At work I call this "letting the fires burn."

This works well with children too!

And probably beneficial for them. Their natural instinct is to ask for help. Many times I can't get there immediately and so they ultimately figure it out themselves. Once I figured out this "trick" I started doing it more often. I suppose most parents figure this out along the way.

My 9-year-old is playing Tears of the Kingdom right now and I've noticed he's getting better and better because I'm not jumping in to help him.

▲

darknavi a day ago | parent | next [-]

It's definitely a balancing act.

I remember part of my new manager training at my company started with "Be a lazy manager". The idea being that you should help your directs build muscles to try to help them self first, and then ask for help.

▲

veunes 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The tricky part (both as a parent and a manager) is knowing which fires are safe to burn and which ones will burn the house down

▲

reactordev 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Be prepared for the “You were never there for me” blame later in their lives. I had the same approach with mine (they were smart kids!) and when they grew up they blamed me for not being there and helping them more. Ce la vie.

▲

veunes 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's hard to imagine a parenting strategy with no tradeoffs

▲

frogperson 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is no way to win with kids, its just part of being a parent. Had you helped, you would have been acused of not giving them space to explore.

	▲	reactordev 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Turns out the “correct” answer was to be there to help them cognitively figure it out by helping them ask the right questions. At least that’s what the therapist said. I guess I don’t mind as they both turned out fine. Way better than the trauma I had so I would say it’s a win.

▲

lo_zamoyski 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What I imagine here is following a middle path between being too eager to help their kids to the point of doing everything for them, and being unhelpful and absent. Finding that middle path requires prudence and proper engagement, because you have to know when to let the bicycle go and when to hold on.

Helicopter parents tend to fall into the former category, because they stifle their child's maturation and competence by depriving them of the challenges that build confidence and agency. It encourages dependence and self-centeredness. It's criminal and produces a class of people that will pay the salaries of therapists for decades.

The opposite extreme is parental absenteeism which is like a football match without a referee. Someone always influences children - their habits, their worldview, their attitudes - and if a parent isn't doing that, then someone else is, and perhaps not someone who should. Absenteeism is thus a dereliction of parental duty, as parents serve as examples from whom children learn, even more by how they behave and live than by what they say. We are social animals, and a healthy family life produces healthy people.

And by following this middle path well, you also teach your children to be able to be appropriately helpful to others themselves and in this manner, able to discern when help is appropriate and when it is not. Practical reason is central to the ethical life.