The Parenting Practices Rating Scale

The Parenting Practices Rating Scale is designed to document the clinical assessment of parenting by the targeted parent.  The scale contains four primary items:

1.)  Category Level of Parenting:

Item 1, the Category Level of Parenting, identifies deviant-abusive parenting relative to broadly normal-range parenting. 

The Level of parenting is rated on a 4-point Likert scale (abusive, severely problematic, normal-range problematic, normal-range healthy), anchored by descriptive categories of parenting.  Identifying the category of parenting locates the parenting in the corresponding Level of the rating scale. 

The 4-point Likert scale is then brought together into two broad categories of parenting; deviant-abusive (Levels 1 and 2) and normal-range (Levels 3 and 4).  It is this dichotomous classification that is used for diagnostic indicator 1 by the Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting to define a “normal-range parent” (Levels 3 and 4)

Ratings on Item 1: Category Levels should offer parenting examples to support the category rating.

2.)  Permissive-Authoritarian Rating

Item 2, the Permissive-Authoritarian Rating, is a 0-100 dimensional rating along the continuum of lax and permissive parenting to over-controlling and authoritarian parenting, with normal-range parenting represented by the mid-range scores.  This clinical rating represents the clinical judgement of the assessing mental health professional based on identified features of parental attitude and approach.  Ratings on Item 2: Permissive-Authoritarian Rating should be supported with examples.

A heuristic for clinical rating is that scores in the upper and lower 20% (0-20 and 80-100) should be considered sufficiently extreme to raise child protection considerations (for neglect at the lower extremes and for hostile-aggressive parenting at the upper extremes).

Normal-range parenting should be considered ratings between 25-75, with allowances provided for the cultural values, religious values, and personal values of the parent.  Clinical psychology typically recommends a mid-range balance along this dimension that incorporates flexible dialogue and negotiation with clearly defined rules, structure, and expectations (preferred rage of 40-60). 

However, some parents tend to be more lax, negotiable, and permissive (building relationship at the expense of child maturity; 30s), while other parents tend to be more rule-oriented, authoritarian, and structured (building child maturity at the expense of relationship; 60s).  These are value laden decisions for each parent, and as long as the parenting is broadly normal-range (25-75), parents should be allowed the right and discretion to form their families consistent with their cultural, religious, and personal value systems.

3.)  Empathy

The nature of parental empathy is not a decisional factor, but is an important descriptive feature for treatment-related considerations.  Throughout the professional literature, authentic parental empathy for the child is identified as the most important factor in parenting.  Highly lax and permissive parenting (30s) can be entirely healthy for the child with the addition of authentic parental empathy for the child’s autonomous experience, and can be damaging for the child’s development in the absence of authentic parental empathy.  Similarly, highly structured and authoritarian parenting (60s) can be entirely healthy for the child with the addition of authentic parental empathy, and can be damaging to the child’s development in the absence of authentic parental empathy.

The Empathy item is rated along a 5-point Likert scale, extending from narcissistic-style parenting evidencing an absence of authentic empathy for the child (emotional indifference or psychologically dominating projective identification), to borderline-style parenting of intrusive psychological over-involvement (psychologically anxious-intrusive parenting and projective identification).

Normal-range parental empathy is rated as a 3.  Narcissistic absence of empathy is rated as 1.  Borderline over-intrusive projective identification is rated a 5.  The mid-range scores of 2 (absent of parental psychological involvement) and 4 (anxious over-intrusive parenting) are indicators of normal-range parenting of concern, while the more extreme scores of 1 or 5 would represent prominent clinical concerns for the child’s development. 

Children flourish emotionally and psychologically from authentic parental empathy that is not projective of the parent’s own emotional and psychological needs and history (a normal-range rating of 3).

4.)  Issues of Clinical Concern

Item 4 identifies parenting behaviors of potential clinical concern, such as psychiatric issues, substance use issues, and trauma history issues.  These clinical concerns are modified by treatment.  If the parent’s psychiatric issues are being stabilized by treatment, if the parent’s substance use issues are in substantial remission (1 year), and if the parent’s own trauma history has received treatment, then these issues are all of lesser and limited clinical concern.  On the other hand, untreated major psychiatric pathology in a parent, active parental substance abuse, or unresolved parental trauma are all domains of prominent professional concern regarding the emotional and psychological well-being of the child.

Item 4, Issues of Clinical Concern, is a nominal rating scale of six categories of parental factors that would trigger treatment-related considerations.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

 

One thought on “The Parenting Practices Rating Scale”

  1. Issue 4 is what my son is dealing with from his ex, and her family history is no better, yet the judge took the children from dad after raising them for 7 yrs, for no reason other than when the daughter was 3 she said mums bf had touched her down below, noone believed her or dad had other witnesses etc THE JUDGE WAS NOT INTERESTED, CALLED THE DR AND OTHERS EVEN THE DAUGHTER ALL LIES, called dad who has no criminal or any record history comes from a normal home, a dead beat father who lives of the tax payer purse (he has a broken lower spine) the ns that has gone on since the courts took the kids for no reason, the ex has no made it that dad has not seen or spoken to the children for over 1yr thats because a report writter let us see the kids for 1hr in his office, his report say they are unsafe at home here were they grew up for 7 yrs and no issue with the mother for that time.
    This is so bad we cannot fix it, the report writter is wrong we are not bad people we have never raised a hand to the kids we always spoke to them.
    Them are loved, they had everything they needed etc, the daily trauma we go throught to understand what happened in the court beggers beleaf.
    Legal is usless, the lies and bs…. what does one do

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s