One reason why so many young adults are utterly incompetent.

[barts]

For many of us in age groups where childhood was essentially devoid of adult supervision, chores were a fact of every day existence, television didn't exist, and two phones were only found in the homes of the rich, this article by Elizabeth Kolbert in The New Yorker, Spoiled Rotten, rings true.

I'm constantly surprised and saddened as to how incompetent and befuddled many of today's young adults from middle-class homes seem to be. This observation is not unique to me. Recently a family member of mine was involved in recruiting new staff for a very well paid government position. Despite over 250 applicants, all with the prerequisite education level of an undergraduate degree, only one of three positions could be filled because of the appalling lack of basic competency of the applicants. Many of the applicants (most in their mid-twenties) were driven to the interview by parents, and parents had arranged to have their resumes and applications written.

So pervasive is the new child-centric world that finding a competent young adult who is not self-absorbed, and is capable of creative problems solving, self-directed initiative, and a competency to do even menial tasks such as cooking one's own food, doing the laundry, or using public transport is extremely difficult.

Within weeks if a child learning to walk, they should be making a positive contribution to a household. A kid who can walk can carry a dirty shirt to the washing machine. A kid who can eat without adult supervision can make sandwiches for themselves, their parents, and their siblings. A kid who can catch a ball, can mow a lawn. A kid who can ride a bike, can go shopping on their own for a few groceries for the family.

Often, the more parents do for their children, the more they harm them. To become an adult, children must learn thinking, practical, and social skills; make mistakes; and develop the courage to take initiatives in unique situations. Helping children often harms them. Unless absolutely necessary to prevent serious injury, parents should avoid helping their children. They should let them make mistakes and learn. They should also be required to be a practical and positive member of a family, and not merely a consumer and parent's pet.

A parent's obligation, in my view, is not to raise children, but rather to raise adults. If by the age of 12, a young person is unable to function as an independent, self-sufficient adult, the parents have utterly failed, and likely irreparably condemned their children to perpetual dependence on more competent people.

[barts]

This is one mother's approach to raising kids who aren't spoiled.



What this mom is doing is of little value. She's substituting giving the kids toys and entertainment to giving them games and exercises that (she hopes) will prevent them from being spoiled. The kids are still running her life, and her life is devoted to them. That's the wrong message to be sending. To raise children to become competent adults, the adults in a family need to be the center of the household, not the children. Parents should have their own meaningful lives that are not dependent on their children so that they can show their kids by example how to live full, responsible lives. To learn, children should be "serving" the needs their parents; parents should not be "serving" the needs of their children.

[Jack]

The opinion you express in your second post is a valid one for those who choose to think that way, but I don't think it's reasonable to try and apply it as a standard for all parents. For many parents I've known having their children and grandchildren as the focus of their lives brings them happiness and gives their lives added meaning.

I do agree too many kids have gotten away with learning no responsibility at home. Once they are adults, though, it's within their capability to develop responsibility themselves. It's a cop out to blame one's lack of responsibility on their upbringing. No matter how poorly or well someone is raised, at some point they have to take responsibility for their own character.

[barts]

For many parents I've known having their children and grandchildren as the focus of their lives brings them happiness and gives their lives added meaning.

This is certainly true, and therein lies the problem. Parents and grandchildren, in my view, are being purely selfish if they think of their children as needed to give their lives meaning. Our job as parents and grandparents is to raise adults, not burden our children and grandchildren with giving our lives value and meaning. We should be giving our own lives meaning by what we do, and not put that burden on other people including our children.

If we're to give value to children's and grandchildren's lives, parents and grandchildren should live lives their children can emulate. Do we want to raise children who see an adult's role as being a servant to children's whims and desires, or a children's role as giving meaning to adults' need for meaning in their lives? No good for anyone, I suggest, can come from this.