Last
night I took a computer game off him that his mother and I agreed
was violent and told him he would not be getting it back. He is
twelve years old and naturally, he disagreed.
But
I am not badly disturbed by his feelings toward me. I know they are
temporary and I trust in the knowledge that sometimes parents will
be hugely unpopular with our own children...if we are being moral,
ethical parents - involved parents.
In
this part of the world people get a lot right about how children
are treated. One of the most notable things is how older children
are largely both tolerant and even downright nice to their younger
brothers and sisters, as well as to other littler kids they are not
related to at all.
In
Mediterranean Europe, the family unit is close and socialising with
the extended family of grandparents, cousins and other blood
relatives is a common part of almost every one's weekly life.
This
is in stark contrast to standard Anglo families.
But
I would argue that across this stretch of the planet (but probably
in other parts, such as North America as well) parents are much too
concerned with their children's happiness.
This
may sound like a harsh, uncaring statement so it needs a bit of
explanation. To me (and to plenty of full-time philosophers)
happiness is a temporary state. It comes and goes under it's own
invisible steam and can arrive and disappear before we hardly
realise it.
The
more we desperately look for it or try to manufacture it the more
it seems to slip through our fingers.
I'm
not advocating that we don't do our best to create situations where
our kids are likely to find enjoyment or fun - quite the contrary.
But
if we put happiness, which is by its nature a short-term sensation,
ahead of trying to develop a son or daughter with a sense of what
is right and what is wrong, then we are making a terrible mistake.
If
we act and speak by instinctively putting our children's immediate
gratification as the priority instead of doing what we can so that
they are playing and learning in ways that are beneficial to them
(at least in the medium or longer term) what is the logical result?
Years
later you end up with adults who value getting as many petty
possessions as they can (because materialism is supposed to create
contentment) and to them this a thousand times more important than
having something as bothersome as a conscience, which just gets in
the way of fueling a bigger bank account.
In
other words, you have corruption and you have it on a grand scale.
The Mediterranean disease.
I
accept that the inclination towards having happy children is a
healthy one. I just don't accept that this injection of happiness
should always be the most important thing.
Faced
with the choice of being strongly disliked by my son for a period
of time or, on the other hand, turning a blind eye to him
exercising disturbing impulses for potentially hours on end, I'd
choose unpopularity every time.
Knowing
what we now know about how violent, first-person computer games
will desensitise even adult users (and that is why modern military
training uses simulated war-games) it would be almost a crime to be
the indulgent parent.
[A
version of this article was first published in Catalonia
Today magazine, March 2014.]
2 comments:
I could not agree more. We spend too much time on our kids happiness, and less time teaching them the tools they need to find and make their own.
Thanks for the comment, Deborah. I know you have a fine track record of being vocal on these kinds of issues. If we cared about our kids sense of right and wrong more than we cared about if they have "the latest" toy/game/screen babysitter, then we'd be better parents, right?
Post a Comment