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

The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 325 posts

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#251

Post by Auracle »

15457345234 wrote: post #234
rpmisms wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please explain how, because if stupid people have more kids, there will be more stupid people.

The heritability of intelligence and other factors is highly variable. You want people who will care diligently for their children to have them. Not people who will be largely indifferent to them, whether they're smart or dumb. The Musk 'I'll have ten and scatter them to the wind with bags of money, the odds will take care of the rest' strategy is not really one that works out well in real life.

The heritability of intelligence is pretty well established.

Your second point is true, of course.

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#252

Post by rpmisms »

15457345234 wrote: post #246
rpmisms wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the oldest of 11 kids, and I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on this. I agree with your second statement, which is why conscientious people should have kids.

I have very little of substance to add beyond 'you should really think about it, and do it for your own reasons alone.' Kids aren't something you owe the world, and Idiocracy is just a movie.

Idiocracy is a joke about a real phenomenon. The outcome will likely be less extreme, but possibly not dissimilar.

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#253

Post by [deleted] »

drivebyhooting wrote: post #250
salamandersss wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the fifth state, colic. It can last for months and the child will cry every waking hour. The binary flag is stuck 'on' which in my experience set every family member into a meltdown so you'll get no relief, because a baby that cries inconsolably for hours (months!) on end and can't be fixed is kryptonite to many people. So yeah, good fucking luck if that happens. You'll have to feed on a schedule, change regularly…

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#254

Post by csomar »

conception wrote: post #22

The book Hunt, Gather, Parent touches on this a bit. It takes 3-4 humans, not necessarily adults but cousins and whatnot, to take care of a child. Two? 6-8. Since western societies broke up tight knit communities, the support system for this in the west has been lacking and jerry rigged with tired parents and nannies etc ever since. The reason for the breakup is fun - https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/11/ro…

Buddhist countries (Burma, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia) have a West-like kinship intensity index. So, hmm, no. You can do better (as better than Muslim like countries and the Western individualistic societies).

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#255

Post by Apocryphon »

rpmisms wrote: post #252
15457345234 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have very little of substance to add beyond 'you should really think about it, and do it for your own reasons alone.' Kids aren't something you owe the world, and Idiocracy is just a movie.

Idiocracy is a joke about a real phenomenon. The outcome will likely be less extreme, but possibly not dissimilar.

That wasn't even the point of the movie

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18489573

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#256

Post by salamandersss »

drivebyhooting wrote: post #250
salamandersss wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the fifth state, colic. It can last for months and the child will cry every waking hour. The binary flag is stuck 'on' which in my experience set every family member into a meltdown so you'll get no relief, because a baby that cries inconsolably for hours (months!) on end and can't be fixed is kryptonite to many people. So yeah, good fucking luck if that happens. You'll have to feed on a schedule, change regularly…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#257

Post by imetatroll »

rexpop wrote: post #190
ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have brainwashed our western minds to make women leave their kids in daycare sometimes weeks after being born. Then we are brainwashed to let kids sleep in a separate room so that mommy can get a good night's rest and be productive at work. We need a minimum of 3 years of maternity leave in our country to being with. It is insane as one of the best countries in the world we don't let people have kids naturally.

Families with "women in the workplace" are not brainwashed, they are wielding hard earned rights and freedoms against violently indifferent economic structures. Under capitalism, we are not free unless we draw a wage, and women have learned there are no wages for housework.

To the detriment of the child.

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#258

Post by imetatroll »

amrocha wrote: post #210
bnlxbnlx wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, parenthood is intense, both both ways. It intensifies the highs and the lows. There's more strain and there's more joy. And there's a lot less strain when moving out of nuclear family structures. It all becomes easier for the children and the parents.

I disagree that there's more joy to parenthood. I think that's a lie parents tell themselves to justify their decision. I'm happy for you if you're happy to have children. That doesn't mean people without children aren't as happy as you.

Western culture no longer seems to appreciate the commitment that is required to raise children. Personally I think people are too self-centered and are too eager to seek hedonism. Whether or not it will be OK long term is to be seen.

I have no doubt that if you were to ask the people without kids on their death bed if they wished they had had them, they would say yes.

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#259

Post by lynx23 »

amrocha wrote: post #210
bnlxbnlx wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, parenthood is intense, both both ways. It intensifies the highs and the lows. There's more strain and there's more joy. And there's a lot less strain when moving out of nuclear family structures. It all becomes easier for the children and the parents.

I disagree that there's more joy to parenthood. I think that's a lie parents tell themselves to justify their decision. I'm happy for you if you're happy to have children. That doesn't mean people without children aren't as happy as you.

So true.

Re: The key to mother and child well-being may be many caregivers

#260

Post by cycomanic »

em-bee wrote: post #226
cycomanic wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find that part of the article and the parallels drawn to nurseries in the UK (by one of the researchers apparently) quite weird. My understanding is that what is denoted caregiver in the article is quite different to a careperson in a nursery. I don't think that a caregiver in the hunter gatherer society will exclusively watch one child only (and not all the time). I suspect more that they are available if needed.…

The article says children had often 10-20 caregivers, based on the 18 children that's a minimum of 180 adults. i do not understand how you could even come up with that kind of interpretation. that caregivers are not exclusive in such a scenario should be obvious. how could it be any different? and no, it doesn't make the whole thing nonsensical. there is a qualitative difference when a child has many adult role model…

I agree that the caregivers are not exclusive should be quite obvious, and yes having a lot of caregivers at different times would give the child a lot of rolemodels to choose from. The part I take issue with is:

> Ratios of caregivers to children were greater than five-to-one in the observed hunter-gatherer groups, whereas in UK nurseries each adult is responsible for numerous children. In fact, regulations on adult-to-child ratios in early years settings have recently decreased for two-year-olds to one caregiver for five children—the opposite of what the researchers observed in the Mbendjele communities.

That is nonsensical. There is at best a very weak correlation between the adult-to-child ratios in nurseries and how many overall caregivers a child has and the ratio of children to one adult in a nursery is certainly not "the opposite" of the ratio of 5 "non-exclusive" adults to one child in the Mbendjele communities.

In fact it's quite conceivable that even in the Mbendjele communities for parts of the day 10 children might only be looked after by 2 adults, the same ratio as UK nurseries.

Post reply on HN