How to Succeed in Childhood

Author Judith Harris suggest that parents play a minor role in socializing their children and that group socialization holds the majority of the power. She argues that books on nurturing are all based on cultural myths with no real substantial evidence. Her logic is that because adults are not nicer, less anxious, or even better citizens then the century before when they had polar opposite parental nurturing habits; individual parents must not play a big factor in the development of these qualities.

Harris combats the notion that children goal is to learn how to be a grown up through imitating their parents. Since children are constantly being reprehended for trying to act like adults it does not make sense for them to continue to try to be like their parent. Children are trying to be successful children. They have to learn how to get along with their family then they have to learn how to get along with members of their generation outside the home.

The two goals of being a successful child are independent of each other. Children learn thing in the settings they are presented and seldom use it out of contact. In a study, a baby with a depressed mother behaved in a subdue fashion when the mother was around but behaved normally with the mother was away. The study further proves that children home life and outside life can bring out two different sides of them.

Another example that parents have less to do with raising their children than the greater society is proving in immigrant families. At home, the children speak the native language to their parents and speak the dominant language everywhere else. It is not surprising that the children become better and more comfortable speaking the dominant language.

Harris argues the parent responsibility is a minor one compared to the historic role groups played in child rearing. Hunter-gatherer and tribal societies raise their child in groups and children become associated with a group identity. The idea of "are you with us or against us" touches the idea that groups bring values, concepts, and identities to an individual. The group loyalty is a lot strong than the ties of a few, even parents. The group kids run into is child and their "out group" is adult.The children base their qualities polar opposite of the adults. These qualities define both group's identity.

Children also make sub-groups when adults are not around to act as their foil. These divisions makes children compare themselves with their peers and help them define their identities even more. They determine if they are smart, fast, cute, and variety other traits by the children that are in their sub-group.

Now Harris does not say parents are completely useless, coalitions of parents pushing the same values and goals have powerful effects children. By making a coalition, kids are not only hearing the values of their parents in the home but outside by other adults in their lives. Also by stating that parents are not the main influence in their children lives, it makes parents feel less pressure raising their children and less guilty if they become a deviant in the eyes of society.

I completely agree that parents are not the major factor in raising children. My parents were very lax when it came to academics and I still perform above average. I think this article brings up a good point that we need raise our children in a community rather than a single home.