Topics and Issues Within the Family: Children

The readings for this week examined the role of children in the family and the various relationships they have with their parents and siblings. In the article by Orellana et al. there were three types of immigrant families discussed. When reading about these, I kept thinking to myself that I could not imagine how hard it must be for a family to be separated from their children in order to provide them with a better life. However, I think that something that was lacking in this article was that it did not discuss how brave these children who leave their families are and the pressure they must feel to succeed. My cousin worked at an all-girl private school in Ontario where the majority of the students were international students who boarded at the high school. They were “parachute children” mostly from Asia but also Venezuela because of its political instability at the time. For the most part their mother’s would escort them to the school at the beginning of the school year and stay for a month in order to help with the transition process. The girls took their studies very seriously because their parents expected them to be accepted into universities in the United States and expected them in the future to have well-paying careers. The pressure for these girls to succeed was immense and anxiety inducing. Especially, because at first they were not used to the Ontario school system, their English was not up to par and they therefore struggled academically. They were terrified when their first report cards were sent home because they knew their parents would not be pleased. I cannot imagine being a thirteen, fourteen, or fifteen year old sent to a foreign country with that much pressure to succeed academically. I wonder if these students will one day resent this pressure and or the success rate of these students getting accepted into prestigious universities.

The Hochschild article discussed eavesdropping by children on their parents and what they learn through this activity. Eavesdropping is something we all do whether we admit it or not but I had not thought about what children learn through this activity. Also, that the main reason that they do eavesdrop is to learn, “their own place in their parent’s world” (Hochschild, p. 173).I am not quite sure if I agree with this statement because I thought it was because children were curious by nature that they eavesdropped on other people’s conversation. I mean, they eavesdrop on conversations that have nothing to do with them or their relationships with their parents. I do believe that it is through this process that children learn about their world, the roles people play in their lives and societal values not just to learn about their roles in their parents’ lives or to learn more about their relationship with their parents.

1. Do you think the relationship between a child and their parents change significantly if they are sent to study abroad by themselves? How do you think this may also affect the relationship between the parents?

2. All children eavesdrop, do you think this can be harmful for the child in certain situations such as if a child had just immigrated or a parent has left the family in order to earn a living elsewhere?

3. In your opinion would a family in which one parent immigrated to another country in order to better provide for their family would this family still be considered a nuclear family? What if a child leaves to study abroad? Is this still a nuclear family?

Children

This week we look at many challenges to the norm of the archetype of the middle class nuclear family, from same sex parents, to the role of children themselves. While all of the articles acknowledge the importance of recognizing differences and obstacles they give little to the discussion of the achievement of this restructuring. This week stresses the raising of children, and the different involvement of parents, and I wanted to bring up the Harlem Children’s Zone as an interesting example of an organization that is set on challenging and changing the divisions caused by socioeconomic class, race, and gender especially with regard to parenting and education. The organization was started by a man who grew up in Harlem, NY and managed to work his way to a middle class lifestyle. He said that when his wife became pregnant, he realized that one of the biggest differences between the parents in his suburb and those in Harlem was access to literature and ideas on “correct” parenting, ie predominantly middle class ideas on raising children, which I don’t say as a bad thing. He realized however, that education, for children and parents, had to be reconfigured at a structural level to have an effect. The group now works within a 97 block radius in New York, providing social services, “training” parents, and providing educational services from day care through college to strengthen individuals, family units and the community.

Obviously providing educational, after school, and health services is extremely important, but I found their emphasis on parenting really interesting and pertinent to this week. They provide a way to essentially “distill and distribute” the writing and ideas on the “best parenting” to those who do not have time or resources. By emphasizing involvement in children’s lives, broader communication, investment in education, and changing ideas of discipline, or just telling parents to use positive words with their children, the organization provides means of implementation for ideological change concerning parental involvement. However, the difficult part of this process is having parents realize that their life may not change; the work they are doing is for their children’s future which in a culture of individualism may not be fair. Of course, their methods are not perfect, but rising literacy and graduation rates from both high school and college attest to its effectiveness.

1. Do you think it is right for an organization to stress and provide means of implementation of “middle class values”?

2. Different kinds of communication are stressed in these articles. What are the class differences in techniques of communication- both in day-to-day life, and extended relationships with family members?

3. Can a parent control what is heard in eavesdropping? Does it take a complete change in attitudes to ensure it will not garner negative consequences?

Topics and Issues Within the Family: Children

One shared concept in these readings is the notion of redefinitions, specifically redefinitions of motherhood, care and intimacy. We have already discussed some of these issues before in class, but I would like to rethink how/why/when care and gender roles are redefined inside the household or family and how this affects directly and indirectly children. Another shared characteristic that I liked is the use of qualitative methods, like ethnographic research and interviews and observation.
On the same line of thought of redefinitions, I would like all to think how the papers of previous sessions would differ if they were written on a different perspective. For example, the readings of this week talk about results from psychology and from children perspective. Hochschild provides an interesting account of this change in perspective when she looks at eavesdropping children. This is one of the things I appreciated most of the paper by Orellana and colleagues. Some migration scholars have argued that the study of the phenomenon (emigration from the country of origin perspective and immigration from the country of destination perspective) is looked differently depending on where the researchers come from. How do you think the paper of Orellana and colleagues would differ if it were written by Latin Americans, Koreans or Yemeni scholars? How do you think the growing trees that children draw in school in Oakland would differ if children in Yemen drew them? What issues and subjects would have been treated in both and what differences would have there been? And this talk to another think I liked about this paper: their comparative approach.
I appreciate also the incorporation of cultural capital into the discussion of family from Stacey and Biblarz since it tells us about another comparison: class and resources. However, I wonder how cultural capital has been transformed in the last years since this paper was written. That is, I would have liked a more current paper on the discussion of social class differences and cultural capital. How do you think a comparative paper of the types of cultural capital before and after 1990 would look like? How has globalization and advances in technology affected social class differences in family-school relationships? How is the internet affecting care and gender roles? Is the internet substituting video games and television and outdoor activities?
Q1. How would you think the effect of eavesdropping differ if the conversations are about same sex couples, immigrants, poverty or poor academic achievement? That is, how does listening to the conversations of others (not only parents) in general affect children (and adults) differently and how does this affect socialization? How do conversations and comments affect self-esteem, our identity, prejudices, stereotypes and discriminating attitudes?
Q2. How has cultural capital changed recently and how do these changes affect family-school relationships? And the relationships between members of the family?
Q3. Stacey and Biblarz write about selection and homophobia and Orellana and colleagues give some hints on selection and migration. But, how do you think selection effects could bias the outcomes of eavesdropping children?

Topics and Issues Within the Family: Children

This week's readings talk about children and how the affect the family. I found Lareau’s article to be very interesting and it raised many important issues that affects today’s education system. Although historically, parental involvement in schooling has been very limited, in today’s society parents play a crucial role in the education of their children. What we have noticed is that there is a large socioeconomic divide, with those of lower class seeing teachers as the educated people, and the mother’s job as being in the home. I definitely do not agree with this statement, as I believe it is important for parents to encourage and even help with the homework, and continue to teach their children even when the bell rings at the end of the day. In Hochschild’s article she points out that children watch and listen in order to learn about their own place in their parents world. Although she calls it eavesdropping, I call it observing. It’s a part of life that cannot be avoided, but it is interesting to see the example of the two girls lives and how they act differently towards their parents because of what they have overheard.

In the article entitled Transnational Childhoods: The Participation of Children in Processes of Family Migration we are given a glimpse into the life of three types of migrants. There is a great deal that is involved in the decision making process of sending a child to another country whether it be for education, self-development or those who leave their children in their birthplace so they themselves could earn money in a different country. The justification being that it is all done in order to meet the needs of the children. Overall, this week's articles address many factors involved in a child’s life. Children are important parts of society that need nurturing care and even discipline. It is important to realize that every little decision and action a parent makes seems to have a great impact on their lives.

1. Do you think there is such thing as being too involved in your child’s education? How will that affect the child? How will that impact the classroom dynamics?

2. In How Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter, it states that homophobia and discrimination are the main reasons why parental sexual orientation matter, does this ignore the fact that the environment in which a person is raised shapes their lives (nurture)?

3. Do you believe that because children are not always old enough to understand everything they hear, can eavesdropping hurt them? Do parents need to have a filter when a child is around?

Topics and Issues Within the Family: Children

It is almost humorous that, after so many studies and findings over the past few years, issues of same-sex parents and the effects on children are still discussed. Stacey and Biblarz highlight the multiple studies that have found no difference between homosexual and heterosexual parents and provide evidence that the few conclusions that have been drawn against it, prove to be more politically and morally biased than scientifically valid. Continued research on this topic demonstrates the extent to which personal beliefs and biases influence research. Stacey and Biblarz article however also leaves open to critique their own openness for gender non-conformity. Several of their ratings, such as ranking children based on their levels of gender-norm conformity traits, only work to perpetuate the defined limits of the gender/sex binary. Their findings which analyze children’s thought patterns of homosexual experiences leads me to two questions: what influence does homoerotic thoughts have on experiences, and what influence does having parents who are outside the norm allow increased visibility and openness about such topics? While the socio-economic divide between homosexuals must be bridged, a task being addressed by the Third Wave Feminist movement to a certain extent, such positive research for the influence of mothers, biological or social, points to the negative findings as simply products of research itself.

Lareau’s article raises many of the cultural capital issues plaguing the education system today. Showing the difference in parental involvement in the school system highlights the existent, and growing, socio-economic divide that is only perpetuating class divisions. While I took offense to some of the tone she uses in discussing lower class parental involvement, her underlying argument demonstrates the crucial role of parents in education. Yet, this leads to the question of ability and resources. Many of the examples she uses to show a lack of parental educational involvement could have clear causes; a parent not attending to a parent-teacher conference should not directly indicate a lack of interest but perhaps a lack of ability to take off from work or to leave other children. Historically speaking, this reliance on parental involvement in a child’s education is relatively new and socially constructed. While I don’t necessarily think that all of the burden of education should be placed on the teacher and the school system (an impossible proposition given the ever-growing class sizes), community and government interventions – such as free day care during parent-teacher conference week or the scheduling of events during non-work hours - could be implemented so that all students are given a fair chance, at least while they’re on the school grounds.

It was interesting reading the “Transnational Childhood” article in light of a class which I’m taking called “Imaging the Child.” In that class, we attempt to answer the question: “what is a child?” Looking at these different models of transnational children help shape this discussion towards what defines a child and the child’s influence on their family, highlighting the social constructivist nature of childhood. Additionally, I found the example of the surrogate parents’ increased concern for the children when receiving money interesting for its effects on the commodificaiton of parenthood. It also raises the alternative issue of what exactly is parenthood: is it the provision of goods (clothes, food, school materials) or does it also necessitate emotional work?

Q1: With the rising cost of living, increased pressure for parent’s to excel at work and the increasing prevalence of the ‘time bind syndrome,’ how should parent’s help to lessen the detachment issues which this situation creates? Reflect how this would be solved considering issues of socio-economic differences.

Q2: On page 168 of Stacey and Biblarz’s article, they report the finding that “Sons of lesbian mothers behave in less traditionally masculine ways than those raised by heterosexual single mothers. However, on other measures, such as occupational goals and sartorial styles, they also exhibit greater gender conformity than do daughters with lesbian mothers.” Why do you think this discrepancy exists?

Q3: In looking at the example of the Yemeni fathers, Orellana et al. state “adult men migrated first, sometimes followed by their oldest sons, with mothers, daughters and younger children of both genders coming together at a later point” (579). This means that for at least some period of time, the father is the sole parental figure in the household. Do you think this has any effect on division of labor once the family is reunited? Which culture – their old or their new – exerts the most influence on familial relations? Is there a time effect that mitigates this difference?

UCLA study: Lesbian parents are really good parents

I found a really interesting article which is closely related to the Stacey and Biblarz's article. UCLA's Williams Institute announced the end of their 24-year study on lesbian families this week.
Contrary to what most critics say, they reported that lesbian parents are good caregivers and that the parents sexual orientation did not influence the sexual orientation of their children. Here is the link of the article:
http://coloradoindependent.com/67189/ucla-study-lesbian-parents-are-really-good-parents
There is also a link on the site where you could download the original summary of the study.

You can also watch this 60-minute clip on the studies of gay and lesbian parents (which is also done by the UCLA's Williams Institute). It is long but it is very interesting! The clip is about the series of debates on extending marriage and adoption to same-sex couples.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWmw40ks2yU

Hope everyone has a wonderful weekend!

Topics and Issues Within the Family: Children

For this week, we look at the development of children in different family dynamics and the emotional costs, strains, and conflicts that may arise within the different types of child development. We look at the upbringing of children within different social classes; those who are in the process of migration and those who are brought up by lesbigay parents. Furthermore, we look at the emotional costs and conflicts of family-school partnerships (from a cultural capital perspective), and of eavesdropping children.

In the case of children participating in the process of migration, we are able to see an immense amount of emotional costs that is involved within this process. Orellana et al. highlight the social and emotional relations that the children take part in the immigration process. They specifically looked at 3 types of migrants; migrants in Los Angeles with close ties to Mexico and Central America, “Parachute Kids” who migrated from Korea (most often without their parents) to attend school in the U.S., Yemeni families who live in Oakland and sustain active ties “back home”. Overall transnational families do challenge the societal norms of motherhood and middle class, nuclear families. Parents do actively engage in the process of meeting the needs and wants of their children. Although they are geographically distant from their children migrant parents (those who send their children away to a different country for education or self-development or those who leave their children in their “mother” country so they themselves could earn money in a different country), they also make greater sacrifices while improving the collective interests of families. As Orellana et al. claim, the presence of the children is central to the families’ decision-making processes, and children fundamentally shape the nature and course of families’ migration experiences (Orellana et al., 387). While these families may not use traditional methods of care, migrant families do come up with alternative means of intimacy in order to stay connected. The use of handwritten letters, international telephone calls and advances in modern technology, such as the Internet, have made it easier for these families to emotionally stay interlinked with each other. Stefana Broadbent’s research on “democratization of intimacy”—the breaking down of imposed isolation enforced by institutions—enforces what Orellana et al. claim. The development in communication technology is capable of cultivating relationships across barriers and even transnational borders. This refutes the argument that there will be a decline in emotional care and love within families that are undergoing the process of migration.

Here is the link for Stefana Broadbent’s lecture on how the Internet enables intimacy: http://www.ted.com/talks/stefana_broadbent_how_the_internet_enables_intimacy.html

Emotional costs are also brought up in Lareau’s article, which focuses on the influences of social class differences in family-school relationships in white working-class and middle-class families. A study including observations of elementary classrooms and interviews with parents, teachers, and principals in different communities indicated that “social class provides parents with unequal resources to comply with teachers’ requests for parental participation” (p.73). Parental involvement could do the opposite of what is desired resulting in emotional costs for the children; “a girl in the lowest reading group began developing stomach aches during the reading period…” (p.77). Teachers from the upper-middle-class school were concerned about the amount of pressure parents placed on their children at home; this “could become counterproductive when it increased the child’s anxiety level and produced negative learning experiences” (p.76).

These teachers, at the upper-middle-class school, also mentioned that parents challenged their professional expertise in certain cases causing straining conflict in which case “parental involvement was unhelpful” (p.77). Other conflicts arose inevitably due to Lareau’s observations of “the variations in teachers’ styles as well as in the way they [teachers] implemented the model of home-school partnerships” (p.76). This meant that parents were judged differently depending on the teacher causing disagreements on the issue of pressure and support. Lareau describes how “the first grade teacher…thought one boy’s father placed too much pressure on him, but the second-grade teacher judged the family to be supportive and helpful” (p.76).

Continuing with the theme of straining conflict; are the children of lesbigay parents more vulnerable in becoming “deviant” and “abnormal”? Stacey and Biblarz’s article look at whether children with lesbigay parents are at higher risk for a variety of negative outcomes. The hetero-normative presumptions, which the society enforces, beget strain and conflict towards those who do not form a traditional, nuclear family. Stigmatization related to sexual orientation and homophobia has led to an increase in researches done that are not at all sympathetic towards lesbigay parents. For instance, Stacey and Biblarz mention Wardle, a Brigham Young University professor, who “argued for a presumptive judicial standard in favor of awarding child custody to heterosexual married couples” (Stacey & Biblarz, 160) and claimed that same-sex parents are incapable of bringing up healthy children. However, after reviewing some of the researches themselves, Stacey and Biblarz come to a conclusion that there are no differences in developmental outcomes between children raised by lesbigay parents and those raised by heterosexual parents. Similar to the migrant families, same-sex couples redefine “motherhood” by developing gender-neutral roles. In contrast to existing criticisms, qualitative studies have suggested that families with same-sex parents tend to embrace high standards of emotional intimacy and that there are no significant disadvantages linked to the development of children with lesbigay parents.