I think Scarr's idea of a "good enough" parent is interesting. She's basically saying that as long as you show a modicum of interest in what your child does, they will turn out as well as a child who's parents' insist on micromanaging everything they do. I believe this is an amazing approach because, as a society, we tend to think that our children need this constant prodding and supervision. This idea of "super parenting", I feel, is more to do with our self obsession than any actual care to the well-roundedness of the child. Culturally, we see our children's successes and failures as a direct reflection of ourselves. When in fact, the things our children accomplish (or not) are simply a credit to them. We help guide them (ideally) but they should sink or swim on their own. There is no evidence that supports "super parenting" turning out anymore spectacular offspring, than those of the "good enough" parenting. And it wouldn't surprise me if those super parented children actually had less coping skills, or more reliance on medication to deal with everyday life. That kind of pressure seems detrimental to the over-all wellbeing of the child. I agree with Scarr.