In the current society, children are raised in a technological world. Having a mobile phone and means to access internet has become a ‘basic ‘need for most children especially in adolescent years. Parents are sometimes out of options and compelled to buy and allow access to mobile devices and internet. Christian Lange once described technology as a risky master and a crucial servant. The 21st century is quite difficult to avoid the impact of technology. Different people strive to acquire the latest technology either for prestige or as a necessity (Tur-Porcar, 2017). However, the society, experiences both positive and negative impacts of technology. As a basic unit of the society, the family experiences these effects first hand (Law et al., 2010). Nearly every person has a phone in the family. People have a tendency to overuse mobile phone devices as it substitutes the need for physical communication. A case scenario is the low likelihood for parents to visit their children in college every weekend while they can call or video call. The virtual connection created between the parent and the child makes parents feel close and eliminate the need for physical contact. The argument in this paper is that the increasing use of mobile devices and internet has led to a decrease in the amount of influence parents have in the lives of their children.
The Busyness Life Style
According to Saxbe et al. (2011), Americans have more free time compared to the mid-1960s. Studies have recorded that families with dual income spend most of their time doing leisure activities at home. Such activities include household chores and nursing children. The article written by Graesch (2009) articulates that most families with a dual income have adopted a ‘busyness’ perspective and fee that they live hectic life. As such, these families customize their daily schedules to fit the lifestyle and in return live in a time-deficit world. Due to being disconnected from actual time and working around schedules of perceived time, family dynamics have been adjusted. The family system, especially the parents adjust their children’s schedules to fit their busyness. The article by Graesch (2009) expresses that the changes have a direct implication on the declining parenthood experienced in three aspects. First, parents feel obligated to fulfil too much activities, these activities follow a sequence of activities for which they should be fulfilled and lastly, the experience of a particular activity until it is interrupted. The aspect influences the view by parents indicating which activities are important for the family. Ideally, research indicates that parents are more inclined to invest leisure goods like internet and mobile phones even though the investment is not a classified among cultural values of a family set up.
Children Schedules Adapt the Busyness Lifestyle
According to Graesch (2009), most parents have adapted a system that structure the lives of their children into the busyness schedule. Children are signed up for new and sophisticated level of activities including full-time studying, tuitions, sports activities and talent development courses. The excessive scholastic and extracurricular activities lead to a self-created circle, the parent has to pay for the child’s schedules, coordinate the child’s commute to different programs, and monitor the child. Also, parents are obligated to communicate with the child and other stakeholders and ensure that they maintain the parental networks with children. In an attempt to meet all these obligations, parents opt to buy mobile phones as a communication gadget but eventually the gadget introduce the child to a new and different world altogether (Pop " Rusu, 2016. The responsibility of parenting declines further.
According to Koehn and Kerns (2017), it is important to consider the age at which a parent allows children to have a mobile phone or to access to the internet. Further the purpose of having access to the internet has significant impact on the role that parents play in their responsibility to raise children. In their article, Koehn and Kerns (2017) argue that the model used to condition the child on the purpose of the phone or internet impacts parenting. Unfortunately, according to Law et al. (2010), most parents have a tendency to provide a mobile phone to a child for companionship. In such a case, the impact on the child exemplifies a decline in parenting. Children learn to rely on their phones for companionship, care and spending time.
Parents and Parenting Guide
The advancement in technology has created multiple platforms on the internet where parents can access parenting guide on how to help children develop morals and character. However, a research on trends of parenting published on google trends shows a steady decrease in the number of people who consulted parenting materials between 2004 and 2016 (Broege et al., 2007).
On the other hand, children are more acquainted with technological devices. Since the society structure is generally isolative, children are more likely to consult online platforms for guidance and advice (Law et al., 2010). The internet acquires a significant role in guiding a child’s morals, values and character which originally belongs to the parents.
The work of Deater-Deckard (2004) argues that most parents have migrated into the digital era while children are born in the era. Most parents struggle with gaining proficiency with the use of modern technology. A decline in parenting is noticeable in the manner that parents handle issues of technology. To begin with, because children are more proficient with technology compared to their parents, children are not likely to perceive the parent as a guide or teacher in technology. As such, children (and sometimes parents) assume that parents do not have authority in this area (Tur-Porcar, 2017). Further, parents might be unwilling to assert parental authority on the use or technology since they look forward to learn more from their children. Children are more inclined to disapprove the authority of their parents given the disruption of power dynamics in the family.
Physically and Psychologically Distance in the Same House
Virtual connection substitutes real physical or emotional concerns in the family (Koehn " Kerns, 2017). In most cases, family members barely see one another. Although in the same house, children create a new social life with their friends and in social media. Since other members of the group are likely to be undergoing periods of isolation at home, these children feel at peace. Children feel free to share personal struggles on social media because it is perceived to be safe, the environment is non-judgmental and harmless from the child’s approach.
In the American middle-class set-up, families do not meet often. A child’s presence at dinner is sufficient to indicate that the child is fine which might not be the case. According to Ishii (2015), children are inclined to enjoy this gap as they feel free to form social circles on online platforms. They also enjoy the independence because they are confident that are parents not in a position to control the new relationships.
Ideally, parents loose physical and emotional touch with the children. Even when the family is in the same room, everyone might prefer to connect with people online while ignoring the people in the same room. The virtual connection draw children further away from their parents. As such parents do not find a chance to impact morals, value and skills development in their children.
The article by (Self-Brown, n.d.), argues that technology is neutral and personal discipline and information that parents have is what determines the role that technology plays in the family. The article by (Hendricks, 2015) highlights that some parents over embrace technology while struggle to alienate their children completely. Such parents are afraid technology and since they not have skills to manage it, they choose avoidance. However, both approaches impact parenting negatively. When children are given an opportunity to over-embrace mobile devices and internet, they grow apart with their parents because they find technology intriguing, unrestricted and addictive. In the article by Ahrons (2005) parents who alienate their children from technology find it challenging to maintain meaningful relationship with the children. Children feel that parents are unfair and seek other means to meet their need to use technology. Taking such an option expose the child to the uncontrolled world of technology that the parents were trying to protect them from in the first through alienation.
Conclusion
The argument in this paper is that the increased use of mobile devices and internet has led to a decrease parenting. An assumption that a busy life is a fulfilling life that produces confident and “well rounded” children who are equipped for adulthood. People have the perception that living a busy life equals a good life. The busy schedules and the distractions induced by mobile devices and internet results in a reduction of available time for parents to spend quality time with their children teaching morals, values, and character. Parents conditions children to adapt a perceived busyness by making schedules on how the children should spend their time. The paper also addressed the decline in parenting impact despite having available advice in the internet. Logically because children spend more time on their mobile phones instead of spending it with parents. The last aspect reveals that people live in the same house but are physically and psychologically apart often meeting and interacting during meals.
References
Broege, N., Owens, A., Graesch, A. P., Arnold, J. E., " Schneider, B. (2007). Calibrating measures of family activities between large- and small-scale data sets. Sociological Methodology, 37(1), 119-149. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9531.2007.00194.x
Deater-Deckard, K. (2004). Parenting behavior and the parent-child relationship. Parenting Stress, 74-94. doi:10.12987/yale/9780300103939.003.0004
Graesch, A. P. (2009). Material indicators of family busyness. Social Indicators Research, 93(1), 85-94. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1007/s11205-008- 9408-3
Hendricks, C. (2015). Children and technology: Ten ways to help parents navigate technology with children. Children and Libraries, 13(2), 36. doi:10.5860/cal.13n2.36
Ishii, K. (2015). Mobile internet use in Japan: Text-message dependency and Social relationships. In Z. Yan (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mobile phone behavior
(pp. 61-70). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-8239-9.ch005
Koehn, A. J., " Kerns, K. A. (2017). Parent–child attachment: meta-analysis of associations with parenting behaviors in middle childhood and adolescence. Attachment " Human Development, 1-28. doi:10.1080/14616734.2017.1408131
Law, D. M., Shapka, J. D., " Olson, B. F. (2010). Parenting around internet use measure. PsycTESTS Dataset. doi:10.1037/t12968-000
Pop, M. V., " Rusu, A. S. (2016). Romanian parents’ use of the Internet: Optimizing parenting skills as sexual educators. doi:10.15405/epsbs.2016.12.61
Saxbe, D. E., Repetti, R. L., " Graesch, A. P. (2011). Time spent in housework and leisure: Links with parents' physiological recovery from work. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(2), 271-281. doi:10.1037/a0023048
Self-Brown, S. R. (n.d.). What is the role of technology in serving parents at-risk? Innovative technology-based approaches to advance parent reach, parent engagement, and program implementation in evidence-based parenting programs. PsycEXTRA Dataset.
Tur-Porcar, A. (2017). Parenting styles and Internet use. Psychology " Marketing, 34(11), 1016-1022. doi:10.1002/mar.21040
Ahrons ,C. (2005). We're Still Family: What Grown Children Have to Say About Their Parents' Divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 784-786. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00172.x
