the cure for what ails society

everyone seems to think there is one core issue that is the root of all that is wrong with our country/society/world and, if resolved, will remedy everything that ails society. granted, this is quite a generalization, and in reality most people don't think there is only one issue but rather put the majority of their emphasis on a single issue. not to be left out, I, too, will choose an issue.

I choose parenting. what will influence this society more than those who will be the next to compose it? obviously, I don't mean to imply that every single problem can be remedied by good parenting. furthermore, I certainly don't purport to assume that their is a single golden standard by which one can determine the "goodness" of any given parent. it's a complicated, difficult, all consuming job, and it doesn't come with a manual. however, I do believe that general guidance can be given. I also believe that the root of all societal change begins with the next generation of the society, and who has more influence on that next generation than the adults with whom they live, i.e., their parents.

Orson Scott Card recently published an article in his Ornery American column entitled I Give You Permission, which in short encouraged parents to actually be strict with their children. not being a parent, I may not have any license to say anything about the way parenting works, but I plan on being a parent someday, and so have at least given it some deal of thought. a large bit of what he says makes sense; things like actually asking your child to be responsible, not giving a child everything he or she asks for, and giving more trust and freedom (though not total) to the child who merits it. most of it seems like reasonably sound advice.

although there were a couple sentences I'm not sure that I agreed with, one idea in particular threw me. he has this idea that kids aren't capable of self-control and need parents to teach it to them by telling them what they can and cannot do. when they get older, they realize that their actions have consequences and so are then able to exhibit proper self-control. I know that certain self-preservation drives are either not present or not as strong in young children, such that kids will often do risky things because they don't have the mental processes in place to stop them. however, I don't think that kids are totally without judgment. I remember what it was like to be a kid. my parents taught me some of what I should or shouldn't do, but they couldn't force me to repress my desires or delay gratification; I had to learn to do that for myself. furthermore, I knew other people who had very strict parents that, when they moved out or went to college, had absolutely no self-control, discipline, responsibility, or ability to delay gratification. it seems like this occurred because the self-control they had when younger was actually an externally imposed substitute for self-control from their parents. if they had been allowed to develop their own self-control with the guidance of their parents, they would have been better equipped when parental control was removed.

one of the biggest things I advocate in parenting is that no two children are alike, and no two parents are alike. often times, a parent must adapt his or her parenting style to fit the specific, possibly idiosyncratic needs of his or her child. to that end, it's entirely possible that my parents gave me the room to develop my own self-control at a young age because they realized that I would, but that might not have worked with another child or for other parents.

ultimately, I'd say that parenting is mostly (but not entirely) relative, both to the parent and the child. while some of OSC's comments are good advice, I'm not so sure that taking them as absolutes makes sense. it's quite possible that the relativism of parenting is an implicit assumption that comes to bear on the remainder of the article, but I would have liked such an assumption to be stated explicitly.