The Overprotected American Child

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-overprotected-american-child-1527865038

by simulate • 8 years ago

109 119 8 years ago

wsj.com

viburnum• 8 years ago

Child poverty is the real problem.

https://peoplespolicyproject.org/2018/02/16/americas-bizarre...

Waterluvian2• 8 years ago

Geez, that article really felt light on examination, then bam, "the solution is obvious, tax the rich more!"

And why wouldn't they compare the US to other countries like Canada, Germany, UK, France, etc. ? We all already know that the Nordic countries really have their act together and are effectively a cherry picked example.

Maybe I'm being paranoid but is this what fake news looks like? The whole point of the article seems to be to further the "tax the rich" argument.

notadoc• 8 years ago

Maybe I'm being paranoid but is this what fake news looks like?

Fake news is literally made up nonsense, usually that appeals to emotion or existing political bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news

awinder2• 8 years ago

No, you are trying to lump state-sponsored attacks on democratic institutions in with opinion pieces that you disagree with, which is not only disengenous but also very very dangerous.

walshemj3• 8 years ago

No sure how taxing the rich is going to solve the nanny state problem here and I am probably more left wing that the average HN reader.

closeparen4• 8 years ago

"20 percent of US children live in families with incomes below 50 percent of the national median income"

This is a bizarre metric. If richer families started having children at a higher rate, or poorer families slowed down, the problem would be fixed?

What if we simply cut the pay of the upper 50%, not even redistributing the income? That would lower median income, and therefore shrink the "less than 50% of median income" demographic, "solving" child poverty.

golergka• 8 years ago

If richer families started having children at a higher rate, or poorer families slowed down, the problem would be fixed?

This does sound like a great idea.

taeric7• 8 years ago

Well, yes, if richer families started having children at a higher rate, this would almost fix itself.

Two major problems, though. a) By and large, rich people don't have more children and b) having a child is a good way to destroy your wealth. That is, many that are just barely in the "rich" category won't be once they have children. More, most wealth in the US does not survive generations. (And this is generally agreed to be a good thing, I believe.)

For the second, ok. Cut the pay. How? That sort of suggestion is literally "wishful thinking." If everyone could get by with less money, everyone would. Folks do grab for the advantages they can get, though, and most rise in costs and pay are ascribable to scarcity. Only wishful thinking will make housing and energy costs flat across the board. Same for social mobility. Or physical mobility.

anonymouskimmer2• 8 years ago

It's bizarre because it's not parent age adjusted and number of parents adjusted.

If only 20% of children are members of age-adjusted & number of parents adjusted families with income in the bottom half then that means that the bottom half of families are being slowly genocided through the cost to have and raise a child.

But we have no way of knowing that from the national median income statistic.

walshemj3• 8 years ago

I thought poor families had more kids

danmg• 8 years ago

http://archive.is/kWzYa

Pinckney• 8 years ago

As a counterpoint, Canada (and presumably the US too) has seen a dramatic decrease in unintentional injury mortality among children over the last 70 years.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28026710

ghaff3• 8 years ago

Yes, although that study suggests the big declines have been with things like choking and burns among very young children. I don't think anyone is arguing for more dangerous products or getting rid of safety precautions for toddlers.

That study also suggests more vehicle-related accidents but it's hard to know what to make of that without knowing more about the type of accidents, population patterns, etc.

wallace_f• 8 years ago

I don't think anyone is arguing for more dangerous products or safety precautions for toddlers.

Maybe some people think that way. Colloquially, I've heard about a million times Europeans laugh at how ridiculous they think some laws are in that regard, such as Kinder eggs being banned in America.

cma• 8 years ago

I don't think anyone is arguing for more dangerous products or getting rid of safety precautions for toddlers.

Extreme "get the government off our back" people are definitely arguing for that.

ballenf• 8 years ago

Valid point, but we should also therefore include suicides in adults where it resulted from childhood anxiety issues caused by overprotectiveness.

JackCh5• 8 years ago

Has there been any change in the rate of depression or other mental disorders in minors, and if so, is loss of autonomy one of the factors in this?

watwut6• 8 years ago

It is hard to say, since we diagnose more then before. Anecdotally, some say that yes there is such rise. Then again, teenagers are now less violent then before, commit less serious crime, get pregnant less often and take drugs less.

It is hard to weight those against each other.

krupan• 8 years ago

Teen suicide rates are up, for what it's worth.

TangoTrotFox• 8 years ago

A problem with isolated stats is that it doesn't necessarily tell you much about the system from which it was derived. Life and development are extremely complex. Has there been a somehow more difficult to measure cost associated with this? For instance there are also various correlations such as a strong increase in mental illness, a decline in academic performance, and a general infantilization of young adults. I'm not sure it's such a stretch to see how we treat our children as, at least possibly, somehow related.

walshemj3• 8 years ago

Probably due to the reduction in people working on farms which can be dangerous places - there was a documentary on Rick Hall - the founder of Muscle Shoals.

He grew up on a farm and one of his siblings was scaled to death and later when he had made money a tractor he had brought for his father overturned killing him.

astura4• 8 years ago

Unintentional injury includes car crashes which have been getting less deadly thanks to increasing safety standards, seat belt laws, car seat laws, graduated licensing, stiffer penalties for DUI (as well as actual enforcement). You're also talking about increasing safety standards on consumer products and packaging leading to less injuries.

m_mueller3• 8 years ago

So does Switzerland where the norm is still to send off children to kindergarden alonr at age 6. Or in Japan where 7 year olds take responsibility over 4 year olds going there (with some adults also warching the crossings). There‘s many ways increasing child safety that don’t mandate parents to helicopter.

HarryHirsch3• 8 years ago

You do wonder how a contemporary American would read Herman Hesse's Demian. Emil Sinclair, the protagonist, he had a protected childhood!

aphextron2• 8 years ago

You can always tell when someone grew up like this. They are always afraid of doing anything that might even remotely be considered outside the box. They lack that ability and drive to find things out for themselves, and instead rely on others for help and guidance to a fault. Professional occupations are full of these people who were coddled from birth, through college, and straight into a high paying job with zero understanding of how life actually works. It makes relating to someone like that almost impossible.

watwut6• 8 years ago

If they ended in high paying profession and are reasonably happy then maybe their decision to follow advice given to them was right.

ShabbosGoy2• 8 years ago

Until some minor setback happens. Then they have a mental breakdown.

DoreenMichele5• 8 years ago

So you are okay with people with no spine basically running this country? Because that's what high paying professionals typically do. It may not be politics, but they typically have a lot of power and their spinelessness impacts a lot more people than just themselves.

I don't think this is at all a good thing.

aphextron2• 8 years ago

If they ended in high paying profession and are reasonably happy then maybe their decision to follow advice given to them was right.

Absolutely. These people make fantastic employees. But the world needs more than just employees.

weeksie• 8 years ago

Maybe. Agreeableness is often very high among the coddled set and that is a trait associated with doing well in the business world, especially for women (sometimes negatively associated when the subject is a man). However, it's also possible that these people ended up in their job due to a number of other factors that are correlated with helicopter-parenting: ability to pay for school, ability to participate in unpaid internships, etc. . . .

As young millennials and gen z (or whatever the fuck we end up calling them) start to occupy management roles we'll be able to make a better call in this regard.

taeric7• 8 years ago

Can you? Or do you just have good selection bias? Or do you just like not liking people?

Reality is most people rely on others for help. And there isn't a damned thing wrong with that. Indeed, the implication of the problem there is that it is not right to help and guide others. How is that ok?

Would it be great if we were all more self sufficient? I think so, but I don't have anything to back that belief. Especially knowing we are social creatures. And, all evidence is we have succeeded in large because we are social creatures. Even the giants among us relied heavily on social influence.

HarryHirsch3• 8 years ago

Reality is most people rely on others for help.

Reality nowadays when a piece of lab equipment breaks down is that the kids call tech support, i.e. The Professor. You wish they'd consult documentation or their own brain, more experienced students in the lab, the tech support number on the business card that's stuck to the instrument &c p.p., but instead they immediately kick the matter upstairs instead of consulting peers or using the means at their disposal. Their childlike trust in authorities is too great.

spamizbad• 8 years ago

The fact that they tracked into a high paying job despite their risk-aversion and limited ability to think abstractly seems to vindicate their parent's method of raising children.

Most parents aren't trying to raise the next brilliant artist, entrepreneur, or intellectual[1]. They just want their kids to have a stable, safe, happy life.

[1] And those that try often don't know what they're doing and end up inflicting emotional damage, so the best case: A successful but absolutely miserable adult.

awat• 8 years ago

I agree to a certain extent that if replicating an upper middle class lifestyle is the parenting goal this can be successful. The big concern I have with that parenting model is antedoctoally these seem to be the people I have seen fall the hardest when dealing with adversity.

For someone who had a long linear career progression a lay-off or temporary underemployment sucks and could cause a lifestyle downsizing but is manageable. For the person who’s entire existence expects xxx,xxx income that’s where foreclosures on very nice homes and bankruptcy happen.

redsparrow2• 8 years ago

It may vindicate the parent's method, but only up to the point where their child gets the job. It seems that the system will let the coddled individual get that far. I wonder what happens to the coddled people after that. Right now they probably have a hard time, but maybe the system is evolving to let those people, at least in some industries, stay in their bubble. (I hope not...)

tscs373• 8 years ago

You can always tell when someone grew up like this. They are always afraid of doing anything that might even remotely be considered outside the box. They lack that ability and drive to find things out for themselves, and instead rely on others for help and guidance to a fault.

I would be careful there it can happen by other means too. I suffer from a fair bit of anxiety, so I show similar symptoms for different reasons; instead of not knowing how to act outside the box or being unable to not rely on others, I'm merely afraid of doing those things, although capable of them.

I think if you want to separate the two cases the easiest way is to give them alone time and a high level task to fulfill that requires initiative to solve. Those who have grown up overprotected will continue to seek guidance while those who are simply afraid of social missteps will be happily on their way the moment they are alone with a clear goal.

throwaway413• 8 years ago

I was with you until the “alone with a clear goal” part.

What if you are left alone with an unclear goal?

dvdhnt• 8 years ago

I was overly coddled and eventually got past it. However, like you mentioned, I have anxiety and it causes similar obstacles.

I’m interested to hear what you think helps?

drdeadringer• 8 years ago

I feel like there is a fine line between people like this and people who insist that documentation exists.

For me, maybe I know what the procedure is because I've done it a thousand times but it's still not written down step by step so what I know in my head is worthless once I leave the job for whatever reason [death, better deal, retirement, &c].

On the other hand, the person doing the job could just be sub-par. I'm not sure what there can be done about that.

ourmandave• 8 years ago

A wallet-sized Let Grow “Kid Card” is meant to be carried by children when they are out on their own, to calm the fears of overly concerned adults.

https://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/B3-AQ358_INDEPE_M...

^This here.

Except the Concerned Adults will never get a chance to read it because they'll call the police to rescue the 12-year-old dropped off at the mall by her mom.

https://www.brainchildmag.com/2014/01/guilty-as-charged/

ebikelaw• 8 years ago

I kinda love the integrated shruggie in their logotype.

repsilat2• 8 years ago

I think it's "pushing upwards", as if struggling against an artificially low ceiling, not shrugging :-).

empath75• 8 years ago

she left a 12 year old in charge of a three year old at the mall which is a much different situation.

ivm• 8 years ago

11-13 year old me was regularly walking with my 1-3 year old brother alone. It was in Russia, in the 90s.

matte_black2• 8 years ago

If a 12 year old child can’t take care of a three year old they have failed as a 12 year old.

m_mueller3• 8 years ago

Seriously? Where I live I regularly see 7 year olds alone in charge of 3 year olds at the playground. I‘m talking about Switzerland, much the same in many European countries and Japan.

autokad• 8 years ago

Am I remembering things wrong, or wasnt baby sitters potentially 12 years old when I was growing up?

astura4• 8 years ago

A generation ago 12 year olds were thought to be fully capable of babysitting and many did.

redsparrow2• 8 years ago

Here's the rule from the transit system in Berlin:

"Children under four years of age may only use public transport if they are accompanied by a person who is at least six years of age."

https://www.bvg.de/en/Tickets/fare-overview/conditions-of-ca...

ThomPete• 8 years ago

When I first moved my family (from Denmark originally) to New York we had to put our oldest son in a daycare.

We have always been fairly "free range" i.e. our kids have had their share of bruises from climbing and in general being allowed to do challenging things.

After a week at the daycare my wife went to pick my son up, one of the teachers pulled her aside and told her that they, unfortunately, had to report some of the bruises on his arm or shoulder (can't remember) and that they hadn't said anything about the bruises on his legs.

My wife and I freaked out worried that the social services would come and take him away.

Of course, we soon learned that it wasn't actually the bruises on our son they were worried about but whether we would report them for mistreating our son.

The primary problem in the US is the liability issue which certainly doesn't help.

People in general though are really weirdly paranoid about their kids. I always thought it would be counterproductive for them later in life. Better to fall when you are a little boy than when you are older.

Anyway who knows.

m_mueller3• 8 years ago

This kinda story is my biggest fear - the state interfering with my family.

osdiab• 8 years ago

I wonder how much the built environment impacts the independence we can give our children. For instance, regarding the milestone of safely crossing the road that this article mentions, does the common milestone age decrease in more pedestrian-friendly places? It's one thing to cross a one-lane, slow-traffic narrow street in Europe versus a wide, high-speed one characteristic of most American suburbs.

bayonetz• 8 years ago

The proliferation of these overprotective practices reminds me of the proliferation of simpler practices we impose on kids like showering regularly and wearing clean clothes that we just take for granted now. The link in my mind is how you can pick most any practice that is common amongst a majority of the population today and look back 50, 200, sometimes 2000 years and you can trace it back to a minority aristocratic or ruling class. You know, like medieval kings taking regular private hot baths but this not becoming feasible for the rest of Europe until the last century.

Another commenter made an observation along the lines of you see overprotected children nevertheless succeeding (or failing up, depending on your perspective) professionally as adults. That would make sense if what we are doing is slowly handing down practices from the higher classes to lower. The failing up phenomenon is clearly highly correlated with the privilege you were born into. As everyone becomes relatively more privileged, then practices would radiate out and be institutionalized amongst more of the population, i.e., everyone would start overprotecting because as long as your kid makes it, worse case, they will be able to succeed via the fail up method.

5DFractalTetris4• 8 years ago

It used to be said that certain kings or personages were made of glass and that if you touched them, they would shatter and the kingdom would fall. Much like a regular private hot bath, I fail to see the value of a Glass King.

Once I visited the UK and some kids threw lit firecrackers into my scarf. Then all the adults kept drinking. I assume America is currently behind the times, Europe having since updated the myth to Atomic Motorcycle Danger King.

This failure has something to do with Americans having enjoyed Downton Abbey more than Mad Max: Fury Road. My investigation continues.

cosmojg• 8 years ago

Don't forget to come back here when you ultimately publish your findings. I know I'll be keeping an eye open.

5DFractalTetris4• 8 years ago

I grew up in the Danger Zone and it was dull.

garyvee_• 8 years ago

Paywall removed https://outline.com/E8VPNv

tropo• 8 years ago

Abraham Lincoln was left in a cabin for 6 months, responsible for his sister, when he was 9 and she was 11. There were some dried berries to eat, and Abraham Lincoln could go hunt with a rifle. The house didn't have power or water.

He turned out OK. Modern social workers would have taken him. Heck, they'd literally swipe baby Jesus.

The Overprotected American Child

Related Stories