Hence, parents should be a child’s disciplinarian as it carves essential values and etiquettes in their child. With parents being children’s disciplinarian, children will value what parents tell them because they hold more meaning with an added demonstration as to why something is good or deplorable, along with a simplistic and logical explication as to why they were erroneous. For example, if a child is not sitting up straight, with a bad body posture, parents step in and tell their child to sit properly, else their phones will be confiscated, but if they sit properly for 2 hours, they will be rewarded. This bargaining technique used by parents in disciplining can lead to a positive feedback. As the child gets used to having a proper body posture, they will carve it into their personal habits and habits are hard to change. Hence, through discipline, essential values and etiquettes can be stained in a child’s life, which will benefit them in the …show more content…
But what they claim is not the best for a child’s development. Being a child’s best friend, parents will most likely understand their child better and know their feelings ,as well as their interest. Although this will definitely form fond bonds between parent and child, but it results in a child’s reliance towards their parents. If a child is stressed over work, they expect their parents to help them resolve their problems. If a child is short of cash due to gambling, they also expect their parents to fund them in their interest. This causes a negative feedback, as parent’s compromise will lead to their child’s eventual addiction and downfall. Hence, I do not think that parents should be a child’s best friend due to the fact that it will not only not benefit their child, but it also causes harm to them as well, for instance having to deal with their over reliant child and trying to solve their child’s