It was with these thoughts bouncing around in my head that I came across the VIA classification of strengths. It was published in 2004 as an attempt to create a common vocabulary regarding character strengths.  While I had seen it before, I hadn’t viewed the list of strengths from the perspective of a parent and reading them this time, they seemed to articulate many of the things I wanted for my son.

The classification was developed after an extensive review of the facets of good character.  The 24 strengths identified aimed to be distinct from one another, be applicable across culture, be valued by others and satisfying for the individual themselves to use.  They were organized around six core virtues – wisdom and knowledge, courage, humanity, justice, temperance and transcendence.  While the original purpose of the classification was to develop a conceptual framework to think about youth development, the strengths have been used as a structure for research into such areas as happiness, well-being and achievement.

I think the classification offers parents a comprehensive but well thought through way of thinking what they want for their children.  It offers parents a way of articulating which of these factors is important to them and whether they believe they are enabling their children to develop in these areas.

I also think the research which has been on the back of this structure is fascinating.  For instance, it is the strengths of the ‘heart’ – zest, hope, gratitude and love that have been consistently found to be associated with life satisfaction. If parents want their children to do well in the military, the number one predictor of performance of West Point military graduates is love. And actually if parents are concerned about their children performing at school, then the factors most often associated with achievement are perseverance, hope, gratitude and fairness rather than the strengths concerning wisdom and knowledge.

A definition of each strength is listed below and  more information about them can be found at http://uat.viacharacter.org

The VIA Classification of Character Strengths

Wisdom and Knowledge – Cognitive strengths that entail the acquisition and use of knowledge

Creativity [originality, ingenuity]: Thinking of novel and productive ways to conceptualize and do things; includes artistic achievement but is not limited to it

Curiosity [interest, novelty-seeking, openness to experience]: Taking an interest in ongoing experience for its own sake; finding subjects and topics fascinating; exploring and discovering

Judgment & Open-Mindedness [critical thinking]: Thinking things through and examining them from all sides; not jumping to conclusions; being able to change one’s mind in light of evidence; weighing all evidence fairly

Love of Learning: Mastering new skills, topics, and bodies of knowledge, whether on one’s own or formally; obviously related to the strength of curiosity but goes beyond it to describe the tendency to add systematically to what one knows

Perspective [wisdom]: Being able to provide wise counsel to others; having ways of looking at the world that make sense to oneself and to other people

Courage – Emotional strengths that involve the exercise of will to accomplish goals in the face of opposition, external or internal

Bravery [valor]: Not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain; speaking up for what is right even if there is opposition; acting on convictions even if unpopular; includes physical bravery but is not limited to it

Perseverance [persistence, industriousness]: Finishing what one starts; persisting in a course of action in spite of obstacles; “getting it out the door”; taking pleasure in completing tasks

Honesty [authenticity, integrity]: Speaking the truth but more broadly presenting oneself in a genuine way and acting in a sincere way; being without pretense; taking responsibility for one’s feelings and actions

Zest [vitality, enthusiasm, vigor, energy]: Approaching life with excitement and energy; not doing things halfway or halfheartedly; living life as an adventure; feeling alive and activated

Humanity - Interpersonal strengths that involve tending and befriending others

Capacity to Love and Be Loved: Valuing close relations with others, in particular those in which sharing and caring are reciprocated; being close to people

Kindness [generosity, nurturance, care, compassion, altruistic love, "niceness"]: Doing favors and good deeds for others; helping them; taking care of them

Social Intelligence [emotional intelligence, personal intelligence]: Being aware of the motives and feelings of other people and oneself; knowing what to do to fit into different social situations; knowing what makes other people tick

Justice - Civic strengths that underlie healthy community life

Teamwork [citizenship, social responsibility, loyalty]: Working well as a member of a group or team; being loyal to the group; doing one’s share

Fairness: Treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice; not letting personal feelings bias decisions about others; giving everyone a fair chance.

Leadership: Encouraging a group of which one is a member to get things done, and at the same time maintaining good relations within the group; organizing group activities and seeing that they happen.

Temperance – Strengths that protect against excess

Forgiveness & Mercy: Forgiving those who have done wrong; accepting the shortcomings of others; giving people a second chance; not being vengeful

Modesty & Humility: Letting one’s accomplishments speak for themselves; not regarding oneself as more special than one is

Prudence: Being careful about one’s choices; not taking undue risks; not saying or doing things that might later be regretted

Self-Regulation [self-control]: Regulating what one feels and does; being disciplined; controlling one’s appetites and emotions

Transcendence - Strengths that forge connections to the larger universe and provide meaning

Appreciation of Beauty and Excellence [awe, wonder, elevation]: Noticing and appreciating beauty, excellence, and/or skilled performance in various domains of life, from nature to art to mathematics to science to everyday experience

Gratitude: Being aware of and thankful for the good things that happen; taking time to express thanks

Hope [optimism, future-mindedness, future orientation]: Expecting the best in the future and working to achieve it; believing that a good future is something that can be brought about

Humor [playfulness]: Liking to laugh and tease; bringing smiles to other people; seeing the light side; making (not necessarily telling) jokes

Religiousness & Spirituality [faith, purpose]: Having coherent beliefs about the higher purpose and meaning of the universe; knowing where one fits within the larger scheme; having beliefs about the meaning of life that shape conduct and provide comfort

Studies of perfectionists would suggest that there are both ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’ perfectionists.  Most of the focus in both the media and in psychology is on unhealthy perfectionism and it is certainly associated with a range of psychological issues – depression, eating disorders and obsessive compulsive disorder.  But what is less well known is people who exhibit healthy perfectionism tend to have higher self esteem, be happier and be more satisfied with life, They are more social and feel they have more support from others.  They also tend to have more active ways of coping so if problems do occur, they feel a greater sense of control. Importantly, healthy perfectionists experience lower levels of depression and anxiety then either unhealthy perfectionists or people who are not perfectionistic. In other words, striving towards high standards can actually be positive for people.

So what are the differences between healthy and unhealthy perfectionists? Healthy perfectionists have high personal standards, they try to do the best they can and they strive for excellence. The critical element is the standards are set by themselves. In contrast, unhealthy perfectionists tend to worry about making mistakes, experience self doubt and are concerned with living up to the expectations of others. The standards they aspire to are set by others and they worry about others judging them negatively.

What does this mean for parents?  The obvious conclusion is parents would benefit from starting to define their own standards and worry less what other people think about them.  They should continue to strive to be better but not worry about their mistakes.  Great parents are not perfect but they are committed to trying to be the best mothers and fathers they can be.

While the hardest element of this may seem to be avoiding comparisons, I think the most difficult part for parents is setting their own standards.  There is no definitive blueprint telling people how to raise their offspring, mothers and fathers have to work this out for themselves.  My guess is people tend to define their model of parenting fairly unconsciously and most people form their view of how they should bring up their children by observing their friends and family.  This of course only encourages people to compare themselves to others.  Perhaps the best advice is for parents is to consciously define how they want to bring up their children and then have the confidence to stick to this.  And parents would benefit from forgiving themselves when they don’t get it right and avoid getting caught up in a web of self doubt.

Stoeber J  Otto K   Positive Conceptions of Perfectionism: Approaches, Evidence, Challenges Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2006 10: 295

Using data from an ongoing study of young adults, the research team analysed the transcripts of 24 in-depth interviews with mothers and fathers to understand how children positively impacted their lives.  The participants in the study were parents in their twenties who were from working class backgrounds.

The researchers found that having a child often resulted in five changes in parents.  Firstly, the arrival of a child allowed parents to develop new dreams or aspirations.  In some instances, the parents described becoming a mother or father as offering them the chance to have dreams for themselves for the first time.  Driven by a strong desire to give their children a better life than their own, they had hopes for their children often centred around education and giving their child more opportunities.

Secondly, many of the participants saw parenting as offering them a second chance.  It was an opportunity to start over and for them to become a better person. Children almost had a redemptive effect, with mothers feeling a greater sense of responsibility to take care of themselves and in some instances to insist that their partners shaped up too.

Having a child also offered parents a chance to break destructive family patterns.  For many parents, their greatest fear was following in the footsteps of their own parents.  Determined not to repeat the behaviour of their parents, they were driven by a strong sense of how they did not want to bring up their own children.

Parenthood offered many the chance to deepen and widen connections.  It enabled them to heal broken relationships with their parents and to give more to others.  It allowed them to tap into emotional reserves that they were not always aware existed.  This seemed to apply particularly to the fathers in the study, who expressed a desire for their role to go well beyond that of financial provider.  Fathers talked of a wish to be involved in the active care of the child and to develop an emotional connection with their children that they rarely had the opportunity to develop with other people.

Finally, parents talked of erecting barriers between themselves and people who might be harmful influences.  The parents’ strong desire to protect their children led them to severing links with people involved in illegal activity or who might not act as the type of role model they desired for their children.  They drew strength from their role as a mother or father to distance themselves from people who may cause their children or themselves harm.

The research focussed on young parents from working class backgrounds, but I think the research has potential interest for more parents.  The arrival of a child seemed to give parents power to make quite considerable changes within their lives.  The examples given in the article included giving up illegal drugs and rebuilding long fractured relationships with parents.  The changes could have been seen as daunting and yet the participants managed to make them for the sake of their children.

The research also highlights some questions for parents to ask themselves as to how they might enhance their own lives.  Namely, what do we want for our children and what lessons do we want to learn from our parent’s mistakes?  How do we want to change our lives to make it safer or better for our children and what relationships do we want to heal?  What kind of emotional connection do we want with our children and how can we deepen our relationships with others or extend them further?

Silva J M,  Pugh A J.  Beyond the depleting model of parenting:  narratives of childrearing and change.  Sociological Inquiry, Vol 80, No. 4, November 2010, 605-627

Gail Heyman, Diem H Luu and Kang Lee performed two studies to increase our understanding of this area.  They firstly asked 127 undergraduate students in the US to review nine different scenarios where a mother lies to her six year old child.  Some of the lies included in the scenarios were designed to encourage children to behave in a certain way.  For instance, one of the lies used was ‘If you do not eat your food, children will die in Africa.’  Some were designed to encourage the child to feel a particular way – one scenario was a favourite uncle dies and the child is told he has become a star to watch over the child.  The researchers deliberately avoided using make believe scenarios where both parent and child knew that they were engaged in fiction or on characters such as Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy.  Participants in the study were asked how strongly their parents promoted the value of honesty to them and the severity of negative consequences if they lied.  Finally, participants were given the chance to describe what their parents had taught them about lying and to include example of lies their parents had told them.

What did they find?  88% of the students could think of at least one instance where their parents had lied to them.  While some of the lies were associated with protected children’s feelings, others were designed to change a child’s behaviour.  There was no evidence to suggest that parents who strongly emphasized the importance of honesty lied less to their children.  And parents who were more punitive in their response to their children lying were actually more likely to lie to their children.

In a second study, the research team asked 127 parents the same questions as the students in the first study.  The only difference was they were asked to comment on their own parenting practices. In this study, 78% reported lying to their children at some point and 74% reported teaching their children that lying was unacceptable.  Again, there was no evidence that the parents who most strongly believed in the importance of honesty were less likely to lie.

It’s easy to critique the research on the basis that it relies on people’s reports of their own and their parent’s lying.  However as lying is not a desirable behaviour, it is likely that if anything people under-reported their lying. Additionally, the two studies found broadly consistent results suggesting they may be accurate.

As the researchers conclude “These results are not consistent with the possibility that parents strongly and consistently avoid lying to their children.”  I would suggest that this is putting it mildly.  The evidence indicates that the majority of parents lie to their children and some are guilty of gross hypocrisy.

So what might be going on? Gail Heyman and her colleagues have three suggestions as to what might be drive mothers and fathers to use the practice of parenting by lying.   First, other goals maybe more important to the parents than telling the truth.  For instance, protecting the child’s feelings may be a higher priority than honesty.  Secondly, they may find it difficult to achieve their goals in any other way.  In other words, lying may be a method of desperation when other approaches have not worked.  Thirdly, parents may not realize that when they lie to their children they are behaving inconsistently with their goal of promoting honesty.  Finally, parents may assume that lying is only a problem if the child finds out.

Whatever the reason, it does appear parents are being inconsistent in their practice and their words.   But does this matter?  What are the consequences of lying to children?   Recent research reported here would suggest that young children are less likely to learn from unreliable sources.  Lying may damage the credibility of parents and has the potential to impact the trust that the child has in their parents.

Parents may therefore want to think twice before they lie.  They might also want to consider if they should be quite so categorical in their espousal of honesty.  A possible route forward is for parents to discuss with their children when it is acceptable to lie and in what circumstances.  Earlier research has suggested that children benefit from the discussion of ethical issues at home and focussing some attention on this area may be advantageous.

Heyman G D, Luu D H, Lee K.  Parenting by lying.  Journal of moral education 2009  38(3) 353-369

170 brave parents gave permission for their child’s lunch to be ‘audited’ on up to five occasions over a month.  The children were all in their first three years of school and were living in Melbourne, Australia.

It turns out that children typically have one sandwich, one piece of fruit and one and a half  ’extras’ each day. Extras were defined as items with low nutritional value but high in salt or sugar. Girls tended to have significantly more vegetables in the lunch boxes than boys, and the older children’s lunches contained more fruit, vegetables and bread than the younger ones. The amount of bread used in general went down as the week progressed and the number of ‘extras’ went up from Monday to Wednesday.

So what does this tell us? The researchers conclude that the lunch boxes contained a larger number of extras than was totally desirable. I think I might conclude that few people have time to create amazing lunches for their children and most people are  putting broadly the same things in their boxes.  Young children are picky eaters and what parents can put in their lunch boxes is sometimes limited.  And parents are possibly running out of fresh bread as the week goes on and substituting bread with a few convenience snacks.

Miles CL, Matthews J, Brennan L, Mitchell S.  Changes in the content of children’s school lunches across the school week.  Health Promotion Journal of Australia (2010)  December; 21(3):196-201

Intellectual development

Parenting practices and styles appear to have a significant impact. Warm parenting and positive, harmonious parent-child interactions were associated with all measures of the child’s intellectual development at ages 3 and 5.  Discipline obtained through compliance to rules was also positively associated with development.

The level of both parent’s investment in their child’s development seemed key.  Reading to children by both the mother and the father was found to be associated with better development as was the frequency with which parents taught their children the alphabet and numbers. Both parents’ own level of education attainment was also strongly associated with their intellectual development.

The impact of grandparents was felt in a couple of ways.  Grandparent care was associated with vocabulary development suggesting that grandparents may talk and interact with children more than other forms of care. Their impact was also felt indirectly through their social economic status.  Higher levels were associated with better development, particularly in lone parent families.

Finally, breastfeeding was positively associated with most measures.

And what were the risk factors? Smoking during pregnancy was linked to poorer results for some tests at 3 and 5. A laissez-faire attitude to parenting was a risk for developmental delays when the child was 9 months. TV viewing had mixed results.  Small doses of TV watching were associated with improved language development suggesting it may help children broaden their vocabulary.  Large amounts of TV viewing were linked to worse scores on a picture similarity exercise when the children were 5 suggesting it may not help develop children’s reasoning ability.

Behavioural development

The factors associated with behavioural development were in many situations similar to those affecting the child’s intellectual development.  Warm parenting and the use of discipline enforced through rules were associated with fewer behavioural problems.   Children where both parents reported they had positive interactions also described their children as having easier temperaments.  Children whose mothers did not smoke and who breastfed likewise reported fewer problems.  A calm, organized household atmosphere, a mortgaged or owned home with safety appliances and a safe neighbourhood were also associated with fewer problems.  Finally, children who visited the library either occasionally or regularly had fewer problems.

Parents who used more punitive parenting tactics reported having children with more behavioural issues. Children whose mothers had higher levels of psychological distress and experienced either moderate or severe depression had higher levels of behavioural issues. Where mothers had poor general health or in some instances long standing illness there were more behavioural issues reported.  Mothers who did not read to their child or who reported not attempting to help their child learn their numbers and alphabet also reported more problems.  As with children’s intellectual development, higher levels of TV watching were associated with more problems.

A few words of caution.  While I think the study is interesting because of its scale and its breadth, a degree of care needs to be reserved in the interpretation of the results.  Firstly, there is a good chance that many of the factors explored are related to one another.  Maternal health is probably highly related to parenting practices for instance.  Secondly, causal links can’t be concluded from the data.

In many ways, the results confirm previous research and probably conventional wisdom.  Children appear to benefit from parents who are warm and attentive.  Setting rules to create discipline rather using punitive tactics seems to have more positive outcomes.  Moderate to severe maternal depression limits mothers’ ability to respond to their children sensitively.  And children appear to benefit from parents who create a stimulating, active environment. What is perhaps new is the impact of people other than the child’s mother. The active involvement of both fathers and grandparents appears to be beneficial to intellectual development. Fathers reading to children as well as grandparents being involved in care appear to be beneficial independent of the mother’s impact.

Violato M, Petrou S, Gray R & Redshaw M (2010) Family income and child cognitive behavioural development in the United Kingdom: does money matter?  Health Economics

Special thanks to Mara Violato for her help in accessing this article.

Angeles analysed data from the British Household Panel Survey, an annual survey conducted with 10,000 households from 1991 to 2005.  His research differed from earlier studies of this area in two key ways.  Firstly, he focused on life satisfaction rather than happiness. Although the terms happiness and life satisfaction are often used interchangeably and the two concepts appear highly related, life satisfaction does perhaps ask people to take a longer term perspective than measuring current feelings of happiness.

Secondly, instead of treating parents as one homogenous group, he sought to explore the impact of having children on different groups of parents.  He set out to find out whether life satisfaction varies according to gender, age, income, education level and marital status in parents.

Children and marital status

What did Angeles find?  Marriage appears to matter when it comes to having children.  Angeles’ results would suggest that the arrival of children was positive for a married couple but possibly a problem for an unmarried one.  Children are positively related to married couple’s life satisfaction and the effect increases with the number of children.  While parents with only one child have practically the same level of satisfaction as couples without children, couples with three or four children have a significant boost to their happiness, equivalent to getting married or improving their health.  Children also appear to have a very positive impact on those widowed.  Children may therefore be mitigating to some degree the loss of a spouse.

In contrast, for individuals who are separated, living as a couple but not married or never married, parenthood had a large negative effect. However, these results were not statistically significant suggesting that they could be down to chance.

Gender: do men and women feel differently about parenthood?

Angeles then explored whether parenthood impacts mothers and fathers differently.  Women’s life satisfaction increased more than men’s when they had children. The differences were small when a couple had only one child but became significant by the time a couple has three children.

Age of parents

Parents who were under 30 had a small but not significant uplift in happiness whether they had one, two or three children.  In contrast, the satisfaction of parents over 30 increased with every new child up to a total of three children where the effect levels off.  Angeles’ suggests that three children may be the optimal number for many.  While parents under 30 may still feel they have time to have more, parents over 30 may feel time is running out.  Those parents over 30 may feel they have achieved their life goal with respect to children whereas those with less may feel a sense of disappointment.

Income and parenthood

For parents who earned less than 50% of the average income, parenthood had a small positive but not significant impact on happiness and this was true regardless of the number of children.  For the majority of parents who earned between 50 and 150% of the national average, life satisfaction increased as the number of children increases.  But for those in the top bracket earning over 150% of the national average income, children tended to lower life satisfaction although again this wasn’t statistically significant.

Education and becoming a parent

Angeles found that parents who had completed university had a significant uplift in happiness when they had one or two children, parents with a full high school education followed the established pattern with an increase in life satisfaction for every child but there was no clear relationship between parenthood and having children for those who left school before they finished high school.

I suspect that the results will seem a lot more plausible to parents than previous findings.  The results suggest that parenting is best thought of in terms of the meaning it creates in people’s lives rather than the moment by moment pleasure it creates.

It’s hard to draw general conclusions because the central point of the research is that parenthood affects people differently according to their circumstances.  It does however suggest that for a large proportion of people, having children can significantly increase life satisfaction.  Good news for parents.

Angeles L.  Children and life satisfaction.  Journal of Happiness Studies  (2010) 11: 523-538

Protection – giving a child confidence

What are the domains and the capabilities involved? The first one highlighted is the capacity to protect the child and as a consequence build confidence.  This domain is called into practice when the child is distressed and the core capability is providing comfort and a sense of security.  What comfort and support look like will vary depending on the child’s age.  The aim however is to reassure the child and through this create a child who is able to venture and explore, confident in the knowledge that their parents will be there for them in times of need.

Reciprocity – enabling children to co-operate

The second area focuses on the parent’s capability to build a partnership with their child where the parent responds to the reasonable requests of the child, and in so doing, teaches the child the skill of reciprocity.  By following the child’s lead and responding to them, Grusec and Davidov argue that parents are helping their child to work in tandem with others in a mutually beneficial and enjoyable manner.  In this domain, children interact as equals with their parents.  By fulfilling the child’s wishes and desires, the children will learn the value in helping others and in turn fulfilling the needs of others.

Discipline – instilling values and self control

In contrast, the third domain focuses on the use of the parent’s greater power in the relationship to exert discipline and instil values.  Rather than advocate that there is one successful way to discipline children, Grusec and Davidov argue that the key to successful parenting is to understand which style of discipline is most effective with their child and use this to achieve the parent’s goal. By using the minimum level of visible control necessary, parents may also help the child feel that they are choosing to behave in the way that their parents wish and through this develop a sense of self control.

Teaching – transferring capability

The fourth domain highlighted centres around acting as a teacher to the child.  The domain is called into practice when there is an opportunity to transfer knowledge or skill and the central capability is to match the teaching approach to the child’s level of understanding.  The aim is to stretch the child beyond its present level of knowledge or skill but not beyond its potential to learn.  In this domain, parents help the child develop through educating them.

Group participation – developing a sense of social identity

The final area focuses on helping the child understand the social norms that exist within their environment.  By merely giving children the chance to experience different social situations, parents are enabling their children to witness and absorb how they should behave.  Here the role of the parent is to expose the child to situations where they can watch, learn and understand the norms of their society.

I like the approach taken by Grusec and Davidov. While it can be criticized for not taking into account cultural factors, the impact of other family members and the impact of the child themselves, the fact that it focuses purely on the mothers and fathers is useful when a parent is trying to understand their own capability. In a simple model they’ve managed to capture some of the complexities of being a parent. They’ve focused on the development of the child in a holistic way and how parenting shapes the child’s intellectual, social, moral and emotional development.

What are the implications for parents?  The first is the model enables parents to think whether they are accurately interpreting when each domain is needed.  For instance, when their child cries, are they looking for reassurance and need their parent to operate in the protection domain or are they protesting and need them to create a sense of discipline?  The second is for parents to assess their own capability in each area.  It gives them the opportunity to acknowledge that they may have strengths in some areas rather than others.  By thinking about these two questions, Grusec and Davidov are offering parents the chance to fine-tune their parenting.

Grusec JE, Davidov M.  Integrating different perspectives on socialization theory and research: a domain-specific approach.  Child Development  2010 May 81(3) 687-709

Violato and her colleagues clustered together factors known to be associated with child development into three areas, parental investment, parental stress and a catch all category entitled ‘Other Related Pathways.’  Parental investment contained factors associated with the family’s investment in the child.  This included physical factors such as the home environment and safety of the neighbourhood as well as more behavioural factors relating to the amount of energy invested in the child.  The factors measured included an assessment of the atmosphere at home, the safety of the neighbourhood, the nature of childcare provided, as well as how often both mothers and fathers read, taught and played with their child.  Parental Stress examined factors associated with the mother’s mental health, measures of parent child interactions and parenting style.  Finally, the ‘Other Related Pathways’ category included factors such as whether the mother smoked through her pregnancy, breast fed her child, the health of both parents and the socio economic status of both grandfathers.

The children’s behavioural and intellectual development were measured three times.  At nine months old, children’s temperament was measured and an assessment of whether there were any developmental delays was made.  At three years old, children’s vocabulary and school readiness were measured along with an assessment of any behavioural difficulties.  And at five years old, children’s vocabulary was tested along with a picture similarity exercise that tested their reasoning ability and a measure of behavioural issues.

Like its predecessors, the study found that children from poorer backgrounds fared worse than their richer peers on measures of both behavioural problems and intellectual development.  However when the factors from the parental investment, parental stress and ‘other related factors’ groups were taken into account, there was a weak or non-existent relationship between parental income and the child’s intellectual and behavioural development.  In other words, it appears that it isn’t poverty itself that causes the problems but the impact of poverty on other factors that is the issue.

As is often the case with these studies, the data used in this study is correlational and therefore it can’t be said with certainty that poverty or any of the other factors are the cause developmental delays  or behavioural problems.  But the study does suggest that it is possible to provide your child with a best possible start even if money is tight.  While factors from all three groups appeared to be linked to a child’s development, it was the level of parental investment that had the strongest association.  It seems that it is less whether parents have money to spend on their children that matters and more how much energy that both parents as well as other family members such as grandparents were able to invest in their child’s development.  Which is not to say that poverty isn’t an issue.  Clearly many of the issues explored in this study are related to poverty and merely having money does not automatically make someone a good parent.  It does at least suggest that there are some factors in the control of parents.

Violato M, Petrou S, Gray R & Redshaw M (2010) Family income and child cognitive behavioural development in the United Kingdom: does money matter?  Health Economics

Special thanks to Mara Violato for her help in accessing this article.