Are you a man coverage or zone coverage parent?

My vision for a community contract in child rearing.

When Marissa and I announced we were pregnant with our 3rd child, it was interesting to notice the different reactions you get from different people. Women were typically eager to join in the excitement of a budding new life joining the universe. Meanwhile the response from a lot of my male peers was something akin to, “I thought you already had three.” The more thoughtful responses usually meander towards the implications of life with three kids or wonder  about which kid in the birth order would make a more profound difference on our lifestyles. A common joke inserted here was something along the lines of: “Three kids is always tough though because you’ve got to switch from man to zone defense.” This is of course a sports analogy, commonly from football describing the fact that the parents would now be outnumbered. 

Here’s a brief explainer of football coverages that might help you understand if needed.

Recently I’ve been increasingly convinced that this analogy of football coverage schemes may have more to teach me. 

Parenthood is full of deeply personal choices, usually a high degree of insecurity and naturally a lot of emotion. In public settings, it’s often a complex network of awkward dances: “Is it okay if I let my kid play over there? Should I correct someone else’s kid for dumping the banana grams all over the store?” Then there are the looks. Somehow as a parent we become certain of what other people think of us: “I have a pretty good idea why they’re looking at me like that, and I’m confident she doesn't approve of how I’m disciplining this child.” I can count on both hands the number of times I’ve heard in the last year that a parent friend considered avoiding a social event because of the parent dynamics. Note: I didn’t say they avoided the event because the kids are too much trouble; I’m talking about the social drama around opinions around the right style of parenting.  

I’m convinced every decent parent is trying to find the perfect balance between total permissiveness and absolute authoritarianism. There are helpful books and articles that call this balance authoritative parenting. Here’s how the APA describes authoritative parents: “[they] are nurturing, responsive, and supportive, yet set firm limits for their children. They attempt to control children's behavior by explaining rules, discussing, and reasoning. They listen to a child's viewpoint but don't always accept it.”

The issue is there’s a lot of gray area here. There’s also an incredibly interesting bias towards what has worked well in the past with our own children, forgetting that even large families have an incredibly small and uncontrolled sample size. I’ve noticed that parents that have “been there and done that” often have an attitude of “if they would parent like I did, they’d have kids like mine.” The biggest flaw in this thinking is the failure to recognize that these are little autonomous people that are all made differently, with different motivations, strengths and abilities being parented by equally different parents in equally different environments. This mantra can go something like, “When they don’t listen, it’s important that you spank them, and if they still don’t listen, spank them harder. If you're too soft to parent like I did, you’ll end up with disobedient kids” or “You need to listen to them and give them more freedom. It’s so important that they feel seen and validated. Otherwise they will rebel as soon as they get freedom in the real world.”

Side note on spanking: I believe that this disciplinary tool has a place in the parental  tool belt for SOME kids. One key is understanding the heart and motivation of each kid. We should however be extremely careful in how we approach spanking in our own homes and how we counsel others. Not all spanking is physical abuse but sometimes it can be and we shouldn’t approach that line lightly. I personally love the approach that Paul Tripp in his book, Parenting, takes on this issue. 

It’s been said that it takes a village to raise a child. It’s a nice thought to many but I would argue that more often today this proverb has been replaced with: “You parent your kid over there, and I’ll parent mine over here. Let me know if you want any advice.” 

There’s a growing refrain of sociologists investigating our growing generation of medicated, lonely, and depressed young people and looking for answers. One theory regarding the cause of this phenomenon is the downfall of unsupervised play. For a lot of history, young people would be initiated into adulthood at more like 13. Not so long ago kids would run the neighborhood all summer long and appear home in time for dinner. This is not the world we live in any more. If we give our kids the autonomy that they enjoyed in those days, it’s likely that we’ll be treated as neglectful or irresponsible. 

A couple of years ago I came across Lenore Skenazy, the creator of “Take your kids to the park and leave them there day.” Leonore is an apologist for the benefits of this kind of “free range parenting.” One of her big ideas is that kids need time to deal with their interpersonal issues without a parent stepping in to solve it for them or protect them from the conflict. They’re capable of working things out but it may look different and take more time, she argues. I tend to agree. 

Here’s the rub. There’s a palpable tension in many public settings when your value is to let kids have a longer leash and work things out than the other parents around might have. The parent with the shortest leash often ends up stepping in to become the default parent while grumbling, “Why do I always have to step in? Those other adults don’t seem to be parenting at all.”

I’d like to raise my kids in a community that cares about the good of our kids. Not just your own but other people’s kids too. One that doesn’t look at kids as a burden to be hidden and tucked aside, but as growing people that will someday be contributors and leaders in our community. In this, each adult's unique gifts and perspectives contribute to the growth of my kids learning from and interpreting different leadership styles. It’s okay if another adult tells my kids not to do what I would normally allow or has to reprimand a scuffle between them and another kid. Anyone that has learned a new skill or played a sport knows that conflict and failing are some of the best teachers. The lesson hits way harder when kids learn that their parents aren’t the only ones in the world that are annoyed or disapproving of their flaws and weaknesses. This isn’t to say that parents should turn off in social settings. However, in the appropriate settings, they should be allowed the autonomy and space for kids to have conflict with other kids or get corrected by other adults. They should also be willing to correct and speak into the other kids in the community. 

Here’s one practical anecdote: When it’s time to clean up and connect with friends and neighbors after church or community events, there’s a team effort to leave a clean space and provide opportunity for deep connection. Parents might carry chairs while older children are encouraged to help or supervise the younger roaming kids. We want the church to be THE place to receive support in our time of need. One of the ways that this can happen is deep conversation about what’s happening in our lives: family challenges, sickness, work-space conflict. Heart connections happen at church, but it can’t happen if both parents need to be completely attentive to their children. After all, this church is full of wonderful adults that have unique life experiences and wisdom. I’m asking for a collective understanding in these settings that it might be okay to remove your gaze from your children while serving the church body or community. It should be not only okay but encouraged to correct a child that doesn't come from your bloodline. It also gives kids the opportunity to grow as leaders as they resolve conflict among themselves or with younger kids. If parents are the only referees, there is little obligation for the kids to create a governing social structure around resolution and character. This is my definition of zone coverage in parenting. I’d like to advocate for a community contract in our churches, clubs, and organizations that agrees to care for the kids in our zone whether they’re yours or not. Our communities are too beautiful and too full of wisdom to create a culture where “you look out for your kids, and I’ll look out for mine.”

 Parenthood is a difficult journey. We weren’t designed to embark on it alone. Kids that are encouraged to take risks, take on responsibility, and be challenged by people outside of their family are the kids that are going to grow up to make the biggest impact.