This book offers a novel theory of childhood well-being as a social good. It re-examines our fundamental assumptions about parenting, parental authority, and a liberal society’s role in the raising of children. The author defends the idea that the good of a child is inexorably linked to the good of society. He identifies and critiques the problematic assumption that parenting is an extension of individual liberty and shows how we run into problems in medical decision-making for children because of this assumption. He develops an objective conception of what is good for a child in a liberal society, drawing on the assumptions of liberty, and from here constructs a set of things that society and its members owe children. There are ways in which society should support and intervene in parental decisions to guarantee a child’s well-being. Ultimately, raising children is a social activity that requires input from society. The author then applies this theory of childhood well-being to develop a framework for medical decision-making for children. He also uses practical examples, such as vaccinations, parental leave, and healthcare access, to demonstrate the implications of his theory for public policy. The Limits of Parental Authority: Childhood Wellbeing as a Social Good will be of interest to practitioners, scholars, and advanced students working in bioethics, political philosophy, and public health policy.
This book is a detailed examination of parental authority: what justifies and what are the proper limits of a parent’s authority over her children? Dennis Arjo focuses on and criticizes attempts to answer these and related questions in the context of liberal philosophy of education. He also offers an alternative framework for thinking about parental authority that draws on recent philosophical work in Virtue Ethics, Care Ethics, and Confucianism that challenges some of the assumptions of contemporary liberal theory. This book will be of interest to philosophers working in ethics, political philosophy and philosophy of education.
Should parents aim to make their children as normal as possible to increase their chances to “fit in”? Are neurological and mental health conditions a part of children’s identity and if so, should parents aim to remove or treat these? Should they aim to instill self-control in their children? Should prospective parents take steps to insure that, of all the children they could have, they choose the ones with the best likely start in life? This volume explores all of these questions and more. Against the background of recent findings and expected advances in neuroscience and genetics, the extent and limits of parental responsibility are increasingly unclear. Awareness of the effects of parental choices on children’s wellbeing, as well as evolving norms about the moral status of children, have further increased expectations from (prospective) parents to take up and act on their changing responsibilities. The contributors discuss conceptual issues such as the meaning and sources of moral responsibility, normality, treatment, and identity. They also explore more practical issues such as how responsibility for children is practiced in Yoruba culture in Nigeria or how parents and health professionals in Belgium perceive the dilemmas generated by prenatal diagnosis.
We are used to having our parents help us, but how do we handle it when the tables are turned and our parents are the ones who need help? Declining health, financial needs, divorce, relational issues—what’s an adult child’s role when their parents are struggling? Counselor Jim Newheiser understands the many types of challenges adults may face ...
This title argues that the legal regulation of families stands fundamentally at odds with the needs of families. Strong, stable, positive relationships are essential for both individuals and society to flourish, but the law makes it harder for parents to provide children with these kinds of relationships. Zoning laws can create long commutes and impersonal neighbourhoods. Criminal laws can take parents away from home. The book contends that we must re-orient the legal system to help families avoid crises, and when conflicts arise, intervene in a manner that heals relationships.
Solve toddler challenges with eight key mindshifts that will help you parent with clarity, calmness, and self-control. In Why is My Child in Charge?, Claire Lerner shows how making critical mindshifts—seeing children’s behaviors through a new lens —empowers parents to solve their most vexing childrearing challenges. Using real life stories, Lerner unpacks the individualized process she guides parents through to settle common challenges, such as throwing tantrums in public, delaying bedtime for hours, refusing to participate in family mealtimes, and resisting potty training. Lerner then provides readers with a roadmap for how to recognize the root cause of their child’s behavior and how to create and implement an action plan tailored to the unique needs of each child and family. Why is My Child in Charge? is like having a child development specialist in your home. It shows how parents can develop proven, practical strategies that translate into adaptable, happy kids and calm, connected, in-control parents.
What should happen when doctors and parents disagree about what would be best for a child? When should courts become involved? Should life support be stopped against parents' wishes? The case of Charlie Gard, reached global attention in 2017. It led to widespread debate about the ethics of disagreements between doctors and parents, about the place of the law in such disputes, and about the variation in approach between different parts of the world. In this book, medical ethicists Dominic Wilkinson and Julian Savulescu critically examine the ethical questions at the heart of disputes about medical treatment for children. They use the Gard case as a springboard to a wider discussion about the rights of parents, the harms of treatment, and the vital issue of limited resources. They discuss other prominent UK and international cases of disagreement and conflict. From opposite sides of the debate Wilkinson and Savulescu provocatively outline the strongest arguments in favour of and against treatment. They analyse some of the distinctive and challenging features of treatment disputes in the 21st century and argue that disagreement about controversial ethical questions is both inevitable and desirable. They outline a series of lessons from the Gard case and propose a radical new 'dissensus' framework for future cases of disagreement. - This new book critically examines the core ethical questions at the heart of disputes about medical treatment for children. - The contents review prominent cases of disagreement from the UK and internationally and analyse some of the distinctive and challenging features around treatment disputes in the 21st century. - The book proposes a radical new framework for future cases of disagreement around the care of gravely ill people.
What is parental control? Is it positive or negative for children? What makes parents controlling with their children, even when they value supporting children's autonomy? Are there alternatives to control and how might we apply them in important domains of children's lives, such as school and sports? This book addresses these and other questions about the meaning and predictors of parental control, as well as its consequences for children's adjustment and well-being. While the topic of parental control is not new, there has been controversy about the concept, with some researchers and clinicians weighing in on the side of control and others against it. This book argues that part of the controversy stems from different uses of the term, with some investigators focusing more on parents being in control and others on controlling children. Using a definition of control as "pressure for children to think, feel, or behave in specific ways," the author explores research on parental control, arguing that there is more consensus than previously thought. Using this research base, the author provides evidence that parental control can be subtle and can lurk within many "positive" parenting approaches; parental control undermines the very behaviors we wish to inculcate in our children; providing autonomy support--the opposite of control--is a challenge, even when parents are committed to doing so. With controversy in the literature about parental control and attention in the media on the ways in which parents step over the control line (e.g., screaming on the soccer sidelines, pressuring children in academics), this book is especially timely. It provides an empathic view of how easily parents can become trapped in controlling styles by emphasizing performance and hooking their own self-esteem on children's performance. Examples of how this can happen in academic, sporting, and peer situations with their emphasis on competition and hierarchy are provided, as well as strategies for parenting in highly involved but autonomy supportive ways. A highly readable yet research-based treatment of the topic of parental control, this book: *explores the controversial topic of parental control; addresses controversy about the positive and negative effects of parental control; and disentangles various parenting concepts, such as involvement, structure, and control; *illustrates how control can be overt, such as in the use of corporal punishment or covert, as in the use of controlling praise; *provides evidence that control may produce compliance in children preventing them from initiating and taking responsibility for their own behavior; *explores why parents are controlling with their children, including environmental and economic stresses and strains, characteristics of children that "pull" for control, and factors in parents' own psychologies that lead them to be "hooked" on children's performance; and *provides examples of control in the areas of academics and sports--the hierarchical and competitive nature of these domains is seen as contributing to parents' tendencies to become controlling in these areas.
Most people believe that parents have moral rights and responsibilities regarding their children. These rights and responsibilities undergird the nuclear family and are essential to the flourishing of its members. However, their basis and contents are hotly contested. Do a child's genetic parents have a right to parent her? The importance of genetic ties is affirmed by many people's gut responses, everyday talk, and many court decisions, but the moral justification for tying parenthood rights to genetics is unclear. Parents are routinely permitted to make far-reaching decisions about their children's medical care, education, religious practice, and even how to punish them. When can parental rights be limited by the interests of the child or society? Matters are no more settled when it comes to parental responsibilities. It is commonly thought that if a man conceives a child through voluntary sexual intercourse he acquires parental responsibilities, even if he took every precaution against conception. On the other hand, sperm donors are widely-though not universally-thought to have no responsibilities towards their progeny. What is the basis for these disparate judgments? Parents are expected to do a lot for their children as they raise them. But there are surely limits. Sometimes parents have to balance the needs of multiple family members or just want to have time for themselves. What is the extent of their parental responsibilities? In The Moral Foundations of Parenthood, Joseph Millum provides a philosophical account of moral parenthood. He explains how parental rights and responsibilities are acquired, what those rights and responsibilities consist in, and how parents should go about making decisions on behalf of their children. In doing so, he provides a set of frameworks to help solve pressing ethical dilemmas relating to parents and children.
