Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The unusual ways Western parents raise children

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 684 posts

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#271

Post by grahamburger »

Clewza313 wrote: post #130
timerol wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of areas open to the public that are accessible to children: playgrounds, libraries, schoolyards, skateparks, large underused parking lots, malls, public pools. Some places have great nature nearby: beaches, creeks, rivers, hills, and mountains. Some of those are more dangerous than others, but they are all accessible if the parent allows it.

In the US, if the children in question are under 12 and going to any of those places unsupervised, they're likely to get the police and/or CPS called on them.

That's one cool thing about living in Utah: https://www.npr.org/2018/04/01/598630200/utah-passes-free-ra...

The other cool thing is all the natural parks and outdoor activities (skiing, biking, climbing.)

The downsides are the utter lack of nightlife (not really my jam anyway, but whatever) and all the damn Mormons (I am one.)

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#272

Post by jkubicek »

meowster wrote: post #82
alistairSH wrote: post #29

Of all the "weird" things we do as parents in euro/anglo nations, sleeping arrangements seems nowhere near the top. IMO, the top "offender" is over-scheduling kid's activities. So many kids in my area have their days booked solid with sports, academic tutoring, music lessons. Approaching zero free time to enjoy being a kid. Edit - and this isn't really a western thing, "Tiger Mom" and similar probably pre-dates this…

I volunteer with a U.S. Scout troop. I see boys that don't know whether or not they can go on an activity/campout because they have to ask their parents if they're free that day/weekend. I try to tell them their old enough (most are teenagers) that they should start deciding for themselves what activities they participate in. Most all of them just seem apathetic. I'm sure their parents are trying to do what is best f…

That seems normal to me? I'm well-past the teenage years, and I wouldn't commit to a weekend activity without double-checking with the rest of my family first.

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#273

Post by technobabble »

AlexandrB wrote: post #129
kkwteh wrote: post #47

From the perspective of the Lindy principle it is weird. I have an eighteen-month old child and have been reading a lot about child rearing since my wife got pregnant. It’s taboo to say this, and I’m sorry if this offends anyone, but I suspect that a lack of adult attention in the first three years of life is a principal factor in the rising autism rates we’re seeing in modern economies. This would explain why autism…

> On the contrary, Kanner held tightly to his original proposal that autism was an innate condition, which was widely understood to mean it had a genetic basis. His behavioral observations of parents contributed to a breakthrough concept that is wholly consistent with genes being a key part of the autism story. Instead of parenting causing autism, Kanner’s idea — which has since been validated — was that autism (and…

quote: He wrote that, overall, the parents seemed perfectionistic and preoccupied with abstractions, rather than showing a genuine interest in people.

I find this sentence interesting in comparison to the phrase "dumb people talk about people, average people talk about things, smart people talk about ideas" that I've seen in various forms on the internet.

Hot take: People are over-optimizing for grand impact, while neglecting the more profound impact on the local level. Most people will not be senators, but I think many people, with some work, can run for office as an alderman, mayor, or county representative.

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#274

Post by NortySpock »

zeku wrote: post #226
rajin444 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you feel certain of this? I may be wrong, but a majority of human history seems to point to (roughly) "spanking is ok, anything more is not". Children do not understand logic the same as adults.

I really don't believe this is true. I was spanked my whole childhood. It never taught me one single thing, because I just wanted to know "why" X was bad and I was never told. It was no more effective than just telling me no. People use spanking as a crutch, it really has no place in the child raising toolkit imo.

So the explanation is more important than the spanking (or other discipline).

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#275

Post by ivanbakel »

meowster wrote: post #178
osterreich0000 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what's known as the "lump of labour" fallacy - the idea that there's a fixed amount of work that needs to be done, therefore opening the job market to more workers necessarily lowers wages due to "increased supply". The reality is that increasing the supply of workers doesn't necessarily mean increased competition for jobs. More people available to work means that more can be produced across the board; each a…

> each additional worker can create opportunities for further additional workers By more people working, we created more opportunities for more people to work? I think there is a fallacy within that "lump of labour fallacy". I'm not saying there is a fixed amount of work needed, but eventually you do run into economies of scale: less and less addional work is needed to support more people. Hasn't cost of living and o…

>By more people working, we created more opportunities for more people to work?

Yes, because more workers = more people with money = more people who stimulate production through spending.

The issue with the "economies of scale" argument is the same issue that the original lump of labour argument has - it assumes that there is a sensible upper bound on the amount of work people want done at any one time.

The only reason more efficient workers would lead to less work per worker is if the work to be done is bounded. What history shows is that instead, more efficient workers work the same amount and produce more, and the consumption of the product of that work is effectively unbounded.

For an example in tech: advancements in programming theory and practice over the last ~50 years have made it so that the modern programmer is easily able to produce the kind of programs that computers used 50 years ago in a fraction of the time it originally took to code them. Does this mean we need a fraction of the number of programmers compared to 50 years ago? No, because the improvements in efficiency have been completely offset by the demand for more complicated programs. In general, there doesn't seem to be any kind of bound on program complexity - the easier the programmer's job becomes, the greater their requirements become.

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#276

Post by screye »

Thiez wrote: post #204
screye wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand needing a room for yourself before puberty strikes. Even then, sharing the room with a same-gender sibling doesn't sound too bad. It's funny because these same people go to college and share their dorm room for the 1st 2 years of university, when someone needs the most amount of privacy. > correlation between sharing your room and poverty levels In India, unless you are super rich, having a room to…

Genuine question: the bedroom is traditionally (where I come from, Western Europe) also a common place for couples to have sex. In addition, many people presumably would prefer not to walk in on their parents, or have sex in front of their children. So how does this work in cultures where it's common for children not to have their own rooms until puberty starts (so 10 to 13 years?)? Do people get more adventurous abo…

I wonder about this myself. I have no clue when my parents had sex and our house was one of the bigger ones (2 bedroom vs 1 bed room). I was ALWAYS in the bedroom, so no way I could've missed it when awake.

Indians frequently send their kids over to an aunt/uncle's place once every month or so....so maybe then ? Another common solution is to move your kid to the living room for sleeping.

I slept with my parents until my brother was born, and never spent a night away from them before this. So...I guess they did it while I was in the room. X|

> delicious spices used to mask the taste of the sleeping pills everybody is feeding their children

The most plausible theory I have heard so far. Indian food IS sleep-inducing and I sleep like a rock, so I won't be one to disagree there.

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#277

Post by bluGill »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #247
petertodd wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also "Formula-fed children have about twice the risk of vomiting or diarrhea during their first year." Yes, that's bad. But it's not that bad. Try your best at breastfeeding, and if it doesn't work out, so be it. Better to focus your energy in being a good parent in other ways that you can excel at than dwelling on what isn't working for you.

Good advice, as far as I'm concerned. The decision to skip breastfeeding is irreversible if you stop producing milk, whereas you can always switch to formula. So it makes sense to try breastfeeding first and see if it works for you.

Make sure you get help. Breastfeeding isn't obviously easy, even though it seems like it should be. There are a lot of tricks need to get the baby to take it.

Don't give up easily. There is a reason formula samples are free in the early days, it doesn't take too many "just this once since it is on hand" events and mom is unable to produce any milk. Then you discover that formula is not cheap when it is too late.

That said, bottles are only slightly worse if at all. So if you need to use it, do so.

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#278

Post by jdminhbg »

rayiner wrote: post #182
silicon2401 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a condescending and unfounded response. Some people can take heroin and not have issues, but that doesn't make heroin safe by any means. You're in a small minority of Americans and not representative of the average person. > The organization estimates that 3/4 of the American population will likely be overweight or obese by 2020.[13] According to research done by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health,…

Americans aren't fat because of Starbucks and McDonalds. Those things are just food. Americans are fat because they eat too many calories and don't get enough exercise: https://www.businessinsider.com/daily-calories-americans-eat... At age 2-3, my parents fed me traditional Bangladeshi meals of chicken or beef curry stewed in heavy amounts of canola oil. My 2 year old, meanwhile, lives on McDonald's chicken nuggets.…

> Americans aren't fat because of Starbucks and McDonalds. Those things are just food. Americans are fat because they eat too many calories

Food is made out of calories, though...?

Re: The unusual ways Western parents raise children

#279

Post by agumonkey »

gdubs wrote: post #171

One of the hardest thing about being a parent today is the constant shame and confusion about the “right” way to do it. We don’t live in a hunter gatherer society anymore, we just don’t. There’s lots of wisdom in that way of life, and sure we could learn from it — but there’s enough anxiety as it is, parents don’t need more of it. We have three kids and we sleep trained them. (Not a pediatrician, standard disclaimer.…

We are in an orthodoctic era. Lots of tensions about what principle is the best to follow, less patience and acceptance.
Post reply on HN