FAFO

The Internet and social networks have become fertile ground for debate about how to raise childrensomething that is used especially by first-time parents who want to know what is the best method to have a ‘model’ son or daughter for society. And while a few days ago we were talking about helicopter parentsnow we have to focus on FAFO parenting, which is at the opposite end and is gaining strength on the networks. FAFO parenting. These acronyms they come from the English ‘Fuck Around and Find Out’ which could be translated as ‘do something stupid and find out what happens’. This is a term that, although it lacks a formal academic basis, under that specific name has become popular to describe a parenting style based on natural consequences. The premise here is quite simple: if a child refuses to put on his coat in winter, the parent does not insist; allows the child to go out, feel cold, and “discover” why the coat was necessary. However, experts point out that the FAFO label is being often used as a “license for parental indifference. A tougher model. Right now FAFO is a trend, but if we look back, we come from a time where social control and extreme protection were on the order of the day with what was known as ‘helicopter parents’. And to understand it, you have to know that right now we have three main axes for raising the little ones: Desirable authoritarian: with clear limits combined with high emotional support, who uses the consequences of actions as a learning tool, but with parental supervision. ‘Just plain’ authoritarian: There is little affection towards minors, causing “I told you so” to prevail over understanding and empathy. Permissive: Here there is an absence of limits and total freedom for minors, meaning that there is no clear structure. The FAFO problem radical is that it slides dangerously towards the authoritarian style or detachment. Here the studies indicate that children raised under purely punitive or indifferent discipline have higher levels of stress, which can lead to anxiety and long-term behavioral problems. Its risks. The controversy arises especially when the strategy lacks emotional support for the child, since allowing a child to “find” the consequence of their actions is only educational if the child’s brain is capable of processing that cause-effect relationship. And it is not something that everyone can, because a 3-year-old child does not have the prefrontal cortex developed enough to understand that his tantrum caused the loss of a toy as a logical lesson, but only perceives the pain of the loss and the coldness of his father who left him crying. How it should be done. And what has to be prioritized in parenting is learning so that it continues to evolve, but logically everything must be adapted to the maturity of the child, there must be supervision to guarantee safety and subsequent emotional support is essential. The big problem with the FAFO approach, as promoted on the networks, is that it often eliminates that last point and makes it necessary to show indifference, inattention or public humiliation. Something that only increases stress. Against overprotection. FAFO triumphs because we come from a time where ‘helicopter’ parenting and ‘snowplow’ parents have dominated in many families. Now we have a reactive effect on overprotection on the table. Although, as positive parenting guides point out, teaching a child that his actions have consequences does not require coldness. Letting the child “crash” can be a very valuable lesson, as long as his parents are there immediately afterwards to help him manage the frustration, without humiliation or the phrase ‘I told you so’. Images | freepik In Xataka | In 2007, Spain forced men to take longer sick leave to care for their children. Fertility then fell.