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

71–80 of 325 posts

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

#71

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

elmomle wrote: post #67
watwut wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that we actually give kids massive amount of attention compared to historical standards ... calling current situation "degenerate" is absurd. Also considering that by many statistics, children do better then they used to just a few decades ago.

For some definitions of attention, yes, but not necessarily historically massive amounts of physical contact and (non -neurotic) care. Think of the images from the world over of indigenous women going about their days largely with their young children strapped to them.

> Think of the images from the world over of indigenous women going about their days largely with their young children strapped to them.

Until they can walk at which point they are increasingly gone to do the vital growing that happens away from adults.

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

#72

Post by watwut »

EGreg wrote: post #38
lotsofpulp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People could accept lower living standards and opt for single income families. However, people like to compete, for purposes of fulfilling their own ego and attracting a mate. That is why higher income individuals attract other higher income individuals. Corporations did not make people competitive. People want financial freedom, people want to buy goods and services, and people want to attract a partner per their li…

Corporations, just like governments, engage in pervasive propaganda, from impressionable school years all the way to adulthood. Edward Burnays said propaganda got a bad name after WW1, so they renamed it to "PR". It's how corporations got women to smoke, too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torches_of_Freedom How they control the crowd, featuring Edward Burnays and his uncle Freud (whose theories became famous ironical…

The high levels of marriages were to large extend result of "women can't eally survive without a marriage, they need man to eat" and following "therefore single me are pressured into marriage cause someone needs to pay for them".

Not all of that was free choice.

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

#73

Post by rexpop »

11235813213455 wrote: post #68
getpost wrote: post #54

> the researchers say that children may be "evolutionarily primed" to expect exceptionally high levels of physical contact and care, What strikes me here is the phrase, "exceptionally high levels." I imagine children need a "normal" level of care; it's only "exceptionally high" in comparison to the deprived state of family systems in these degenerate times. I often reflect on the understanding in Attachment Theory, w…

I think it's not really about responding to 100% of a child demands, it's maybe even detrimental, and probably better to start teaching him patience, and let him learn what to do in boredom. But the other part is having long and meaningful activities/experiences with a child

We decry "demands" when we should acknowledge "dependencies;" kids won't properly compile without their needs met.

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

#74

Post by watwut »

elmomle wrote: post #67
watwut wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that we actually give kids massive amount of attention compared to historical standards ... calling current situation "degenerate" is absurd. Also considering that by many statistics, children do better then they used to just a few decades ago.

For some definitions of attention, yes, but not necessarily historically massive amounts of physical contact and (non -neurotic) care. Think of the images from the world over of indigenous women going about their days largely with their young children strapped to them.

They have another child in 18 months. This one is then unstrapped and you don't see it on the pic. Nor you see even older siblings. And those women work with infant strapped cause they have to, they can't stop working once the kid is toddler.

And by the time they are 5 they play alone unsupervised. Which was even the same in villages in Europe even after WWII. My grandma was herding goats with pack of kids at 5 and remember it as normal. School started at 6.

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

#75

Post by alex_lav »

11235813213455 wrote: post #68
getpost wrote: post #54

> the researchers say that children may be "evolutionarily primed" to expect exceptionally high levels of physical contact and care, What strikes me here is the phrase, "exceptionally high levels." I imagine children need a "normal" level of care; it's only "exceptionally high" in comparison to the deprived state of family systems in these degenerate times. I often reflect on the understanding in Attachment Theory, w…

I think it's not really about responding to 100% of a child demands, it's maybe even detrimental, and probably better to start teaching him patience, and let him learn what to do in boredom. But the other part is having long and meaningful activities/experiences with a child

You’ll note the person you responded to never suggested responding to 100% of a child’s “demands”

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

#76

Post by toomuchtodo »

em-bee wrote: post #60
toomuchtodo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of folks don’t want kids or to be involved with them too, another important consideration.

those that do not want to be involved with kids would obviously not choose to participate in such an environment, so they are out of the picture.

Has to be explicitly said, lots of folks expect a village without asking if the village consented towards the effort (n=1). Managing and openly communicating expectations derisks disappointment and suboptimal outcomes.

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

#77

Post by alasdair_ »

getpost wrote: post #54

> the researchers say that children may be "evolutionarily primed" to expect exceptionally high levels of physical contact and care, What strikes me here is the phrase, "exceptionally high levels." I imagine children need a "normal" level of care; it's only "exceptionally high" in comparison to the deprived state of family systems in these degenerate times. I often reflect on the understanding in Attachment Theory, w…

In the UK, 50% is a c and anything over 70% is an A.

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

#78

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

ajb wrote: post #62

This is once of the things that remote work/homeworking may enable, if companies don't succeed in taking it away. If people can rely on getting remote work, they can arrange their living situation to improve the rest of their life, instead of for work: - young people living in large halls, to improve their dating prospects - groups of friends living close together across job moves, enabling longer term friendships -…

I laud your foreseen outcomes but we are far away from everything else we'd need.

ex: A scenario where large public halls are widely built for young workers.

An income to housing ratio that would allow people to make block-level housing choices.

Widely available, affordable, walkable neighborhoods.

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

#79

Post by pfisherman »

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…

The linked article is pretty ridiculous. I am pretty sure it leaves out a lot of nuance from the underlying work - as these types of press releases normally do - but there is a bunch of stuff in there that just does not make sense.

First the taboo against consanguineous marriages was most likely because of genetic diseases. Biology may not have been very advanced, but people were smart enough to pick up on patterns. Similar to taboos against cannibalism despite having no concept of prion disease.

If this was pushed by the catholic church then explain Italian families!

Is “the hero’s journey” not a story about rugged individualism that has been told over and over in different forms across cultures since the beginning of history?

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

#80

Post by silexia »

ajb wrote: post #62

This is once of the things that remote work/homeworking may enable, if companies don't succeed in taking it away. If people can rely on getting remote work, they can arrange their living situation to improve the rest of their life, instead of for work: - young people living in large halls, to improve their dating prospects - groups of friends living close together across job moves, enabling longer term friendships -…

Only for the upper class. The lower class still has to go man the gas stations, grocery stores, warehouses, and factories.
Post reply on HN