How a people regard its family structure determines the path of its children.

            In historical China, the child was of minor importance.  Babies were not even named until reaching the first month after birth, to ensure that the infant was viable before the investment of a meaningful name and the full welcome into the family.  Children were taught to remain silent in the company of their elders and their wishes and desires were not consulted before fateful decisions were made for their futures.  The families of maidens were given dowries, as the bridal price for removing them from their birth families.  Upon marriage, they became a useful part of their husbands’ families and often no longer had contact with their own parents and siblings.   It is said that “a daughter is a daughter until she gets married.”

            In traditional Indian and Chinese societies, the familial ties are maintained through the sons; multi-generational dwellings were common, both amongst the affluent as well as poor ones.  In David Leavitt’s book, The Indian Clerk, which is about the relationship between the noted mathematicians, G.H. Hardy (1877–1947) and Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887–1920), Ramanujan is imagined to have asked Hardy, “Why did children not stay with their parents after they married?  Did they not love their parents?  Would they not be lonely?” 

            When I consulted a friend, Diane Sandoval, about her Mexican-American upbringing, she noted that in traditional Mexican families, “the idea that parents alone are responsible for raising their children in a nuclear family without the input of other members is outside of the culture.  This isn't unique to Mexicans, but certainly is part of it.”  This has a major positive impact on the health of mothers and babies, such that perinatal rates of complications, including low-birthweight deliveries, are low amongst the poorest families.  Interestingly, according to Ms. Sandoval, the epidemiological data showed that the rate of low-birthweight deliveries goes up in the second generation when they are at a higher economic level.  It may be that the greater familial cohesion among first-generation families confers a nurturing and supportive environment.

Furthermore, writes Ms. Sandoval, “It's not just rules but familial norms which actually have to be reached by some sort of greater familial decision because children in traditional families are in and out of the various houses of the family so frequently.  Perhaps this is carried over from the traditional Mexican households in which all members of a family lived within one large house--almost an apartment house--around a common patio.”

In the historical Jewish experience, the child was afforded greater independence of thought as compared to an Asian education.  The traditional method of teaching (an upcoming theme of this blog) emphasizes a dialectic approach, with a hairsplitting disputation (pilpul in Hebrew) on even minor points of Jewish law, in a collection known as the Talmud.  The utmost praise offered to a questioning child may be: “What a great question!  Rabbi Akiba had that same query centuries ago.”   However, the inquisitive mode of study did not get carried through to any independence in behavior, as Jewish children raised in ghettoes of Europe were limited by strictures from without their community as well as within a traditional society ruled by religious laws.

 The coming-of-age ceremony of the Jewish bar mitzvah and bat mitzvah signaled a transfer of responsibility in religious matters from the parents to the offspring.  This did not carry over to any financial independence.  In previous centuries, children had a significant role in their families’ welfare, whether the roles involved farming chores or jobs at a factory.  In contemporary times, American families have experienced a change in the family dynamic with a protracted period of adolescence-- a stage of life with great spending power but with no equivalent demand in responsibility.   Since the 1960’s, parents and adults of power have not been held in high regard (the “Question authority” slogan).  The free-thinking consumer philosophy has meant a diminution in respect for our elders as well as a recklessness in life choices. 

               Family structure has also broken down, with new and unusual pairings resulting from splintered marital relations.  
Furthermore, individuals move 11.7 times in their lifetime and over 15% of people moving are moving out-of-state 
[http://www.monstermoving.com/About_Us].  Families are now spread far apart and there is often no longer a close relative 
around to spend time with the children.  However, this does not have to be the norm, and efforts to remain connected yield 
great dividends.   I know of some uncommon familial ties in Israel— admittedly, a country much smaller in dimension than the U.S.,
 thus easier for family members to meet—where the grandchildren take turns spending afternoons with a grandparent, 
learning the piano or practicing French.  Even more remarkable is one Israeli family, where the now octogenarian grandfather—
and Nobel laureate-- has promised to treat every grandchild to a solo trip to an exotic place with him.  So, after years of hearing
about a cousin's trip to India or the Galapagos, every grandchild is agog over their 15th birthday.  What a wonderful way to 
forge kinship between the generations!