tl;dr this book is good for people who are interested in how moms in non-American cultures approach challenges of raising little kids, or if you are similar to the author in being at your wits end with your little kid but learning best from observing a whole integrated approach (cultural practices vs. pick and choose from different popular books).
I think this is one of those books that's not been set up for success by its marketing. I think learning about how other cultures do things is an incredibly fascinating topic, but I also can't help but roll my eyes at yet another parenting book positioning itself as saying non-Americans do it better than Americans. And this is with me agreeing with so many of the proposed alternative strategies too! You never see a more thorough reflection about who benefits in the American system:
* kids and young adults can pursue their own interests if they aren't contributing to collective care for younger children
* adults who don't like kids can be away from kids
* I expect there's a lot more diversity of approaches that American families take, as compared to cultures that strongly emphasize The One Right Way We Do Things
* increasing (at least, I hope) expectation that boys and fathers will also develop their emotional resiliency and caregiving skills (there are a handful of involved dads included, but no older boys helping out the family in the way that the older girls do)
etc.
Everything's a tradeoff but there are still benefits to an individualistic society that a lot of people happily partake in, until they have babies, at which point you realize that we are definitely not meant to raise kids in such an isolated way.
This should have been positioned as like, memoir of a mom who took her toddler on trips to remote areas and improved her parenting skills in an immersion environment--with helpful, realistic takeaways to bring back to the U.S. The summaries of tips are really well done actually, with the reasoning laid out and practical examples given.
It's just that despite the author trying not to fetishize non-(white) American cultures (and walking the walk by giving 35% of her advance to the families and communities she stayed with), I feel like plenty of these ideas are derivable from the right American parenting books just fine. Extensive international travel was not necessary at all. Examples: The Whole Brain Child (directly referenced), How to Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen So Kids Will Talk, Free-Range Parenting, Montessori and RIE books, etc. I'm not happy about it but I definitely judged the author's research skills (via books) a lot until she shared more of her background in growing up in a "viciously angry home" and how isolated she was postpartum. Good on her for being as vulnerable and honest as she was about her approach prior to taking these trips.
============================
A bit of history on American parenting:
* by dividing up powerful families and clans, the church likely set off a chain reaction that shifted the way people think and what they value...the longer a community had been exposed to the Catholic Church's marriage restrictions, the more likely people in that community thought like Westerners do--that is, they valued individualism, nonconformity, and other psychological traits unique to the West.
* the advice books we have today, which are 'swollen descendants of terse little booklets written by eighteenth-century doctors for the use of nurse in the foundling hospitals'
* In the 1960s, parenting experts used guilt, shame, and fear to charge American parents with a new task: stimulate, instruct, and teach children, at every moment. This high-energy, high-talking approach stuck like superglue in American culture. We take the practice for granted.
Western culture is likely the only place where the concept of 'self-esteem' exists--and we are definitely the only culture that requires parents to maintain and cultivate it in their children...the approach requires that parents spend a great deal of time and energy monitoring their children's behavior
* you see this same pattern repeating again and again in key aspects of Western parenting. A practice comes along at the right time in history; it becomes overhyped by the media, psychologists, pediatricians, public health experts, or all four combined; and then its importance is amplified by a product you must buy or a scary self-help book you must read.
* Why do I feel the need to control Rosy's behavior so much? To guide and narrow her path through the world? ...I reach a simple conclusion: I think this is what a good parent does. I believe that the more I say to Rosy--and the more I instruct her--the better parent I am. I believe that all these commands will keep Rosy safe and teach her to be a respectful, kind person.
Ideas I learned:
* acomedido: it's not just doing a chore or task because someone told you to; it's knowing which kind of help is appropriate at a particular moment because you're paying attention
* When you invite the child to help, remember the invitation is always to work together. You're not asking the child to perform the task alone.
Praise...can cause strife among siblings, because praise breeds competition. * Psychologists have found that when young children grow up hearing frequent praise, they learn, from an early age, to compete with siblings for approval and attention from their parents.
* When a child breaks rules, acts demanding, or seems "willful," their parents need to put them to work. The child is saying, "Hey, Mom, I'm underemployed over here and it doesn't feel good."
Ideas I already agreed with:
* Children don't see a difference between adult work and play...Parents don't need to know how to play with kids. If we get kids involved in adult activities, that's play for kids.
* parents and other caretakers don't constantly give instructions, commands, and warnings
* Every time you stop yourself from acting in anger, your child sees a calm way to deal with frustrations. They learn to stay composed when anger arises. So to help a child learn emotional regulation, the number one thing parents can do is learn to regulate their own emotions.
* Instead of characterizing young children as manipulative button-pushers trying to make us angry, what if we think of them as illogical, newbie citizens trying to figure out the proper behavior?
* See tantrums as a chance for the child to practice calming themselves down, and for you to model calmness--not the time for you, as their parent, to prove a point.
* American parents tend to rely on verbal instruction and explanations to change children's behavior. But words are often the least effective way to communicate with children, especially young children.
* they believe that children know best how to learn and grow. Anything a parent says--the vast majority of the time--will only get in the child's way.
* the formula: practice, model, and acknowledge
* multiage playgroups not only give parents extra time to themselves, they also give children a physical and mental boost [like mixed age Montessori classrooms]
* the ideas are described as a "universal parenting approach" which sounds grandiose at first but I think it does generally track, in that brain development in kids is pretty consistent across history and the world; nonetheless, Magda Gerber and Maria Montessori were already way on top of many of these aspects thanks to observing a lot of children.
Phrasings I identified with:
* I didn't know how to be a good mother. Never before had I been so bad at something that I wanted to be good at. Never before had the gap between my actual skill and the skill level I desired been so crushingly wide.
* In Western culture, we tend to think of motherhood as 'an instinct that comes as naturally to women as the sex drive does to men'...But in reality, parenting is a learned skill. (imo this is true, Americans are really into the idea of "listening to your gut")
* Here in the U.S., we overestimate children's emotional abilities. We expect children at a very young age--even eighteen months to two years old--to have well-developed executive function and to understand sophisticated emotional concepts such as respect, generosity, and self-control. And when they don't demonstrate these qualities, we become frustrated and lose patience with them. Many Inuit parents view children from an opposing perspective. They *expect* children to have poor executive function and poor emotional control, and they see it as their job to teach children these skills. Basically, when a child doesn't listen or behave, the reason is simple: The child hasn't learned that particular skill yet. And perhaps, they aren't quite ready to learn it. So there's no reason for a parent to get upset or angry.
Ideas I disagree with:
* The questions aren't accusatory or denigrating [ex: "Who made this mess?" "Who's ignoring me?" "What am I, a trash can?". They aren't meant to make a child defensive. [can be effective if playful, but generally seem very easy to be accusatory/passive-aggressive and escalate a frustration]
* parents can teach children which emotions aren't valued in the home by not responding to those emotions. [this is done by ignoring/looking past the child]
* She accepted her discomfort. She learned to control her emotions, and she did it all by herself. [I'm skeptical, I think it's more learning to withhold expression of feelings]
* the author does a thing of putting helicopter parenting and free-range parenting at opposite ends of a spectrum about controlling kids, which is a misunderstanding