STUDIES, STUDIES, STUDIES: Greg Popcak replies to David Benkof and Arturo Fernandez

[Greg Popcak blogs here.]

I am writing regarding the discussion between Benkof and Fernandez about studies showing "harm to children."

The problem, as I see it, is how to define this notion of "harm." The fact is, studies consistently show there are about a million and one ways to raise a grow-up-get-a-job-participate-in-society kind of kid. Arguments about how this parenting style or that family structure will or will not "harm" children tend to try to suggest that a child, raised in a certain manner or in a certain family structure, will not be able to function as well in society. But, except in the most dramatic instances (such as cases of physical abuse and neglect) this just isn't the case. But hear me out...

What IS true is that children who are raised with certain parenting styles or family structures will exhibit dramatically different worldviews and value-systems (which is how conservatives tend to define "health." ) That's the argument I make in my book, Parenting with Grace, and it is a view supported by recent ethnopediatric studies such as that done by Bornstein, et al., (1998) in Developmental Psychology, 36(4), and by Bornstein and Cote (2001) in the International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25(6). Despite the fact that children of many nations are raised in dramatically different ways, they are all "healthy" (defined as social functionality) but they do exhibit dramatic differences in self-concept, their idea of societal obligations and their understanding of how the individual interacts with society. As Alice Miller in her own work on Germany during WWII and Meredith Small in Our Babies Ourselves, 1998 observe, different cultures encourage certain parenting styles and family structures in order to increase the likelihood that children will exhibit the worldview and values that particular culture values.

My point is that I doubt that social science will ever be able to show that one family structure or parenting style is convincingly, clearly, and objectively "healthier" than another if "health" is defined as functionality--as it tends to be (at least by liberals).

Ultimately, while this debate can be argued from the social science perspective, I do not believe that this debate can be won on the social science front since the real question is not functionality, but weltanschauung. I would argue that the only way social science could make some inroads is to stop talking about "health" and instead draw from ethnopediatric data to ask, "What are the worldviews fostered by tradtional vs non-traditional family structures/parenting styles (inculding cohabiting heterosexual families) and what are the worldviews and values we, as a society want to encourage?"

Social science CAN help illuminate this debate, but the final call will have to be made in religion, philosophy, and politics, where people will take the social science data and vote on a societal "corporate mission statement" --if you will.
posted by Eve at 7:11 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home