A qualitative analysis of mothers' childrearing behaviour towards their disabled child.
Mothers of disabled kids artfully blend firm and gentle moves minute-by-minute, so assess the pattern, not single acts.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Soulières et al. (2007) talked with mothers who have a disabled child.
They asked open questions about how the moms guide, correct, and comfort their kids.
The team read the transcripts and pulled out themes about everyday parenting moves.
What they found
Mothers said they switch between firm and gentle tactics many times a day.
They pick coercive moves like “stop that now” when safety is at risk.
They pick inductive moves like “let’s think why that hurt” when the child can learn.
The moms choose the move based on the child’s mood, skill, and the place they are in.
How this fits with other research
Osnes et al. (1986) first showed that harsh cycles keep going when the child can’t guess what mom will do next. Isabelle’s moms prevent that chaos by matching their tactic to the moment, showing the other side of the same coin.
Boonen et al. (2015) watched moms of kids with ASD and saw lower warmth only when stress was high. That lines up with Isabelle: stress, not the label, shapes which tactic moms use.
Phillips et al. (2017) found moms of kids with Down syndrome slide toward permissive style. Isabelle adds nuance: the slide is not lazy parenting; it is a moment-by-moment choice to avoid battles the child cannot win.
Boswell et al. (2023) link authoritative, autonomy-support moves to stronger self-determination. Isabelle shows moms already weave those moves in; we just need to help them do it more and when it counts.
Why it matters
Stop labeling moms as “too harsh” or “too soft” from one clip. Watch several moments across settings. Note when she flips from firm to gentle and why. Coach her to insert brief explanations and choices right after the stop command. This keeps the child safe, builds language, and still ends the coercive chain fast.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →During parent coaching, track three stop-and-explain cycles: parent says “no,” then adds a short reason or choice; praise the sequence.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The present study provides a qualitative analysis of mothers' childrearing behaviour focused on the coercive-inductive dimension, in particular in an effort to show that coerciveness is not always negative, but may be adaptive to the child's characteristics. Thirty-one mothers provided self-reports from a structured interview on their childrearing behaviour to the child in diverse situations. Data analyses examined the associations between the ratings of the mother's reports on the coercive-inductive dimension and three measures: the child's disability (mental, sensory and multiple), the child's personality traits and the child's observable behaviour. Results demonstrated that the mothers' childrearing behaviours were adapted to their child's characteristics, in particular by combining degrees of coercive and inductive strategies according to situations. They contribute to qualify in a more articulated way the mothers' childrearing behaviour than through more simple quantitative measures. The discussion finally underlies the interest in analyzing mothers' reports for research on parent-child interaction and for clinical issue.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2007 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2006.02.002