Are today's kids and young people (especially) spoiled?

[amicus]

Cold Eyes makes an appropriate and amusing reference to Socrates and Hesiod, but thas not the whole truth, as everybody knows....

There has never been in all of history another period of time like the present, an oxymoronic statement if ever there was one, but temper it with this: watch any young teenager working the computer as a fast food joint and acknowledge the skills they have compared to what we, in the pre computer era, had.

Most of my contemporaries in the 50's worked full time during the summers and many of us did morning and afternoon newspaper routes or took on other work to earn a little spending money.

Include the Ipods and Ipads and Twitters & Tweets, Facebook, Myspace, the Internet in general and I feel I am witnessing a revolution of culture unlike any ever before it.

Drugs also...stats say a majority of kids entering high school have smoked pot or had a beer...

Thanks to our Liberal sex education advocates, six year olds know how to apply a condom, that abortion is available and that kissing your same sex frie4nd is okay...go figure...

Thusly...I beg to disagree that this generation is merely reflecting a cyclical condemnation of the younger generation...it may be that, but it is so much more.

Amicus

 

[Pure]

interesting article

by a pioneer in the study of childhood.

On Writing Childhood History
by Lloyd deMause

http://www.psychohistory.com/childhood/writech1.htm

it's pretty clear through most of western history that children and young people--of all social classes-- were generally NOT indulged; their desires were NOT catered to, and they were subject to a number of things such as physical violence, sexual molestation, etc.
these last eventualities were not subject to any criminal code [or social sanction, either], till our lifetime.

put this together with the historical pattern of complaints that _kids are overindulged_ one sees an interesting incongruity, and a new light on the complaints, their possible justificatory nature: "since they're such a bad lot, here's what we have to do--x,y, z-- to shape them up."

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[Trudy_Antone]

I didn't answer the poll because there was no option for "Over-protective, paranoid parents are to blame thanks to a barrage of fear media and general ignorance"

Back in the day (insert whatever era or century floats your boat) people weren't bombarded with stories of rape and murder and random assaults. Case in point: Story on the news today - 15 year old bashed at a train station. After a continuous stream of stories like this, a large percentage of people in my city are too terrified to take the train themselves let alone let their children do it alone. What the story failed to mention was that thousands rode the same train line today without hassle, and, the teenager was not a passenger, he was hanging with a gang well after the trains had finished running, and a rival gang beat him up.

My children are a dying breed at their local primary school, actually walking to school under their own steam. I've been accused of being a bad mother for putting them in danger. They walk approximately three blocks up hill. Meanwhile, most of the other parents in my suburb throw their children in the car every morning and afternoon, parking and walking them to and from the classroom, carrying their bags for them like pack horses. My kids love the freedom and responsibility. When my son was six he was the ONLY child in his class who got himself dressed and made his own breakfast.

I am surrounded by f*cked up parents who try to micro manage their children's every happiness. I live in a state that has the highest rate in the world for prescribing anti-depressants to under 4 yr olds. Yes. I kid you not.

Are kids today especially spoiled? Hell yeah. And it's all the parents fault.

 

[3113]

I was a kid in the 80's and early 90's, so I can't compare with any earlier generations.

So the squirrel had a mullet?

 

[oggbashan]

The young people serving in Afghanistan aren't spoiled.

They are doing adult tasks at a young age, just as their grandfathers did on Omaha Beach and Iwo Jima (or Tobruk and El Alamein for UK).

They are risking their lives, dying and being greviously wounded - to keep us safe.

Og

 

[Weird Harold]

The article writer earned his doctorate in the 1950s and, while a disturbing historical view into parenting, the article doesn't really add much to the youth of today, does it?

Apples and oranges.

Edited to add: On second thought, perhaps it's more indicative of the growth of parenting, and the replacing of cruelty and physical over-punishments with intellect and reason when dealing with offspring. Perhaps.

The pioneers of the field of Child Psychology made some very good points and offered some very good solutions -- most notably in Dr Benjamin Spock's
famous (or infamous) book, The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care. The problem is that their disciples and successors have thrown the baby out with the bathwater; nt to mention the ill effects Child Psychology has had on education theory.

The problem is that the Early Child Psychologists presented a complete package designed to produce intelligent, well-balanced, responsible adults but the parents who bought Dr Spocks book and students of the field of Child Psychology took the portions they liked and amplified those points to extremes and ignored anything that they didn't agree with. The end result is atrocities like Little Leagues that don't keep score because it would damage the losers' self-esteem and students advanced through graduation simply because their peers are being advanced.

Spock, deMause, and their peers, didn't advocate the elimination of parental discipline and control, they just advocated that abuse in the name of discipline be stopped.

 

[xssve]

Not really, but baby boomers are, and always have been.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

The pioneers of the field of Child Psychology made some very good points and offered some very good solutions -- most notably in Dr Benjamin Spock's
famous (or infamous) book, The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care. The problem is that their disciples and successors have thrown the baby out with the bathwater; nt to mention the ill effects Child Psychology has had on education theory.

The problem is that the Early Child Psychologists presented a complete package designed to produce intelligent, well-balanced, responsible adults but the parents who bought Dr Spocks book and students of the field of Child Psychology took the portions they liked and amplified those points to extremes and ignored anything that they didn't agree with. The end result is atrocities like Little Leagues that don't keep score because it would damage the losers' self-esteem and students advanced through graduation simply because their peers are being advanced.

Spock, deMause, and their peers, didn't advocate the elimination of parental discipline and control, they just advocated that abuse in the name of discipline be stopped.

Uh-huh. I swear, more people complain about Ben Spock than have actually ever read him. There's a bunch of left-field pipe dreams about how to raise children ascribed to his book that don't exist within the covers. Poor guy ended up being a straw man for social conservatives, especially when he publicly opposed our involvement in Vietnam.

 

[Trudy_Antone]

The young people serving in Afghanistan aren't spoiled.

They are doing adult tasks at a young age, just as their grandfathers did on Omaha Beach and Iwo Jima (or Tobruk and El Alamein for UK).

They are risking their lives, dying and being greviously wounded - to keep us safe.

Og

True Og, but with respect, I think you're talking about young adults and that's the next step up from kids and teens. Also, are these YA's there to escape circumstance (recruitment promises of travel and glory) or because they came from families that raised them to give back, or have a family history of service in the army? I only say this because I come from four generations of servicemen/women and it takes a different mindset all together to go to war for family and country.

Those serving in Afghanistan aren't the usual run of the mill spoilt teens.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

yes...and lazy.

 

[Weird Harold]

Uh-huh. I swear, more people complain about Ben Spock than have actually ever read him. There's a bunch of left-field pipe dreams about how to raise children ascribed to his book that don't exist within the covers. Poor guy ended up being a straw man for social conservatives, especially when he publicly opposed our involvement in Vietnam.

Don't get me wrong. I blame Dr Spock for the state of our educational system and the decline of personal responsibility; he started the whole child psychology racket, even if he was not directly responsible for some of the undesireable directions it took.

 

[3113]

Not really, but baby boomers are, and always have been.

Even those who, like VM, served in Vietnam?

I don't think most of the homeless Vietnam vets I see on the street feel they are or have always been spoilt.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Homeless Vietnam Vet is an urban myth.

A few years ago I read an article written by a perfesser, someplace, who did a Quest to find the homless Vietnam Vet. What he found was a cohort of high functioning, successful, productive men who served in Vietnam. When I worked at the hospital every homeless Vietnam Vet we served hadnt been to Vietnam or ever been in the military.

None of my Vietnam associates are homeless. All of them have college degrees.

Its a ruse to snag the sentimental do-gooders like 3113.

 

[bronzeage]

Since every generation, all the way back to Socrates has been declared useless and mentally bankrupt, can anyone point out a generation which actually failed?

Was the class of 1878 any better or worse than 1910?

 

[Weird Harold]

Was the class of 1878 any better or worse than 1910?

Not noticeably, but there is empirical evidence that the class of 1978 was better prepared to be productive members of society than the class of 2010 -- Although there was probably more more difference between 68' and '00.

Juvenile crime rates have gone up, Gang membership has gone up, and study after study has been conducted to find out why "johnny can't read" and other educational failings.

Every generation is disappointed in the next to some extent, but since the end of WWII or shortly thereafter, children became the focus of statistics and studies to track whether the next generation was really less capable or responsible, so there is more evidence than simple senility to support the point.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Since every generation, all the way back to Socrates has been declared useless and mentally bankrupt, can anyone point out a generation which actually failed?

Was the class of 1878 any better or worse than 1910?

The Civil War generation and the Depression/World War 2 generation were colossal failures.

 

[Lady_June]

Id say we have to deal the most rotten generation/s of all.

 

[Pure]

empirical evidence

weird hNot noticeably, but there is empirical evidence that the class of 1978 was better prepared to be productive members of society than the class of 2010 -- Although there was probably more more difference between 68' and '00.

Juvenile crime rates have gone up, Gang membership has gone up, and study after study has been conducted to find out why "johnny can't read" and other educational failings.

Every generation is disappointed in the next to some extent, but since the end of WWII or shortly thereafter, children became the focus of statistics and studies to track whether the next generation was really less capable or responsible, so there is more evidence than simple senility to support the point.

==
[revised 12:52 pm, 7-20]
yes, it's said SAT scores are down and the tests are made easier. college textbooks are 'dumbed down' and so on.

to which it might be countered, these are the tests of things the older generation feels are important. what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot? can you operate your kid's i-pod-nano? how many megabtes in your kid's average mp3 download?

in any case, book smarts are not the main topic. IF there is less literacy, is there also more self centredness and self absorption, by which i mean treating others manipulatively and as lesser (having needs that are of little consequence)? the claim which Kohn talks about is really a moral one i.e. about the young showing LESS regard for others (as equals) than did the previous generations.

looking at the other side of the coin, HAVE the parents of the 'younger generation' indulged them, catered to them, and so on (with a 'spoiling' effect). i'm not sure; lots of money is spent getting them gadgets and clothes. showering with material goodies--can't it be a sign of indifference, as opposed to indulgence.?

 

[Weird Harold]

weird hJuvenile crime rates have gone up, Gang membership has gone up, and study after study has been conducted to find out why "johnny can't read" and other educational failings.

==
...
in any case, book smarts are not the main topic. IF there is less literacy, is there also more self centredness and self absorption?
the claim which Kohn talks about is really a moral one i.e. about LESS regard for others.

Which is why I also pointed out the rise in crime rates and gang membership -- among other anti-social indicators.

Personally, I think that the educational system is the largest contributing factor to the "spoiling" of modern youth; it is the one influence/experience that nearly EVERY youth has in common and it is twelve years of learning that being lazy and self-centered has no consequences because it practically takes an act of Congress to hold a student back or expel them.

Parental style and interest will vary from family to family, but everyone goes to school. Many kids of working parents (rich or poor) will have more interaction with the school system over the first eighteen years of life than they do their parents.

looking at the other side of the coin, HAVE the parents of the 'younger generation' indulged them, catered to them, and so on (with a 'spoiling' effect). i'm not sure; lots of money is spent on gadgets and clothes. is there MORE adult attention to basic needs, however?

On average, over the entire economic spectrum of US children, I would guess that there is little change in the current generation in the attention paid to basic needs -- at least physical needs, like food, clothing, and shelter -- although social programs like WIC, food-stamps, school lunch programs and "section eight" housing assistance, have reduced the neglect at the lower end of the economic scale.

Rich kids get spoiled more than poor kids because their parents are better able to indulge them, but I don't think that raises the aggregate spoilage much more than it ever has.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I'm sorry, Harold, but that kind of screed really gets my back up. Before I retired, I could and, if necessary, did expel a kid in under a month. Retention, except in cases of severe immaturity (I had a couple of those, too) is a waste of time. If the kid don't get it on time, he ain't gonna get it doin' it again!

I hate to break this piece of bad news to such a literate group, but three-quarters of all children are not going to get a four-year degree. They don't need it either. American schools are not failing because they've gotten soft, contrary to Tea Party rhetoric. Our mistake, driven by the demands of anxious, middle-class parents, is in trying to send every child to Haw-vud. The public school system has fallen into the pit of being a farm club for the Upper Tier universities. Stupid!

So if you are unhappy with teenage behavior, just remember that the human brain isn't mature until around the age of thirty. The part that matures last, the frontal cortex, controls responsibility. Kids are goofy and self-centered because that's normal development. You want your kids to be well-behaved and responsible? Train 'em that way early. Fruit doesn't fall too far from the tree.

 

[bronzeage]

...
So if you are unhappy with teenage behavior, just remember that the human brain isn't mature until around the age of thirty. The part that matures last, the frontal cortex, controls responsibility. Kids are goofy and self-centered because that's normal development. You want your kids to be well-behaved and responsible? Train 'em that way early. Fruit doesn't fall too far from the tree.

A fifteen year old boy will put on a helmet and shoulder pads, then go out and run full speed into someone dressed just like him, because his coach told him to "Go out there and hit that man!"

A few years later, a Sargent can get similar results with "Go out there and shoot that man!"

When Coach and Sargent are not available, he will be riding a skateboard down a banister into a dumpster.

This is a silly thread. If kids are spoiled, it is the fault of the previous generation. At who do we point the finger? The Vietnam War generation gave us two quagmire wars, in which we are still stuck.

Can today's teens top that?

 

[Weird Harold]

I hate to break this piece of bad news to such a literate group, but three-quarters of all children are not going to get a four-year degree. They don't need it either.

Not all school districts are equal. You clearly worked in districts that weren't afraid to expel kids.


As for the "College Prep" argument, I could care less what secondary education in in their future, because I have had very had little contact with college graduates (other than officers) in the course of my life and my opinions are shaped primarily by the trainees I was saddled with nearly twenty years as an OJT trainer and OJT supervisor plus the classmates of my daughters and granddaughters and the school systems they were/are enrolled in.