I'm surprised that these articles don't address demographics and their attendant economic impacts as influencing parental behaviours. DeeDee suggested wisely up thread that what is perceived as negative behaviour could well be a rational response. Consider that fertility rates have fallen well below replacement levels in much of the western world, with the US just hovering at or a hair below replacement levels.
Speaking in the crass terms of human investment, parents are less broadly diversified in their offspring than in previous generations. As a result, the expected biological and financial rates of return to reproduction are lower on an aggregate family level than previously. Add to this phenomenon the fact that age at first childbirth of educated women, in particular, is rising. In a not insignificant share of the population, fertility is delayed to the end of women's reproductive years, at which point the ability to respond to shocks in the family "portfolio" by having more children is limited.
At the same time as fertility rates have fallen, costs associated with credentialing children into fields with a high probability of high earnings and stability are outpacing average income growth a few times over. (Here's a brief article on the Canadian case, which isn't atypical of the west:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ort-warns/article4535869/?service=mobile)
Add to that climate the belief among economists that the west is poised to enter a long term period of sub-2% real economic growth, with attendant hits to employment opportunities and real wage growth. In many countries, slower forecast economic growth is accompanied by fiscal instability and intergenerational overhang of pension and other social safety net costs. (Average per capita Canadian public debt alone is approaching $40K, so newborns are inheriting a hefty load.) I urge you to refe, as well, to this info graphic on private debt in Canada as cautionary, particularly the reference to the 12% of the population-- basically adults under 35--whose household debt is >2.5x gross income. Given the share of private debt from mortgages in this segment, there is arguably a professional class that is disproportionately overexposed to housing market risk in the younger generations. Considering these economic drivers, is it surprising that we're witnessing more risk averse parenting styles among a segment of the population?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...atistics/article24322565/?service=mobileSo, families are relatively resource constrained and less broadly diversified, and the demographic and economic drivers are poised to soften over the next decade. What do they do in response? They intensify their attentional resources on their small stock of offspring to maximize the probability of their children successfully self-sustaining and reproducing, as proxied by chaperoning developmental decisions to a greater degree, and later in the child's life, than witnessed in previous generations. Rational? Yes. Prone to maladaptive application? Also yes.
