parenting practices, children's relationship with parents and peers

Proceeding of the International Conference on Social Science Research, ICSSR 2013 (e-ISBN 978-967-11768-18). 4-5 June 2013, Penang, MALAYSIA. Organized by WorldConferences.net 1552

PARENTING STYLES, CHILDREN’S PERCEIVED RELATIONSHIP WITH PARENTS, AND THEIR SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT

Norivic N. Gilongos

Aklan State University-College of Hospitality and Rural Resource Management Ibajay, AKlan

Ma. Jhoanna G. Guarin

Aklan State University- College of Industrial Technology Kalibo, Aklan

ABSTRACT

This study dwelt on the parenting styles, children’s perceived relationship with parents, and their social adjustment among the 75 randomly selected households in Barangay Mabusao, Ibajay, Aklan with the parents and school-age children as respondents of this investigation. The study utilized the one-shot survey research design employing the pure basic research method. Both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered using four kinds of instruments including interview schedule, FGD guide, parenting style quiz, and case study guide. Data were analyzed and interpreted using descriptive statistics and other appropriate tools. Study revealed that, on the average, the parent-respondents’ age is 44.12 years old and majority had attended formal schooling. The common occupation among the fathers is as construction worker while the mothers are mostly housekeepers. More than half of the 75 households have 5 or more children where Catholicism is the most dominant religion. In terms of the parenting styles, majority of the parent-respondents claimed that they are authoritative yet subjecting their child to punishment when needed. With this, most of the children believed that they have warm and supportive parents where they felt they are loved and given special attention. Most of them also disclosed that they have somehow felt hostile and conflicting relationship with their parents. Lastly, the children believed that they are helpful and cooperative and can get along well with their family and friends. However, at times when they are bullied or persecuted, they also retaliate. For them, however, getting revenge is not a grave act of violence. Field of Research: Parenting Styles, Children’s Perceived Relationship With Parents, Social Adjustment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY Parenting is an enormous responsibility. It involves protecting the life of a child, providing for his optimum development and molding his character. Effective parenting is safe, nurturing, and instructive. (from: http://www.kidshealth.org.html.1995-2010) In the Province of Aklan, a police report was submitted stating that an 8 year-old boy committed suicide at around noontime on the 9th day of August 2008 due to frustration, heavy remorse, and lack of parental guidance. One of the most pressing concerns in our society today is the suicide incidents. What is worst about it is that, those who commit suicide are getting younger and younger. This is usually associated with

http://www.kidshealth.org.html.1995-2010/


family problems and dysfunctional relationships with parents or friends. A news in the October 3, 2010 publication of Philippine Star states that in Quezon City, a 13-year old boy committed suicide. It was reported that the boy allegedly hanged himself after his father scolded him for pestering his sister. Aside from suicide, there are many other problems observed in our society like juvenile delinquency, mendicancy, abortion and the like, which rooted in poor parenting and unhealthy relationship among family members. With the aforementioned family and societal problems --wherein many social scientists had investigated, tried to explain its cause, and likewise, offered sound solutions -- still, many essential issues were left unobserved and were not given proper attention. This realization had served as the jump off point for the conception of conducting a study concerning parenting and children’s social adjustment. With the desire of contributing to the fluid knowledge on parenting styles used by Aklanon parents, understand how children really feels about their relationship with their parents and their peers, and know how children adjust or respond to society and their immediate environment including their family and their peers; this pure basic research on parenting styles, children’s perceived relationship with their parents and peers, and the children’s perceived social adjustment was conducted. Statement of the Problem This study was conducted to determine the parenting styles and children’s well-being among the selected households in Barangay Mabusao, Ibajay, Aklan. Specifically, the study sought to find answers to the following:

1. What is the profile of the parent-respondents in terms of their age, educational attainment, occupation, number of children and religion?

2. What are the parenting styles of parent-respondents categorized into three practices such as the parent being permissive, the parent being authoritarian, and the parent being authoritative?

3. How do children perceive the kind of relationship that they have with their parents? 4. What are the children’s perceived social adjustment in terms of their social behavior,

peer status and peer responses, and social satisfaction or distress? 5. How do permissive, authoritarian, and authoritative parents relate with their children as

portrayed in the real-life situations? 6. How do children associate with their permissive, authoritarian, and/or authoritative

parents as well as with their peers?

Theoretical Framework of the Study

This study could be situated within the perspective of symbolic interactionism by Charles Horton Cooley and George Herbet Mead having relations inside and outside the household playing the key role of molding both the parent and the child’s behavior among themselves and among their peers. Symbolic interactionism views self-concept as based on the principle of "reflected appraisals," or the "looking glass self," that is, an individual sees oneself by taking the role of others (Cooley and Mead as cited by Macionis, 1993). Family constitutes an essential part of the "other" for children.

According to Mead, as he expanded Cooley’s idea of the social self, to play the game of life, the individual must know his or her role in relation to others and be aware of their values. In the


process, the individual assumes the organized social attitudes and moral ideas of the social groups or communities to which one belongs. These exert an influence on a person’s attitudes toward different projects and cooperative activities as well as in dealing with social problems which the group faces. As a result, the person will be capable of directing his or her own behavior accordingly (Panopio and Raymundo, 2004). Conceptual Framework of the Study In view of the Symbolic Interactionism Theory, this study tried to establish the idea that the children’s perception about their relationship with their parents, their social behavior as aggressive and violent or helpful and cooperative, their feeling of acceptance or rejection with their peers, and their feeling of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the family is the outcome of how their parents treat them and how their parents respond to their behavior at home. To describe the profile of the parent-respondents’, variables such as age, educational attainment, parents’ occupation, number of children and religion were also used in this study. Significance of the Study This study revealed how the parents dealt with their children in common day-to-day situations of their lives. It had actually discovered the parenting styles used by the parents with their children in prevalent undesirable circumstances. In reference to the parenting styles exhibited by the parents, the children had revealed how they perceived their relationship with their parents as well as with their peers. The children also disclosed how they feel with their family and with their peers. With this, the value of the study is presented as follows: To the parents, this study can give them enlightenment on what better parenting style that they can use with their children, which can help their children become better individuals. To the academe, the information provided in the result of the study can be used as the basis in formulating an extension program or policy which can help educate the parents in the wider community on effective and responsible parenting; likewise help improve the welfare of the children. To the concerned government and non-government agencies, the outcome of this study can give them insights on the realities of parenting styles used by some Aklanon parents and how children perceived their relationship with their parents and peers. Thus, this can contribute in improving the existing programs that these agencies are already implementing with regard to helping the parents become better parents vis-à-vis address some emotional and psychological needs of the children. To the academic scholars and reseachers, this study offers rich options on related and relevant researches that can be conducted in the future. Methodology Research Design This study used the one-shot survey as its research design because the data will be collected only once (David, 2002). The pure basic type of research was also employed in this study. This type of research attempts to describe an existing situation and/or explain certain patterns of behavior using either or both qualitative and quantitative research techniques. The goal of pure research is to offer


better descriptions and better explanation of human behavior. The intention is to accumulate knowledge about a certain phenomenon (David, 2002). In this regard, the investigation had utilized both the quantitative and qualitative research techniques to gather all the information needed to answer the objectives of the study. The Respondents of the Study Respondents. The respondents of this study were the parents and school-age children of the 75 randomly selected households in the adopted barangay of ASU-CHARRM, Barangay Mabusao, Ibajay, Aklan. A total of 12 parents from 12 different households participated in the focus group discussion (FGD) set for parents while 11 school-age children participated in the FGD set for the children. Sampling Technique. The desired number of households was drawn using the simple random sampling specifically lottery.

The Data Gathering Instrument There were four kinds of instruments used in this study. The first two kinds of instruments, interview schedule and parenting style quiz, were used for the quantitative dimension of this study and the other two, FGD guide and case study guide, were used for the qualitative aspect of the study. There were two sets of interview schedules, one for the parent-respondents and the other set was for the children-respondents. The formulation of the aforementioned instruments was based on a researcher-made instrument by A.S. Morris, J.S. Silk, L. Steinberg, F.M. Sessa, S. Avenevoli and M.J. Essex in their study entitled Temperamental Vulnerability and Negative Parenting as Interacting Predictors of Child Adjustment (2002). The interview schedule for parents included questions on their profile and parenting styles; while the interview schedule for children included questions on their perceived relationship with parents and peers and their social adjustment. The interview schedule included both closed and open-ended questions, which ensured that all the information needed will be gathered accurately. The parenting style quiz was utilized to check the consistency of the parenting style used by the parents. The said instrument was patterned from a standardized parenting style quiz taken from Error! Hyperlink reference not valid..(Access date: July 16, 2010) To validate the responses of the parents and children in the structured interviews conducted with them, a focus group discussion (FGD) was conducted using an FGD guide. Lastly, a case study with the use of a case study guide was conducted with the three families, each with a unique parenting style --permissive, authoritarian, authoritative-- used by the parents.

Validity. The jury validation was done to check the validity of the instruments. The jury was composed of five authorities in social science research. The Data Gathering Procedure As soon as the researcher was permitted to conduct the study, the interview schedules were reproduced as well as the parenting style quiz, the FGD guide and the case study guide. The four sets of data gathering were done one after the other. The structured interviews with the parents


and children respondents were conducted first. After several weeks, the FGD was conducted followed by the administration of parenting style quiz. Lastly, three unique case studies were conducted with three families. Data Analysis The statistical tools and measurement employed in analyzing the quantitative data were purely descriptive utilizing the frequency distribution, percentages and the mean. Qualitative data were appropriately processed, analyzed, and were presented in narrative form. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Parent-Respondents’ Profile. The average age of the parent-respondents is 44.12 years old. Almost all of them had attended formal schooling. The most common occupation among the fathers was construction worker while most of the mothers were housekeepers. More than 50 percent of the households had five (5) children or more and 84 percent out of the 75 families were Roman Catholics. In terms of the fathers’ occupation, 32 or 42.67 percent were construction workers, 24 or 32 percent were farmers, 10 or 13.33 percent were tricycle drivers, 4 or 5.33 percent were barangay officials, 2 or 2.67 percent were seamen and only 1 or 1.33 percent was a government employee. In terms of the mothers’ occupation, 58 or 77.33 percent were housekeepers, 13 or 17.33 percent were government employees, and 3 or 4 percent were vendors. There were 39 or 52 percent of the parents who have 5 or more children, while 28 or 37.33 percent have 3 to 4 children and only 8 parent-respondents have 1 to 2 children. With these results, it can be said that majority of the fathers obtained their source of living from working as laborers; while most of the mothers were left to manage their household. The data on the number of children and the sources of income of the fathers somehow elucidate why most of the mothers remained as housekeepers. Table 1. Distribution of respondents according to their personal profile

Personal Profile

f

(n=75)

%

Age

40 and below 28 37.33

41 – 50 34 45.34

51 and above 13 17.33

Educational Attainment

Elementary level 20 26.67

High school level 41 54.67

College level 13 17.33

No response 1 1.33

Occupation

Father


Parenting Styles. Majority of the parent-respondents claimed that they were authoritative parents. They said their parenting style would be authoritative if ever their child runs up and pushes the other child who is playing on a toy, keeps on getting out of bed and it is late for bedtime, says that he/she hates the gift received, keeps on running along the river or the seashore, is watching TV and an inappropriate program comes on, throws his/her things for the parents to carry, and cries because he/she wants to be carried as they are walking home. On the other hand, majority of the parents adopted a permissive parenting style when their child does not want them to leave the home. The parents, however, admitted during the focus group discussion that they also subjected their child to punishment, from the mild form of reminder to verbal reprimand (mueay), pinching (kurot), pulling hair (sabunot) or spanking (bunae). Table 2 shows the overall and the most dominant parenting style used by the respondents based on the result of the parenting style quiz. Most of them (72 or 96 percent), showed an authoritative parenting style; wherein, the parents lay boundaries and the child is given a certain degree of freedom, which is within the bounds of the safety walls set by the parents. (from: http://pediatrics. about.com/od/infantparentingtips/a/04_pntg_styles.htm)

Only two (2) or 2.67 percent claimed to be permissive; wherein, they allow their child to get or do what they want. (from: http://pediatrics.about.com/od/infantparenting tips/a/04_pntg_styles.htm) Lastly, only one or 1.33 percent was authoritarian wherein the parent shows his/her children that he/she is the boss in their household and the children has to do what they are told without reasoning or explanation. (from: http://pediatrics.about.com/od/infantparentingtips/a/04_pntg_styles.htm)

Construction worker 32 42.67

Farmer 24 32.00

Driver 10 13.33

Barangay official 4 5.33

Seaman 2 2.67

Government employee 1 1.33

No response 2 2.67

Mother

Housekeeper 58 77.33

Government employee 13 17.33

Vendor 3 4.00

No response 1 1.33

Number of Children

1 – 2 8 10.67

3 – 4 28 37.33

5 or more 39 52.00

Religion

Roman Catholic 63 84.00

Non-Catholic 11 14.67

No response 1 1.33


Table 2. Overall parenting styles of the respondents based on the parenting style quiz

Children’s Perceived Relationship with their Parents. Most of the children believed that they have warm and supportive parents and they felt that they were loved and given special attention; however, some of them admitted that they experienced hostile and conflicting relationship with their parents like, being blamed for the family’s misfortunes, criticized for their imperfections, witnessing their parents shout and quarrel with each other, and admitted that they cannot openly communicate with their parents.

Table 3 shows the parenting style of the respondents when their child does not want them to leave the home. Forty—seven or 62.67 percent, comprising the majority of the respondents, replied that they were permissive or they would cancel their visit and stay at home. Twenty-six or 34.66 percent were authoritative. They would explain to their child that they had made a date that they want to keep, so, they would decide to bring their toddler with them and make sure that they bring a toy so the child can play with it. Only 2 or 2.67 percent believed they were authoritarian or they demanded their child to get ready and force him to come with them. This result simply implies that most parents have a very close attachment with their child. They cannot afford to leave their child behind if their child is begging them to stay. The parents were not even aware of the repercussions of their decision in tolerating their children yet they know for sure that they don’t want to see their child crying at the top of their lungs. After all, they will only be going to meet a friend. Filipino parents, by nature, give more value to family members than friends. This is strongly supported by the ‘close family ties’ values which is highly dominant among Filipino families (Zulueta, 2002).

Table 3. Parenting style of the respondents when their child does not want them to leave the home

Parenting Styles f %

Permissive 47 62.67

Authoritarian 2 2.67

Authoritative 26 34.66

Total 75 100.00


Permissive 2 2.67


Permissive 2 2.67



Total 75 100.00




Total 75 100.00

Children’s Social Adjustment. In terms of the children’s social adjustment, majority of the children believed that they exhibit both pro-social and anti-social behavior. They all claimed that they are helpful and cooperative and can get along well with others including their families. However, when they are bullied or persecuted, they tend to exhibit aggressive and/or violent behavior because they make sure that they get even with to those who bullies them. In terms of peer status and peer responses, almost all of them claimed that they really like their friends and they find it easy to find new friends. They also felt that they are genuinely accepted by their peers and friends. Very few of them who felt that they were not welcome and victimized by other children. Lastly, most of the children feel that they were satisfied with their family and peers and they were happy when they were at home or with their peers. Only one admitted that he/she experienced that feeling of being lonely. Parenting Style of the Respondents When Their Child Runs Up and Pushes the Other Child Who is Playing on a Toy As shown in Table 4, most of the respondents, 71 or 94.67 percent, said they would be authoritative if ever their child runs up and pushes the other child who is playing on a toy. The authoritative parents would go to their toddler, explain that he is not allowed to push the child off the toy, give the toy back to the other child and ask their child to apologize. Only 3 or 4 percent said that their response would be authoritarian; wherein the parent would go to the child, shout at him saying that he is never to do that ever again, and punishes him by not giving the child any snack. Only 1 or 1.33 percent said that he would be permissive; wherein the parent would let the child get the toy because the parent believe that the child is developing his confidence and he has to learn to stick up for themselves. This finding implies that most of the parents do not want their child to start any fight with a playmate or peer. Common values among Filipinos include respect for family and peers. In this case, the parents only showed that they want to instill among their children the value of respect to their peers. Table 4. Parenting style of the respondents when their child runs up and pushes the other child who is playing on a toy


Permissive 1 1.33




Total 75 100.00

Most of the respondents, 66 or 88 percent, as shown in Table 5, said that they would be authoritative if their child keeps on getting out of bed and it is late for bedtime. The authoritative parents agree that they would take the child gently back to bed and explain to the child that his body needs a rest. Eight or 10.67 percent believed they would adopt an authoritarian parenting style, which is to order the child to get back to bed, shut the door and ignore any protests. The parents believe that by doing this, the child will learn who is the boss and that will get him to sleep. Only 1 claimed that he will be permissive when his/her child will keep on getting out of bed. The parent would let the child get out of bed believing that when he is tired he will go to bed anyway. This finding concords with the concept presented by Panopio and Raymundo (2004), which says that, the child primarily gets affection and love from their parents. Table 5. Parenting style of the respondents when their child keeps on getting out of bed and it is late for bedtime

Parenting Style of the Respondents When Their Child Says That He/She Hates the Gift Received As shown in Table 6, 69 or 92 percent of the respondents admitted that they will be authoritative when their child says that he/she hates the gift received. The parents claimed that they would apologize to the person giving the gift and they will explain to their child that it is important to thank people. The parents will try to teach the child how he can use the present and have fun with it. On the other hand, 5 or 6.67 percent, believed they would be authoritarian. They admitted that they will shout at their child, demand that the child will ask for an apology, say thank you and play with the present. Consequently, the parents agreed that they will punish the child by taking away from him his favorite toy. Only 1 said that his parenting style would be permissive; which is, to laugh at it and would say, it’s fine to be free and say what you really think.


Permissive 1 1.33



Total 75 100.00


Table 6. Parenting style of the respondents when their child says that he/she hates the gift received

Parenting Styles of the Respondents When Their Child Keeps on Running Along the River or the Seashore In Table 7, most of the respondents, 60 or 80 percent, said they would be authoritative if ever their child keeps on running along the river or the seashore. Parents agree that they would tell their child to stop running, explain that it is dangerous for them and others, and ask their child to go on swimming instead. Nine or 12 percent believed they will be authoritarian in such a situation, wherein the parents would yell at the children to quit running, demand that they immediately come back to their parents to change into their day clothes and blame them for spoiling everyone’s fun. Six or 8 percent said they would be permissive or they will let them run because these 8 parents believe that they are having fun and if they fall, they will learn that running might be dangerous. Table 7. Parenting style of the respondents when their child keeps on running along the river or the seashore Parenting Style of the Respondents When Their Child Throws His/ Her Things for the Parent to Carry Seen in Table 8 is the parenting style of the respondents when their child throws his/her things for the parent to carry while the parent is picking up the child in a friend’s house. Fifty-six or 74.67 percent, comprising the majority of the respondents, replied that they were authoritative. They would ask the child to pick up the things, carry it properly and explain to the child that it is important to take good care of their belongings.


Permissive 1 1.33



Total 75 100.00


Permissive 6 8.00



Total 75 100.00


There are 12 or 16 percent who claimed to be authoritarian or they would yell at their child to pick up his things and threaten that they will not be allowed to come at their friend’s house to play again. Only seven (7) or 9.33 percent believed they were permissive. The parents will just pick up the things and continue chatting with their friend on the way out. Table 8. Parenting styles of the respondents when their child throws his/her things for the parent to carry

Parenting Styles of the Respondents When Their Child is Watching TV and an Inappropriate Programme Comes on Most of the respondents, 62 or 82.67 percent, shown in Table 9, said that they would be authoritative if their child is watching TV and an inappropriate programme comes on. The parents agree that they would just turn the TV off and explain to their children that some programmes are for older children and adults. The parents would also suggest to their children to play on something else together. This result conforms to what Patterson as cited by Palispis (1996) described an adequate parenting skills which is to clearly state the rules the child is expected to obey. Ten or 13.33 percent asserted that they would be permissive or will allow their children to watch it. The parents believe that their child knows it is not real and the child is interested to watch it anyway. Only three (3) or 4 percent said that their parenting style would be authoritarian. The parents would shout at the children to turn off the TV and would say how dare them watch that kind of programme. The parents will also command the children to have a time out. Table 9. Parenting styles of the respondents when their child is watching TV and an inappropriate programme comes on Parenting Styles of the Respondents When Their Child is Crying Because He/She Wants to be Carried as They are Walking Home Fifty or 66.67 percent of the respondents, comprising the majority, presented in Table 10, used an authoritative parenting style when their child is crying because he/she wants to be carried as they


Permissive 7 9.33



Total 75 100.00


Permissive 7 9.33



Total 75 100.00


are walking home. The parents claimed that they will kneel down so that they will be at their child’s eye level and will suggest to the child to have a rest. The parents would agree to carry their child for a little while but will ask the child to walk on his own again and act as if they are just playing. There were 15 or 20% who asserted that they would be permissive in such a situation. The parents will just carry the child even though they are carrying heavy bags because the parents feel that their child needs them. Ten or 13.33% said that their parenting style would be authoritarian or the parents will refuse to carry the child and shout at him to stop crying and whining. The parents claimed that they will just get on with walking home. Table 10. Parenting styles of the respondents when their child is crying because he/she wants to be carried as they are walking home Respondents’ Parenting Styles when their Child Exhibits Misbehavior (based on the Structured Interview and FGD conducted with Parents) Table 11 shows the result of the structured interview conducted with the parents. As shown in the Table, most of the parents claimed that they are authoritative. They do scold their child but explain or remind the child of the rules whenever their child hits a playmate (31 or 41.33 percent), breaks a glass (41 or 54.67 percent), throws up a tantrum (43 or 57.33 percent), tells a lie (39 or 52 percent), plays in a forbidden street (33 or 44 percent), and/or interrupts them with their household chores (35 or 46.67 percent). These findings were validated during the FGD with the parents, citing a situation, when their child hits a playmate. A common reaction of the parents was to ask their child to explain as to the cause of the incident and the reason for hitting their playmate. They also said that they would reprimand their child in a nice manner and caution him/her not to do it again. If ever their child is at fault, a penalty would be given to the child. Out of the 12 parents who participated in the FGD, two authoritative parents claimed that their children must be reminded to be extra careful to avoid accident like breaking a glass. FGD result also showed that the authoritative parents would try to explain to their child the realities of life when their child throws up a tantrum. If the tantrum of the child is caused by the parents’ refusal to buy or provide what their child is asking from them, the parents firmly inform and enlighten their child that they don’t have money. The child is, however, assured that if the parents will have enough money, sooner or later, their demand will be granted. The parents instill in the minds of their child to be patient since they are financially hard up.


Permissive 7 9.33



Total 75 100.00


Whenever their child lies, the authoritative parents reprimand the child and emphasize not to do it again since telling a lie is evil. When the child plays in a forbidden street, authoritative parents claimed during the FGD that they remind their child not to play on the street since it is dangerous. They also ask their child to stay on the side of the road to avoid any accident. They also admitted that they are protective of their child; hence, their children are reminded at all times. Table 11. Parenting styles of the respondents when children exhibits other misbehavior based on the structured interview conducted with parents

Children’s Perceived Relationship with their Parents based on the structured interview and FGD conducted with children Table 12 shows the children’s perceived relationship with their parents based on the structured interview conducted with them.Warm and supportive. There were 64 or 85.33 percent out of the 75 children who perceived that they have warm and supportive parents for the reason that their parents choose the words carefully in conversing with them. FGD result revealed that the parents’ good way of conversation is reciprocated by the children by talking to their parents in a nice way. There were 5 or 6.67 percent of the children who did not experience that their parents were choosing the words carefully when talking to them and 6 or 8 percent had no opinion about this matter. Sixty-seven or 89.33 percent of the 75 children believed that their relationship with their parents was warm and supportive because their parents tried to inform them and made them understand that every person makes mistakes. The children were also assured that they were still loved even if the behavior was not loved. There were six (6) or 8 percent who claimed that they never heard this statement from their parents, while two (2) or 2.67 percent had no opinion on this matter. During the FGD with 11 children, most of the children claimed that their parents love them even when they did something wrong. With this, they really feel the warmth of their parents’ love and care for them. The generous praises given by the parents on their child’s accomplishment whether big or small was one of the reasons why most of the children (68 or 90.67 percent) felt that their relationship with their parents was warm and supportive. Only two (2) or 2.67 percent have not experienced

Misbehaviors

Permissive

Authoritarian

Authoritative

No Opinion

(n = 75)

f % f % f % f %

Child hits playmate 1 1.33 25 33.33 31 41.33 18 24.00

Child breaks a glass 8 10.67 17 22.67 41 54.67 9 12.00

Child throws a tantrum 4 5.33 18 24.00 43 57.33 10 13.33

Child lies 6 8.00 15 20.00 39 52.00 14 18.67

Child plays in forbidden

street 3 4.00 25 33.33 33 44.00 14 18.67

Child interrupts parent’s

chores 6 8.00 22 29.33 35 46.67 12 16.00


receiving this kind of recognition from their parents, while five (5) or 6.67 percent did not give any opinion on this matter. The FGD result showed that nine (9) out of the 11 children-participants asserted that they have received compliments whenever they achieved something good, be it big or small. According to them, their parents praised and gave them rewards, such as food treat, new clothes and many others. Those who received compliments felt delighted while those who did not felt sad about it In terms of giving the children some freedom or independence so they can develop confidence in doing things that they are capable of, 68 or 90.67 percent claimed that they experienced this from their parents. This is highly supported by the FGD result wherein, all of the 11 children-participants agreed that their parents allowed them to do things on their own. They were in fact given household chores as part of their duties and responsibilities at home. They were entrusted to clean the house, wash the dishes, cook rice and gather firewood. With all these chores given to them, they believed that their parents want them to be independent and responsible so that when their parents are away or have other things to do, they can take charge. Sixty-five or 86.67 percent out of the 75 children-respondents agreed that they have a warm and supportive relationship with their parents because they spend quality time together, like, spending time together for a family meal. Though there were five (5) or 6.67 percent who have not experienced this and another five (5) have no opinion about this, these findings was strongly validated by the FGD result wherein, all the 11 children-participants claimed that they enjoyed quality time with their parents by doing simple things like watching TV or simply talking with each other. They further claimed that they were times during weekends or vacation that they went to Kalibo to dine and go shopping. They also believed that having their parents with them to help in their assignment or project was already quality time. There were children-respondents (56 or 74.67 percent) who believed that their parents were taking effort in putting something special in their lunchbox or baunan, though not necessarily a note. Four or 5.33 percent of them admitted that they had not encountered this thing with their parents; while 15 or 20 percent of them had no comment about this. It is amazing to know that all the 11 children FGD children participants have not experienced this practice. They themselves were surprised with the thought that some parents do it to their kids. Most of the children (71 or 94.67 percent) understood that their parents are really trying to nurture and encourage them in whatever instance even if the parents are imposing discipline on them. For the two (2) children, they do not believe that they are nurtured and encouraged by their parents and another two (2) cannot give their opinion about it. This result is supported by the findings in the FGD with children; wherein, many of them said that their parents really do care and yet did not neglect to discipline them. According to the children, their parents had explained to them that they were given due sanctions so that they will become good persons someday. Everyone even admitted that they had been punished because of wrongdoing but all of them agreed that it is needed because they must learn their lesson (para magtanda). Lastly, many of the children (69 or 92 percent) believed that they have warm and supportive parents because they received generous rewards like love, hugs, and other compliments from their parents. Only one (1) child admitted that his parents have not shown any generosity in terms of love, hugs or compliments; while, there are 5 children who just can’t give any opinion about it. FGD result showed that most of the children claimed that their parents are generous in terms of giving immaterial rewards especially praises. Only four claimed that their parents often kiss or hug them especially when they did something good.


In a perceived hostile and conflicting relationship with parents, 14 or 18.67 percent replied that they were always blamed by their parents for misfortunes in the family. Though it was quite alarming that there were 14 out of 75 children-respondents who always have this bad or traumatic treatment from their parents, there are a good number of children (56 or 74.67 percent) who asserted that they never experienced this. There were five (5) or 6.67 percent of the children who cannot give their opinion on the said issue. FGD result showed that none of the 11 children-participants claimed that they were blamed by their parents for the adversities of their family. Out of the 75 children-respondents, there were 9 or 12 percent who said that their parents would criticize them for their imperfections; while 59 or 78.67 percent did not experience being criticized. Seven children had no opinion about it. The children who participated in the FGD claimed that they have not experienced being ridiculed by their parents, especially as regards their physical attributes. They said they were only criticized for not doing their projects or homework or for getting so dirty after playing. In the result of the structured interview conducted with the 75 children, only five (5) or 6.67 percent claimed that their parents quarrel in front of them; 68 or 90.67 percent claimed that they have not experienced such; and two (2) or 2.67 percent did not give their stand about it. These findings, however, did not coincide with the FGD result because all of the 11 children-participants admitted that their parents fight with each other in their presence. When asked how they felt about it, they said, they were scared and often, would cry whenever their parents were fighting. However, one participant said that, whenever her parents were quarrelling, instead of crying, she’s scolding her parents (namueay). The children said that the quarrel of their parents usually last for a day or less and reasons are not too serious. In connection with the parents’ fight, seven (7) or 9.33 percent out of the 75 children-respondents claimed that they heard their parents shout at each other. However, 63 children admitted that they did not experience such; while five (5) or 6.67 percent have no opinion about it. FGD result showed that the children-participants saw and heard their parents shout at each other or exchange words; but, they have not seen them fight aggresively such as beating each other or other forms of physical fight. Of the 75 children-respondents, only two (2) or 2.67 percent admitted that their parents used to utter abusive or foul words on them and their siblings. Seventy or 93.33 percent have not heard any bad words from their parents; while three (3) or 4 percent did not give their stand on the issue. This result was strongly validated during the FGD; wherein, none of the 11 children-participants claimed that they experienced hearing abusive or foul words from their parents. The result of the interview conducted with the 75 children-respondents revealed that majority (71 or 94.67 percent) of them claimed that they were not physically abused by the parents and only four (4) or 5.33 percent answered that they have no opinion on that matter. Contradictory to the FGD result with 11 children-respondents, they admitted that there are times that their parents have to hit them with belt or with their hands especially when they committed mistakes. According to them, sometimes, it is painful; sometimes, it is not really painful. When the children were asked if the communication is open between them and their parents, only three (3) out of the 75 children, admitted that no open communication exists between them. Seventy-one of them claimed that the communication is open in the family and only one (1) answered “no opinion”. These findings were strongly confirmed when the 11 children-participants


disclosed during the FGD that they can share problems with their parents, especially those petty ones. Table 12. Children’s perceived relationship with their parents

Children’s Relationship with their Parents

Yes No No Opinion

(n = 75)

f % f % f %

Warm and Supportive

Choosing the words carefully 64 85.33 5 6.67 6 8.00

Makes the child knows that everyone makes

mistakes and that he/she is still loved even if the

behavior is not loved

67 89.33 6 8.00 2 2.67

Praising the child’s accomplishment whether

big or small 68 90.67 2 2.67 5 6.67

Letting the child do things independently that

will make him or her feel capable and strong 68 90.67 3 4.00 4 5.33

Spend quality time together like spending time

together for a family meal 65 86.67 5 6.67 5 6.67

Putting a note or something special in your kid's

lunchbox 56 74.67 4 5.33 15 20.00

Strives to nurture and encourage, even when

disciplining your kids 71 94.67 2 2.67 2 2.67

Generous with rewards — like: love, hugs, and

compliments 69 92.00 1 1.33 5 6.67

Hostile and Conflicting

Always blames the child for misfortunes in the

family 14 18.67 56 74.67 5 6.67

Criticizes the child for his/her imperfections 9 12.00 59 78.67 7 9.33

Parents quarrel in front of the child/ children 5 6.67 68 90.67 2 2.67

Shouts at each other 7 9.33 63 84.00 5 6.67

Parents utter abusive/foul words to children 2 2.67 70 93.33 3 4.00

Abuses the child physically (hitting, beating,

punching) - - 71 94.67 4 5.33

No open communication between the children

and the parents 3 4.00 71 94.67 1 1.33

Parents do not respect the opinions/suggestions

of the children 3 4.00 70 93.33 2 2.67

Misbehaviors

Permissive

Authoritarian

Authoritative

No Opinion

(n = 75)


Their usual problems are school-related such as school bullies, fighting with classmates, and missing school things. After sharing this to their parents, they feel relieved and braver because they find their parents as allies. According to the children, their parents are willing to go to their school if ever somebody bullied them. Out of the 75 children-respondents, three (3) admitted that their parents neither respect nor listen to their opinions or suggestions, while 70 of them claimed that there parents do. Only two (2) have no opinion on the matter. FGD result revealed that the parents listen to children’s opinion. However, it can be seen in the children’s eyes that they do not exactly understand the difference between an ‘opinion or suggestion’ to ‘just saying something’. The participants’ reactions imply that they are not the type of children who utter bad words or put malice to whatever they say or whatever is said to them. Children’s Perceived Social Adjustment Measured in terms of their Perceived Social Behavior, Perceived Peer Status and Peer Responses, and Perceived Feelings of Social Satistfaction and/or Distress Children’s Perceived Social Adjustment measured in terms of their Perceived Social Behavior When the children were asked if they have exhibited behaviors that contradict the norm of their community, refused to mingle with others or any bad behavior that are against what is expected from them, 60 out of the 75 children-respondents answered negatively, while 12 responded positively. Only three (3) opted not to comment. These data are shown in Table 13. When the children were asked if they showed aggressive and violent behavior, 57 out of 75 negated the query. There were two (2) who confirmed and there were 16 who answered ‘no opinion’. During the FGD, the children disclosed that there were times when they play the role of a bully. They also make fun of other people but for them, such actions were not meant to show as extreme acts of violence. Out of the 75 children-respondents, almost all (73 or 97.33 percent) asserted to have exhibited prosocial behavior. That means, they show behaviors that are in accordance to the norms of their society and to what their family and their community expect from them. During the FGD, the children-participants strongly agreed that they want to belong to a group so they can play together and talk with each other on their way home. They also believed that when they belong to a group, there would be somebody to defend and protect them when bullies will attempt to do something bad to them. Along with their prosocial behavior, most of them (73 or 97.33 percent) declared that they are also helpful and cooperative. Only one claimed that he is neither helpful nor cooperative; and the other one answered “no opinion”. It was found out during FGD that the children were really helpful and industrious. They do household chores such as cleaning the house, watering the plants, cooking rice, washing dishes, and many more. These findings concurred with the FGD result on children’s training to be independent; wherein, their parents allow them or ask them to do chores on their own. This simply implies that parents play a significant role in molding the behavior of their children. Since many of the parent-respondents teach their children to be independent, their children in return developed their sense of responsibility and self confidence. This was reflected on their social behavior of being helpful and cooperative.


These findings are supported by the studies of Patterson, Reid and Dishion (1992); and by Bluestone and Tamis-LeMonda (1999), which revealed that parents who are responsive to their children's needs, who permit children to be active participants in the establishment of family rules, and who engage in inductive reasoning when disciplining their children are more likely to have children who are self-assertive, independent, friendly, and cooperative. Table 13. Children’s perceived social adjustment measured in terms of their perceived social behavior Children’s Perceived Social Adjustment measured in terms of their Perceived Peer Status and Peer Responses Peer status and peer responses are psycho-social terms that generally represent the concept whether the children’s peers like their company and accept them, or their peers do not like their company and maltreat them. Table 14 shows the children’s perceived peer status and peer responses. On peer liking, the biggest number of respondents, 73 or 97.33 percent, believed their peers liked their company and only two (2) or 2.67 percent believed otherwise. These findings were strongly validated by the FGD result. The children-participants alleged that they have no problem getting along with friends. They sometimes fight but this would only last for a few hours. However, they also admitted that they have enemies too -—those who annoy them with nasty jokes. These FGD results, likewise, supports the data on peer disliking where there are eight (8) out of the 75 children who said that they are victimized by their peers. The most common form of victimization is bullying. They all admitted that they had been bullied many times. The bullies in their school would punch or tease them. Some would tie their bags on the chairs while others would scare them for no reason at all. According to the children FGD participants, in order to stop the bullying, the children reported them to their teacher or to their parents so they could meet their teachers and settle the problem. In relation to peer liking, 67 or 89.33 percent said that they were accepted by their peers. However, there were seven (7) children who believed negatively. This result is supported by the data on peer disliking; wherein, there were also seven (7) children who admitted that their peers do not like their company.

Children’s Perceived Social

Behavior

Yes No No Opinion

(n = 75)

f % f % f %

Antisocial

Exhibits antisocial behavior 12 80.00 60 16.00 3 4.00

Children are aggressive and

violent 2 2.67 57 76.00 16 21.33

Prosocial

Exhibits prosocial behavior 73 97.33 - - 2 2.67

Children are helpful and

cooperative 73 97.33 1 1.33 1 1.33


The 11 children FGD participants believed that they are accepted by their peers. They expressed that they can even find new friends in just a short time. Their definition of peers is actually synonymous to playmates. Though there were 63 children-respondents who have not felt being disliked by their peers, there were five (5) who had no idea if their peers like their company. In terms of victimization by peers, there were six (6) children who cannot tell whether they were victimized by their peers and there were 65 who firmly believe that they were never victimized by their peers. Table 14. Children’s perceived social adjustment measured in terms of their perceived peer status and peer responses

Children’s Perceived Peer Status and

Peer Reponses

Yes No No Opinion

(n=75)

f % f % f %

Peer liking

Peers like the company of the

child 73 97.33 2 2.67 - -

Accepted by peers 67 89.33 7 9.33 1 1.33

Peer disliking

Peers do not like the company of

the child 7 9.33 63 84.00 5 6.67

Victimization by peers 8 10.67 65 86.67 2 2.67

Children’s Perceived Social

Behavior

Yes No No Opinion

(n = 75)

f % f % f %

Antisocial

Exhibits antisocial behavior 12 80.00 60 16.00 3 4.00

Children are aggressive and

violent 2 2.67 57 76.00 16 21.33

Prosocial

Exhibits prosocial behavior 73 97.33 - - 2 2.67

Children are helpful and

cooperative 73 97.33 1 1.33 1 1.33


Children’s Perceived Social Adjustment measured in terms of their Perceived Feelings of Social Satisfaction and/or Distress

Table 15 shows the children’s perceived feelings of social satisfaction and/or distress. Out of the 75 children-respondents, there were 73 who felt satisfied with their family; while, 72 were satisfied with their peers. During the FGD with 11 children, everybody claimed that they love their family and will never exchange them for other families. The children also claimed that they are happy with their present peers but they would like still to meet new friends. They said, “it is just easy to find new friends…all you have to do is ask them to play with you”. In terms of being distressed with family and peers, only one (1) child felt lonely, 65 believed that they never felt lonely at all and nine (9) cannot tell whether they felt lonely or not. The children FGD participants said that they are just lonely if they have no playmates, have no baon or if they have enemies. But they believed this only lasts for a short period of time. FGD result further revealed that there are times when the children want to be alone especially if they feel bad after a fight or if the people around them are not their friends. However, the children emphasized that they rarely do this. None of the 75 children-respondents perceived that they are victims of their peers even if there were five (5) who responded that they have no opinion about it. During the FGD, they positively replied that they do not consider themselves as victims of their peers because even if they were bullied, they know how to fight back. In view of the nature of this present investigation, which is a pure basic research, these three unique case studies were conducted in order to give a clear real-life picture of the three distinct parenting styles in congruence with their children’s perceived relationship with parents as well as their social adjustment as observed from three different households. Table 15. Children’s perceived social adjustment measured in terms of their perceived feelings of social satisfaction and/or distress

Children’s Perceived Feelings of Social

Satisfaction and/or Distress

Yes No No Opinion

(n-75)

f % f % f %

Satisfied with Family and Peers

Feels satisfied with the family 73 97.33 1 1.33 1 1.33

Feels satisfied with peers 72 96.00 2 2.67 1 1.33

Distressed with Family and Peers

Feels lonely 1 1.33 65 86.67 9 12.00

Perceived to be a victim of peers - - 70 93.33 5 6.67


This was during the times when they felt hurt by bullies among peers or when they were made fun of by other people. This implies that children merely react to situations around them. In normal and healthy situations, they exhibit socially acceptable behavior; while, in situations where they felt they were victimized, they also learned how to retaliate and defend themselves. The children showed healthy attitude toward their parents and their peers. They were capable of coping with distressful situations at home, in school and in the community. Conclusions The parents were authoritative yet there are instances that they exhibit the behavior of either an autocratic or a permissive parent. Thus, there is no absolute parenting style among these parents, only that the most dominant parenting style among them is being authoritative. With the humane parenting style exhibited by most of the parents, many of the children perceived themselves to have a prosocial, helpful and cooperative behavior. However, a significant number of children thought of themselves to have antisocial behavior. This was during the times when they felt hurt by bullies among peers or when they were made fun of by other people. This implies that children merely react to situations around them. In normal and healthy situations, they exhibit socially acceptable behavior; while, in situations where they felt they were victimized, they also learned how to retaliate and defend themselves. The children have healthy attitude toward their parents and their peers. They are capable of coping with distressful situations at home, in school and in the community.

a) At the top of the paradigm is ‘GOD’

with an arrow pointing through ‘the family’, ‘parents’ and ‘the child’. This represents the idea that a family’s existence may be anchored with God. It can be considered that the parents’ belief in God, spirituality and morals may influence the manner of nurturing their children;


b) The ‘heart’, which serves as the end point of the arrow, represents the love of God to every family. Whether or not the family acknowledges God’s love as the axle of their family life, this can somehow define why parents act and react in a certain manner towards their children;

c) On top of ‘the family’ is the ‘family history’ which is superimposed above the arrow in a luminescent grey shade. This represents the idea that for every parent of a child, that parent is also a product of their own parents. Thus, it can be taken into account that a parent’s way of parenting may be influenced by how they were nurtured or brought up by their parents. This idea can be validated in the three (3) case studies;

d) In view of the larger ‘society’, which embodies the school, church, local community, government, and culture –-are thought to be contributory factors in molding the life and behavior of every human being. This concept may be applied in understanding the why’s and how’s of the observed parenting styles and practices; and

e) The parents’ social group, just like children, is considered to be a dynamic influence on parents’ behavior. Thus, it is most interesting to uncover how friends, peers, and for others, enemies, influenced parenting practices and/or parenting styles.

Other features of the paradigm include the following: a) The arrows pointing out and inward the circles represent the interconnectedness of the

elements within the immediate world and the larger environment of the child; and

b) In relation to the two-way arrows, the broken lines that form the small and big circles mean that nothing in this world exists nor live in isolation. It further represents the interrelatedness among the elements and entities in the basic units of society and the agents of the larger society.

Recommendations While there are no schools on parenting, a good extension program of the Aklan State University and of any academic institution can be designed to help and guide the parents on effective parenting practices/ styles so that they too can guide their children in developing positive and healthy social behavior. Another study on parenting style should be conducted to check the validity of the result of this study. References Angsioco, Elizabeth (2008). National Chairperson Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines (DSWP). Retrieved December 4, 2010 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/36613837/ DSWP-RH-in-the-Philippines-Responsibilities-and-Realities. Bethesda, M.D. (2006). Positive support for families. National Association of School Psychologists. Davis-Kean, P. (2000). How does parents education level influence parenting and child’s achievement. from: psidonline. Isr.umich.edu/ publications/ workshops/ davis – kean.pdf Dowshen, Steven. (2008). http://kidshelath.org/ parent/positive/ family/ nine_steps.html#

http://kidshelath.org/%20parent/positive/%20family/%20nine_steps.html


Medindia Health Network Pvt Ltd, (201). Retrieved December 4, 2010 from http://www.medindia.net/ patients/ calculators/ height-weight-chart Sanchez, Custodiosa A. and Rey A. Sanchez. (2004). Human Sexuality, Family Planning, Responsible Parenthood. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: national Book Store. Zulueta, Francsico M. (2002). General Sociology. (Revised Edition). Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Academic Publishing Corporation. The Good Mother: The history of the normative model of “mover-love.” Sociological Studies of Child Development, 2, 39 – 70.

http://www.medindia.net/

parenting practices, children's relationship with parents and peers

Documents