Tag Archive for: parenting

Back-to-School Sanity: Start Parenting, Stop Helicoptering

/in , , , , , , /by

More Critical Thinking about Parenting. 

I occasionally repost another author’s column that I believe is consistent with my Critical Thinking objective.

This is a good example from respected parenting guru John Rosemond…

As should be widely known by now, I take requests.

“Can you give us some back-to-school tips?” asks Geraldine, mother of three.

Yes, Geraldine, I can, and will, the first such tip being…

Tip #1: Get over your child

It is my civic responsibility to inform you that your child is not without fault. And yes, your child is capable of “it,” whatever it is. Your child, like all human progeny, is capable of lying, stealing, bullying, disrespecting, vandalism, etc..

In and of itself, bad behavior doesn’t mean you’re a bad parent. Sometimes, because free will is a wild card, decent people raise indecent people.

If a teacher says your child did so-and-so, there’s a 98 percent chance the teacher is 100 percent spot on and even if she’s only 85 percent spot on, which is about as low as it gets, it is important that children see solidarity among the adults who care for them, so support your child’s teacher when she says he isn’t a candidate for sainthood.

Tip #2: Make it clear to your child that disobedience, disrespect, and anti-social behavior of any sort at school are not options

Teachers consistently report that their favorite students are not necessarily those who make the best grades, but those who pay attention, obey the rules, and do their best (whatever their “best” may be).

Good behavior begins in the home, not at school, and not even the best teacher can discipline a child who comes to school not already respectful of adult authority.

Make the rules of proper behavior clear to your child, and when the rules are broken, enforce with a firm, even hand. Research finds that a child’s level of self-control is positively associated with school achievement.

Tip #3: Assign your child a fair share of day-to-day housework

Again, teachers tell me that the best students are usually those who have daily chores at home. It makes sense, doesn’t it, that a child who comes to school already accustomed to accepting assignments at home will have fewer problems accepting assignments from teachers?

The more responsible a child is within his or her family, the more responsibility the child will demonstrate in the classroom.

Tip #4: Limit electronic entertainment to non-school days, and allow no more than five total hours a week

The research is increasingly unequivocal: screen time of any sort decreases attention span. Learning from a real-life, flesh-and-blood teacher requires being ready to ask questions, being ready to answer questions, memorizing, conducting independent inquiry, transferring what you’ve learned to paper, listening to the teacher’s feedback concerning your work, and correcting your mistakes.

As for television alone, a researcher once found that truly gifted children tended to watch no more than five hours of television a week. The national average is 25 hours per week per child, which is simply to say if you want your child to be average, let him watch a lot of television

Tip #5: Always be interested in what and how your child is doing — but take care not to get involved doing his work for him

There is a difference between interest and involvement. The interested parent says to the child, in effect, “I am concerned about your education, but it is ultimately your responsibility.’‘ The involved parent says, “Your education is my responsibility.’‘

Unfortunately, too many well-intentioned parents have unwittingly accepted/appropriated responsibility for their children’s school work. The result of this parental benevolence is a child who has difficulty taking the proverbial bull by the horns. New research supports this low-involvement parenting model.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Take a load off and have a lovely parenthood!

Copyright 2025, John K. Rosemond

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

The Gaming Connection: The Role of Online Culture in Charlie Kirk’s Assassination

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, a national dialogue emerged over what contributed to Kirk’s alleged murderer, Tyler Robinson, resorting to violence. Debate has raged over his motivations, political allegiance, and his tie to gender ideology. While the FBI investigates further, one topic of discussion has been Robinson’s involvement online. Already, the investigation has unearthed some indicators as to the level of Robinson’s online presence.

Multiple friends of Robinson described him as “terminally online.” The bullet casings used by Robinson were each inscribed with messages containing numerous online and gaming references. The bullet that struck and killed Kirk read, “Notices, bulges, OwO what’s this?,” which comes from a meme commonly used by members of an online subculture known as “furries.” These “furries” are obsessed with anthropomorphic animal characters, or animals with human characteristics. Another of the inscriptions read, “If you read this, you are gay, LMAO,” which may derive from common online “trash talk” or “troll behavior.”

Two of the messages specifically related to the world of gaming, with one reading, “Oh, Bella Ciao, Bella Ciao, Bella Ciao, Ciao,” which comes from an Italian folksong commonly used by “antifascists,” but it’s also referenced in the video game “Far Cry 6.” One bullet held another gaming reference, saying, “Hey fascist catch,” followed by a series of arrows with one arrow pointing up, one pointing right, and three pointing down. The message seemingly comes from the video game “Helldivers 2” where the user plays as a type of “fascist” in space to enforce “managed democracy” in the galaxy. The arrows correlate with a control input combination meant to call in an airstrike.

Robinson also allegedly confessed his guilt in a chat thread via a common messaging platform among gamers called Discord. When Senator Josh Hawley (R- Mo.) observed the thread contained as many as 20 users, FBI Director Kash Patel noted that the chat included “a lot more than that.”

Given Robinson’s gaming references and online presence, many are reviving the debate as to how video games may affect their users, and whether they stoke proclivities toward violence. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins pointed out that online gaming has coincided with “real world violence” before, while positing the question, “Is there a connection or is it just coincidence?”

Reagan Rose, founder of the media ministry Redeeming Productivity, warned of the potential dangers of today’s gaming culture in radicalizing the younger generation when he joined Thursday’s “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins.” Rose pointed out that even the military has seen an advantage to utilizing video games for the purposes of training. Rose said, “I think most of us know that they would use flight simulators for those types of things, but even first-person shooter type games they’ve been using as far back as the 90’s.” Rose described a game called “Doom 2” which the Marines “would train scenarios” with. He continued, “They’ve been doing that ever since. Even in the early 2000s, the Army put out their own game, ‘America’s Army,’ which they used for training, and they actually put it out to the public and used it for recruitment as well.”

“Some of these games are not harmless,” Perkins contended. “There is a desensitizing that takes place in these games.”

Amid the conversations surrounding gaming chat rooms, Rose pointed out that both American and British intelligence had programs looking into communications via these platforms. He said, “I think the idea was that the people were taking advantage of these non-traditional communication platforms to almost hide in plain sight, recruit, [and] plan terrorist activity or otherwise nefarious things. The military realized there was this whole area that they weren’t paying attention to.”

Perkins asked Rose, “How deeply does it appear that this Tyler was involved in the gaming world?”

Rose noted he was a “highly online person,” citing Robinson’s references on the bullets, knowledge of memes, and his use of Discord. “…That platform for chat is very popular in the gaming community, and some of those corners of the internet can get quite dark. I know from my own experience being very deep in the gaming world myself, there’s a lot of conversations [and] a lot of attempts to be edgy. A lot of the things that are on the fringes of society are discussed there more openly,” Rose said. He added, “I think a lot of anti-social tendencies are cultivated in the gaming world that people that are outside of that world don’t realize just how dark it can be.”

Rose mentioned that the conversation surrounding video games contributing to violent tendencies in young people is rekindled often after mass shootings, and yet, “The American Psychological Association has come out twice saying that they don’t see a causal relationship between video game violence and real-world violence.” In response, Perkins pointed out that if the military believes it will improve their performance, “how is it not affecting young people?”

Rose agreed, saying, “I think that the connection is closer than most people are willing to look at. … It’s desensitizing and it’s tremendously anti-socializing as well, if you get very deep into these gaming communities.”

Rose described video games as one layer deeper than the desensitization that comes from simply viewing violent media. “The immersiveness and the fact that it’s you carrying out those things, it’s not you as an observer, it’s you acting it out, I think, is a level of participation in the violence that is even more desensitizing,” he added.

Perkins asked Rose what parents should be looking for in their children playing video games. Rose advised parents to monitor the amount of time their children are permitted to play. He also warned they should “pay close attention to the content of the games. Some of the games that are out there are horrific.” He added that when taking games away from their kids, parents should gauge their reaction, which “can be a warning sign that you should pay attention to.”

As for the spiritual element, Rose said, “I think that there really is a demonic element to it. … I’m not trying to say that all video games are evil or [that] no one should play them, but I think we need to be much more cautious than we are.”

AUTHOR

Zachary Gohl

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

When Lying to Your Kids is OK

/in , , /by

Another Major Parenting Challenge. 

This is a cross-post as I thought it was a well-written, thoughtful piece. Mary Rooke (whom I do not know) is the author, and it was originally published in the Daily Caller. This is her Good Life signup page and her Twitter account.

It brings up an important parenting question: which burdens on our children are harmful and we should protect them from — and which burdens are ultimately a net benefit (i.e., an essential part of maturing)? Here goes…

Welcome to Good Life, a newsletter about navigating our modern culture and staying sane in the process. This week, we discuss the little lies of motherhood.

It’s okay to lie to your kids.

My daughter had surgery this week. I’ve been like a duck on the water, calm on top, telling everyone I know that it’s really nothing to worry about. Underneath the surface, my legs are anxiously pedaling to get to the other side.

I don’t want to worry her, so I lie and tell her the same. In times like these, parents must put their own emotional needs on the back burner to ensure their children aren’t carrying any unnecessary burdens.

Don’t get me wrong. I have complete faith in her surgeon. I’ve been around enough of them in my lifetime to recognize his confidence comes from years of success. He possesses the perfect balance of self-assurance and bedside manner, which makes him a well-rounded surgeon. Still, even well-disciplined doctors find themselves in a tornado of complications. I know this firsthand, but that’s a story for another time.

So I lie to my daughter. I tell her that there is no chance anything bad will happen, that the doctor has performed this surgery a thousand times. I don’t mind carrying the weight of the anxiety about the “what ifs.” It’s my job to send her into that procedure with a calm body. Lying to her is a mercy for her and a sacrifice for me.

Since she is so young, I was allowed to be in the room with her. They needed her awake for the surgery. There were times when she would wince and silent tears would roll down her face. I couldn’t grab her hand and physically reassure her that she was being very brave. Instead, I sat across the room, outside the sterilized area, maintaining eye contact and telling her what a great job she was doing.

These moments were the hardest. At this point, I wasn’t lying about the status of her surgery, but more about my own bravery. I wanted to collapse onto her and cry with her. But she didn’t need me to do that. She needed me to look her in the eyes, smile, and show her love. I had to push my selfishness away in order to keep her morale high.

My daughter really did so well. When the doctor finished, he called it a success. All those worries and fears are now gone. The little lie saved her from the emotional baggage that I willingly carried around for her. While in recovery, she hugged me so tightly, thanking me for not leaving her.

There has been a societal movement that encourages parents to communicate with their children on a peer-to-peer level. While there will be a time for that when they are adults and self-sufficient, until then, it’s incredibly important that your children do not see you as “on their level” in any way.

Of course, the most obvious reason for this is discipline. You want them to respect your authority and listen to your instructions or obey your punishments when they break your rules. However, this is only a small part of it.

When I tell my daughter that I have complete confidence that everything will be okay, she believes me. She doesn’t have to worry about any possible complications because her mother has told her not to.

We aren’t on the same level. I’ve never made her carry unnecessary emotional weight. She’s not an adult. She doesn’t have the life experiences to lean on in times of stress or trouble, but I do.

That’s the beauty of how God created the nuclear family structure. Everyone plays a divinely inspired role that is incredibly important for building a healthy family. My husband and I are not her peers or friends. That doesn’t mean we aren’t close. In fact, protecting the parent-child dynamic builds concrete trust.

She knows that if I tell her I’m going to do something, or, as with the surgery, that everything will be all right, she believes me completely.

I’ve spent her whole life cultivating this trust between us. Not because I have demanded it, whether she likes it or not, but because I chose to guide her through life with confident, loving authority. I haven’t made her come up to my level. I’ve allowed her to grow and mature at her natural pace. With each passing year, our conversations become more sophisticated, but I am cautious not to overwhelm her with thoughts, themes, and stresses that she isn’t ready for.

This isn’t an easy thing to do, because these worries don’t simply disappear. Someone has to carry them and deal with them. But I genuinely believe that a mother’s ability to hold the emotional weight of the family is a blessing. I get to be the one that my children and husband turn to when their worlds are spinning or they are feeling emotionally drained.

I’m sure my husband feels the same way when the girls boast about how they know their daddy could beat up the bad guys. I’ve said this before, but parents have a responsibility to protect their children. I’m the emotional protector, and my husband is the physical one.

After the surgery was over and I had a moment alone, I let out all the pain, fear, and stress. Then I gathered myself to go back in and continue the work. She was smiling when I walked through the door.

There will be a time when she realizes that it will be her job to lie to her children. She will have to be the emotional protector of her family. Mothers are made through their endurance to withstand their role and are rewarded with immeasurable blessings. Her smile was my blessing.

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

4 of the Biggest Challenges Facing Parents — and What to Do about Them

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Raising kids in today’s radically evolving culture isn’t for the faint of heart. Younger and younger parents are realizing that their children are being exposed to ideas and people that never crossed our minds at their age. Things like: How many genders are there? Am I racist because I’m white? Am I hopelessly disadvantaged because I’m not? “Leading our kids through a world we’re trying to understand ourselves as parents isn’t simple,” FRC’s Joseph Backholm acknowledged. How should moms and dads confront this moral revolution and emerge with kids whose faith and convictions are intact?

First, Andrew Walker insists, we have to identify the challenges. He and his wife Christian, authors of “What Do I Say When? A Parent’s Guide to Navigating Cultural Chaos,” want to help parents think about these issues in a way that’s accessible and practical. Recently, the dean of Theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary stopped by the “Outstanding” podcast to point out the landmines families face and what to do about them.

1. An Increasingly Secular Culture

This isn’t your grandma’s America — or even your mom’s. The world is a different place than it was when most of us were growing up, Backholm pointed out. Walker couldn’t agree more. “And I’m not just saying that like an old fogey like, ‘Oh, things were so much better in my day.’ I really do sense that there’s been a substantive moral revolution. I graduated college in 2008. That’s seven years before Obergefell, right? … So, yeah, we do live in a different moral era. It’s not just a different moral decade. It’s a different moral era, where all of those assumptions that you and I could have taken for granted in our culture are no longer the case.”

And while Americans, based on the elections, have woken up to the dangers facing our society and our children, they need to resist the temptation to think that indoctrination or woke ideology won’t affect them. There’s this dangerous mentality out there that’s leading Christian parents to think, “It’s not going to happen to my kids.” If you live in a conservative state or community and send your kids to a faith-based school, that’s great. But it’s not enough to protect them from the slippery slope of our degenerate culture. Parents don’t have the luxury of being reactive. They have to be proactive in instilling their biblical worldview and values.

2. A Lack of Preparation and Courage

As Backholm pointed out, most parents today “didn’t equip [themselves] for battle, because we did not grow up in a battle. Therefore, we are not presently prepared to equip others for battle.” Even 20 years ago, both men agreed, the public school system and U.S. colleges weren’t nearly as hostile to conservative Christian beliefs as they are now.

“If you are parents roughly [our] age, you grew up in a [world] where you could assume certain cultural norms that were vaguely reminiscent [of] Christian norms,” Walker said. “… So I’m going to operate from the assumption that you feel overwhelmed and that you feel ill-equipped. And I think that then leads into that second problem, which is a lack of courage — that you feel like you’re facing kind of a secular tsunami, and you actually don’t have anything substantively to say to push back on this culture. And if I can really be honest with you, one of [my] driving passions … is for Christians to go on offense.”

As researcher and Family Research Council Senior Fellow George Barna has found, “Most parents have no plan for what they’re going to do to raise their children up. Less than 10% of them have any kind of spiritual development plan for their children. And that includes worldview development. And then when you look at the parents themselves, what we know is that only 2% of parents in America today actually have a biblical worldview.” In other words, “You can’t give what you don’t have. So we’re in a situation where we’ve got a lot of parents who are winging it.”

The solution, he insists, isn’t reading a million parenting books. It’s reading one: God’s word. Even if you just spent 10-15 minutes a day in the Scripture, he urges, that’s enough. “The first step is basically adopting a plan of action so that you’re systematically in the word of God. … Get [it] into your mind that your primary job in life is to raise your children to know love and serve God with all their heart, mind, strength, and soul. That is one of the things that you will be judged upon. … And so, [we] need to make sure that my children are pursuing that as well.”

In his studies and surveys, Barna has found that “parents [who] had a spiritual and worldview development plan are much more effective at raising spiritual champions. Those who are consistent with their children over the course of the 15 to 20 years they have their children [are] much more effective [at] building deep relationships with their children, which means investing a lot of time. But when you’re doing it, [you’re] not always telling them what to do or to think,” he advised, “but spending time listening to what the child is saying so that you can respond appropriately, knowing where you want to take them, hearing where they’re at, and then bringing them forward to a different place and making sure that the Bible is the foundation of your conversations.”

He found that these conversations are best centered around real-world events or examples of what your children are going through in life. “Relate biblical principles to those stories.” Don’t beat them over the head with God’s word, Barna urges, “but by asking them questions about what they believe, why they believe it, what they did, why they did it, asking if they’re familiar with different biblical principles. Do they think that might have worked in the situation? Those kinds of conversations are so critical.” But he warned, “None of it will take root, we discovered, unless you as a parent model that in your own life. That’s part of that consistency element, which was so critical.”

3. A Misunderstanding of Discipleship

One of the biggest mistakes moms and dads can make, the duo explained, is outsourcing your responsibility to parent. That didn’t necessarily happen overnight, Walker pointed out. “If your upbringing was like mine, it was the idea that discipleship is something that a youth pastor does. You offload that [duty] to Wednesday night and Sunday night. And the parents — all they’re expected to do is to bring their children to church on Sunday and Wednesday.”

Obviously, bringing your kids to church is one of the best things you can do. “That’s putting you way above a deficit from what we have today at this point.” But, Walker said, we have this misguided notion that if “the culture really isn’t that antagonistic to your faith, you don’t feel that you have to take the time and energy to build in reinforcements.”

That was a bigger deal in the 1980s and 1990s, he agreed. And it’s not like youth groups or church activities are bad. “But there has to be a higher degree of fortification” that comes from the home. There’s been a change of heart lately, he believes, where parents are more conscientious about this. “… At least in my world of Southern Baptist life, I get the sense that … evangelical parents my age, they do have more eyes wide open than perhaps [our] parents did. And I don’t say that to criticize our generation of parents, simply because that’s the culture that they grew up in. But there has been … a positive awakening, so to speak.”

4. Underestimating Technology’s Influence

This is a tricky issue for a lot of parents, both men acknowledged. Christian moms and dads, especially, wrestle with whether they should have a blanket ban on social media and cell phones or trust their kids to be mature enough emotionally and spiritually to handle the content flying at them on their own.

It’s such a difficult challenge for parents to navigate, Backholm admitted. At some point, “We have to [trust our] kids’ guidance and their ability to assess these things enough to say, ‘Is this a value to my life? … Is this enriching my spiritual life? Is this making me who God made me want to be, or who God intends me to be? Or is this not?”

But Walker’s advice, especially for parents who aren’t taking away technology early on, is doing their homework on what protections are available to them already. “Here’s my insight that I would have for listeners: Most parents don’t utilize [the controls on their children’s phones]. They simply don’t. Those controls are powerful, and they’re there.” As his teenage daughter gets older, he and Christian adapt and adjust what she can see. “She gets a little bit more leeway and room with that phone” as she grows, rather than seeing it as an all-or-nothing concept.

In technology, or anything that could have a negative influence on their lives, “It should be understood by our kids that when we say no, that’s because we’re saying yes to something better. That all of the pleasures and joys that the world offers are counterfeits, and they don’t actually deliver on their promise. And we say no to licentiousness. We say no to dishonesty. We say no to greed. We say no to corruption, because we’re saying yes to virtue and self-control and diligence and long-term gratification that comes from just obedience.”

Ultimately, Walker went on, “It’s seeing parenting not, I think, primarily as rules-focused, but as prudence-focused and principles-focused. Because oftentimes a hyper-focus on rules — ‘do this, don’t do that’ — isn’t teaching your children practical wisdom, right? It’s not teaching them how to interact in the world, how to make good decisions. And so, if you go with this approach that lends itself more towards prudence and practical reason and wisdom, I think that’s a much safer bet. And I think that that kind of works with that dimmer switch analogy rather than the hard on/off switch analogy.”

Encouragement for Parents

At the end of the day, Walker emphasized, the goal of Christian parenting is to really train them up and send them out. And a successful Christian parent will be one who has taught their children emotional maturity, social maturity, [and] has demonstrated in the home a walk with the Lord that’s integrated with the church. Ideally, they are brought up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. There’s been a salvation experience. There’s discipleship occurring in the home. And when they turn 18, it’s sad, but it’s a natural kind of letting go because they’re ready. And I think that a healthy Christian parent is going to be one that as the parents age, the grip loosens a little bit, and you’re letting them experience the world.”

In the meantime, he urged, pray for their obedience. Pray for their wisdom, their gentleness, their kindness, and their ability to put Christ first in their life. When they leave the house, pray that they surround themselves with godly friends and understand the church as something central to their lives. Then, when you’ve done all you can do, leave the rest with the ultimate Father: God.

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

This is not fake news: U.S. Surgeon General warns that parenting is a health hazard

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The US Surgeon General, Dr Vivek Murthy, just issued an official advisory warning against the stressful nature of parenting and labelling it “an urgent public health issue.” The document says Surgeon General Advisories “require the nation’s immediate awareness and action.” So, according to the Surgeon General, what exactly is the urgent issue and what immediate actions should be taken to rescue parents from the stress of raising their own children?

In short, the advisory cites data showing that parents experience more stress than non-parents and that sometimes, some parents’ stress levels are so high they cannot function. It says parental stress can negatively affect children. It says major sources of parental stress include “financial strain and economic instability, time demands, concerns over children’s health and safety, parental isolation and loneliness, difficulty managing technology and social media, and cultural pressures.”

All true.

I’m a mom of five children, and I birthed four of them within a time span of roughly five years. 12 years later, I had a baby in my 40s. We had diapers and dating going on at the same time. I’m no stranger to stress. I have known financial strain, the instability of layoffs, bone-deep fatigue, and so much more.

As for not being able to function, that depends on your definition of the word “function”. (Does inventing games where I lay motionless on the bed while my kids pile heaps of clean laundry on top of me count as “functioning”?) Parenting has beat the stuffing right out of me at times. But through all these years, I never saw my children as a threat to my mental health.

Children are a danger to their parents

This Surgeon General’s Advisory is the first time I recall seeing an official government entity framing children as a clear and present danger to their parents. It reminds me of radical feminist Sophie Lewis’ assertion that babies in utero commit “fetal violence” toward their mothers by introducing health threats to and demanding nourishment from their unfortunate maternal hosts. Likewise, Suzanne Sadedin says an unborn baby employs “manipulation, blackmail, and violence” against its mother while floating in the womb and usurping whatever sustenance it can suck from her body.

Collectivism is always the answer

What does the Surgeon General say should be done about this assault on parents’ health? The “We Can Take Action” section of the advisory starts with this preface: “[W]hile parents and caregivers may have the primary responsibility for raising children… [it] is a collective responsibility.” It then gives a laundry list of collectivist solutions including the following:

  • “Bolster support for childcare financial assistance programs such as childcare subsidies and child income tax credits; universal preschool; early childhood education programs.”
  • “Establish a national paid family and medical leave program.”
  • Prioritise “poverty reduction, prevention of adverse childhood experiences… and improve access to healthy food and affordable housing.”
  • “Strengthen public and private insurance coverage of mental health care.”
  • Expand workplace policies, including “paid parental, medical, and sick leave” and “access to childcare (in the community or on-site)”.

Unsurprisingly, most of the solutions call for more government intervention and lots more childcare. (Sorry, but universal preschool has not been shown to improve the situation of the majority of children or their parents.) We will never fix the problem by encouraging less family unity and more government “help” that comes at the cost of higher taxes.

There doesn’t seem to be acknowledgment in the Surgeon General’s Advisory that the separation of parents and children for most of the waking hours of every day and the reality of both parents focusing most of their time and efforts outside the home may be contributing to the very problem they’re trying to solve: the widespread breakdown of the mental health and happiness of both children and their parents.

The advisory does have some solid suggestions that deserve kudos. For instance, it urges friends and family members to offer practical support to parents, including “lending assistance with household chores, childcare responsibilities, or running errands” and “looking for ways to support parents and caregivers so they can take breaks, attend needed appointments, and engage in self-care activities.” Bravo.

Humble solutions

Here are some additional suggestions for policymakers and individuals:

  • Live near family. Grandparents and others can offer vital support. Studies show that living near grandparents can benefit children, parents, and grandparents.
  • Ease parents’ financial burdens by lowering taxes; do this by eliminating social programs, not increasing or expanding them. Largely let families solve their own problems with their own money.
  • Cultivate an economy in which one parent can primarily support the family financially, and one parent can primarily focus on the physical and emotional needs of their children.
  • Spend more time and effort preparing children for parenthood. Cultivate selflessness, sacrifice, and responsibility in children (Hint: Large families often foster this.)
  • Limit time spent on electronic devices for both parents and children (for more vital information on this, see my articles here and here.)
  • Revitalise THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. Initiate simple neighbourhood gatherings to get to know the people around you. Use social media neighbourhood groups to support each other, like offering to pick up a gallon of milk, etc., for the family next door.
  • Don’t wait for the government to save you. If you are overstressed — as I was at one time when my kids were young — ask another parent to swap babysitting with you every week (or as often as needed.) Doing this reduced my stress level significantly.
  • Reconsider and revise your priorities. If work has become more dominant than home life, or if your life is overrun with too much to do, simplify and sacrifice in order to focus on what matters most to you.

Despite the often chaotic and stressful nature of parenting, most parents see their children as a deep and satisfying source of joy — despite the pain. There is work and struggle in parenthood. That’s part of what you sign up for when you decide to welcome a helpless person into your life.

But you also sign up for a life of purpose and boundless adventure beyond what you could have imagined. And almost all parents rise to the occasion. They embrace the adventure of raising a family, and it gives them both daily and lifelong purpose. At the end of the day — and at the end of their lives — most parents consider themselves better off rather than worse off for having embarked on the irreplaceable adventure of becoming parents.

What do you make of the US Surgeon General’s advisory? Leave your thoughts below.

AUTHOR

Kimberly Ells is the author of The Invincible Family. Follow her at Invincible Family Substack.

EDITORS NOTE: This Mercator column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

What Father’s Day Means to the Fatherless

/in , , , , /by

Fatherlessness is a root cause of many of our social ills.

Father’s Day reminds me that I haven’t spoken to my father in four years.

It actually feels like even longer, as my experience with fatherlessness goes back much further than the final conversation I had with the man who sired me. When my father dropped me off on my grandmother’s doorstep at age 18 and told me not to come home, it had already been many years since I truly had a dad.

I moved in with him at age 13, shortly after my parents’ divorce. Over the course of the following five years, my father failed me.

He failed as a dad, failed as a man, and failed to fulfill even the most minimal moral obligations of any parent. During that half-decade of my life, I was verbally, emotionally, and psychologically abused by my homophobic and hateful stepmother. My father watched in apathy—then, when push truly came to shove, cast me aside rather than stand up for his son.

What I needed in that dark time was a parent, a role model, an advocate—a dad. But the one thing I needed was the one thing I never had.

My father never taught me how to be a man. He never showed me more than fleeting moments of kindness and affection. Instead, he convinced me that the abuse I suffered was my own fault—if I could just stop provoking my stepmother, stop asking for it, the firestorm burning through our household would be extinguished. I believed him.

My father’s failures led to years of tumult in my teenage life. Even afterward, he left a gaping hole in my own development as a person and as a man that has taken me years to overcome—and I’m far luckier than most who have experienced fatherlessness. I had a supportive and loving mother, access to a good high school and a college education, the resources of a middle-class family, and more. I turned out just fine.

Suffice it to say many are not so fortunate.

More than 25 percent of children in the United States, 20 million, grow up in a home without a father. Beyond that, untold millions more have fathers who are abusive, neglectful, inattentive, or otherwise inadequate. In all its forms, fatherlessness takes a serious toll on young people, particularly young men and boys, that can quite literally ruin lives.

As noted by the National Fatherhood Initiative, fatherlessness strongly corresponds to higher poverty rates, increased rates of teenage pregnancy, behavioral problems, abuse, and neglect. Children without fathers are much more likely to end up incarcerated, get addicted to drugs, commit suicide, or drop out of high school.

Fatherlessness is a sickness of our culture. It’s hard to imagine a more glaring indication of this cultural failing than the fact that when a man who grew up with no father and now has kids started a YouTube channel named “Dad, how do I?” he quickly amassed more than 2 million followers. His videos, such as “How to change a tire” and “I’m proud of you,” have been viewed millions of times.

This deep hole in the soul of our culture has no easy answer. One way we can begin healing is through initiatives such as fatherhood involvement programs, community-level programs in place across the country where stepfathers, neighbors, and other men in the community step up and provide father-like role models for fatherless kids.

But the government has also caused fatherlessness and enshrined it as a perennial problem in our society through structural flaws in public policy.

A generation of children has had to grow up without fathers because of the failures of our criminal justice system. We have locked up millions of men (disproportionately African-American men) over nonviolent and victimless crimes through the failed War on Drugs, with no thought for the consequences this had on families and children left with no man in the home.

There’s another problem with our legal system that contributes to fatherlessness as well. In family court divorce proceedings, courts are overwhelmingly biased in custodial decision-making in favor of mothers over fathers. Of course, in cases where truly only the mother is capable of providing a safe home, giving her primary or sole custody is entirely warranted. But it’s sadly quite common for family courts to limit even a loving and capable father to seeing his children every other weekend—leaving those kids with a gaping hole in their day-to-day lives.

Moreover, our welfare system has long encouraged, enabled, and exacerbated single motherhood because the benefit levels of various government programs skew higher when no male is present in the household. As Wall Street Journal columnist Jason Riley wrote of the welfare state,

“The government paid mothers to keep fathers out of the home—and paid them well.”

Unfortunately, it worked.

These areas offer fertile ground for reform, but they are by no means the only cause of this problem. Repairing this crisis will take time and long-term efforts. But even just raising awareness of the issue is an important place to start, and Father’s Day offers an opportunity to do just that.

People should certainly celebrate Father’s Day and recognize the dads who have played such an important role in their lives. Yet no one should forget that for millions of people like me, Father’s Day is a holiday filled with emptiness and regret—and that as a country, we still have much to do to remedy this crisis.

This article was reprinted from the Washington Examiner.

AUTHOR

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Wokeness is stalking your kids. Here’s how to protect them

/in , , , , , /by

Parents need Courage, Clarity, Compassion, and Communication to dialogue effectively with their children.

In recent weeks, the following incidents took place, all involving people I know personally who live near me.

  • A middle-schooler was unable to focus at school where a female student who identifies as a boy identifying as a dog kept barking in class. The teacher refused to say anything about it.
  • A girl refused to use the school washroom all day because she didn’t want to use the gender-neutral washroom with boys. Using the girls-only washroom, which is out of the way, would single her out among her peers.
  • A mother was baffled when her teen started spouting words like “colonialism” and “patriarchy” while dressing down her father for not clearing his plate from the table.
  • A grad-year student looking into post-secondary options found the first required course for the local college’s fine arts program is “Intro to Critical and Cultural Theory,” a Marxist-based philosophy that subtly encourages aggression and division.
  • An elementary student borrowed a library graphic novel of Little Women in which Jo comes out as a lesbian and shares a kiss with another girl.
  • A Catholic high school teacher asked students to introduce themselves using their preferred pronouns.

Examples of wokeism are also taking place in the workforce:

  • A new employee taking diversity/inclusivity training was required to answer Yes to the question, “Does refusing to use a person’s preferred pronouns constitute harassment?”
  • A hairdresser had two customers an hour apart tell her how they “can’t say anything” in the face of woke ideology such as these scenarios. They feel as if their opinions have been nullified.

Then there was an employee who decided to speak out after being required to attend a training session to make the organization more LGBT2SQ-friendly. She wrote a direct and charitable letter to her employer explaining her beliefs. The employer decided to make the training optional.

How radically different my childhood was compared to today’s, when words like colonialism, patriarchy, transgenderism, critical (race) theory, intersectionality, white privilege, and social justice are seeping into my home and into society’s everyday vocabulary. Along with these ideas comes a climate of anger and division. Ironically, all facets of woke ideology instil a victim mentality which ultimately disempowers its adherents.

Hence the anger.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that many woke “values” piggyback on Christian virtues. As Christians, we also want to put an end to racism and injustice. The difference is that in the woke framework there is no mercy, no forgiveness, and no hope.

It has taken me a while to understand the movement.

I started meeting monthly online with a group of moms to discuss the origins and issues facing our children. We studied Noelle Mering, a podcaster and the author of a new book Awake, Not Woke: A Christian Response to the Cult of Progressive Ideology. We examined Catholic Voices resources and invited Peter Nation to present several talks. Having a clear picture of the historical facts behind the movement has helped us in our discussions with family and friends.

Mering exhorts us to have Courage, Clarity, and Compassion: courage for effecting change; clarity for understanding issues in order to dialogue; and compassion for everyone regardless of whether they are a woke fellow traveller or a woke ideologue.

For parents, I would add a fourth “C” – communication. This should be at the forefront of our minds at all times. A river can’t flow if it is blocked.

The teen years present a bigger challenge, so parents have to get creative. Even if a teen is intractable, flowers secretly placed on her desk, extra Rosaries prayed, and perseverance in saying, “Good night, honey” to someone who only grunts can soften the heart for eventual conversation. We work on what we can work on today.

Woke ideology particularly disdains three aspects of Christianity: that we need to forgive; that we need to be open to dialogue; and that we are children of God. Focusing on these positives will instil in children a love for the beauty and truth of the Christian faith.

Forgiving others and being forgiven produces a tangible peace that children easily recognize. This can be fostered in daily interactions and, importantly, for Catholics, in regular confession.

Teaching our children to dialogue with others who hold different views fosters self-confidence and contributes to a healthy society. Even our worst enemies have some good points. Similarly, we can relate to someone with woke values in many ways: all people are equal, whether white or black, woman or man. This can be a foundation to start a dialogue.

We can guide our children in learning about opposite viewpoints, figuring out how each perspective is different and which is most consistent with facts and logic.

Additionally, they need to see that regular dialogue with God is necessary to thrive in this life. For a Christian, the core of personal identity is the fact that we are sons and daughters of God. It is not the colour of our skin, our sex, our gender, our ethnic background, or our nationality. Children are amazed when they realize God planned on creating them specifically, with all their quirks and qualities, before the beginning of time.

These approaches, along with Mering’s constant advice to “have fun in the family,” constitute an effective inoculation against many harmful influences.

Parallel to the internal guidance of our children is keeping an eye on external factors.

Pay attention to what goes on in school. Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson recommends that children whose teachers rely upon words like equity, diversity, inclusivity, white privilege leave the classroom. Why should they be indoctrinated with “radical leftist, neo-Marxist ideology”?

Erroneous ideas often come more from peers than teachers, so getting to know your children’s friends is important. Pay attention to their internet habits. Invest in a parental control or filtering device.

Read books and watch shows together that support your values. There’s a wealth of information available in an entertaining form on the internet – on topics ranging from preferred pronouns to same-sex attraction to social justice.

Helping children to remain loyal to noble human and Christian values has always been a challenge for parents. Imagine what it must have been like to be a parent in Nazi Germany when children were being courted by Hitler Youth groups, or in in the Soviet Union, when everyone was expected to join the Young Pioneers. Love your children, educate them, and entrust them to the Lord. He will open their eyes to the truth.

AUTHOR

Ida Gazzola is the mother of 6 girls and one boy and lives in British Columbia, Canada. Before embarking on the adventure of parenting, she studied and worked in the financial industry. Team Baby: Creating… More by Ida Gazzola

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

What Is “Libertarian Parenting”? Laissez-Faire Is Wrong for Families by Steven Horwitz

/in , , /by

One of the dangers of modern libertarianism is that some people want to apply the ethical rules and insights that make complete sense in the market to micro-orders such as the family and the firm. Because our day-to-day life is made up of these micro-orders, it would seem to many libertarians that any consistent philosophy should go all the way down.

But as Hayek argued in The Fatal Conceit, the macro order and its rules — which he called the “extended order” — are distinct from the norms and rules that make up these more localized levels of description. When we fail to make this distinction, we wrongly apply the ethics of the extended order to the intimate orders of families and firms, which risks crushing those micro-orders.

This problematic tendency is most pronounced in the ways some libertarians discuss parenting.

They often begin by asking what “libertarian parenting” would look like. Naturally, they then imagine parents being analogous to government and children being analogous to citizens. Unsurprisingly, they conclude that, on libertarian grounds, parents should interfere as little as possible in the lives of their children. Some even propose organizing the household on market principles.

For example, advocates of libertarian parenting might argue that children should always get paid for chores and that parents should never say, “Because I said so!” to their kids. With the best of intentions, they believe that what we might call “laissez-faire” parenting will create children who will be more likely to support a laissez-faire society.

I think they are deeply mistaken for several reasons.

First, there is the empirical evidence from psychology. Psychologists distinguish among a number of parenting styles, but the major ones fall on a spectrum from most involved to least:

  • authoritarian
  • authoritative
  • permissive
  • neglectful

The advocates of libertarian parenting clearly reject the “authoritarian” style and presumably would reject “neglectful.” What they seem to want is perhaps something like permissive parenting:

Permissive parents … allow children to make their own decisions, giving them advice as a friend would. This type of parenting is very lax, with few punishments or rules. Permissive parents also tend to give their children whatever they want and hope that they are appreciated for their accommodating style. Other permissive parents compensate for what they missed as children, and as a result give their children both the freedom and materials that they lacked in their childhood.

As it turns out, permissive parenting doesn’t work very well. The psychological research indicates that children of permissive parents suffer from a variety of problems as they mature.

By contrast, authoritative parenting provides the best results:

Authoritative parents encourage children to be independent but still place limits on their actions. Extensive verbal give-and-take is not refused, and parents try to be warm and nurturing toward the child. Authoritative parents are not usually as controlling as authoritarian parents, allowing the child to explore more freely, thus having them make their own decisions based upon their own reasoning. Often, authoritative parents produce children who are more independent and self-reliant. An authoritative parenting style mainly results when there is high parental responsiveness and high parental demands. Authoritative parents will set clear standards for their children, monitor the limits that they set, and also allow children to develop autonomy.

In other words, it’s perfectly appropriate to place limits on your children’s actions and to insist on only such freedom as is age appropriate. Authoritative parents have high expectations and are not hesitant to say no to their kids. The evidence is clear that this style produces the best psychological outcomes for children.

This style of parenting is not just the best for individual outcomes, but also for promoting a liberal social order.

Many things that might seem to be “anti-liberty” that happen within healthy families are, in fact, preparing children for life in a free society. What children need to become responsible adults is not freedom but structure. For example, they need to learn the importance of following rules, as a free society is a rule-governed society. Political and economic freedom are enhanced by rule-following, and parenting can model that.

It’s perfectly fine as a libertarian parent occasionally to say, “Because I said so.” Obedience to legitimate authority, which includes following rules, is not anti-libertarian. It’s a necessary skill in a world where some people and institutions actually do have authority. And small children in particular do not need everything explained to them. That’s how you end up putting them in the center of your familial universe, which is the mistake that permissive parents make. Parents should be leaders, and they should lead by example.

Encouraging and even forcing your kids to share their possessions is not socialism and it’s not bad parenting. It is not a bad thing to demonstrate to kids that sharing with other individuals they know, even when they might not wish to share, is often an effective way to prevent conflict and establish trust. You can also help them to understand the difference between the expectation to share with known others versus anonymous others. Sharing is what families do, after all. Would children rather their parents didn’t share the income they earn and the food they prepare?

And requiring chores without compensation is an excellent idea and it’s not anti-liberty. The institutions of civil society, such as families and religious organizations, are not bound together by the cash nexus. (There’s a reason that cash gifts among close friends are often considered tacky.) The world does not divide into either state or market. Outside state and market, we often do things out of obligation to others, whether it’s some form of expected sharing or providing help without monetary compensation. Learning that this is often the appropriate way to behave helps to ensure that the institutions of civil society survive and thrive. They are just as important to liberty as are the institutions of the market.

One area where the “libertarian parenting” advocates are correct is in the importance of allowing children to play on their own, without constant parental supervision. The psychological literature is clear about the benefits of unsupervised play for helping children develop the capacity to create, follow, and enforce rules; think about issues of fairness; and learn empathy. Most important, from a libertarian perspective, such play requires the continuing consent of the players. Behaving in ways that upset other children will bring play to an end. Unsupervised play teaches children how to negotiate and compromise to ensure that playing relationships are consensual. Consent is at the core of both markets and civil society, and parents who let their children play without parental supervision are helping those children to develop skills and abilities central to a free society.

When libertarians think about parenting, we should not be asking, “What sort of parenting appears to be implied by our ethical and political views?” Instead, we should be studying what psychologists know about child development and seeing how that aligns with the aptitudes and attitudes we know are necessary for a free society. We shouldn’t want parenting to be libertarian; we should want to parent in ways that produce children who have the skills they need to value and sustain liberty.

Steven Horwitz

Steven Horwitz is the Charles A. Dana Professor of Economics at St. Lawrence University and the author of Microfoundations and Macroeconomics: An Austrian Perspective, now in paperback.

REPORT: Child Obesity Caused by Single Parent Households

/in , , , /by

In 2010 Michele Obama made it her mission to address the “child obesity epidemic”. The goal of Mrs. Obama is to reduce child obesity from the current 20% of all children to 5% by 2030. WebMD reports, “To accomplish this, the plan makes 70 recommendations for early childhood, for parents and caregivers, for school meals and nutrition education, for access to healthy food, and for increasing physical activity.”

According to WebMD, “Obesity is an excess proportion of total body fat. A person is considered obese when his or her weight is 20% or more above normal weight. The most common measure of obesity is the body mass index or BMI.”

“U.S. kids haven’t always been obese. Only one in 20 children ages 2 to 19 was obese in the 1970s. But around 1980 child obesity began to rocket to today’s stratospheric level: Nearly one in three kids is overweight or obese, and nearly one in five is frankly obese,” notes WebMD.

What is the cause of this stratospheric increase in child obesity? ANSWER: Single parent households.

In July 2010 the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) reported, “Prevalence of childhood obesity and its complications have increased world-wide. Parental status may be associated with children’s health outcomes including their eating habits, body weight and blood cholesterol.” [My emphasis]

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for the years 1988–1994 provided a unique opportunity for matching parents to children enabling analyses of joint demographics, racial differences and health indicators. Specifically, the NHANES III data, 1988–1994, of 219 households with single-parents and 780 dual-parent households were analyzed as predictors for primary outcome variables of children’s Body Mass Index (BMI), dietary nutrient intakes and blood cholesterol.

The NHANES survey found:

  • Children of single-parent households were significantly more overweight than children of dual-parent households.
  • Total calorie and saturated fatty acid intakes were higher among children of single-parent households than dual-parent households.
  • On average, Black children were more overweight than children of other races.

The study results implied a strong relationship between single-parent status and excess weight in children. The NHANES survey states, “Parental involvement in the development of school- and community-based obesity prevention programs are suggested for effective health initiatives. Economic constraints and cultural preferences may be communicated directly by family involvement in these much needed public health programs.”

Mark Mather from the Population Reference Bureau reports, “In the United States, the number of children in single-mother families has risen dramatically over the past four decades, causing considerable concern among policymakers and the public. Researchers have identified the rise in single-parent families (especially mother-child families) as a major factor driving the long-term increase in child poverty in the United States.” To read the full report click here.

Data from the Sarasota County School Board shows that since President Obama took office the number of children who are classified as obese is Sarasota public schools has risen as the children progress from Grade 1 – to Grade 3 – to Grade 6. The cohort obesity numbers go down at Grade 9. For example, 15.7% of students in Grade 1 in the 2008/2009 school year were obese. In 2011/2012 school year 18.8% of students in Grade 3 were obese. An increase of 3.1% of students in grade during school year 2008/2009 18.8% were obese. In Grade 6 that cohort increased to 20.1%. The Grade 6 cohort in 2008/2009 data was 21.5% and in 2011/12 dropped to 17.6%.

Public schools do not keep data on obese children who live in single parent households. 

Many are questioning whether the First Lady is addressing the root cause of child obesity – single parent households. Some see this health initiative as expanding government control of parents and children. Setting caloric standards is the first step in setting eating limits. Limits lead to control of food sources, leading to the redistribution of calories. Should not we be focused on the rising number of single parent households?

Perhaps it would be better for the First Lady to focus on increasing the number of traditional two parent families? After all, she has a traditional family and her husband and children all have normal weights according to the BMI calculator.

JUST FOR FUN:

As an aside, Watchdog Wire looked at some well known public figures and calculated their BMI scores.

Using the BMI calculator we determined that New York Jets quarterback Tim Tebow, who is 6′ 3″ tall and weights 236 pounds, is overweight. If Tebow gains 5 pounds he will be categorized as “Obese Class 1”. In fact the entire New York Jets offensive and defensive lines are obese.

Muscle Chemistry lists the height and weight of actors. Those in Hollywood who are overweight according to the BMI calculator include: Whoppi Goldberg, Al Pacino, Oprah Winfrey, Brad Pitt and George Clooney. Sylvester Stallone is rated as Obese Class 1.