Since about a decade ago we are hearing that kids from today are different from the kids from our time, they tend to be more rebel, that they don’t believe everything we say, a lot of them define them as they are born with another chip. All of this is common and it is a stereotype more than reality.
Things have changed
It’s true that the period of today’s childhood is going too fast, therefore it is shorter. The children from today have access to information since their early years, that technology contaminates them while breaking the walls and puts the whole world to a click away.
In most cases the sources through which they have access to the primary information in complex subjects is not the best and much less when, in addition, it almost always lacks complete accompaniment, dialogue and due explanation on behalf of adults committed to the educational process of the coming generations.
All of this is true and nevertheless in all of the moments in history there has been and will be difficult children with the absolute certainly that in other moments adults sought to think that the kids think differently as they did, that they were rebels, they were bold and daring. (there the concept of difference).
If we inquire a little in the History of past generations surely in each moment it will have been affirmed for different reasons that the generations of the minors of that time were difficult: know it all’s, rebels, bold and daring, that did not respect figures of authority nor to their elders and that caused great havoc in due time.
Perhaps children may have been more submissive – more than that, it was a society where only from a certain age people become relevant and have a voice within society – but also because they were given much less importance and the protagonism was placed in the adults more than in the children.
During that time there was not a lot of talk about minority rights, children should listen to adults and did not question the reasons they gave, whether or not they were right.
But more than that, to think that the theory of the blame of the children are in theory different and more rebel, due to the access of technology and information, it is like thinking the kids during the age of romanticism had a higher suicidal tendency because it was a common theme and frequent for that time.
Those who grew up under the influence of the Flowers of the wrong by Baudelaire, would have tendency to commit capital sins, the excess of meat and passions or homosexuality or affirm that those who were children in the epoch of the hard core sex, drugs and rock and roll would develop vicious at an earlier age as well as their sex life.
Social and cultural phenomena
Every moment in time has a complicated history by one or other factors. Kids have always been exposed in one way or another to the social and cultural phenomena of each time. Nevertheless, it is until now that exacerbates the idea that “the children are different” And that is where the main difficulty of today’s education lies.
The popular adagio says, that children are what they see. They are permanently molding the attitudes, behavior, and most of all, for example what they receive in part of the adults.
It is also said that the formation starts and it is given mainly at home. It is where the children learn to socialize among them, to establish a personal value scale and give more in importance to certain things than others and in itself to be a good person, capable of relating and developing in the best way possible in society.
In the educational field it is observed, precisely there is where it fails, mostly by the parents where they don’t know what is going on with their children and even worse they cover it up, they tolerate it, the deny or let them behave in a negative way.
The problem with today’s education is not that children come with a different chip but that their parents allow them everything: they do not rebuke or correct them because they believe that this will involve trauma to children because it denies freedom of expression with which children must grow, because it is against their rights or because they are simply busier exercising all kinds of roles except the role of a parent.
Maybe they didn’t choose that rol but they accepted it. Parents ignore the problems that their children have more than that it implies that they have to take time to be with their kids and know what is happening in their children’s life, the answer is not to reprimand their kids (although you can see the two types of cases, there is also who with true conviction think that if you yell or punish their children they can grow traumatized and will not accomplish their objective: to be happy).
Obviously, children have rights, although in any civilization somewhat civilized, the children should be first and the adults should look after their well-being and fulfillment of the children’s rights.
But we are talking about the real rights and the right of education and without a doubt their fundamental rights. Receiving an education does not mean only having the possibility of going to a school or learning to add or subtract, receive education also and mainly means having the right to be trained as good people.
Learning about ethics and values and, above all, learning that what is wrong is wrong – for example, hurting others, breaking rules or laws or being a problem for society because of their behavior and attitudes – and in addition, wrongdoing necessarily have certain implicit consequences and we must learn to take responsibility for what we do so this implies having punishments or sanctions that must be complied with.
Nevertheless, to obtain this, first it is necessary that the parents are committed to the integral and absolute education of their children, even if it implies time, effort and additional resources.
In theory that is why they brought children into this world, to give the best and form them the best way possible, because that is their responsibility with society, to raise their children to be good citizens and correct people and for some reason if they consider that they don’t have the intellectual, moral or material resources to have them.
Isn’t it better not to do it, isn’t better to make a conscientious decision and have no kids? But beyond engaging as parents to train them should also allow schools and schools that chose “voluntarily” for their children do, should also commit not to hinder the process, to accept when they say something not so good of their children.
They should reflect on why they say it and what may or may not be true, to support the educational institutions so that students are not only prepared cognitively and academically to face the future. So that they are also prepared to be socially committed and active people to perform ethically within the world that surrounds them more and more convulsive and complicated, to be in short, a person of good.
In conclusion
In conclusion, paternity must in any case be a decision made conscientious, responsible, mature and committed that also implies being able to devote all possible resources and not only materially or economically speaking.
It implies a total and absolute dedication of intellectual resources, moral, time, interest and motivation, to be able to make a conscious and committed review of themselves as people to rethink how to be better parents present and committed to the integral development of their children.
Above all, being a parent must imply in any case a real commitment to society to do everything in its power and to allow society itself to do so without hindering, covering up or encroaching on the mistakes of its children. The idea is that they become well hearted people, raised within the ethics and morals that contribute with their values to society, and above all, who are able to assume the consequences of their mistakes and assume responsability when they are wrong.
