Finding What's Important in Raising Our Kids

I get very weary of being told it is so much better in the countries where morals deteriorate every year farther into the pit. That is not the direction we should be striving for. I'll take the United States, thank you very much. My children turned out just fine. They were educated in the public schools and survived the liberalism of college. I wouldn't put much weight in a survey done by UNICEF which is part of the UN.

In my opinion, the US is not distinctly different from other countries in terms of the deterioration of morals.I'll take the US too. If not, I wouldn't be here. But I'm not so proud of it that I'm not willing to consider criticism of it or to consider that it may have room for improvement in certain areas relative to other countries.It's great that your kids turned out just fine. That's a testimony to your parenting and the "...stable, supportive family and social relationships."It's not hard to give examples that paint a different picture: link. My impression is that a significant fraction of kids in the US are in crisis, are not happy, are medicated to try to make them happy, don't have adequate family and social relationships, feel their lives are empty. I don't have a good feel for how other countries compare to us.We can't really make conclusions based on our personal experiences. That's why scientific studies are useful because that take a more representative sample. Yes, data can be spun, so we have to watch for that, but one a certain level, the data is the data...we may not like the data, but I'd prefer to not just dismiss it.It doesn't seem surprising to me that kids are better off with more "stable, supportive family and social relationships" and in places with more "a more equitable distribution of wealth and higher relative investment in education and public health".From the LA Times article:

The U.S. was at the bottom of the list in health and safety, mostly because of high rates of child mortality and accidental deaths. It was next to last in family and peer relationships and risk-taking behavior. The U.S. has the highest proportion of children living in single-family homes, which the study defined as an indicator for increased risk of poverty and poor health, though it "may seem unfair and insensitive," it says. The U.S., which ranked 17th in the percentage of children who live in relative poverty, was also close to last when it comes to children eating and talking frequently with their families.

If these data are true, then I think there is a message here for us as a country. And I don't see why the values UNICEF is advocating here would be especially controversial (except of course that we don't like to be criticized and feel like we're always being criticized).

Of course children are better off in stable homes. That was not my point.My problem with the study is theassumption that is always made thatsocialist countries are so much better off than we are in the US. Well, good for them. I don't see people flooding their borders to live there. The social decline that now includes euthanizing childrenin the Netherlands is not the social mores I want in the US. No where is perfect, but I won't live anywhere else. And sorry, I will always make conclusions based on my life experiences.

I think studies like this are interesting because, instead of assuming, they try to measure...try to collect data to determine who is better off...not assume.Of course your life experience colors your views, but if you're making broad conclusions it helps to at least consider that your experience may not be representative of the experience of most or at least some of others.

IF children are better off in stable homes...and IF homes tend to be more stable in certain other countries...then I think the better response is to try to understand the underlying reasons and figure out how our country could improve rather than than to say, effectively, "Mind your own business, UNICEF. We're happy the way we are, thank you!"

Jonathan - I did not say mind your own business UNICEF and we're happy the way were are. I just get weary of being told how bad we are here in the US.

That's the feeling I got from "I'll take the United States, thank you very much...I wouldn't put much weight in a survey done by UNICEF which is part of the UN.", but I was mistaken.

I guess you could interpret my statement that way, but not in those words. UNICEF can do whatever they want - that doesn't mean they don't have an agenda. The survey outcome depends on how the data is formulated and reported. If you look at articles written by Stanley Kutz you will see how marriage data in Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark are skewed. Taking the report and articles by Kutz both into consideration, I wouldn't say that the UNICEF report is the end all for raising children. I don't think those societies are the utopia that they present, but they would most likely disagree.

Stanley Kurtz, "Fanatical Swedish Feminists", National Review online: linkStanley Kurtz, "No Nordic Bliss", National Review online: linkStanley Kurtz, "The End of Marriage in Scandinavia", The Weekly Standard: link

The 2004 article by Kurtz focuses on Sweden and it's increasing rate of children born out of wedlock and argues that Sweden's divorce rate appears to be improving because fewer people are getting married...and that Sweden's "family dissolution rate" is getting worse.The full UNICEF report is here: linkIt seems to agree about Sweden, ranking it near the bottom in terms of "family and peer relationships." Finland is even lower.It looks like the Scandinavian countries scored high by scoring well in most of the other categories. That seems to contradict The Week's editor's emphasis on the importance stable homes contributing to better scores in other countries.Article by Kurtz about marriage in the Netherlands: link