Raising Likable People

My friend Rona Kader Wolfe, one of the most perfect parents I know, posted something on her facebook page yesterday that brilliantly sums up much of what I've been thinking about recently.  Her little daughter Sadie asked her, 
"Mom, why do some people grow up to be so mean?" 
Rona- "Maybe because no one let them be happy when they were little. When you don't know how to be happy with yourself, you don't know how to like others." 
Sadie- "Oh, if that's the case when I grow up I guess I'm gonna love everybody!"


I doubt that anyone deliberately sets out to abuse children.  However, I know parents who think it's good to be "tough" with a child in the name of "discipline."  Before Dr. Benjamin Spock, the "experts" counseled mothers not to cuddle and comfort their babies too much, because it would spoil them.  It wasn't considered healthy to kiss little children, because they might get germs.  They said it was "unscientific" to show children too much love, even psychologically damaging.  I still know people who say suffering is good for the soul.  What doesn't kill them will make them stronger.  Unfortunately, what doesn't make them stronger might just kill them.   Yes, they do need to learn that there is cruelty and injustice in this world, but they shouldn't feel beaten down by it and develop full-time despair.   


Children will have plenty of time when they're older to develop strength and independence, but before they can do that, they need to develop a sense that they are loved and secure and that a good life is possible within their families, if not in the world at large.  

Public vs. Private

I care about my children, as I’m sure other parents care about theirs, and I want what’s best for them.   As someone who cares about education in particular, of course I want mine to get the best possible education.  And I love my own children better than anyone else’s children, so doesn’t that mean I want their education to be better than everyone else’s children’s education?  No, it does not.   We cannot say “all that matters to me is my own family, and nobody else.”

I posted a link yesterday to a video about some of the people behind the crusade against public schools.  Wisconsin was the first battleground in the privatization wars, even before the current attacks on public school teachers here.  The people who have tried taking control of the government here have tried pulling some of the same stunts in North Carolina.  There are even some people who support their efforts.  The argument these people continually offer is that parents who care about their children need to take them out of “government controlled” schools, which are failing them, if they want them to get a quality education, and put them into private schools instead, at the taxpayers’ expense.  People who don’t have children in public school shouldn’t be taxed to support these institutions, they say.   It’s not fair to make families pay for two educational systems when they’re only using one. 

Having sent my children to private school for a total of thirty child/years (37½ if one counts preschool) before sending them to public high schools and universities, I can certainly understand these parents’ point of view.  I would certainly have loved having help from the government with their tuition, especially since my daughters didn’t attend the local public elementary school.  

But saying “I shouldn’t have to pay to support a school unless it’s my own child’s school ” makes as much sense as saying “I shouldn’t have to pay to support a fire department unless it’s my own house they’re saving ” or “I shouldn’t have to pay to support a police department or judicial or prison system unless it’s my own mugger they’re arresting and prosecuting,” or “I shouldn’t have to pay to maintain roads I never drive on or parks I never visit.”  The public schools are there free for every family to use.  Our city, Milwaukee, has some excellent public schools where I would have loved sending them, but I wanted them to receive religious instruction that they could not have received in public school.  Parents who prefer to use other schools, as my husband and I did, make that choice freely, and choices come with responsibilities.   Because we chose a private school, we faced our responsibility and paid the tuition.  We did not ask the taxpayers to do so, because we knew it wouldn’t be fair to punish them for our family’s choice.

Whether one has children or not, public schools are an essential institution in one’s society, and good public schools are in everybody’s interest.  A business owner wants employees capable of doing their jobs well and consumers with high enough incomes to afford the business’s goods or services.  Property owners want their neighbors to be sufficiently well educated that they could afford to buy their own jewelry and electronics and not think of stealing from others.

Assuring that other people’s children receive good educations helps my family.  My children all love books and music and movies.   They have a personal interest in assuring that other people’s children learn to write well, play music well, and make good movies.  My children want to have decent homes and modern transportation infrastructure so they can get to work.  They have a personal interest in assuring that other people’s children grow up to be good, well-educated architects and engineers.  My children sometimes get sick.  They have a personal interest in assuring that other people’s children become excellent, well-educated physicians.   My children plan to live in a state with a government.  They have a personal interest in assuring that other people’s children grow up to be wise and capable legislators.

My children don’t need to compete with your children for academic honors.  My children will lose nothing if your children win.

Where are you going, little girl?

I want to thank my friend Ebony Thomas, PhD for bringing this blog post to my attention this morning.

  See also the video in yesterday's post, about what's happening to public education in this country. 

To Spank or Not to Spank

Today's New York Times had an interesting story and follow-up discussion about corporal punishment.  According to conventional wisdom, African American parents are more likely to use spanking as a means of discipline than European American parents.  I was aware, when my own children acted up, that slapping them in public might have gotten some people to condemn me, perhaps even to the police, but I was also aware that other parents would judge me unfavorably and think, "Those people just don't know how to discipline their children" if I didn't slap.  Since so many other words have been spent, I won't summarize, but readers can to go to this link and decide for themselves where they come down on the issue.  

Of course how one disciplines one's children has to do with more than race alone.  The greatest predictor is probably what one's own parents modeled.  Nevertheless, I understand the point.  In generations past, spanking was a way black parents impressed upon their children the necessity of instant obedience to those in power, which could have had life or death consequences in the Jim Crow South, or before.  If it fostered fear, sullenness, resentment, humiliation, or aggression, at least that was better than the alternative, a horrible and premature demise at the end of a rope.  

Some people argue that corporal punishment is an unforgivable form of abuse.  Others insist that they were spanked as children and it did them no harm.  Still others say we all do it, but few will admit to it.  One common refrain is "never punish in anger."  I always found the idea of a parent losing his temper (as almost every human occasionally does) and striking out less troubling than a spanking delivered in cold blood.  What does a parent tell a child when he decides that at his calmest, clearest, and most rational, he has no better recourse than to strike out physically?  Whenever I have entertained any urge of striking my children, I have always seen it as a failure to deal with a problem in a rational adult manner.     

I was particularly impressed by a few of the comments readers made, especially one schoolteacher who wrote that children who have been spanked are less likely to listen to adults who don't spank them.  Instead of learning to respect teachers in their own right, they learn to respect the power to inflict pain or humiliation on others, and they develop an attitude of "You Can't Make Me!"  That is, indeed, a response I have seen in the classroom.

I do believe that children need discipline.  Without it, they would grow into obnoxious, selfish brats.  But parents need to consider what ultimate goals they're trying to accomplish in disciplining their children, and what they want to instill.  Is it obedience?  Obedience is important if one intends to spend one's entire life as a child or a serf or slave, or cannon fodder, as many people did in centuries past.  Tragically, some children whose parents value obedience above all do spend their entire lives as children, all ten or four years of their lives, or both two.  Yet most children now live to face a long tenure as adults, and in the long run, they will need to develop competence and confidence more than obedience. 

I would rather see parents teach their children to act out of respect and consideration for others.  Instead of saying "You must obey me, because if you don't, I'll whack you from here to Timbuktu," I think parents should say "You must respect me, because as a human being, I deserve the respect of every other human being, and as your mother (or father) I deserve your respect and consideration even more than anyone else does."