Living with Children: Why does Mom have to yell?
I'm a yeller,” she said, she being the mother of three young children.
“No,” I replied, “you're not. There is no genetic predisposition toward yelling, and no biochemical or neurological condition that makes yelling inevitable, much less irresistible.”
“But I yell at my kids all the time it seems.”
“I'm not arguing with that.”
“Well, why, then, do I yell?”
“My best answer, based on experience, is that you yell for the same reason many of today's mothers yell: You're trying not to be mean.”
She stared at me for a few seconds, then said, “You're pulling my leg, right?”
No, I wasn't pulling her leg. As in this case, too many of today's moms think they're “yellers.” First, they think yelling is the inescapable consequence of having children. Have child, will yell. Have more than one, will yell even more. Then, they justify their yelling by conjuring up some disability that compels them to open their mouths, bulge their eyeballs and scream at the top of their lungs on a regular basis.
When said disability strikes, the calm-challenged mom will, looking for consolation, often call another mom. “I did it again,” she confesses, to which the other mom says, “It's all right. We all do it.”
Several years ago, I asked about 500 people in Des Moines, “Raise your hand if your mom never yelled.” About 300 hands went up. Then I asked, “Raise your hand if you're a mom with children living with you in the home and you've never yelled.” Not one hand went up. They thought it was funny. It's not. (I've done that same exercise many times since, always with the same outcome.)
Yelling is not good for the parent, and it isn't good for the child. It doesn't traumatize a child, but it fails to convey confidence in one's authority. And, children need a constant, calm, confident authority like they need a constant unconditional love. All the love in the world cannot make up for a lack of leadership in a child's life. Authority, properly conveyed, is a form of nurturing.
Over the past several generations, yelling has become epidemic in American mommy culture. Why? Because today's moms, as opposed to moms in the prepsychological parenting age (pre-1970, approximately), are trying not to be mean. They're trying to be nice.
Example: When a modern mom wants her child to perform a chore, she bends forward at the waist, grabs her knees, and employs a pleading tone like she's petitioning the King of Swat for a favor. Oh, and she finishes this wheedle by asking the child if her request meets with his approval, as in “OK?” How nice!
With the best of intentions (she wants to be nice), Milquetoast Mom gives her child permission to develop attention deficit and oppositional-defiant disorders. As these disorders develop, she finds herself having to exert more and more energy to get her kids to do something simple, like look at her when she speaks. She begins raising her voice, then she screams, then she feels guilty, then she goes back to grabbing her knees and wheedling.
“But I don't want my kids to think I'm mean!” said Yelling Milquetoast Mom.
“Yes, you do,” I said. “From a child's point of view, a parent is mean when the child accepts that the parent means what he or she says, the first time he or she says it. When you have convinced your child of that, which requires that you stop trying to be so nice, you will stop yelling, and you and your child will have a far more creative relationship.”
I don't think parenting was ever so ironic as it is today.
Family psychologist John Rosemond answers parents' questions on his web site at www.rosemond.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Pirates’ attempts to bolster roster at deadline a fruitless endeavor
- Report: Man jumps from Tarentum Bridge
- After years of lobbying, Big Ben has Steelers running the no-huddle
- Slide stabilization project delayed
- Steelers notebook: Brown calls Sanders’ comments about Roethlisberger ‘terrible’
- Steelers hold high hopes for pass defense
- EPA talks on pollution limits trigger protests, arrests Downtown
- It’s lights out for Bayer sign on Mt. Washington
- Beloved teacher at 3 Western Pa. schools hears from students across nation
- NFL notebook: Ravens RB Rice calls actions ‘totally inexcusable’
- Joe Greene only 2nd player in Steelers history to get number retired