As long as my child has a need that I perceive to be a need, it is my right to "helicopter" if not my moral obligation. Who else knows what is best for a child than the parent? Usually people who care very little about your child and want them to fit into a little mold - so that it is easier for them.
What is really funny is the results of parenting. There have been several studies that have said children with involved parents, that spend time with their parents do much better than "hands off" parents. But, being "hands off" makes it easier for schools and society in general to push "their will" on our children.
Yes, there are some parents that live through their children, but I doubt that is the norm. However, articles like that one make concerned, involved parents question what they are doing. No, I am not going to put my kid on a bus and let him be shipped off to a school where I have no idea of the background of the teacher, no - I am not going to just leave my kid at a ball park and think that the coach only has good intentions and would never do anything inappropriate. If being a helicopter means keeping my kid out of the hands of predators or bully adults or what have you then I am all for it.
I definitely think many kids today are over committed, but I don't think the parents are bad - they are just trying to keep their kids occupied - yes, having dinner together every night would do fine, but that isn't everyone's reality. I would much rather be a helicopter parent than a parent like one of my friends students.
Teacher calls parent: "we need to talk about your child"
Parent: "look, your shift is 8-3; I don't call you during my shift so you don't call me during your shift".
Now, whose child has a better chance at success in life?
