Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure if I’ll get this question across well enough to say what I actually mean. I’ve been really doubting myself as a parent recently. I’ve gotten a few responses to a post on here that I must be a failure of a parent with people agreeing. Yes, I know it’s DCUM but maybe I am. But maybe these people are vastly overestimating their own parenting skills and overgeneralizing that how they approach situations is objectively the best way.
I started thinking...there are people out there who are doing just fine but think they’re failing miserably and there are also (the same number? More? Fewer?) people out there who think they have it all figured out and are killing the parenting game but are not really.
Which brings me to my next question. How can we objectively know how we’re doing? I guess it’s the whole nature vs. nurture debate.
I think I’m doing pretty well day to day. I have my good days and my bad days like the majority of parents (I think?). But when I think about it, it all seems so high stakes if nurture really holds more weight than nature.
So where do you think most people fall—do they overestimate or underestimate how well they’re doing as parents?
I think as a general rule, men overestimate. Good moms underestimate, bad moms overestimate.
My husband thinks he does SO SO SO much with our kids, but he sits and watched youtube with them endlessly if he's the "on" parent. He's literally never taken them to a playground, or out anywhere, at all...
My friends and acquaintances who are great parents, are the ones who worry about being bad parents, and self reflect and adjust and monitor waht theyre doing and always feel like they could be better. So they underestimate, they're doing great.
The shit moms I know, (and my dh, and his friends/the guys I know from work), all think they're GREAT parents, but really really SUCK