What Happened To The Wonder Years?

[Sukerkin]

Here's a very interesting 'debate' being carried out on the BBC website about a new study, regarding the impact on childhood of socio-environmental factors, that has substantially confirmed what a lot of 'ordinary' people have being saying for thirty years!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/02/we_blame_the_parents.html

 

[Tez3]

This is a result of the 'greed is good' and the 'me, me, me' years. On another thread people were talking about parents watching their children training, well to me, while agreeing they should watch and why they should watch, parents are for the most part an utter nightmare.

I'm the one who tells the children to cover their mouths when they cough so as not to spread germs, one parent just shrugged when I told her child that as if to say, 'do I care'. I'm the one who asks the children to say please and thank you because they tend to think everything they are given is a right. They do this because the parents assume everything is a right. Actually having to work to earn something is out of the question. There is a general air of entitlement around these days.

The Tories are fine ones to talk though, it was Maggies years that I believe engendered this! Now they are bleating it's the Labour governments fault lol!

 

[MA-Caver]

Great article and probably IMO a great book. Lots of points throughout the article that I nodded vigorously at. I added America to various parts in ( ) because it would seem our problems here in the states are the same as across the pond.

Adult selfishness is blamed for many of the problems afflicting young people in Britain: (AND America) high family break-up, teenage unkindness, unprincipled advertising, too much competition in education and ("of course" say the report's authors) "our acceptance of income inequality". There is an emotional bluntness to the analysis. It talks of the need for "a more caring ethic and for less aggression, a society more based upon the law of love".

At this point I'm not going to care if I tick people off... but do give it some thought. You cannot have a society based on the law of love when God is being continually eradicated from it's consciousness. Because God ... IS love.

Echoing Conservative party arguments, the collapse of the traditional family is seen as a critical factor. Lone parents, absent fathers, working mothers - all are listed as potentially damaging to young people's lives.
"Child-rearing is one of the most challenging tasks in life and ideally it requires two people," the report concludes.

It produces evidence suggesting that three times as many three-year-olds living with lone parents or a step-parent have behavioural problems compared to those living with married parents.

More generally, the report concludes: "Children with step or single parents are 50% more likely to suffer problems with academic achievement, self-esteem, popularity with other children, behavioral difficulties, anxiety and depression."

We are beginning to see the effects of single parent homes over the long term since divorce rates began climbing in the 50's and 60's and carried over to latter generations. Not all kids are turning out bad but it would seem that a majority are suffering from the aforementioned ailments.

"The closeness of fathers to their children influences the children's later psychological well-being even after allowing for the mother's influence," the report states, also suggesting that women's new economic independence has contributed to family break-up. <snip> The choice of staying at home to bring up a family should be more easily available, it argues.

It's easy to see how this is difficult to do especially in light of today's economy where an additional income helps the family budget manage better. Yet again, the effect is showing or beginning to manifest itself. I've nothing against the "women's new economic independence", I think it's great wonderful... provided that the children are cared for and attended to properly... by BOTH parents.

So may its assertion that British (AND American) society has "tilted too far towards the individual pursuit of private interest and success".

Vain, ignorant and selfish. What's in it for me? I deserve it. I want it now. Me, me, me, my, my, my, mine, mine, mine.
Ohh aren't you tired of it all already?

Scrolling down the commentaries this one caught my eye and I think it's got bloody brilliant observations. Snipped from commentary #36

Yes, life has become much harder for children and it IS connected with the different pressures in modern society, including family breakdown, materialism, the demands placed on children and the way society actually marginalises them whilst appearing to pander to every need.

I think the main problem does lie with the increasing selfishness of modern society, a downhill slope that Thatcher certainly accelerated. This manifests itself in several ways: people are much more likely to be preoccupied pursuing their own goals (and yes, this does include parents 'fulfilling themselves' at the expense of their own children) and much less likely to concern themselves with others. This is part of the problem for single parent families - of course it's easier to bring up children with 2 people than with one but the problem for single parents is magnified by the fact that we have lost a sense of community responsibility for children.

This is also apparent in the intolerant attitude to children in public places: a child crying on a bus is much more likely to evoke tut-tutting and 'why don't you shut that child up?' responses than sympathy (most parents have been there), let alone offers of help.

And the extreme tragedies of high profile child abuse cases would surely become less likely if society felt more responsible for the well-being of all its children.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Hey, here's a concept that works:

If you aren't prepared to make the sacrifices and lifestyle changes that are required to Actually raise a child into a halfway decent human being worth its life--DON'T HAVE ONE.

Nobody's gonna thank you, or cut you any slack, or give you the Medal of Honor just for making a baby--our own existing population, on BOTH sides of the pond is incontestable evidence that any IDIOT can do THAT.

The trick will be to either make the necessary sacrifices /changes to your life and make the ones worth making, or have the decency to recognize your limitations, and just not make ANY.

 

[Drac]

Hey, here's a concept that works:

If you aren't prepared to make the sacrifices and lifestyle changes that are required to Actually raise a child into a halfway decent human being worth its life--DON'T HAVE ONE.

Nobody's gonna thank you, or cut you any slack, or give you the Medal of Honor just for making a baby--our own existing population, on BOTH sides of the pond is incontestable evidence that any IDIOT can do THAT.

The trick will be to either make the necessary sacrifices /changes to your life and make the ones worth making, or have the decency to recognize your limitations, and just not make ANY.

Anyone can be a Father, it takes a man to be a Dad ....

 

[Empty Hands]

You cannot have a society based on the law of love when God is being continually eradicated from it's consciousness. Because God ... IS love.

If this was true, then logically, atheists would be incapable of love. We know that isn't true. Love is a chemical reaction in your brain, which has been studied by neuroscientists. Some people are even born without the capability (reactive attachment disorder). Love is not supernatural.

 

[Hagakure]

Whoaa nelly, that's English, for stop a horse!

While I fully agree that there are a lot of selfish sods who don't deserve to be parents, and frankly, drag their charming offspring up, rather than bring them up, let's not label ALL parent/step/single parent arrangements.

I'm a step dad to a wonderful step daughter. She's polite, helps round the house, has a well developed manner and manners, and, although not hugely academic, will do well enough to get her onto A-levels and uni should she choose, just not likely to be Oxbridge.

I also have an incredible 2 year old daughter who says please and thank you already and a zest for life that astonishes me. She has her "terrible twos" moments, but not often. They're both fed healthily, watch the scant minimum tv, read a lot/are read to a lot, get to play with Jayne (the wife) and I, and we spend as much time as we can together. That said, after 8-830pm, that's adult time, our time so to speak. We devote a lot of time to them, playing with and educating them, then we get our time.

So... There are a lot of parents who do sod all with their kids. Their kids'll be fat and lazy, arrogant, uninterested in life, and "sheeple", just like the parents. I don't care if that sounds pretentious, because, in the main, it's true. Doesn't mean we're ALL like that though. It doesn't matter to the UK anymore, because we're emigrating, and taking our lucky, balanced family to another country to live soon, because of the crap parents and their snot nosed offspring.

 

[Steve]

Very interesting article. I agree with a lot of the conclusions of the article, particularly the parts where we provide free parenting classes as well as professional counseling available for families in trouble... call it Nanny 911, but for anyone.

I'm also not sure I buy the god IS love thing, either, MC-Caver. Love is love. God is simply how some people embody that abstract concept in their lives.

what I think is most significant about this article is the call to action, which I believe is sorely needed. I'm certainly not a pollyanna, but we should take pains to give our children a childhood for as long as we can. Personally, I don't have a problem with most video games or electronics. It's the pervasive and unavoidable access to information, even that which is innappropriate for kids, which is a big part of the problem. The constant barrage of scariness, violence and negativity as well as the constant focus on sex that robs our kids of their childhood.

 

[Hagakure]

Very interesting article. I agree with a lot of the conclusions of the article, particularly the parts where we provide free parenting classes as well as professional counseling available for families in trouble... call it Nanny 911, but for anyone.

I'm also not sure I buy the god IS love thing, either, MC-Caver. Love is love. God is simply how some people embody that abstract concept in their lives.

what I think is most significant about this article is the call to action, which I believe is sorely needed. I'm certainly not a pollyanna, but we should take pains to give our children a childhood for as long as we can. Personally, I don't have a problem with most video games or electronics. It's the pervasive and unavoidable access to information, even that which is innappropriate for kids, which is a big part of the problem. The constant barrage of scariness, violence and negativity as well as the constant focus on sex that robs our kids of their childhood.

*claps* Spot on. Nuff said. Tis why I deliberately limit the amount of television mine are subjected to.

 

[MA-Caver]

Love is not supernatural.

I agree. Neither is God.

 

[MA-Caver]

Love is not supernatural.

I agree.

 

[Gordon Nore]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/02/we_blame_the_parents.html

Suke,

What are "SATS tests," as quoted in the article?

 

[Gordon Nore]

I'm the one who tells the children to cover their mouths when they cough so as not to spread germs, one parent just shrugged when I told her child that as if to say, 'do I care'. I'm the one who asks the children to say please and thank you because they tend to think everything they are given is a right. They do this because the parents assume everything is a right. Actually having to work to earn something is out of the question. There is a general air of entitlement around these days.

And you haven't been sued yet?

Seriously, I can relate. We have to teach social graces to children; they won't learn it automatically because they're no longer a requirement in daily life. We're becoming rapidly more individualistic in our adult society, and it's rubbing off on our children.

For my part, as a teacher and as the parent of a now-grown son, I go out of my way to model courteous behaviour for children. The reason a child should say, "Good afternoon, Mr Nore," is not that I am the adult, but because I have just said, "Good afternoon," to the child, or I am about to. In order to be civil, we have to consciously slow the world down and take a little time with eachother.

Just the other day, I was blowing snow from my elderly neighbour's walkway. I've been helping her for years, as have her neighbours on the other side of her property. When I first ventured into her yard, some years ago, she went running inside to get her cheque book and asked me if I had a job. It was a very kind thing of her to do. Of course, I explained to her that I was glad to help, appreciated her offer, and that I was employed.

It makes me wonder sometimes though: Isn't it normal to help a neighbour, particularly an elderly one? When did that go out of fashion? How can you not stop and help someone who's spilt their groceries on the sidewalk? When did it become ok to honk your horn at a school crossing because you're on your way to a meeting?

We cannot teach children what we do not model ourselves. We reap what we sew.

 

[Sukerkin]

Suke,

What are "SATS tests," as quoted in the article?

They're tests given at school to determine ability 'stream'. It's an acronym of Standard Assessment Test's I believe. I'll have to ask my sister to be sure tho' as this all came in ages after I graduated, let alone went to school .


A quick Google with a UK bias (as I know America uses SAT's too (or did) might help clear up the details.

 

[Gordon Nore]

They're tests given at school to determine ability 'stream'. It's an acronym of Standard Assessment Test's I believe. I'll have to ask my sister to be sure tho' as this all came in ages after I graduated, let alone went to school .


A quick Google with a UK bias (as I know America uses SAT's too (or did) might help clear up the details.

That's what I suspected, but the acronym I'm familiar with is SAT, not SATS. In education there's acronym for everything.

 

[Hagakure]

Just re-read this thread again, some excellent posts, well made.

I'd just like to qualify my post about my darling 2 year old, who spent the vast majority of last night throwing the mother of all hissy-fits. Oh well... The exception to prove the rule eh. :shrug:

 

[Carol]

Interesting reader comment that mentions something the BBC omitted - this "study" was published by a group that is part of one of the largest Christian bodies in the UK. Christian groups are likely to overwhelmingly support the type of family unit that were spoken of so favorably of in their book.

While I happen to agree with many of the points made, this to me sounds about as genuine as the sugar industry financing a study that concludes sugar is better for you than Splenda.

Although we do not always use the charity&#8217;s full title, we remain The Church of England Children's Society. The Archbishops of Canterbury and York are presidents of the Society and nearly all of the Diocesan and some Suffragan Bishops (60 in all) are Vice-Presidents, and the Chair of Trustees is currently the Bishop of Leicester, Bishop Tim Stevens.

http://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/all_about_us/who_we_are/our_church_partnership/4335.html

 

[seasoned]

Kids are like sponges, give them something to model after at home, in a positive way. Everyone knows right from wrong, it’s just that we sometimes get caught up in life, “family comes first“. Once you decide to have kids, you have decided to add something to life, in a tangible way. Don’t blow it, by treating your possessions, car, house, things, better then your kids. Kids aren’t stupid, give them something to look back on, so if they do stray, they will have something to cling to and remember, in their darkest times.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Exactly. The average person now that has kids wants to keep on with the young single partying life because they were never taught that once you have a kid, that kid OWNS you for the next 18 years.

And on top of that they let the kid find this OUT.

No wonder it's a mess.

 

[Gordon Nore]

Interesting reader comment that mentions something the BBC omitted - this "study" was published by a group that is part of one of the largest Christian bodies in the UK. Christian groups are likely to overwhelmingly support the type of family unit that were spoken of so favorably of in their book.

I had wondered about that. I sensed some sort of agenda in the language regarding single-parent families. Nonetheless, I think they've some good points about parenting and civility.