Most certainly! After working with children for these years, I could not be more convinced of this fact. They derive security from knowing where the boundaries are. Perhaps an illustration will make this more clear. Imagine yourself driving a car over the Royal Gorge in Colorado. The bridge is suspended hundreds of feet above the canyon floor, and as a first-time traveler, you are tense as you drive across. (I knew one little fellow who was so awed by the view over the side of the bridge that he said, "Wow, Daddy. If you fell off of here it'd kill you constantly! ") Now suppose that there were no guardrails on the side of the bridge; where would you steer the car? Right down the middle of the road! Even though you don't plan to hit those protective rails along the side, you feel more secure just knowing they are there. The analogy to children has been demonstrated empirically. During the early days of the progressive education movement, one enthusiastic theorist decided to take down the chain-link fence that surrounded the nursery school yard. He thought the children would feel more freedom of movement without that visible barrier surrounding them. When the fence was removed, however, the boys and girls huddled near the center of the play yard. Not only did they not wander away, they didn't even venture to the edge of the grounds.
There is security in defined limits. When the home atmosphere is as it should be, the child lives in utter safety. He never gets in trouble unless he deliberately asks for it, and as long as he stays within the limits, there is mirth and freedom and acceptance. If this is what is meant by "democracy" in the home, then I favor it. If it means the absence of boundaries, or that each child sets his own boundaries, then I'm inalterably opposed to it.