21–30 of 358 posts
[flagged]
[flagged]
Psychology is pretty uniform in the observation that children need parents, preferably both, but just one is a massive developmental influence. There are minor benefits from they/them being biological but it isn't absolutely necessary, but a care worker, teacher, etc is not filling the same social niche with a child that a parent is. Its a job title in its own right that also has by far the most impact on developing functioning healthy human beings than any other. Its also a job you don't just quit or substitute for without lasting consequences, the role of a parent is to anchor children and provide an immovable stake upon their foundation.
You can absolutely hire a parent if you don't want to or have the time yourself to parent the children you make, but it is substantively harmful to deny them having parent(s) when they need them. If a mother wants to work a full time job while a spouse or even just long term domestic partner? wants to take on the job of being a (or more) parent(s) that works. If a father wants to do the same, that works. But kids still need parent(s), preferably two, and that is two full time positions to fill.
One quandary to think on is that society really doesn't organize or optimize for parental efficiency. We organize schools to lecture and teach to try to balance between quantity of children to a quality of education, but adults are just en masse making new lives and mostly playing it by ear on fulfilling parental responsibilities. We haven't tried to promote good parents to be parents by getting them more children - biological or not - to parent. As a civilization it feels backwards to me how what might be the most important job there is - developing future generations - is the one that is the least recognized for its value and importance. It isn't a career, it isn't prestigious, it isn't treated with the same scrutiny you would want to see in getting your plumbing fixed. But broken pipes are a much less substantive issue than mental malaise or physiological complications brought about by poor or absent parenting in the development of the billions to succeed us.
Disheartening. I grew up with absentee parents. This is an unwelcome spin on that situation. I can't even give an opinion on this that doesn't immediately fly into rage. I just hope I don't try to pair off with someone who ends up getting hoodwinked by articles like this. This is disgusting.
There is a difference between parents who are absent because they don’t care, and parents who are absent because they have a lot of work to do. My dad worked overseas and was gone for 30-40% of the year when I was a kid. Grew up to have a great relationship with him, because when he was here he was always attentive. (Not in the sense of spending a lot of time with us—he worked 60 hour weeks stateside. But in the sens…
I wouldn't ever disparage him for it. He provided well for his family, and most of my favorite childhood memories are the times we spent together. To this day, I try to spend as much time with him as possible while I still can.
I can only hope that I give my kids as much of myself as he did.
I love this article. Parents today spend more than twice as much time today with their kids today than fifty years ago: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/11/27/parents-... . Fat lot of good that did the last couple of generations. Parents spend too much time apologizing for prioritizing their careers, and it’s particularly unfair to women. Studies repeatedly fail to show significant and durable results fr…
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19833853
> Taken together, the results of these analyses suggest that ma- ternal employment early in a child’s life is not commonly associ- ated with decreases in later achievement or increases in behavior problems.
I respect her choice but I wouldn’t want to be her kid
lol, my coworker always goes off on a rant about how much it would suck being elon musk's kids. can't convince him its just a different upbringing