"It Takes a Village to Raise a Child"

[Sunstone]

Both Hitler and Stalin were raised by abusive parents. Think of how different the world might be today if someone had intervened and taken them away from those environments early enough and put them on a different path in life.

Or, even leaving them in those environments, had done things to ameliorate the effects of their parent's abuse. I've seen that happen -- where someone has taken an abused kid under wing and quietly, but successfully encouraged them down a healthier road.

The idea that parents "own" their children and have absolute authority over them is an idea that must be abandoned at all costs.

I agree, although I would add the caveat that parental rights ought not be abridged lightly. But I'm sure you meant that anyway. I'm just nitpicking for clarity.

 

[Sunstone]

This is not a topic that is as easy to tackle as it appears at first glance. While yes, a village should and to some extent does raise children, the distribution of power and authority are not so easily resolved. A child's parents are naturally in a position to receive such authority. Our system of laws is firmly designed around this concept. So we see that power passed to the child's guardians in the parents stead. Whole court cases are fought over this guardianship precisely because of the authority we do not argue over the little stuff but rather over guardianship which entails the authority to decide the little stuff.

I believe you're looking at the issue through an all too legal frame of reference here. While you make good points about matters that somehow progress into becoming matters for the legal system to resolve, that's all but irrelevant to the OP. Perhaps I didn't make clear, but when I was talking of a community raising a child I was not at all talking of cases in which it might be advisable for the courts to become involved in raising a child. To me, that's a whole 'nother issue. But I do think the breakdown of communities in this country might have something to do with the apparent readiness of folks today to throw miscreant kids into the legal system, rather than sort things out more informally.

When multiple individuals are involved there is disagreement.

Frankly,. that was never an issue with me despite how often and how seriously other people took an interest in me growing up. I always gave my mother's authority precedence -- instinctively. Never even had to think about it.

Moreover, there seemed to have been some vague, but commonplace, boundaries in my community about just how much "advice and guidance" an adult could offer a kid without properly asking permission of the kid's parents. For instance, folks would tell me stuff, then sometimes add, "Ask your mother if that ain't so", or something similar to that. Looking back, my impression is folks were generally pretty careful about not undermining her authority.

 

[Rival]

Both Hitler and Stalin were raised by abusive parents.

I'd hardly say Keke was an abusive mother. She did everything she could for Soso. Beso was a drunk who abandoned his family periodically and hated the idea that Soso was at the seminary, as he wanted him to join the cobbling trade of his own. Soso was mostly raised by his mom and, more importantly, the priests and deans at the seminary, one of which, 'Black Spot' was notorious for his nastiness and strictness.

Also, 'abusive parents therefore Stalin' is kind of a ****ty argument.

 

[Mock Turtle]

"Stranger danger" is of course very real, but it can be overblown -- and I think it has been. There were most likely just as many perverts lurking around when I was growing up in that small town as there are today in the same town, and yet I never encountered any. Call it "luck", but I think the odds were in my favor. So I guess the real question is whether your neighborhood or community is a reasonable safe one for children.

Those two are interrelated to my thinking. Strong communities tend -- I believe -- to be safer communities.

It seems to me that these days we so often refuse to think that any amount of risk is justified. We don't want a reasonably safe environment for kids, we want a perfectly safe environment. And that is not only an impossibility, but it also in my view deprives kids of the optimal sort of environment the need to learn how to assess and deal with dangers, how to take responsibility for themselves, and in which they can explore and discover so many valuable life lessons.

It is so hard to describe in words the value of your first all day journey into the countryside with your brother or on your own, and what it taught you about yourself, your abilities, and your capacity for self-reliance.

Well I can testify as to things not being better long ago as I was a victim of a sexual predator in a cinema as a child, recounted in my journal. But nevertheless, I still did a lot on my own as you mention, perhaps being encouraged by being in the Scouts, but I was often out on my own walking or cycling, and seemingly quite safe. Too much seems to be made of avoiding risk this days.

 

[Sunstone]

Too much seems to be made of avoiding risk this days.

To me, that's an essential point. It seems we have become as societies so risk adverse that we now attempt to eliminate virtually all risks. But doing so, in effect, makes perfection the enemy of the good, and cannot be achieve in any case.

 

[Jumi]

Only in America would that be a bad thing.

And in much of the world outside of it.

 

[Curious George]

I believe you're looking at the issue through an all too legal frame of reference here. While you make good points about matters that somehow progress into becoming matters for the legal system to resolve, that's all but irrelevant to the OP. Perhaps I didn't make clear, but when I was talking of a community raising a child I was not at all talking of cases in which it might be advisable for the courts to become involved in raising a child. To me, that's a whole 'nother issue. But I do think the breakdown of communities in this country might have something to do with the apparent readiness of folks today to throw miscreant kids into the legal system, rather than sort things out more informally.



Frankly,. that was never an issue with me despite how often and how seriously other people took an interest in me growing up. I always gave my mother's authority precedence -- instinctively. Never even had to think about it.

Moreover, there seemed to have been some vague, but commonplace, boundaries in my community about just how much "advice and guidance" an adult could offer a kid without properly asking permission of the kid's parents. For instance, folks would tell me stuff, then sometimes add, "Ask your mother if that ain't so", or something similar to that. Looking back, my impression is folks were generally pretty careful about not undermining her authority.

It needn't be courts. We could have the Thunder Dome if you would rather. The point is that people disagree. If your mom disagrees with me teaching you x, she can do y. If I am your biology teacher, teaching you that evolution is a lie or a truth, and she objects she can change schools, or challenge my teaching you that in a court. If I disagree with her teaching you the same in home school, I can not enrolled you in a different school. I simply do not have that authority.

If you call her a name, she can deprive you of property. If I did the same, it would be conversion. She can ground you to your room for calling her a name, I risk false imprisonment doing the same without authority over you.

It is not that I am looking at it through a legal lens, but that the issue cannot be clearly understood without addressing the legal aspects. When we see this, we can further understand what exactly "it takes a village" means. What exactly are ones duties within that village, what authority does one have.

These are important aspects of the idea that get glossed over in the idealization.

I agree that not understanding these boundaries, not accepting these boundaries, and frustration have led us to the point where we are quick to toss problems to the courts, but the problems are there whether the courts exist or not. We say "it takes a village" but really we all mean something a little different. This cannot be teased out if we use an idiom like "it takes a village." The notion is great in expressing that more than one or two people are at play in child rearing, but the expression is wholly insufficient if we are actually discussing how children ought to be raised in our culture.

 

[Sunstone]

The idea that parents "own" their children and have absolute authority over them is an idea that must be abandoned at all costs.

Excellent point. Although I fear you'll soon enough be taken to task on the grounds that you are somehow advocating wholesale and wanton disregard for all parental authority. I know! Even in our enlightened age such a misreading of your words is a possibility!

 

[Stevicus]

While I understand your point, I think that the problem is overstated. There is a reason why we presume parents choices are in the best interest of their children. Who is in a better position to know the child's best interest? Who is likely to care more for the child?

Ideally, the parents would be considered more likely to care for the child. But if it's the child's best interests which are considered most important, then that's where society's focus should be. Too often, we speak of "parents' rights" as if placating the egos of parents should be more important than the welfare of the child. Children have rights, too.

 

[Stevicus]

Excellent point. Although I fear you'll soon enough be taken to task on the grounds that you are somehow advocating wholesale and wanton disregard for all parental authority. I know! Even in our enlightened age such a misreading of your words is a possibility!

Yeah, I know, but children have rights, too. The notion that children are too immature or too stupid to know what their interests are until they're age 18 (or age 21, in some cases) just doesn't seem plausible to me. I already knew by age 9 or 10 that I wanted to get the hell away from my parents and dysfunctional, abusive family, but I had no place to go. Nowhere to turn. There is no greater hell than that, and to advocate laws and legal principles which help to enable these private hells that so many children have to endure - I just find that there's something terribly wrong with that.

 

[Curious George]

Ideally, the parents would be considered more likely to care for the child. But if it's the child's best interests which are considered most important, then that's where society's focus should be. Too often, we speak of "parents' rights" as if placating the egos of parents should be more important than the welfare of the child. Children have rights, too.

I would agree that children have rights that must be respected. Parents too have rights which must be respected. Too often a person focuses on one and forgets the other.

 

[Stevicus]

I'd hardly say Keke was an abusive mother. She did everything she could for Soso. Beso was a drunk who abandoned his family periodically and hated the idea that Soso was at the seminary, as he wanted him to join the cobbling trade of his own. Soso was mostly raised by his mom and, more importantly, the priests and deans at the seminary, one of which, 'Black Spot' was notorious for his nastiness and strictness.

Also, 'abusive parents therefore Stalin' is kind of a ****ty argument.

Yeah, okay.

 

[sun rise]

raise kids "free-range"?

I utterly boggled the fire time I heard that expression. It speaks precisely to a social problem.

'stranger danger' panic

When the history of the current era is written, I think fear will be noted as one emotion that ran utterly wildly out of control.

 

[WalterTrull]

I can only tell you some of the best experiences and most formative advice I got as kid came from people of no relation to me.

It's always great to hear of positive nurturing childhood experiences. My knee jerk reaction is to think "Holy Ghost" Ah well, my knees seem to always be jerking these days.

What, if anything, do you see as the advantages or benefits to being raised by a community?

I suppose there are advantages and disadvantages. My hunch is that there are many who could tell of very negative experiences from childhood communities. I don't understand the differences; I just recognize them.
The bottom line, slowly revealing itself to me, is that I'm not getting the point of it all. Forest for the trees? Copernicus? Glass darkly? Probably.
Browsing RF occasionally yields interesting insights. That's fun.

 

[wandering peacefully]

I agree with Clinton. Karl Marx also advocated for such a system. My family isolates themselves from the "community". Talking to strangers is a big no no and would get me in trouble, so my parents say. This has stayed with me today, as i get rather nervous when strangers ask me something or strike up a conversation with me, especially if they are male. Parental shenanigans aside, i do wish i was raised by a community, and not just my parents, since it would have taught me valuable things like the OP had mentioned.

One thing I have noticed about the 18-25 somethings, is when I wave or say hi when walking past someone on the street or on the trails even, they stare at me as though I have two heads. No acknowledgement, no reciprocating, just a blank look. It is too bad parents and thus children have become so isolated as a unit they don't even know how to, or are scared of saying hello to a "stranger". At least the very young children still wave or say hi or smile. They haven't been taught yet to fear anyone they don't know. Or it could be something else I suppose but it sure is strange.

 

[wandering peacefully]

It all sounds very Mab

Some decades ago, Hillary Clinton, an aspiring politician at the time, penned a short book in which she advanced the notion that children are best raised in and by communities of people rather than raised by their mom and pop alone.

Unbelievable as this might sound to those of us living in this current age of abundant fair-mindedness and over-flowing rational discourse, hordes of people immediately -- miracle of miracles! -- turned overnight into experts at child rearing and at once took Clinton to task along such unpredictable lines as that she was advocating socialism, communism, and even the very destruction of the family and civilization!

Even such notably childless individuals as Rush Limbaugh suddenly discovered themselves to be awesome authorities on child rearing and with ample reasons to denounce her notion that children are best raised in and by communities. “The town doesn't raise a child, village, or what have you,” He groused, "That was just code word for the parents don't really matter." One time presidential candidate Bob Dole pronounced, “And after the virtual devastation of the American family, the rock upon which this country was founded, we are told that it takes a village, that is collective, and thus the state, to raise a child. And with all due respect, I am here to tell you it does not take a village to raise a child. It takes a family to raise a child.”

Lesser well known pundits had their day too. Andrea Tantaro -- employing a logic that was then, and will eternally remain, inscrutable to all rational people -- blamed the phrase, "It takes a village to raise a child" for all the horrors of rampant teenage sexuality.

Yes, incomprehensible as it might be to us in this enlightened age, there was actually more than a wee bit of self-serving misinterpretation and distortion of Clinton's message!

I know! Unbelievable!

Thank the gods such barbarity is well in our past nowadays. So I am confident I can now tell the following truths about my own childhood as a prelude to asking a few questions that, no doubt, will be calmly and fairly discussed without prompting too many mindless partisan knee-jerks.

I was raised in a small, Midwestern town where during my childhood, unrelated adults who had no official reason to take an interest in me (such as by virtue of their being my official teachers) nevertheless took an almost proprietary interest in my well-being and in seeing that I "turned out right".

I cannot more than begin to tell you how often that happened to me. In one instance alone, I almost bicycled into the path of a car. The driver, a man on his way home from work, and possibly hungry for his dinner, pulled over, sat down with me on the curb, and then proceeded to spend about a half hour with me getting to know all about me, before gently explaining to me how reckless I'd been, how much he feared that I might be as reckless again, and making me promise him that I would look both ways before crossing a street again. All that effort just to make sure he got his message across!

It would not be too much of an exaggeration to call such incidents "typical" or -- at the very least -- "unsurprising".

I grew up accustomed to strangers giving me advice to study hard in school, to play fair in sports, or on one occasion, how to fight dirty if -- and only if -- I desperately had to fight dirty. And the people who were actual friends of the family were even more caring. Friends of my mothers would ask to "borrow" me and/or my brothers to take us swimming, duck-hunting, to concerts, or just to dine out at some fancy restaurant they thought we should be "exposed to".

Although it didn't happen to me, when a friend of my family was widowed with two young teenage daughters, her neighbor undertook (with her permission) to now and then invite the underage girls to dinner at his house where he served them wine in order to teach them how to responsibly drink before they came of age. But such things were typical in my community.

Did such "attentions" ever undermine my mother's authority in my eyes?

Hell no. How could they have? That they might have strikes me as so absurd as to be just as imaginary as a boogie man lurking under a bed.

But did they prove to be beneficial to me? I can only tell you some of the best experiences and most formative advice I got as kid came from people of no relation to me. And yes, there were even times when some stranger's intervention in all likelihood prevented me from going down the wrong path -- although I am certain some of you reading this will now be thinking, "Sunstone? Our sterling Sunstone? Ever in serious danger of going down the wrong path? Why, the very thought of it is absurd!"

Based on my own experiences, I think today's kids -- at least, those that are not raised in genuine, working communities -- most likely miss out on a whole lot of formative experiences that could benefit them years later as life lessons. That's to say nothing -- absolutely nothing -- of the sense of security and confidence it gives a kid to be able to think so many people are looking out for him. The early maturity and self-responsibility that comes to a kid who is able to safely go anywhere and everywhere within bicycle range of his home -- "just so long as you're home for supper" -- cannot be duplicated by any amount of parental "hovering".

So, are children best raised in and by communities? Is there anything essential that a community provides a kid with that cannot be so easily or efficiently provided by mom and pop alone? What, if anything, do you see as the advantages or benefits to being raised by a community?

Comments? Questions? Dire warnings Clinton -- Clinton who? -- might run again? Lonely tales of being dumped by true first loves? Fond memories of your kitten's first hairball?

It sounds very lovely and nostalgic but I don't think there are such things as communities anymore. At least not what you were raised in. People are so busy working for the lousy system we have in place, they don't have time to raise their own kids. Off to daycare with them, then to work, then dragging home to make dinner, and everything else involved with being working parents. Being concerned about their next door neighbor's kids has no time slot.

One thing that is happening is many more grandparents are helping raise the children. That is a positive outcome of too much work and no time. Grandparents who have patience and time and hopefully some wisdom are filling in the gaps.

People are spread apart now and often moving too. And there unfortunately is a real danger of letting kids free range like we did as kids in a lot of cities. I used to ride my bike around in Tucson at age 7. I would never allow my child to do that now.

But if it were possible, I would definitely vote for communal raising of children. The Inuit and other natives still do raise their children like this for the most part I believe.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Some decades ago, Hillary Clinton, an aspiring politician at the time, penned a short book in which she advanced the notion that children are best raised in and by communities of people rather than raised by their mom and pop alone.

Unbelievable as this might sound to those of us living in this current age of abundant fair-mindedness and over-flowing rational discourse, hordes of people immediately -- miracle of miracles! -- turned overnight into experts at child rearing and at once took Clinton to task along such unpredictable lines as that she was advocating socialism, communism, and even the very destruction of the family and civilization!

Even such notably childless individuals as Rush Limbaugh suddenly discovered themselves to be awesome authorities on child rearing and with ample reasons to denounce her notion that children are best raised in and by communities. “The town doesn't raise a child, village, or what have you,” He groused, "That was just code word for the parents don't really matter." One time presidential candidate Bob Dole pronounced, “And after the virtual devastation of the American family, the rock upon which this country was founded, we are told that it takes a village, that is collective, and thus the state, to raise a child. And with all due respect, I am here to tell you it does not take a village to raise a child. It takes a family to raise a child.”

Lesser well known pundits had their day too. Andrea Tantaro -- employing a logic that was then, and will eternally remain, inscrutable to all rational people -- blamed the phrase, "It takes a village to raise a child" for all the horrors of rampant teenage sexuality.

Yes, incomprehensible as it might be to us in this enlightened age, there was actually more than a wee bit of self-serving misinterpretation and distortion of Clinton's message!

I know! Unbelievable!

Thank the gods such barbarity is well in our past nowadays. So I am confident I can now tell the following truths about my own childhood as a prelude to asking a few questions that, no doubt, will be calmly and fairly discussed without prompting too many mindless partisan knee-jerks.

I was raised in a small, Midwestern town where during my childhood, unrelated adults who had no official reason to take an interest in me (such as by virtue of their being my official teachers) nevertheless took an almost proprietary interest in my well-being and in seeing that I "turned out right".

I cannot more than begin to tell you how often that happened to me. In one instance alone, I almost bicycled into the path of a car. The driver, a man on his way home from work, and possibly hungry for his dinner, pulled over, sat down with me on the curb, and then proceeded to spend about a half hour with me getting to know all about me, before gently explaining to me how reckless I'd been, how much he feared that I might be as reckless again, and making me promise him that I would look both ways before crossing a street again. All that effort just to make sure he got his message across!

It would not be too much of an exaggeration to call such incidents "typical" or -- at the very least -- "unsurprising".

I grew up accustomed to strangers giving me advice to study hard in school, to play fair in sports, or on one occasion, how to fight dirty if -- and only if -- I desperately had to fight dirty. And the people who were actual friends of the family were even more caring. Friends of my mothers would ask to "borrow" me and/or my brothers to take us swimming, duck-hunting, to concerts, or just to dine out at some fancy restaurant they thought we should be "exposed to".

Although it didn't happen to me, when a friend of my family was widowed with two young teenage daughters, her neighbor undertook (with her permission) to now and then invite the underage girls to dinner at his house where he served them wine in order to teach them how to responsibly drink before they came of age. But such things were typical in my community.

Did such "attentions" ever undermine my mother's authority in my eyes?

Hell no. How could they have? That they might have strikes me as so absurd as to be just as imaginary as a boogie man lurking under a bed.

But did they prove to be beneficial to me? I can only tell you some of the best experiences and most formative advice I got as kid came from people of no relation to me. And yes, there were even times when some stranger's intervention in all likelihood prevented me from going down the wrong path -- although I am certain some of you reading this will now be thinking, "Sunstone? Our sterling Sunstone? Ever in serious danger of going down the wrong path? Why, the very thought of it is absurd!"

Based on my own experiences, I think today's kids -- at least, those that are not raised in genuine, working communities -- most likely miss out on a whole lot of formative experiences that could benefit them years later as life lessons. That's to say nothing -- absolutely nothing -- of the sense of security and confidence it gives a kid to be able to think so many people are looking out for him. The early maturity and self-responsibility that comes to a kid who is able to safely go anywhere and everywhere within bicycle range of his home -- "just so long as you're home for supper" -- cannot be duplicated by any amount of parental "hovering".

So, are children best raised in and by communities? Is there anything essential that a community provides a kid with that cannot be so easily or efficiently provided by mom and pop alone? What, if anything, do you see as the advantages or benefits to being raised by a community?

Comments? Questions? Dire warnings Clinton -- Clinton who? -- might run again? Lonely tales of being dumped by true first loves? Fond memories of your kitten's first hairball?

I think having a trusted adult role model/mentor outside of family is good for children. I never had one that I can think of, but I likely would have benefited from one.

 

[Terese]

One thing I have noticed about the 18-25 somethings, is when I wave or say hi when walking past someone on the street or on the trails even, they stare at me as though I have two heads. No acknowledgement, no reciprocating, just a blank look. It is too bad parents and thus children have become so isolated as a unit they don't even know how to, or are scared of saying hello to a "stranger". At least the very young children still wave or say hi or smile. They haven't been taught yet to fear anyone they don't know. Or it could be something else I suppose but it sure is strange.

It's unfortunate, but every girl i know at school would have done the same thing, including me. But i am trying to be a more open person and lessen the conditioning my parents instilled in me.

 

[LuisDantas]

And in much of the world outside of it.

How much is "much"? In this case, nearly nothing, apparently.

 

[Jumi]

How much is "much"? In this case, nearly nothing, apparently.

Got any proof that the rest of the world outside the US sees communism positively? Communism is still unpopular around here and the nearby ex-Soviet states due to all those atrocities.