The existing critical literature on constructions of childhood and parenthood is only beginning to listen to what parents have to say. As a result, parents may paradoxically be viewed as passive victims and therefore reduced to be the spectators of what is supposed to be their ‘problem’. The present study analyses dominant parent advice texts in the Flemish community of Belgium, as well as the voices of parents on the Internet. The study confirms the tendencies noticed in critical literature: the tendency to individualize responsibilities and the focus on autonomy in the neoliberal era. In addition it unveils the double bind nature of autonomy in expert discourse. It also illustrates the performative agency of parents, as co-constructors of dominant discourse as well as contesting this discourse. In so doing, the study complements the existing vein of literature with the way in which parents think of and experience the dominant parenting discourse.
BeckUBeckE (1995) The Normal Chaos of Love. Cambridge: Polity Press.
2.
BlackfordH (2004) Playground panopticism. Ring-around-the-children, a pocketful of women. Childhood11(2): 227–249.
3.
ButlerJ (1990) Gender Trouble. London: Routledge.
4.
CamposG (2004) What are cultural models for? Child-rearing practices in historical perspective. Culture and Psychology10(3): 279–291.
5.
ChoiPHensawCBakerS. (2005) Supermum, superwife, supereverything: Performing femininity in the transition to motherhood. Journal of Reproduction and Infant Psychology23(2): 167–180.
6.
DepaepeM (1998) De pedagogisering achterna. Aanzet tot een genealogie van de pedagogische mentaliteit in de voorbije 250 jaar. Leuven: Uitgeverij Acco.
7.
DrenteaPMoren-CrossJ (2005) Social capital and social support on the web: The case of an internet mother site. Sociology of Health and Illness27(7): 920–943.
8.
EdwardsRGilliesV (2004) Support in parenting: Values and consensus concerning who to turn to. Journal of Social Policy33(4): 627–647.
9.
EllisBHeislerM (2008) Motherhood and the construction of ‘mommy identity’: Messages about motherhood and face negotiation. Communication Quarterly56(4): 445–467.
10.
FairclothC (2009) Mothering as identity-work: Long-term breastfeeding and intensive motherhood. Anthropology News50(2): 15–17.
11.
FaircloughN (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. New York: Routledge.
12.
FeatherstoneB (2006) Rethinking family support in the current policy context. British Journal of Social Work36(1): 5–19.
13.
FoucaultM (1993) About the beginning of the hermeneutics of the self: Two lectures at Dartmouth. Political Theory21(2): 198–227.
14.
FoucaultM (1998) Politics, Philosophy, Culture: Interviews and Other Writings of Michel Foucault, 1977–1984. New York: Routledge.
15.
FreireP (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
16.
GilliesV (2005) Meeting parents’ needs? Discourses of ‘support’ and ‘inclusion’ in family policy. Critical Social Policy25: 70–90.
17.
GlazemakersIDeboutteD (n.d.) Evaluatierapport implementatie Triple P in de provincie Antwerpen. Antwerp: Collaborative Antwerp Psychiatric Research Institute, Department Youth Mental Health.
HeytingF (1998) Opvoeden tot samenleven. Afscheid van moraal en deugd als voorwaarden voor maatschappelijke integratie. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Opvoeding, Vorming en Onderwijs14(1): 35–49.
26.
HsiehHShannonS (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research15(9): 1277–1288.
JensenT (2010) Warmth and wealth: Re-imagining social class in taxonomies of good parenting. Studies in the Maternal2(1): 1–13.
29.
JohnstonDSwansonD (2006) Constructing the ‘good mother’: The experience of mothering ideologies by work status. Sex Roles54(7–8): 509–519.
30.
JonesLOsgoodJ (2007) Mapping the fabricated identity of childminders: Pride and prejudice. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood8(4): 289–300.
31.
Kind en Gezin (2011) Jaarverslag 2011. Brussels: Kind en Gezin.
32.
Kind en Gezin (2012) Het ABC van baby tot kleuter. Brussels: Kind en Gezin.
33.
LeyB (2007) Vive les roses!: The architecture of commitment in an online pregnancy and mothering group. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication12(4): 1388–1408.
34.
ListerR (2007) Why citizenship: Where, when and how children?Theoretical Inquiries in Law8(2): 693–718.
35.
MartinC (2010) The reframing of family policies in France: Processes and actors. Journal of European Social Policy20(5): 410–421.
36.
MayallB (2002) Towards a Sociology for Childhood: Thinking from Children’s Lives. Buckingham: Open University Press.
37.
MillerSSambellK (2003) What do parents feel they need? Implications of parents’ perspectives for the facilitation of parenting programmes. Children and Society17(1): 32–45.
38.
Moran-EllisJSunkerH (2008). Giving children a voice: Childhood, power and culture. In: HoutsonenHAntikainenA (eds) Symbolic Power in Cultural Contexts: Uncovering Social Reality. Rotterdam: Sense Publishing, pp. 75–92.
39.
MossPDillonJStathamJ (2000) The ‘child in need’ and ‘the rich child’: Discourses, constructions and practice. Critical Social Policy20(2): 233–254.
40.
MurphyE (2007) Images of childhood in mothers’ accounts of contemporary childrearing. Childhood14(1): 105–127.
41.
MyringP (2000) Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qualitative Social Research1(2): 1–10.
42.
NicholsSNixonHRowsellJ (2009) The ‘good’ parent in relation to early childhood literacy: Symbolic terrain and lived practice. Literacy43(2): 65–74.
43.
PartonN (2006) Every Child Matters: The shift to prevention whilst strengthening protection in children’s services in England. Children and Youth Services Review28(8): 796–992.
44.
PattonMQ (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45.
PerrierM (2012) Middle-class mothers’ moralities and ‘concerted cultivation’: Class others, ambivalence and excess. Sociology. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/0038038512453789.
46.
PinderhughesENixRFosterE. (2001) Parenting in context: Impact of neighborhood poverty, residential stability, public services, social networks, and danger on parental behaviors. Journal of Marriage and Family63(4): 941–953.
47.
PykettJSawardMSchaeferA (2010) Framing the good citizen. British Journal of Politics and International Relations12(4): 523–538.
48.
SandersMMarkie-DadsCTurnersK (2003) Theoretical, scientific and clinical foundations of the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program: A population approach to the promotion of parenting competence. Parenting Research and Practice Monograph1: 1–25.
ThorneB (2007) Editorial: Crafting the interdisciplinary field of childhood studies. Childhood14(2): 147–152.
51.
TiggelovendI (2009) Positief opvoeden werkt. Triple P magazine nr. 1. Available at: www.triplepmagazine.be/.
52.
TiggelovendI (2010a) Positief opvoeden werkt. Triple P magazine nr. 4. Available at: www.triplepmagazine.be/.
53.
TiggelovendI (2010b) Positief opvoeden werkt. Triple P magazine nr. 2. Available at: www.triplepmagazine.be/.
54.
TiggelovendI (2011a) Positief opvoeden werkt. Triple P magazine nr. 6. Available at: www.triplepmagazine.be/.
55.
TiggelovendI (2011b) Positief opvoeden werkt. Triple P magazine nr. 5. Available at: www.triplepmagazine.be/.
56.
TisdallE (2006) Antisocial behaviour legislation meets children’s services: Challenging perspectives on children, parents and the state. Critical Social Policy26(1): 101–120.
57.
VandenbroeckM (2009) In verzekerde bewaring. Honderd vijftig jaar kinderen, ouders en kinderopvang. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SWP.
58.
VandenbroeckMBouverne-De BieM(2006) Children’s agency and educational norms: A tensed negotiation. Childhood13(1): 127–143.
59.
VandenbroeckMBoonaertTVan der MespelS. (2009) Dialogical spaces to reconceptualize parent support in the social investment stateContemporary Issues in Early Childhood10(1): 66–77.
60.
WynessMG (1999) Childhood, agency and education reform. Childhood6(3): 353–368.
