Since the beginning of society, the way parents raise their kids is unique to each family. Each set of parents raise their kid based on their moral standards and expectations. The old theory was that it is necessary to use fear to strictly instill values and good actions into your children, along with strict consequences if the rules are broken. This is not so much the case anymore. As our society grows and becomes more focused on liberal arts, parenting has changed too. Mistakes that kids make are more widely accepted, and consequences are less severe. Nowadays, when a child messes up, having a deep discussion is a more common result than hitting or yelling. "Helicopter" parenting is becoming less and less prevalent. However, there is still a major percentage of parents who believe that the best way to raise a child is come down hard on them whenever a mistake is made. Things such as not tolerating bad grades, tracking, using strict consequences, etc. are how the parents were raised, so they want to continue this parenting style. The logic a lot of times is "well my parents were strict, and I turned out successful." This "if it ain't broke don't fix it" moral is something that many parents believe in, and therefore they pass it on to their kids. These two styles of parenting do seem to collide, with advantages and disadvantages on both sides. As being a teenage son right now, I believe I have dog in this fight. And that is why I think it would be intriguing to explore both sides extensively to see which style fits better in the modern day.