughter. They should also include hugs, kisses, and pats on the back, all of which communicate approval and high regard for the child.

Dr. Sylvia Rimm concurs:

Praise is probably the most effective communicator of adult values and provides parents with a critical tool for guiding children. The expressed pleasure of adults is the most powerful early motivator.

Praise for children's accomplishments encourages them to continue to accomplish and share their achievements with those whom they please.

In order to guide your children without pressuring them . . . recognize that they should not be encumbered with impossible expectations. Moderate praise empowers children enough to feel confident and love learning.

Dr. Sylvia Rimm adds this special warning for parents against "over-praising" our children through the use of grandiose adjectives like "brilliant" or "genius," when a child performs well. A more appropriate, emotionally nourishing response to a task well done might be: "Boy, you sure are a hard worker! You did an excellent job on your project. I'm proud of you." When we habitually over-praise children, it gives them an unrealistic view of themselves and their abilities. And as they mature, they will begin to see the exaggeration in our praising, which can deliver a powerful blow to their self-esteem. Over-praising can also send children the message that they must perform "brilliantly" every time in order to please us. Some children respond to these unrealistic expectations by giving up on things they can't immediately perform well, while others may become dependent on our approval to feel good about their accomplishments. And if we praise our children only for certain things, stereotypically for appearance in girls and athletic ability in boys, and so forth, they may begin to think that these are the only worthwhile qualities they possess. Realistic praising in all areas is what makes our children feel good about themselves, and encourages the joy of learning, as well.

We must also make sure that we are not using praise as manipulation. For example, praising a child because he prepared dinner for us as a way to manipulate him into doing it every night is not genuine praise. Or, say, praising him only when he does well in the high school courses that we deem valuable, and neglecting to praise him when he does well in some of the others, is clearly coercion. Manipulation in the guise of praise is extremely damaging to the inner lives of our children and should be avoided at all cost. So it is important to keep a keen eye on our motivation when we are expressing praise (and love) to our children, making sure to encourage and not manipulate.

It speaks volumes about a parent's devotion to their children's emotional health when they can pay enough attention to "catch them being good," as Irwin A. Hyman advises. The parenting methods that many of my contemporaries and I grew up with, in varying degrees, centered on the idea that children should not "bother" their parents too much. As long as we were playing relatively quietly (not fighting), and not making too much of a mess, things went along fairly smoothly in the household. Of course, we weren't getting all the great benefits of genuine praising from our parents: increased feelings of being loved and wanted, and being "emotionally rewarded" for making the efforts to share and get along with others. Then, when the normal childhood fussing began, instead of being praised for behaving well most of the time, we were shamed and punished for being "bad." And of course, when the yelling and spankings and being sent to our rooms was over, we felt like "bad" children. We could be playing nicely for two hours and not hear a positive word from our parents about that behavior, but for the ten minutes we were being "bad," we got all kinds of attention for that, and all of it bad!

Effective praise and expressed love include parental expressions of approval, as opposed to mere statements of fact. Saying, for instance, "You're so smart, dear," doesn't give our children the emotional payoff that "I'm very proud of you for studying so hard for your history exam" does. Then adding, "You're really a good kid!" Can you see the difference? And do you see how supporting our children's natural feelings of self-satisfaction and self-worth might just spur them on the next time they don't feel like studying hard for an exam? It is our feelings of approval - just for being the marvelous young people they are - as well as our delight in their efforts and accomplishments that our children crave. Genuine parental declarations of praise, admiration, appreciation, and love, such as: "I'm so proud of you for . . .; I really admire you for . . .; You're really a good kid; I love you so much, just for being you;" and "I will always believe in you" provide potent emotional nourishment for our children's hungry souls. Use these phrases, and others like them, diligently, then watch the marvelous results.

At this point, I want to discuss an antiquated societal belief that needs updating because it is dead wrong: A high degree of self-regard tends to make one conceited, while a low degree of self-regard tends to make one altruistic. The problem with this belief is that we are confusing conceit with self-esteem. The difference between the two becomes apparent, once you think it through. People with high self-esteem don't waste their lives bragging about themselves. They don't agonize over petty jealousies, such as, "Is so and so prettier than me?" or "Does so and so have more money than I do?" They're busy getting things done and following their dreams! And they don't need to expend precious life energy pumping themselves up trying to feel good about themselves. They already possess sufficient internal love and don't have to constantly elicit admiration from others in order to feel a sense of self-love, like a voracious mosquito satisfying her need for blood. Indeed, their well is full! They have plenty of good will to go around, and give it to others freely and abundantly.

It is invariably the people with low self-esteem who waste their lives, as well as the lives of everyone who has to listen to them, telling others how wonderful they are. It is my belief that the greater the need for this tragic life-wasting activity (that is, boasting and vying to be the center of attention), the lower the self-esteem in the individual who is doing it. Their well is empty! And since they need the water of attention to survive, they will always try to get some from you. But they can never get enough to fill their well because attention from others is a poor substitute for self-love. So the next time you see someone carrying on and on about themselves, maybe you will have some empathy for the sad life that he or she is obviously leading. Just imagine what it must be like to spend every day of your life having to convince others how marvelous you are so that you can feel like a worthwhile human being.

The reality is, a high degree of self-regard tends to make one altruistic because you possess enough self-love that you're not always trying to "get" from others. Rather, you have plenty of internal love and enjoy the process of sharing it with others. And a low degree of self-regard tends to make one emotionally needy, which many times expresses itself in the form of conceit. So in addition to bolstering our children's feelings of self-value, our words of parental love and approval tend to teach them how to empathize with and generously give love to others because this is what is being shown to them.

In his book, Sound Mind, Sound Body, Dr. Kenneth R. Pelletier reports on a 1988 study conducted at the University of Illinois in the Department of Psychiatry. One hundred randomly selected medical students were interviewed to determine if there was a link between their views on how they were reared and their adult mental health. In his review on this research, entitled Empathy and Its Development, Dr. Mark Barnett concludes:

Children who are encouraged to feel good about themselves may be more inclined to empathize with others than children who are preoccupied with personal inadequacies and other concerns about the self . . . Development of empathy would appear to thrive in an environment that encourages the child to experience a broad range of emotions and provides numerous opportunities for the child . . . to [develop] emotional sensitivity and responsibility to others.

When we freely and openly express love and affection for our children, it provides them with a crucial ingredient of their emotional nourishment, enabling them grow into strong, capable adults who possess abundant internal love. As a result, they won't grow into one of those needy adults who is always trying to extract love from others because they feel empty inside. But, instead, they will carry enough internal love that they can regularly offer it to others, and be happy to accept it in return. They will have learned this lesson from our poignant example, watching us "model" the beauty and gratification of showing love to them and to others.

Believe it or not, there is a new school of thought in psychology teaching that praise is emotionally damaging to our children's self-esteem. Some of these psychologists are actually advising parents against praising their children altogether! Thankfully, they are in the minority. Their belief is that praising children is detrimental to their emotional health because it teaches them to do things only for approval, which I think truly underestimates a child's will to self-motivate and derive joy from self-accomplishment. It's easy to see that our children feel a sense of satisfaction about the things they do well and come to us primarily to share their feelings of accomplishment - as an addition to their self-satisfaction, not instead of it. One author even warns, "Surprisingly, praise is as harmful to children as shame and blame!" I can't tell you how disheartening it is for me to hear these words. Now non-demonstrative parents have a justification for denying their children the valuable emotional nourishment they need. In my experience, the loving and praising I give my daughter and her reaction to it in no way relates to the shaming and blaming with which I grew up. It's like comparing the fragrance of flowers to the stench of excrement; there is no way to make any kind of reasonable correlation except as opposites. I wrote this woman a polite letter asking her to cite me the studies on which she bases this assertion in order to make my own judgement. Not surprisingly, I did not hear back from her. Most likely because there are no such studies.

So I must warn you, if you plan to read a lot of parenting books, you may run across this kind of commentary on praising. It is disconcerting to be reading a good book on parenting with some really helpful advice and then come to a section on praise, only to find that the author discourages it because it encourages approval seeking. It just seems like common sense that if we don't want our children to depend upon our approval of their accomplishments in order to maintain their self-esteem, we must also give them our love and approval when they fail - for a good effort, or encouragement to do better next time.

Giving our children enthusiastic approval when they succeed and intensely shaming them when they fail is the lethal combination that creates approval-seeking individuals. Expressing our approval, in itself, is not the culprit. When an author appears to possess a keen intellect and insight into the workings of the human mind, yet in the realm of a child's need for praise, appreciation, and acknowledgement appears to have some kind of emotional blockage, I believe there is a distinct possibility that they may have a hidden psychological agenda. My guess is that they may not be particularly demonstrative parents. That is, it makes them uncomfortable to give praise and approval to their children - probably because they were not praised much during childhood, themselves - and never learned those emotional skills. Therefore, they have created a justification for their inability to praise their children by adhering to this disheartening new psychological theory. Any human relationship that is devoid of praise, appreciation, and approval of one another must inevitably be a sad and barren emotional environment within which to dwell.

Another author warns that if you praise your child a lot, he or she will be jealous when you give praise to other children. That has not been my experience at all. I tell all of Camille's friends that I'm proud of them, for instance, when they pick up the massive clutter they always seem to make when they are playing. I asked Camille about this after I had read it, and she thought it was silly. She actually likes it when I tell her friends that I am proud of them. And I can tell by the way she responds when I do that she really means it. In fact, I think she is proud that she has a Daddy who interacts so well with her friends. From time to time, I also tell the kids that I love them, and she's not jealous of that either. I say, how can telling children that you love them and that you are proud of them be wrong? Don't our children really need more of this rather than less? I think it is more likely that those children who are "praise-starved" are the ones who will be jealous when other children are shown praise by their parents. Maybe this author gets jealous, herself, when others are given praise, and then assumes that everyone feels as she does. And her children probably do get jealous when she says good things about other children because they need her praise and expressed love so badly, themselves - and they are not getting it! Of course, I can't be sure, but there is undoubtedly some explanation (or several explanations) of this sort for the small percentage of parenting authors who discourage praising children because it is harmful.

Just ask anyone who has grown up with acutely non-demonstrative parents if they wish that their parents had occasionally told them that they were proud of them and impressed with the things they did. It is usually a gut craving within these people, and something they cannot understand how their parents could deny them. For another example, the fastest way to kill an employee's motivation is to not praise and appreciate his or her hard work, extra efforts, and good results. And a primary complaint of people who have lost the connection with their mates and are on the verge of a breakup is as follows: "I don't feel appreciated; I never get any attention any more; I feel like I'm being taken for granted!" Do the non-praisers really want their children to feel like they are being taken for granted? I think we can safely dispel the misguided idea that "praise is as harmful to children as are shame and blame." This belief just doesn't stand up to the common sense test.

Many of the traditional religious teachings in Western culture have also had an influence on some parents' wariness of praising their children. "Pride goethe before the fall," as they say. But as a result of this simple yet lethal phrase, many people who are brought up in religious households are taught that it is immodest to have good feelings about oneself. This is a clear contradiction to me. Because if we are God's precious children, it follows, then, that it is good and proper to love ourselves and our fellow man as God loves us.

There is an interesting side issue to this prohibition within many religious groups against feelings of personal pride. As a result of their self-repression, we find many examples of people who "displace" their forbidden feelings of personal pride with acceptable feelings of group pride - and with the sanctioning of the religious body, I might add. These feelings of religious group pride are often expressed in thoughts and words, such as: "We're saved and you're not. What the world needs is for us to save everyone with our one true teaching." And the individuals who practice religious group pride don't even have to feel responsible for their feelings of self-righteousness. They are merely following what God and the religious group expects of them. In reality, this is just another example of one of the age-old arrogant delusions that permeates mankind: "If everyone thought (or believed) like I do, then most of the worlds problems would magically disappear."

Personal pride, indeed, is a decent and moral emotion. When you work long and hard at something, what other word is there to describe how you feel about yourself? Or, what about when you are tempted to do something that you know is wrong and you resist that urge because you know how ashamed you would feel afterward? And because of that honorable decision, you instead feel extremely proud of yourself! It is sad, indeed, when children are discouraged from feeling proud of themselves for their hard work and good deeds. As the wise old adage tells us: "Character is what you do when no one is looking." And being encouraged to feel proud of yourself for doing the right thing is the strongest builder of character that I know of.

Continue to: "Inclusion"

Ten Principles of Empowered Parenting

Table of Contents

We Care what you think!  Please take a few moments to email us with your comments.

©1996 Mark A. Reuther, All rights reserved.

http://www.living-library.com/HeartMates