Review of Related Literature

Passive-Aggressive Relationship between Parents and their children has long since been a common problem in the family.This chapter is organized in a way to address this problems. First, it is needed to understand what parent-child relationship problem is, so it was first focused on. Next, as it is important to know about certain factors that may affect this relationship, so Parenting was discussed. Then, the approach by the parents to their child, starting from his/her infancy was tackled, since it is essential that we understand this relationship since it started, when the child, is still an infant. Lastly, the personality of the child as he/she grows older is discussed, for it is also considered as one of the factors of friction.
Parenting/Parenthood
Chandra Davis(2010), an examiner in Cincinnati Foster Families, stated that Parent-Child Relational Problems is a clinical diagnosis of mental health that can cause severe damage to families. These problems start from birth of the child and continue all through out life. The major root of these differences is the family itself and its common dynamic situations, such as a big age gap between siblings and hands-off parenting during childhood. Davis (2010) further believed that when parents fail to strengthen their bond with their children during early childhood, spending time with them on later years would become difficult. This just shows that some frictions is contributed more to the way of parenting by the parents.
According to Benedek (1970), author of a chapter, Parenthood during the Life Cycle, in a book, Parenthood-It’s Psychology and Psychopathology by Anthony,J, (1970), parenthood as a psycho-biological process that ends only with the death of the parents. Children might appear to outgrow their parents when they become parents themselves. Benedeck (1970) further stated that parenthood is a continuous adaptation to physiologic and psychological changes of the parent parallel to the changes in the child and his/her expanding world.(p. 185) As opposed to this idea, Handel (1970), in his book, Sociological Aspects of Parenthood, parents from a sociological point of view should prepare their children to become adult members of society. Parents are responsible for imparting to their children the concept of socialization. (p.87)
In relation, Kenstenberg (1970), defined parenthood as a process of continuous adaptation. As the child learns to communicate with the people outside the family, parents should also adapt to the changing world of the child. The world is continuously changing and parents need to be aware that attempting to grow up with their children will evoke them less anxiety.
There are classification of parenting that may affect the child’s behavior from his/her infancy. Diana Baumrind’s (as mentioned by Chang , in her book, How to Win your Child’s Heart, 2009) Classification of Parent Theory tells about four classifications of parents. The first one is an authoritative parent, with a high control, demand, acceptance, and responsiveness over their child. Children with this kind of parents are presumably healthy with balanced authority and love. The Authoritarian parents, on the other hand, with high control and demand, but low on acceptance and responsiveness, develop a “one-way communication” with their child. Baumrind (cited by Chang, 2009) believed that children with this kind of environment would be growing up with fear from their family. This classification is very much similar to Steinberg’s (2001) one of the two kinds of parent-child relationship. The demanding parents are too authoritative, making the child develop to be passive, irritable, and aggressive, with less competence and self-confidence.
In accordance with this classification, Burnham (2003) in his book Achieving a Wholesome Personality, some parents continuously pressure their child into accepting excessive competitiveness a way of life, causing the child to possibly grow up seeing everyone as a rival. This would make it difficult for them to make life adjustments and to live harmoniously with others. Sometimes, if parental demands are too great and pressure becomes too intense, some children simply quit trying, thus creating a negative self-image. Burnham (2003) believed that this would hamper the child from developing to his/her full life potential. Unfortunately, some parents thought that pressuring their child is a way of helping their child prepare for the intensely competitive world of adult world. Parents believe that the child will not be able to assume adult responsibilities unless he/she can accept challenges and meet oppositions.
Another classification from Baumbrind’s (cited by Chang, 2009) theory would be the Indulgent parents, with low control and demand, yet high acceptance and responsiveness, which leads to letting the child control the family resulting to too much freedom, chaos and insecurity. This another close relation to Steinberg’s (2001) unresponsive Parent kind, which have minimal control with their child and often gives everything the child the wants.
The last classification by Baumbrind (cited by Chang, 2009), however, called the Neglectful parents have low control, demand, acceptance, and responsiveness on their children. This kind of parents emits fear, desperation, and insecurity in the atmosphere leading to the ruination of their children.
As opposed to earlier discussion, however, Steinberg (2001) emphasizes that a Parent-child relationship is not a one-way street, where only the parents can influence their child. Children attribute to their relationship as much as parents do. Steinberg (2001) exemplifies for instance, when a parent is too authoritative towards the child, the child seeks comfort from another antisocial groups leading to rebellion, and rebellion leads to harsher parenting, which makes the child more aggressive.
Parents’ Interaction with Children
While Baumbrind’s 9 cited by Chang. 2009) theory and Steinberg’s(2001) “kinds of parent-child relationship” centers on the classification of parents as a contributing factor of the child’s personality, communication between parents and children are also essential. Based on Erikson’s Psychoanalytic Theory (as cited in Benedeck’s, book, Parenthood during the Life Cycle, 1970), the communication between parent and child is purely based on primary biologic needs. Communication becomes more complicated paradoxically as it becomes verbal. During the early years of verbal communication, parents respond with a sense of gratification to the spontaneous expression of the child because parents view their child as lucky extension of themselves. But when the child’s individuality emerges, communication becomes less understandable. (p.185)
Some researchers, Laible & Carlo(2004) examined if parenting dimensions of both mothers and fathers could predict the adolescents’ domain of sympathy, self-worth, and social competence. The researchers found out that maternal support and rigid control were the most predictors of adolescent adjustment. Laible & Carlo(2004) emphasizes that predicting sympathy, however, is the exception because when the adolescent received more sympathy from his/her father, maternal support is not related to sympathy and vice-versa.
Grille (2011), on the other hand, believes that being a good parent listener means being interested to what the children have to say and empathize with their feelings.Sometimes, though when parents are stressed out emotionally they stop listening and block their feeling so as not to feel their child’s pain. They feel guilty when they hear their children’s frustrations, so they use “empathy blockers” to save them from pain. But children wants to be heard rather than protected. Grille(2010) defined empathy blockers as the cost of their connection with each other, they create detachment and distance with parent-child relationship. Children starts to stop their communication with their parents and instead turn to others for help, at the same time, they stop listening to their parents, causing the parents to stop being an influence to their lives and diminishes their sense of closeness with each other. Grille(2010) stated that as much as possible parents should at least remind their children their “attachment” with each other.
As there are many ways to treat your child effectively even in early years, a British psychologist, John Bowlby, (as cited in McConell’s article, Getting Attached, 1998) coined the term “Attachment”, which refers to the biological-bonding theory between a mother and her baby. Bowlby (cited by McConell, 1998) together with Mary Ainsworth (cited by McConell, 1998) realized the depth of the child’s attachment and their despair upon short-term separation from their mothers. From McConell’s(1998) point-of-view, attachment parenting may seem like a modern way of parenting to Americans but actually the oldest way of child-rearing and the one that is widespread in Asia and Europe. It also involves the responsiveness and respect of parents to their children’s needs. To deepen the mother-infant relationship, attachment parenting encourages mothers to engage a close contact between baby and mother by giving constant attention to the baby’s physical and emotional needs. Parents may fear that attachment parenting would result to dependent, clingy children but it goes the other way around. McConell (1998) believed that the attached children completely fulfilled their dependency phase, thus grow into an independent, secure adult.
Further studies show that the strength of the attachment of the child towards the parent contributes more to his/her psychological development than the structure of their household. Davis (2010) said that parents should be patient enough to build and form the trust and comfort that the child needs even at birth. Davis (2010) suggested that the best way of parenting is to spend more time with the child and constantly involve themselves with the child’s activity even with the coming of siblings.
Relatively, Maccoby(1980), in his book, Social Development:Psychological Growth and the Parent - Child Relationship, explains how attachment with the “important adults” greatly influences the child’s developing social behavior and other “later-appearing” behaviors (for example, aggression). Their so-called “partnership”is essential for their social interchanges. Though this partnership is unequal one at the first, Maccoby (1980) insists that this can be balanced as the child matures making their demand on each other neutral. However, sometimes, in some families, both parties attempt to force their own demand ignoring the others’ demand by means that can hurt the other side. (p.408) According to Kashtan (2003) parents might find bargaining with their children effective but the child’s compliance may meet his/her parents’ needs but not the child’s long-term needs. Parents sometimes forget that in order to have a good relationship with their child, they should not think only for themselves but also for their child. Kashtan (2003) observes that parents most of the times focus too much on their extrinsic motivations by giving rewards and pay little attention to their intrinsic motivation which is to maintain a good relationship with their child.
In a family relationship, however, attachment is not enough to keep relationship at bay, a family also needs consistency. Consistency, as Burnham (2003) defines it, is very important to develop a smooth-sailing parent-child relationship. The child needs to understand the expectations of his/her parents and in return, parents should also know the limitations of their child. In this process, mutual trust and respect would develop. Burnham (2003) emphasizes that parents need not mold their child’s behavior but instead help their child develop a positive self-image and a sense of dignity. By doing so, the child would live a life of spontaneity and confidence.
Furthermore, Burnham (2003) stated that the way a child perceives others is determined largely by his/her early experiences in the home. If the child grew up without feeling the love and warmth of his/her parents, he/she also tends to see others as cold and impersonal. If the child grew up with inconsistent parents, he/she would also see others as undependable. If the child grew up rejected by his/her parents then he/she will have low expectations from others but sometimes they tend to hope for acceptance from others.
Studies were made to find out how can attachment parenting affect the child in the future. Torquati & Raffaelli (2004) studied the social contexts and daily emotions of young adults who experienced secure and insecure attachment. The researchers elicit extreme positive emotions from the participants who underwent secure attachment while the researchers harnessed extreme negative behavior from those participants who underwent insecure attachment. For Torquati & Raffaelli (2004), attachment style is an organizational construct for emotion.
Furthermore, the relationship between the quality of parent/adolescent attachment and adolescent social aggression was examined by Paternite & Shore (2001). Adolescents completed measures of attachment with mother and with father, self-esteem, social cognition, and aggressive tendencies. Mothers, fathers, and teachers each completed measures of adolescent aggressive and pro-social behavior.Controlling for mother/adolescent and father/adolescent attachment and adolescent self-esteem, adolescent higher social cognition was associated with adolescent lower self-report of aggression. Paternite & Shore (2001) found out that controlling mother/adolescent and father/adolescent attachment and adolescent social cognition, adolescent higher self-esteem was associated with father-reported lower adolescent aggression and father-reported higher adolescent pro-social behavior. Implications for further research are discussed.
This processes of attachment and consistency must start when the child is still an infant for as what Burnham (2003) further stated “Personality development, for better or worse, starts in the cradle”, meaning an infant could distinguish whether he/she is accepted or rejected by his/her parents; the way their parents hold them, speak to them, and to their promptness in attending to their infant’s needs. Even before a child could describe his/her feelings through words, he/she could label the people around him/her as dependable or not and whether it is right to take his/her parents’ values as his/her own. Burnham (2003) believes that as the child develops an understanding on language, the child becomes aware of the beliefs, hopes and fears of the people surrounding him/her. As the saying goes, “little pitchers have big ears”. A child is in the process of developing his/her self-image where in early years in the home being particularly important. Burnham (2003) said that the child’s self-image is largely a reflection of how their parents and others see them. Children, like infants recognize various forms of acceptance and rejection. It depends on how their parents treat them.
As if to second Burnham’s idea, Parnay(2006) stated in her article, Empathic Parenting:Being There for our Children and for Others, that children are great imitators of others’ behavior. If the child is surrounded by people who loves him/her and if he/she is responded with respect and empathy, he/she would also treat the people surrounding him/her the same way. To maintain a close bond with the child, it is essential for parents to focus on being lovingly responsive in their interactions with their child. Parnay (2006) advises that parents just have to stop, “get down to his/her level, look lovingly in his/her eyes, and give him/her their full attention.”
Burnham (2003) identifies two kind of positive regard to a child, the unconditional and the conditional. Unconditional positive regard is experienced when a child always receive a positive attitude from his/her parents regardless of his/her behavior. While conditional positive regard is experienced when a child receives a positive attitude from his/her parents if he/she behaves accordingly to his/her parents’ standards. Children that are treated like this, develop a “marketing personality”. Burnham (2003) stated that children understand themselves as worthy for what they do rather than for what they are.
One causes of a friction between parents and children is the over protectiveness of parents over their children. Overprotection, as Burnham (2003) defines it, leads to the poor development of a child’s self-confidence thus, parenta overprotection may lead to developing a feeling of inferiority. As Landis (1945) said in his book, Adolescence and the Youth, the overprotective parent will always be involved in the child’s life, making decisions for him, and telling him what and what’s not to do. While indifference may lead the child to feel worthless and would never realize their self-worth. Burnham(2003) emphasizes children also needs to be treated fairly. When their parents deal with them in a complete straightforward manner, they will develop a sense of self-respect.
Landis (1945) pointed out, however, that parents are only humans who may or may not know what exactly it is they’re doing. Immature parents often make use of their child’s emotional ties and constantly nag him about the expenses that parents had for him. The child, feeling he/she is not left with any choice will either defy the parent or ruin his own future.
Child PerosnalityDevelopment
Child Personality is greatly affected by their interaction in their family. Since parents are the first teachers, and home is the first school of children. Jerome Kagan Ph.D.(2001) states that some factors that contributes to the child’s personality includes the “early attachment relations, parental socialization, identification with parents, class, and ethnic groups, experiences with other children, ordinal position in the family, physical attractiveness, and school success or failure, along with a number of unpredictable experiences like divorce, early parental death, mental illness in the family, and supporting relationships with relatives or teachers”.
To support this idea, an internet site, faqs.org (undated) believed that the most important influence on personality is identification. A female child of young age, start to identify with her mother. She assumes her mother’s personality, so if the mother is praised, she too feels that is praised, but if a mother is rejected, she feels anxiety or shame. faqs.org (undated)also include the child’s position in a family as a great contributor to personality. They believed that first - borns are more strongly motivated to achieve in school and less aggressive.
According to the study done by Jones & Strowig(1968), on the other hand, the mental ability of the adolescents along with their self-concept of ability and self-expectations were used to predict scholastic achievement. The researchers found out that girls’ self-expectations were not a satisfactory predictor of achievement nor were the boys’ identity development. “Girls tended to be more realistic while boys were more idealistic in terms of self-expectations. Boys were less mature and diversified compared to the girls in terms of identity development”, Jones & Strowig(1968) said.
Children was found out to have undergone a phase of negative punishment by his/her parents. Based on the research done by Readdick & Chapman(2000), more and more children are subjected to “time-out periods”. It is a form of negative punishment in which reinforcing stimuli are removed from an undesirable response, thus decreasing the chances of undesired response to occur. Readdick & Chapman(2000) believed that “time-out periods”, however, don’t always lessen the rate of disobedience of the child, it could also lead the child to misunderstand such negative punishment.

Of Fiction and Reality

Books had once been our core source of entertainment, hobby and knowledge. We were once very dependent on them that even our very own lifestyles were once patterned after them. But our dependence on them is slowly fading.  Why should we even bother to stay up all day and night looking for information in that old dusty library when we could already have what we need in just one click? Viola; copy, paste, print!

At first, I really looked at the novel as a pain in my neck. The first pages were so abstract I just couldn’t seem to get hold of the gist of the story. But as I go on to the next chapter, I was prettily captivated by Montag’s dilemma that I just couldn’t wait for the next pages to pass and humor me. The setting of Ray Bradbury’s novel is somewhat similar yet somewhat different to our current setting.

It’s a bit disturbing to know that the firemen in Montag’s world were the ones who start fire. Ruining houses or establishments is their job and the smell of kerosene is their perfume. In our world, our firemen are the ones who are heroic enough to save properties, and lives even at their very own expense.

The characters in the novel are like robots that always follow what the society dictates them to do. They never did question the system, while in our world, we are capable of expressing our concerns and we are always capable of questioning the system whenever we feel that there is a need for change.

The novels family setting also bothers me. Couples marry not because they want to bare children. They marry because they just feel like marrying; they don’t even do it out of love! In our world, couples that were united under the sanctity of marriage committed their selves to their partners because they couldn’t find someone better to spend their whole life with. They do it to procreate and for their love for each other.

I just couldn’t understand the personality of the characters in the novel, Mildred for instance. She is very complex though her daily activities seem so simple. She is very ecstatic whenever she watches the “family” in their parlor. She is equally ecstatic whenever she is around her friends, but with Montag? She is very bitter to Montag; I just couldn’t imagine what their marriage life looks like. And she is also very dependent to sleeping pills. All of us have a very complex personality but I guess all of us are capable of reducing our set of differences.

The hound! The society they lived in is full of violence. The hound is always there to track those guilty people who still possess books. It is always on the go, ready to track down people and even end their lives. In our society, our policemen are also after those notorious people who are insensitively committing crimes. But despite the fact that they are labeled as criminals they are still respected as humans so as they are still entitled to their human rights. We track down criminals as we put them by following a certain procedure and trying hard not to even harm them. No violence as long as possible.

Books! The people in the novel are not allowed to own even a single book.  If they do so, their properties are mercilessly burned and converted to ashes. Their government just put it as a favor for the population because absence of books means freedom from rational thinking. They took advantage of the weakness of the people; laziness. In our current situation, we are not prohibited to own books. We are even free to build our very own library if we just want to.  We are also free to be rational thinkers. I can’t imagine living in a society wherein books are prohibited. What would happen to people like me who finds pleasure in reading books? Burned to ashes?  I can’t imagine myself abiding to all those things imposed by the society even if I know that there is something going wrong.

Reading Fahrenheit 451 made me aware of the sudden changes that we are now facing. Books are now slowly fading! Gone are those times when students would always rush their ways into the library and borrow some books for their assignments and for further readings. Why? You would surely see them in front of a not so big screen; typing, and clicking. And a minute later you see a smile painted on their face. Satisfaction written all over their faces and then the printer would start producing the output.

Books are taken for granted  nowadays because of the continuous technology modernization. And maybe those events that happened in the fictional world of Montag would soon be our reality.

A Baby No More

As an eleven year old child, I was very small that people mistook me of being a third grader. Of course, it blew off my self-esteem for my folks were treating me like a baby. They would not take me seriously and would sometimes counter my ideas with a cruel “look at who’s talking”.
Now as a bit grown up, looking back to what happened to me five years ago, puzzles me. I am supposedly on top of the class in terms of academics but how come I just earned a little of their respects. Does size really matter?
I remember asking my mother to stop sending and fetching me at school out of depression. I courageously carry my bag full of books up and down the stairs to and fro our second floor classroom. My mother insisted on doing it for me but stubbornly I said no. I wanted to be like my classmates who effortlessly go up and down the stairs with their bulky backpacks.
Yes, I was successful in showing them that I am no longer a baby. But gaining their respects costed me my health. I suffered an asthma attack!
Remembering those times makes me want to laugh out loud. How could I be so pathetic! But what do children do?

Faithful Believer

I am brought up in a Catholic family. Unlike other Catholics, my family is not one of those you could consider as a faithful devotee.
When I enter the gates of high school, I still can’t lead the Holy Rosary Prayer without looking at the prayer guide.
I could still remember the reaction of one of my classmates when I declined on the offer of leading the prayer during our celebration of the Holy Rosary Month. Distaste was written all over her face and she even told me that I am just a Catholic by name but not by heart. Of course I felt offended, and defended myself. That classmate of mine has no right to tell me that. She could and would never understand me. We were brought up by two different families that shared only one common religion.
For me, faith is not measured by how well you memorize a prayer. It is measured by the strength of your faith. It is measured by how long and how strong you could cling on to your belief.

Truth Behind Lies

   As a daughter brought up by a Catholic family, telling a lie is definitely a no-no. But such truth is also a lie! Could someone confront me and tell me that he/she hasn't ever uttered a lie? I don't think so. Everything happens for a reason, in the same way we have one or two when we lie.

   Complex situations attack us at times when we least expect it. Problems here, problems there, making it very hard for us to set our main priority. Due to our pile of problems, sometimes we happen to say things we don't really mean, thus making us a liar.
   When I was in high school, my friends were really very emotional, to the point wherein they tend to overact to things. At times, I really find it very annoying but of course I can't just tell them that. So instead of showing them the annoyed me, I pretended to be very interested at their dilemma. Guilt slowly eat me up. My friends were already bursting out, and there I was solely pretending to care. But what could I do? Tell them I don't care? It would be more harsh for me to do so. 
   All of us have our own fair share of secrets; some we choose to share to those chosen few and some we choose to keep to ourselves. At times when our confidentiality is threatened, there and then we opt to our only choice; lie. It's not really that we Can't tell them the truth but there are always situations wherein we encounter difficulties in relying the whole story and for audience to determine the real score. One couldn't deny the fact that telling the truth is no easy job. Oftentimes, it could even lead to more complications while a single lie could end it all.
   It is our nature as a human being to opt for things that would make our lives easier; that's why at crucial times, we no longer consider what's good and bad as long as we could get out from the problem. I can't say that telling a lie is better than telling the truth because it is still the truth that could and would set us free. Liars exist not because they are pure blood liars; they exist because there's a need to.