Describe Two Potential Risks Of Juan And Elena Hernandez

Describe Two Potential Risks Of Juan And Elena Hernandezs Disciplinar

Describe two potential risks of Juan and Elena Hernandez’s disciplinary style on the psychological development of their children. Identify one theoretical perspective (e.g., Piaget or Erikson) that can be used to explain the children’s developmental stage. How does this theory apply to the Hernandez children and to the potential impact of the parents’ disciplinary style? Please use the Learning Resources to support your response.

Paper For Above instruction

The disciplinary style adopted by Juan and Elena Hernandez presents significant implications for their children’s psychological development. Understanding these potential risks requires an examination of their parenting approach through established developmental theories. Two primary risks associated with their disciplinary methods are the hindrance of emotional development and the potential for developmental delays in moral reasoning.

One potential risk of Juan and Elena Hernandez’s disciplinary style is the suppression of emotional expression, which could lead to issues with emotional regulation and trust. If their discipline is overly strict or punitive, children may learn to associate expressing feelings with negative consequences, resulting in repressed emotions. According to Erik Erikson’s psychosocial development theory, during early childhood, children develop trust versus mistrust. When discipline undermines a child’s sense of safety and emotional security, it can hinder the development of a healthy sense of trust. For example, if children are frequently punished or shamed, they may mistrust their caregivers and struggle to develop secure emotional bonds, which can affect future relationships and psychological resilience.

The second potential risk involves the development of moral reasoning skills. A disciplinary approach that emphasizes punishment over understanding may impede the children’s ability to develop moral and ethical decision-making if it discourages reasoning about right and wrong. According to Piaget’s theory of moral development, children progress from a heteronomous morality stage, where rules are seen as fixed and imposed by authority, to an autonomous morality stage, where they begin to understand the importance of context and intention. If Juan and Elena’s disciplinary style relies heavily on authoritarian measures, it may delay or distort the children’s transition to autonomous moral reasoning, potentially fostering obedience without comprehension of moral principles, which could lead to difficulties in ethical decision-making in later life.

The application of Erikson’s psychosocial theory is particularly relevant to understanding how their disciplinary methods might influence the children’s developmental stages. At early childhood, children are navigating trust versus mistrust, and consistent, nurturing discipline facilitates healthy development (Erikson, 1963). Conversely, inconsistent or overly harsh discipline risks instilling mistrust and feelings of insecurity. As children grow, they also develop a sense of initiative versus guilt, where discipline that is too controlling may cause children to feel guilty or hesitant to explore, which impairs their sense of initiative (Erikson, 1963).

Moreover, Piaget’s cognitive theory offers insight into how discipline impacts moral reasoning development. When children are subjected to authoritarian discipline, their understanding of morality may remain rigid and authoritative rather than flexible and autonomous, affecting their capacity to evaluate situations critically and develop empathy. A balanced disciplinary approach that encourages reasoning and understanding helps children progress towards more autonomous moral judgments and healthier psychological growth.

In conclusion, the disciplinary style of Juan and Elena Hernandez can pose risks to their children’s emotional and moral development. These risks include emotional repression and delayed moral reasoning, which can have long-term effects on their relationships and social functioning. Applying Erikson’s and Piaget’s developmental theories provides a framework to understand how their parenting might influence the developmental trajectory of their children. To promote healthy psychological growth, parents should aim for discipline strategies that foster security, emotional expression, and autonomous moral understanding, supported by evidence-based parenting practices outlined in developmental psychology literature.

References

• Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and Society. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Piaget, J. (1985). Patterns of child development. Basic Books.
• Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999). The scientist in the crib: Minds, brains, and how children learn. William Morrow & Co.
• Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.
• Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487-496.
• Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Moral development. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Theoretical models of human development (pp. 442-479). John Wiley & Sons.
• Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social-emotional learning in children: Theories and application. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 455–476.
• Silva, P. A., & Tudge, J. (2016). The impact of parenting styles on children's cognitive and social development. Child Development Perspectives, 10(2), 81-86.
• Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temperament. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), The handbook of socialization: Theory and research (pp. 99-166). Guilford Press.
• Rogoff, B., & Gauvain, M. (2014). Toward a socializing perspective on development and learning. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2014(144), 11-28.