Why I'm Not Like that Supernanny!

Although I did a Supernanny episode for KARE 11 TV in the Twin Cities a few years back, I want to make a clear stand on why I am not like the Supernanny on NBC.


First, Jo Frost has no children of her own, so I find it difficult to imagine that she can empathize with the parents she advises. I'm not saying that I don't think anyone without kids can help others parent. As a parent coach and mom, I just don't feel Jo has the credibility, despite her English accent, which I guess is supposed to evoke authority a la Mary Poppins (who also didn't have children, and was um, a character, not a real person.) Please, instead of letting off-shoot characters from some fiction writer's imagination dictate how we parent, let's try to be in the real world, where parenting is truly the most important job.

Second, I find Jo judgmental of the parents she tries to help. Instead of spending her time rolling her eyes at them, maybe she could dig for some compassion. Oh yeah, she doesn't have kids herself, so it's hard for her to see what parents go through. She's a character, based on a character.

Third, it's TV. Eyerolling and judgment sell, because all the poor parents who are watching NBC are so upset with themselves for not parenting the way they'd like that they project blame onto the parents on TV to cast it away from themselves. That projection keeps them glued to the TV, and the ratings remain high. There just has to be a better way.

Fourth, there's no lasting follow-up. The Supernanny goes into the home with her camera crew, the kids get upset (more so, likely because they are not only being watched, but invaded and filmed by strangers) and the parents overreact. Over a week's time, Jo offers advice, and then leaves. OK, she comes back for a second round of the exploitation that is reality TV, but really, who do the parents call after that?

Fifth, Jo often corrects the parents in front of the children. I have a really hard time with this, as it clearly undermines the parents' authority in the eyes of the kids. To effectively coach parents, you need to have the parents' full attention, and give them yours. Having the children in the room and attempting to "speak in code" is not the most efficient way of communicating. And the kids always know what's going on anyway, or worse, feel enormous guilt that something is really wrong with them. Parents need to stay in the parent place, not be taught how to parent in front of their children. Having appointments outside the home supports them from the background, where the kids don't even have to know help is being sought. This is a much stronger position for the parents to hold. And it's better for the kids, who are very sensitive to "having something wrong with me (or us)". When parents can learn techniques for handling challenging behavior, go home and apply the techniques, and come back and see their parent coach for more advice and support, this works the best for everyone.

Sixth, Jo uses time outs, which are punitive at worst and ineffective at best. So many really effective parenting techniques exist that lift the child out of the judge-blame-punish mode, and free parents from being dictators.

Time outs are passé in my book, and the books of many other parenting experts. I had to turn the TV off one time, watching Jo vehemently make a two-year-old stay in the "naughty chair." It took me back to when I was a young mom and knew very little about good parenting. We can do a lot better.

I have no grudge against Jo as a person. I'm sure she's a wonderful woman. It's just that parenting should not be a spectacle on TV, but a personal, spiritual, relational endeavor.

So I guess I just ruined my chances of ever landing a network gig on a reality TV show, but you know what? I'd much rather coach parents until their children are really feeling good, parents feel empowered and loving, their relationship with their child is healed, and peace is the order of the day at home. So be it.

By Tina Feigal