I'm not sure what I've said that's contradictory. 5% isn't nothing, but it's not much either. The thread began by stipulating that ESPN was protecting Andy Reid, whose poor parenting skills were what led to his children being cretins. What I'm saying is that is probably not true, assuming that he has met the minimum parenting threshold. He could have been Danny Tanner or Ward Cleaver and they still probably would have gown up to be cretins.

As for saying that 5-10% could be the difference between an average or above-average student, like I said, there is a small effect. If you help your kid study for an exam, he'll probably do better, and that's a good thing. He'll get a better grade, you're improving his life, his self esteem, all that good stuff. But those are very particular instances, and small apples in the grand scheme of things. Your parenting isn't going to turn your child into a genius if he isn't going to become one already, regardless of how hard you try. It can only have some influence at the margins.

We're probably reaching the point of diminishing returns on this argument. But I cannot stress this enough: morally, the supremacy of genetics does not matter in the slightest when it comes to how we treat our children. Finally, this knowledge should come as a relief to most parents. For half a century, behavior scientists and Freudians had led parents to believe that every mistake a child made reflected a mistake in their upbringing. The failures of the child were the failures of the child-raising mechanism. If your child was of average intelligence, or a criminal, or aggressive, or not aggressive enough, it was your fault as a parent. We now know that's not true. Their mistakes are not yours as well. Unfortunately, neither are their successes, although it certainly shouldn't stop you from being proud when a child does well.

As a note, it was the Freudian psychologists who started the practice of splitting up identical twins for adoption in the 60s in the hopes of proving how important parenting and socialization are to the child. Needless to say, that backfired.

Remember that your children are your children genetically and behaviorally. That's why twin studies are so important to disentangle the two. Also remember that as children get older, genetics matters more and more, and socialization matters less and less. And while kids are mimics, they are going to mimic their friends a lot more than their parents. That's why the children of immigrants drop their parents accent, for just one example.

Interesting stuff Irish Boy. Both of my parents were not intellectually advanced, and my brother and I are about four years apart, but I ended up somewhat intellectually advanced and my brother is really behind. My mom tried everything she could to help him. Years later when I was older, we had gotten into this discussion and found that she was beating herself up greatly for how things turned out and I essentially told her how could she blame herself if she doesnt change her parenting between two children and yet one turns out differently then the other.

I am now faced with a similar issue as both my wife and I are educated and we are trying our best to foster our 3 year old to be successful. It is very hard because our definition of successful is far different then that of others. For me, if I can help my child to discover the one to five things she is best at and/or enjoys most, and she finds herself excelling in them, I feel I have done the best i can to make my child's life successful.

That being said, I feel a parent is generally best as a mentor/teacher, where there is both discipline and learning. I agree with you, we cant be directly responsible for success or failure, but we can teach and discipline while being a life counselor.

_________________