I think the article should also include the theory of "The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do" developed by Judith Rich Harris

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nurture_Assumption

• The assumption that child-rearing practices are responsible for how children
develop is a myth of modern western culture.
• Most socialization research ignores the effect of genetics and peer groups on
personality and behavior.
• Research into the results of different pa renting styles may confuse cause and effect;
do parents spank difficult kids or do kids become diffi cult because they are spanked?
• Human beings naturally form groups. They are social animals and excellent imitators.
• Children learn by identifying with a peer group and imitating its members.
• Peer groups are more influential than parents in determining children's behavior.
• Among his or her peers, a child's goal is child success – not adult success.
Negative peer influence may, for instance, undermine programs intended to fi ght
juvenile delinquency.
• The ability of parents to determine how children turn out is decidedly limited.
• The family can become the peer group that affects a child, but that‘s rare.
• Perhaps the most that parents can do to infl uence children's decisions and behavior
is to choose a community or school where the peer group refl ects parental values.

The goal of a child is not adult success, but rather childhood success. Status in a peer
group is a lynchpin factor in that success. Children do not seek to emulate their parents;
instead, they want to be like their peers. This is why children consider the prospect of
being held back in school as frightening. They lose membership in the group they know
and must take the status of being misfi ts in a group they do not know.

Group forces may be responsible for the failure of certain programs intended to combat
juvenile crime or to improve educational outcomes. It isn’t unusual, for example, for
African-American boys to consider academic success as un-African-American – or even
to scorn too-studious peers for “acting white.” Research shows that children are more
likely to smoke if their friends smoke – but whether their parents smoke makes little
difference. Some teen peer groups value criminal behavior, toughness and a willingness
to take risks. Recidivism is particularly high among juvenile delinquents who are sent to
programs where they live with other youthful offenders. This is to be expected, given the
power of group norms. Small wonder, then, that the neighborhood where a child grows
up can have a powerful determining infl uence on how it develops. A Danish study found
that children adopted by criminals were only likely to become criminals themselves
under one circumstance: growing up in a high-crime neighborhood.

To influence behavior and development, social programs should address groups rather
than individual children or their parents. Groups transmit language, culture and values
to children. It is noteworthy that historically black colleges produce the majority of
prominent black intellectuals, and that girls seem to do better in science and math in all-
girl schools than in co-ed schools. In a school with an all-black or all-female population,
academic achievement is not defined as nonblack or unfeminine. Group norms do not
discourage excellence.

Clearly, parents have a limited ability to influence children’s development. Socialization
researchers have not demonstrated that such factors as birth order, spanking or
parental education are responsible for how children develop. Genes and environment
matter. However, in the long run, it is not the parental environment, but the peer group
environment that really counts.

Parents can affect the development of children most directly through the influence they
exercise over establishing a child’s peer group. Parents pick the neighborhood where the
family will live, and often choose their children’s schools. All things considered, it is
obviously better to select a neighborhood and a school where peer pressures are likelier
to push your child in a good direction. Seek a school where students consider academic
achievement desirable and admirable – and where members of the child’s ethnic group
do not value academic failure. If possible, choose a vicinity where juvenile crime is
rare or nonexistent. Of course, almost every neighborhood has its share of delinquency,
and kids who are bent on defi ning themselves as delinquents will somehow manage to
fi nd peers. However, degrees of delinquency differ from neighborhood to neighborhood,
so it is important to recognize that choosing a neighborhood is a decisive step toward
choosing a peer group.

Parents can help children do better within their groups, and this is crucial. Selecting a
child’s name can be key. Parents who pick bizarre names can sentence children to ridicule
and perhaps even victimization. If your child has skin problems, go to a dermatologist.
If the child has crooked teeth, get them straightened. If the child has an obesity problem,
address it. Group status matters deeply to children, and their self-esteem grows from
group acceptance. Of course, group status also matters to adults. Many child-rearing and
child-development fashions have spread only because groups defined them as desirable.

In the natural order of things, dominance happens. Parents are supposed to be the
dominant members of families. They aren’t entertainers or playmates. Their job is to
be in charge. In many societies, older siblings also have a dominant and caretaking role.
Consider that the arrival of a young brother or sister displaces the older sibling as a center
of attention. The middle-class American insistence on treating children equally means
that the older sibling does not receive the perquisite that could soften the blow of this
displacement – a degree of authority and responsibility. Sibling rivalry does not seem
to happen in societies that allow older siblings to take their “rightful” place as bosses
of younger siblings. Indeed, children tend to develop close alliances in such societies.
Brotherhood and sisterhood really mean something.

The nurture assumption has been responsible for plenty of parental anxiety and distress.
When children turn out badly, the nurture assumption says that it is the parents’ fault.
But no evidence supports the nurture assumption. It’s a myth. So, parents should stop
worrying and do the best job they can. However, this job includes recognizing their
limits, and acknowledging the power and importance of peer groups. Children live and
learn in groups. They adopt group norms. They try hard to be good members of their
groups, to achieve status and recognition by the group’s standards. They learn, through
the group, to be members of society. So, the most important contribution that parents
can make to a child’s development may very well be the influence they wield in making
certain groups available – or unavailable – for the child to join.