This week, we published a feature from Madeleine Schwartz about the American export that’s currently roiling France: positive, “gentle” parenting. Caroline Goldman, whom Schwartz considers “France’s most polarizing psychologist,” has set off a fierce debate within the country after calling for the return of disciplining children, specifically through timeouts. In “Go to Your Room!” Goldman lists behaviors that should be forbidden after age 1. These include “complaining” and “making too much noise.” A 1-year-old might need a timeout if he or she is “throwing dishes and spoons from the highchair, playing with the buttons on the stove, pulling on the tablecloth, stealing the remote, opening the fridge.” This punishment needs no negotiation, discussion or justification. If a child protests, or tries to leave the room, that’s a reason for more punishment. “You’ve just earned yourself 20 more minutes in your room.” Supporters of positive parenting are rallying against Goldman. Seeing the timeout as “a form of psychological violence,” they argue that she “is doing nothing less than encouraging parents to mistreat their children.” The proponents of positive education accuse Goldman of creating a culture of fear. They have become so concerned about her methods that they moved to counter them officially. When a committee put together a new document for professional caregivers titled “National Standards for Early Childhood Care” last year, they included a clause that read, “When a child does not follow rules, boundaries or prohibitions, punishment (such as belittling words, timeouts or isolation) is prohibited by law; it is counterproductive and harmful to the child.” According to one expert, “this guideline was specifically developed for Ms. Goldman to help calm things down a bit, and it has the force of law.” This debate comes as the birthrate in France has fallen to its lowest level since 1918, while cuts to government programs have reduced the support infrastructure available to parents. FEATURES ON THE COVER
COLUMNS
FROM THE ARCHIVES Mastering the Art of French ParentingIt may not surprise you to know that this week’s story about French and American parenting is not the first time a comparison between French and American children has appeared in the pages of the magazine. In 1954, Celia B. Stendler wrote about the differences in the ways that French and American children are raised: American parents begin arranging group play opportunities for children as young as 2. They want the toddlers to begin to learn to share, to take turns, to be friendly, to be accepted by others. This concern about the child’s “adjustment to the group,” is further emphasized in school. Neither French schools nor French homes indicate this concern. Their emphasis is upon individualism. Parents arrange for play experiences for children, not to give the children practice in getting along with others but because children enjoy one another’s company. “Children have nothing to learn from other children,” a French parent told us. “It is the family who teaches.” In 1957, Laurence Wylie, an American scholar on French language and culture, wrote about briefly raising his children in a small village in France (Roussillon, which he gives the fictional name of Peyrane): It has become stylish for American journalists and political scientists to look at French political behavior, shake their heads and moan, “France is sick!” French journalists and sociologists look at American family life, shake their heads and moan, “America is sick!” Surely both countries have their troubles, but it is a poor diagnosis that is based on only one symptom. If these diagnosticians were willing to have a look at the total pattern of a nation’s behavior — including the more humble aspects, such as what goes on in the schoolrooms of Peyrane and Haverford — their diagnosis might not be so self-flattering, but it would make sense. And lastly, all the way back in 1922, Katharine S. Lamb wrote about the children of Paris: One sees a trifle more hoops in Paris, perhaps, and more kiddy-cars here, but under the skin they really seem to be the same. It’s most surprising! And disconcerting to have one’s ideas turned about so! But I really believe now, yes, really, that before we are American or French, we are human, that children are children the world over, that the proportion of babies from year to year varies very little, and that Paris is quite as safe and healthful for them as Hoboken or Pittsburgh U.S.A. COMMENT OF THE WEEK Hungry? Why Wait?A comment in this week’s On Language column about the term “frictionless”: At the airport yesterday, I went to buy a Snickers. I waited a while before being told to go to the person-less register, where I had to click through like five things before I could actually buy my Snickers. The funny thing is doing things in person is actually much easier, because you aren’t forced to not sign up, not donate, not ask for a bag. Buying a pizza is the same, you can literally call and just order a large supreme and you are good. That’s all for this week. Email us at magazine@nytimes.com with your thoughts, questions and feedback. Stay in touch: Like this email? Forward it to a friend and help us grow. Loved a story? Hated it? Write us a letter at magazine@nytimes.com. Did a friend forward this to you? Sign up here to get the magazine newsletter.
|
