This post may contain affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, I may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Read my Affiliate Disclosure.
Remember Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof?
Every time he encounters a difficult situation, he tries to consider one side of the argument, then the other. He weighs tradition against change, parental authority against his children's wishes, and what he believes is right against what the world seems to expect him to accept.
I've always appreciated that about him.
You can understand someone else's position without automatically agreeing with it.
Which brings me back to Roseanne Conner.
In my earlier article, "Roseanne Conner Got It Wrong: What Becky's Birth Control Request Revealed About Her Parenting," I examined the way Roseanne handled her seventeen-year-old daughter's request for birth control.
I gave Roseanne credit for listening instead of exploding, arranging a medical appointment, and keeping the lines of communication open.
And I stand by the importance of those things.
But on the other hand...
I still don't believe Roseanne should have bought Becky birth control pills.
There. I said it.
I didn't particularly like that decision when I watched the episode years ago, and revisiting it hasn't changed my mind.
Now, before somebody assumes I'm suggesting parents should scream at teenagers, throw them out of the house, or pretend teenage relationships don't exist, let me make something clear.
I'm not.
What I am suggesting is that a parent can love a child, listen to a child, and help a child obtain reliable information without approving of every decision that child makes.
And I think Roseanne blurred those distinctions.
The Episode That Made Roseanne Conner Look More Progressive Than I Wanted Her to Be
In the fourth-season premiere of Roseanne, "A Bitter Pill to Swallow," Becky approaches her mother about obtaining birth control.
Lecy Goranson plays Becky, while Roseanne Barr plays her mother.
Becky's aunt Jackie, played by Laurie Metcalf, encourages her to speak openly with Roseanne.
Roseanne is stunned.
She tries to maintain a calm appearance, but once Becky leaves the room, her distress becomes obvious.
Dan, played by John Goodman, isn't thrilled when he hears about it either.
And when Roseanne eventually talks privately with Becky, she tells her daughter that having a boyfriend doesn't mean she must have sex and suggests that she consider waiting.
So far, I have no objection.
Actually, I wish she'd had that conversation sooner.
But Becky then reveals that she and Mark, played by Glenn Quinn, have already been sexually active.
Roseanne is shaken, although she doesn't punish Becky for telling her the truth.
The episode presents Roseanne's willingness to help her daughter obtain contraception as an important part of being an understanding mother.
I understand why the writers approached it that way.
I just don't agree with everything they wanted viewers to admire.
And here's something worth remembering: the question of who paid wasn't left entirely to our imaginations.
In the later fourth-season episode "Vegas, Vegas," Becky tells Darlene that Roseanne bought her the pills.
So the show went beyond Roseanne listening sympathetically or making an appointment.
She paid for them.
And that's the decision I want to examine.
Since When Does Listening Mean You Have to Say Yes?
One of my biggest complaints about modern parenting discussions is the assumption that being understanding must eventually lead to approval.
A child comes to a parent with something difficult.
The parent listens.
Wonderful.
The child explains what she wants.
Also wonderful.
But somewhere along the way, people begin treating the parent's willingness to hear the request as an obligation to agree with it.
Why?
When did that become the rule?
I believe children should be able to approach their parents with serious questions.
But I also believe parents have the right—and responsibility—to communicate their values.
Especially when they're raising teenagers.
If a seventeen-year-old tells her mother she's considering a decision with potentially serious consequences, I don't think the mother should simply announce that whatever makes her daughter happy is fine with her.
Sometimes good parenting involves explaining why you disagree.
Sometimes it involves setting reasonable boundaries.
And sometimes it means declining to participate in something you genuinely believe is wrong.
That doesn't mean treating your child as an enemy.
It means remembering that being a parent involves more than maintaining your popularity.
You can be approachable without being permissive.
And I don't think Roseanne always understood the difference.
I Wouldn't Have Paid for the Pills
Here's where my opinion differs from the way the episode encourages us to see Roseanne.
I understand the practical argument.
Becky was already having sex.
Roseanne couldn't turn back the clock.
Helping her obtain contraception could reduce the risk of an unintended pregnancy.
Those are real considerations, not something to wave away because they complicate the moral argument.
And I would never suggest using a teenager's access to accurate medical information or necessary healthcare as a weapon to punish her.
But I still believe there's a legitimate difference between making sure your daughter can speak with a qualified healthcare professional and personally agreeing to fund a choice you believe she shouldn't be making.
If I were in Roseanne's position, I would have made my values clear.
Something like:
"I'm glad you came to me, and I'm glad you're being honest. But I don't believe you're ready for this kind of relationship, and I'm not going to pretend I approve simply because you've already made the decision."
Then I would have listened to her answer.
I'd want to know whether she felt pressured, whether she understood the possible consequences, and whether she had questions that deserved accurate answers.
I wouldn't abandon the conversation.
But I also wouldn't behave as though my objections had suddenly become irrelevant.
And I wouldn't have offered to pay for the pills simply to prove how understanding I was.
Now, someone else might see paying for contraception as a practical safety decision rather than moral approval.
I understand that argument.
I just don't think acknowledging it requires me to adopt it.
This is where Tevye would begin considering his other hand.
And where I'd remind him that parents are allowed to have convictions.
Roseanne Could Be Strict About the Smallest Things
What makes this episode particularly frustrating to me is Roseanne's inconsistency.
This was a mother who could turn practically anything into an argument.
She had opinions about what her children wore, whom they dated, how they behaved, how they spoke to her, and whether they followed her instructions.
Roseanne was hardly a woman who sat quietly in a corner and let everyone do as they pleased.
She could be bossy.
She could be intrusive.
And she could make her children's lives miserable when she decided she didn't approve of something.
Yet when Becky approached her about a decision involving sex, responsibility, and the possibility of pregnancy, Roseanne suddenly seemed afraid that expressing too much disapproval would destroy their relationship.
I find that backwards.
I'm not suggesting that Roseanne should've screamed at Becky.
Quite the opposite.
Save the shouting over everyday nonsense.
When something genuinely serious comes along, sit down and talk.
Explain your concerns.
Ask questions.
Give the child an opportunity to respond.
But don't abandon your convictions because you're afraid the teenager might not like what you have to say.
If parents are going to draw lines, shouldn't those lines reflect what they actually believe matters?
I don't see much value in fighting over every minor household annoyance while becoming uncertain about the bigger responsibilities of raising children.
And Roseanne seemed awfully good at making that distinction difficult.
Jackie Had a Point, but Only Up to a Point
I know what Jackie was trying to accomplish.
She wanted Roseanne to recognize that Becky trusted her enough to ask for help.
And Jackie was right about one important thing.
A teenager who's willing to approach a parent has given that parent an opportunity to provide guidance.
You shouldn't throw that opportunity away.
But I think we need to separate two ideas.
It's good that Becky felt able to ask.
It doesn't automatically follow that Roseanne had to say yes to everything Becky requested.
Those aren't the same proposition.
If a teenager asks for permission to do something potentially dangerous, the fact that she asked doesn't obligate the parent to approve it.
If a child admits breaking a rule, the honesty deserves acknowledgment, but the rule doesn't necessarily disappear.
And if a teenager asks for help with a serious personal decision, listening should be the beginning of the conversation—not necessarily the end of it.
Jackie wanted Roseanne to remain someone Becky could trust.
I agree.
But trust shouldn't require a mother to pretend she has no moral objections.
The real challenge is communicating those objections without humiliation, threats, or emotional manipulation.
And that's a challenge I wish the episode had explored more thoroughly.
There's a Difference Between Protecting Your Daughter and Endorsing Her Decision
Here's the other hand, and I don't intend to ignore it.
Becky had already made her decision to become sexually active before approaching Roseanne.
Refusing to acknowledge that fact wouldn't make it disappear.
Nor would a dramatic speech about how disappointed her mother felt.
That's why I wouldn't advise a parent to obstruct access to medical care or withhold reliable information as punishment.
Parents can encourage teenagers to wait, discuss their values, and establish appropriate household rules without pretending that healthcare is a reward for good behavior.
But I also don't think a parent's duty to protect a teenager means she must celebrate or morally endorse every choice.
That's the distinction I would have liked Roseanne to articulate.
She could have told Becky:
"I love you. I want you safe. I also want you to know that I strongly disagree with the decision you're making, and I'm not changing that opinion simply because you've already done it."
Firm.
Clear.
No insults.
No threats.
And no requirement that Becky agree before she can receive guidance.
A parent doesn't lose the right to have values simply because a teenager begins making independent decisions.
And a teenager doesn't lose her dignity simply because her parent disapproves.
Both things can be true.
Dan Wasn't Wrong to Be Concerned, but His Reaction Wasn't Helpful
Dan's reaction deserves attention, too.
When he learns about Becky's request, his immediate anger turns toward Mark.
He wants to confront the boyfriend.
Later, he expresses that anger indirectly through an absurd lecture about the proper treatment of a wrench at the motorcycle shop.
It's funny television.
But it isn't much of a parenting strategy.
I have no objection to a father being concerned about his teenage daughter's relationship.
I think he should be concerned.
I also think he should be involved in teaching responsibility, respect, and good judgment.
But threatening the boyfriend doesn't substitute for a conversation with the daughter.
Becky has agency.
She's responsible for her own decisions.
And if Dan believes she isn't ready for a serious sexual relationship, he needs to explain his concerns rather than turning Mark into the sole villain.
There's also a difference between a father expressing disappointment and a father trying to intimidate everyone into obedience.
I admire fathers who establish boundaries and take family responsibilities seriously.
I don't admire fathers who think aggression is the same thing as authority.
Dan could've had a serious discussion about expectations, emotional maturity, and what he believed was appropriate for Becky's age.
Instead, much of his frustration comes out sideways.
Which, unfortunately, seems to be a specialty of the Conner household.
What Happened to Teaching Children to Wait?
One part of the episode I do appreciate is that Roseanne tells Becky she doesn't have to have sex simply because she has a boyfriend.
I agree wholeheartedly.
And I wish that idea had been the center of a more substantial conversation.
I don't think teenagers should be made to feel that having sex is simply the next automatic step in dating.
There's nothing embarrassing about waiting.
There's nothing wrong with having standards for yourself.
And there's certainly nothing wrong with deciding that you're not ready for a responsibility simply because other people are doing it.
I believe parents can teach that without resorting to shame.
You can explain that relationships involve more than attraction.
That affection doesn't create an obligation.
That a decent partner respects the word no.
And that a teenager should never feel pressured to make an important decision just to keep somebody interested.
That's not an outdated message.
That's a message about self-respect.
And I would've liked to see Roseanne emphasize it without immediately becoming so anxious about whether Becky would continue considering her an understanding mother.
Sometimes your child isn't going to like your opinion.
Sometimes she'll disagree with it.
And sometimes she'll make a decision you wish she'd handled differently.
That's part of parenting.
Your job isn't to guarantee agreement.
It's to provide honest guidance while maintaining a relationship in which difficult subjects can still be discussed.
Being a Mensch Doesn't Mean Being a Pushover
I don't believe being a mensch means saying yes to everything.
Actually, I think it's quite the opposite.
A decent person should have principles.
He should know where he stands.
And he should be willing to explain those convictions without humiliating someone who disagrees.
That includes parents.
If you believe honesty matters, tell the truth.
If you believe responsibility matters, establish expectations.
And if you believe your teenage child is about to make a serious mistake, don't remain silent simply because you want to be popular.
But there's another responsibility that comes with having convictions.
You have to treat other people decently even when they don't live according to your expectations.
You can't force someone to adopt your beliefs through cruelty.
And you shouldn't use love, affection, or access to basic care as bargaining chips.
The strongest parental authority doesn't depend on shouting or threats.
It comes from consistency, judgment, and being willing to demonstrate the standards you're teaching.
That's what I would've liked from Roseanne.
Not a performance about being the world's most open-minded mother.
A clear expression of what she believed, why she believed it, and what she expected from her daughter.
Followed by enough self-control to hear Becky's answer.
What I Would Want Parents to Take Away From This Episode
Suppose a teenager approaches a parent with a decision the parent strongly opposes.
I wouldn't begin by making the teenager feel worthless.
And I wouldn't immediately say yes simply because I was pleased she'd trusted me.
I'd begin with:
"I'm glad you told me. I need to understand what you're thinking before we decide how to handle this."
Then I'd have the difficult conversation.
I'd ask whether the teenager felt pressured.
I'd explain my values without pretending they're merely suggestions.
I'd make clear which household expectations remain in place.
And I'd distinguish between personal approval, financial participation, and helping someone obtain accurate information or appropriate care.
Those are separate questions, and they deserve separate consideration.
I'd also tell the teenager:
"You don't have to agree with every opinion I have. But I expect you to understand why I take these responsibilities seriously."
And finally, I'd leave room for another conversation.
Because parenting isn't one lecture followed by a final grade.
It's an ongoing relationship.
The teenager may disagree.
The parent may be disappointed.
But the communication shouldn't have to end.
That, to me, is a much stronger demonstration of parental responsibility than either unconditional approval or an explosion of anger.
On the Other Hand... I Still Wouldn't Have Bought the Pills
I know there are people who will disagree with me about Roseanne's decision.
They'll argue that Becky was already sexually active, that helping her obtain contraception was the responsible thing to do, and that Roseanne's willingness to pay showed she was putting her daughter's well-being ahead of her own discomfort.
I understand why they see it that way.
And I don't question that Roseanne loved Becky or wanted to protect her.
But I'm entitled to view her parenting decision differently.
I can recognize that she avoided humiliating Becky.
I can appreciate that she arranged a medical appointment.
I can acknowledge that preserving communication was important.
And I can still believe that Roseanne went further than I would've gone by personally buying the birth control pills.
Understanding a teenager's decision is not the same thing as approving it. Helping someone stay safe is not the same thing as celebrating the choice. And being a good parent doesn't mean surrendering every moral conviction in the name of being understanding.
That's where I stand.
I don't need every television mother to share my values.
But I do want to examine what those characters are teaching us to admire.
And when Roseanne presents a mother's willingness to fund her seventeen-year-old daughter's contraception as a measure of good parenting, I think there's room for another opinion.
A decidedly old-fashioned one.
Perhaps Tevye would consider the argument from both sides before making up his mind.
So would I.
But after considering both sides, I'd still have a few choice words for Roseanne Conner.
Because sometimes being a mother means saying something your child doesn't want to hear.
Sometimes it means drawing a line you genuinely believe is important.
And sometimes it means accepting that your child may disagree with you without abandoning your responsibility to guide her.
I don't believe Roseanne needed to be Becky's enemy. But I don't believe she needed to buy the pills, either.
She needed to be her mother.
And in my book, that means having the courage to stand by your values while treating your child with love, dignity, and respect.
That's the other hand.
And that's my position.
Sources and Further Reading
Want to Watch the Show?
Find your favorite classic TV shows on DVD or Blu-ray at Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Enjoyed This Article?
Get more TV nostalgia, good laughs, and life lessons delivered to your inbox. Subscribe to CouchDegree.com!
