Sure, there are those instances where you can do nothing but agree that the way the parents treat their child is only feeding their arrogance, like buying that car for them when they stomp their feet loud enough, but I'm not sure how parents loving their child too much turns them into a rebellious drug- and sex addict from the beginning on. Even when you have drill sergeant-parents, the same conclusion gets drawn and it's still/again the parents' fault.
So. When is it not their fault?
If being a caring parent turns your child into shit, if being an evil parent turns your child into shit, if letting them do their thing turns them into shit, if being controlling over them turns them into shit, what won't turn a child into shit?
Is it possible, just maybe, that the child itself is simply shit?
I know this was posted a long ago but I actually have read multiple studies that provided evidence for children's behavior being related to genetics.One of which even found evidence for children's obedience to genetics. (I don't remember where, but if your interested I can go look for them and provide links).
ReplyDeleteI think the idea that parent's a responsible for every single thing their child does is a widespread cultural thing. (For example many online articles that mention the studies are often full of people calling it b.s and an excuse for parent's to not take responsibilities, despite probably none of them actually reading the paper, or even it's abstract, itself)
Though this does lead to something of a logic fallacy. If a person's attitude is based on how they were raised and thus parent's to blame... doesn't that mean the parent's own attitude was caused by the way they were raised by the grandparent's and thus can't be blamed for their attitudes that impacted the way they raised the aforementioned person?