One of the most difficult social adjustments of the 20th century was the growing involvement of social, scientific and legal interests in child-rearing. Before the 20th, a parent could more or less do whatever they wanted with their children with only very limited restrictions that prevented wanton cruelty. Starting in the 20th, things changed; all of a sudden, laws started to emerge that severely limited the choices a parent could make in how they reared their child.
It is a well-known and well-established fact that the influences of early childhood set the tone for a person's entire life. A young child does not have the knowledge to decide what direction they wish to take, so it is necessary at that early stage to have guidance. Traditionally, parents have been the almost sole source of that guidance. Do you think they should be?
A parent could theoretically condition a child to whatever ends the parent desires (and in some cases, this has been done). They could choose to doctor the facts the child is taught, and even teach them outright lies (some parents opt to home-school their children for this very reason). They could imbue them with prejudices that have been passed down for generations. All of this happens today.
On the flip side, if parents were not allowed to raise their children according to their beliefs, then entire cultures and traditions could disappear in a single generation. Children would be indoctrinated by state or socially approved norms, creating a drab conformity, and stifling diversity. Opposition could be easily trained away, and an entire generation of almost blind followers to whatever the current social agendas are could be created. It happens today, in a limited sense (for example, state schooling in certain countries serves that purpose), and it has happened in the past.
Rights of the parent
Rights of the child
It is a well-known and well-established fact that the influences of early childhood set the tone for a person's entire life. A young child does not have the knowledge to decide what direction they wish to take, so it is necessary at that early stage to have guidance. Traditionally, parents have been the almost sole source of that guidance. Do you think they should be?
A parent could theoretically condition a child to whatever ends the parent desires (and in some cases, this has been done). They could choose to doctor the facts the child is taught, and even teach them outright lies (some parents opt to home-school their children for this very reason). They could imbue them with prejudices that have been passed down for generations. All of this happens today.
On the flip side, if parents were not allowed to raise their children according to their beliefs, then entire cultures and traditions could disappear in a single generation. Children would be indoctrinated by state or socially approved norms, creating a drab conformity, and stifling diversity. Opposition could be easily trained away, and an entire generation of almost blind followers to whatever the current social agendas are could be created. It happens today, in a limited sense (for example, state schooling in certain countries serves that purpose), and it has happened in the past.
Rights of the parent
- Does a parent have the right to raise their child the way they see fit?
- Do they have the right to teach their child their culture, value and beliefs?
- How far does that right go?
Rights of the child
- Does a child have the right to be raised according to the values of the society they're born into (whether or not those are the parent's values)?
- Do they have the right to the best education and child-rearing techniques available (even if that education and those techniques contradict the parent's will)?
- Who should have the right to determine how to best raise a child?
I'm not into the whole writing a research paper on here, so I don't know how much I'll add. However, I did saw this in the "Homosexuality & Adoption" thread and quite liked it.
