On Wednesday 27 Jun 2012 9:17:32 am Biju Chacko wrote:
> I wonder where we Indians stand in the spectrum of spoiledness?

Indians think that if it's American it must be good. 

Having said that, assuming that the article is an accurate description of kids 
in American society, it suggests to me that American society is confused. I 
think Americans have been told for generations that they lead the world and 
have tended to reject existing knowledge in favor of experimentation, and I 
believe that Americans have experimented with their own society for too long. 

The article speaks of "helicopter parents" who give their children everything 
and hover over them.  But I always felt that American society - at least after 
the 1960s did not give what children need most - that is warmth and comfort in 
the early months and years, and firm discipline after a point. 

Children are put into a separate room as babies and are encouraged to make 
their own decisions. Adults (parents) actually leave children out of social 
gatherings. Parties are for adults, not children. Children are not encouraged 
to accompany parents if the latter go for a social gathering. When you give a 
child so much independence, to the extent of asking his opinion on every 
decision he is going to have some very clear ideas about when he should have a 
bath or clean his room. 

What might have happened in the west in general is an increasing interference 
of government and the law in parenting without the latter agencies necessarily 
knowing what is good or bad. The government mostly does not interfere with 
parenting in India, so there is a lot more abuse, a lot more trampling on 
children's rights, but a lot fewer "spoiled children", whatever that means.

If you think that you are preparing your child for the sort of society you 
think is right then you must dicipline him firmly. If you think that your child 
has to build up and live in his own future society, why worry if he is 
"spoiled"? Do what you want and don't worry about it as long as you are not 
breaking any laws.

I have a philosophical/rhetorical question to ask that leads from this: "What 
is meant by the admittedly well meaning idea that a child must have a happy 
and carefree childhood?"

I think that idea is silly. Children too have anxieties, sorrows and worries 
and they need to be taught how to cope and not be allowed to think things 
through on their own in a situation where their brains are not developed 
enough and their experience not long enough to differentiate good from bad. 
Could bad parenting be better than no parenting? What constitutes bad 
parenting?  What are children's rights? 

shiv

Reply via email to