> On one hand you want your kids to be successful
How about wanting your kids to be just _happy_, regardless of what _you_ consider to be "successful"?
How about wanting your kids to be just _happy_, regardless of what _you_ consider to be "successful"?
What would make your kid _happy_ would be to play all day and do nothing about their future (I'm yet to see a kid who would rather study than play).
Wanting your kid to be _happy_ means you need to prepare him/her to be _successful_ (aka to be able to face the challenges life throws at him/her) which might not be _fun_ in the short term. As the OP mentions, striking a balance is a tricky part.
It's alright to fail, but when you have the next opportunity, improve.
if you can't manage to earn a living after I'm dead how will you survive ? if you're not alive, how will you manage to even try to be happy ?
I say this as someone who seen relatives and acquaintances try the just be happy approach with their children. now the children are close to their 40 and still not self sufficient and nowhere close to happy either.
But when these parental and educational practices are clearly linked to addictions and emotional/mental health issues, parents and schools should certainly be asking themselves what they're doing. And why.
Of course there's a balance between pushing too hard and not pushing at all, and between worthless-if-you-don't-win culture and get-a-prize-for-breathing culture.
A friend of mine used to say that the perfect job was just challenging enough to be interesting, but not so challenging it was overwhelming, and not so unchallenging it was boring and pointless.
Parenting is similar. There has to be some challenge and some unconditional support, but not an extreme of either.
It's hard.
What I wrote was in defense of GP commenter who was downvoted at the time, not against the article.
As with most things in life both too little and too much can have negative effects. The Hard part is figuring out where that middle values range lies for each task.