Another Entry on Chapter 7

This is what our latest author, Lauren Ducusin, had to say about this picture: "It's a picture of my twin sister and I dressed as bunnies. My grandma took great pride and pleasure in hand-making most of our costumes and clothes when we were little. I'm on the right, in case you can't tell! With Easter around the corner, I thought, 'Bunnies! How appropriate!' But I also chose this picture because it captures our true social personalities so well. I have always been 'the shy one.' And my sister... well, she's... not."
Lauren might be shy, but you'll see when you read her work here that she's definitely great with words!

She wrote:
Family: we all come from one. For some of us, the family is a source of great strength, safety, and belonging, or as Elkind describes it, a sort of haven. And for others, the family operates more like a prison, where members do not find refuge in familial ties, but rather, are burdened by limitations, restrictions, and disconnectivity. As a system, the family can function as either a haven or as a prison, or, as Elkind suggests, it acts as a little bit of both- both supportive and destructive, both dysfunctional and conducive. Either way, he suggests that it is from our families that we derive an understanding of how to live within a society.
From our experiences and interactions with our families, we are socialized.

According to Elkind, there are at least four ways in which families socialize their children. These ways include modeling, behavior modification, social cognition, and psychoanalysis. Elkind takes a more comprehensive approach, one that incorporates all of the positions and combines them to form a so-called “contract” model of socialization, one that focuses on parent-child contracts. I really like his perspective. It is one that is based on what he refers to as “collective realities,” shared expectancies, a complex balance between consistent parental expectations and legitimate child performance. In other words, parental expectations and child capabilities correspond. I particularly appreciate the idea that with natural maturation of a child, this perspective calls for readjustment, a reconstruction of realities. In other words, parent-child contracts need to be revised and rewritten to better fit the child’s current cognitive status. For example, when a child moves from infancy, to school-age, to adolescence, realities, too, must follow suit. Realities shift, moving from explicit to relative; to more abstract or general. Adolescents are given more freedom than they were given as young children. This freedom is to be earned when responsibility is demonstrated through their behavior. Still, it is important that this freedom be appropriate.

Children, as future contributing members of our society, are entitled to some appropriate expansions of freedom as they develop. It is equally important, however, that parental expectations not exceed a child’s capabilities. When they do, as can often occur when children are hurried, not only has the contract between child and parent been seriously violated, but it is the children who are dealt with the heaviest blow. We have all witnessed this inconsistency take place. A small child “gets to” dress himself for school, for example, because his mom is running late for work, and he is “old enough” now, but he walks outside in fifty-degree weather with his favorite Superman cape on, and unfortunately, shorts and sandals. In another instance, a first-grader is told that she can pick whatever she wants to watch on TV, because by now, she “knows what is appropriate,” but she ends up on a channel that features violence and other “adult situations.” And then, a fourth grader comes home from school to an empty house. “After all,” his dad thinks, “we can trust him to stay out of trouble. He knows right from wrong.” But this type of thinking can be faulty. It is crucial for parents to maintain a healthy balance between freedom and restriction, based on what their children can adequately handle.

In an effort to produce individuals who are socially competent, responsible, and independent, parents are often giving their children too much freedom- freedom for which they are not yet prepared. I have a real-life example of this situation to share. I have a family friend, a single mother, who is currently raising three adolescent boys. Her youngest, a sweet, funny, smart eleven year old, is a budding musician who excels at playing nearly any instrument placed in his little hands. By the age of eight, he and his “band” were playing gigs in bars and nightclubs, as elementary school-students! Sure, he is a genuinely good kid. He “knows right from wrong,” so to speak. But has he been given too much freedom? Should any young child be in such an adult atmosphere? The text addresses this type of problem, stating that when children are placed in situations in which they are perhaps given too much freedom before they are truly ready for it, they are, in some twisted way, forced to acquire the responsibility that is associated with the freedom given. This can be debilitating to a child, who is significantly limited with regards to the appropriate level of responsibility.

I think there is enough pressure on our kids today, to grow up before they are truly ready. The last place a child needs to encounter this unreasonable pressure is at home. At home, a child is supposed to feel encouraged, not hurried; appreciated, not overlooked; and worthy, not inadequate. When we expect too much, or push too hard; when we give them more freedom than they have earned, that’s exactly what we’re doing: hurrying them in their own homes. What a terrible disservice. We can encourage without pushing; we can have goals for them without making them feel inadequate; we can afford them some freedom without forcing them to acquire responsibilities that are out of their reach. As parents, we owe it to our kids to help them face the world and to see themselves as productive, stable, strong, competent members of the society, but not at the cost of their childhoods.