Sunday 12 September 2010

Giving children the 'facts'

A few days ago I was writing here of the folly of allowing children to make important decisions about their long term future, arguing that it is far better if adults make decisions on their children's behalf. Several people commented, telling me that they felt that children should be 'given the facts' and allowed to make their own choices. This is such a grotesque idea that I couldn't help chuckling out loud. Giving children the facts! As if any parent ever does such a thing.

The topic under discussion was of course education and the taking of examinations, but the principle is the same whatever 'facts' we are supposedly giving children in order for them to come to their own decision. Whether the subject is further education, racism, health, nuclear power, homophobia or vegetarianism; the last thing any parent supplies or intends to supply are plain facts. Let us take one example and look at it in detail. We won't use education, because I always manage to annoy somebody when I write about this. Perhaps, I had better steer clear of racism and homophobia as well. Let's look at something upon which every parent in the country would agree; the undesirability of our children taking up smoking.

Now there are many reasons why we don't want our children to start smoking, but the chief one is that we don't want them to develop lung cancer. Of course there are many other problems associated with smoking, ranging from bad breath to Buerger's Disease, but without doubt the main fear is of our child dying of cancer as a consequence of cigarettes. So if we suspect that our twelve or thirteen year old daughter might be tempted to experiment with smoking, we tell her that a good reason not to do so is that smoking causes cancer. Now this is so misleading a statement as to be practically a lie, but we persuade ourselves that, as the Jesuits claim, 'If the end is lawful, then the means are likewise lawful'. Are we really giving our child the facts and letting her make her own decision? Not a bit of it. What are the facts?

To begin with a woman who smokes has just over one chance in ten of developing lung cancer in the course of her life. Therefore 90% of women who smoke for the whole of their lives will not get lung cancer. Secondly, one must smoke for at least twenty or thirty years to increase the risk of lung cancer to a statistically significant level. In other words, if a girl starts smoking at fifteen and then smokes until she is forty, she is in no more danger of lung cancer than a non smoker. The blunt statement which practically every parent in the land delivers to her child, 'Smoking causes cancer' is thus revealed to be a deliberately untruthful piece of crude scaremongering. We might truthfully say that under some circumstances smoking might cause cancer, but that the development of the disease is also associated with a large number of factors which we do not yet fully understand. Doesn't really sound as catchy as 'Smoking causes cancer', does it?

If we really wanted to give our teenage daughter the facts, then instead of telling her that 'Smoking causes cancer', we would say something like this;

'Well Mary, you have to bear in mind that the vast majority of women who smoke for the whole of their lives do not develop lung cancer. It is pretty rare and the chances are ten to one against your getting it, no matter how many cigarettes you smoke. Also, you could safely start smoking now and then carry on until you were forty without really increasing your risk of the disease. This is because the development of cancer in this way is also the result of a huge number of other factors unconnected with smoking, such as genetic disposition and other matters, some of which could relate to lifestyle. And remember, if you stop for five years, then your chances of lung cancer drop to the same level as a lifelong non-smoker!'

These are the facts about smoking and the teenage girl. Hands up any parent who would dream of presenting the matter like this, simply setting out the facts and leaving the girl to make up her own mind? Has anybody here ever pointed out to her daughter that the odds of a lifelong female smoker developing lung cancer are ten to one against? None of us do this, with smoking or anything else. Instead, we decide what we think is good for our children and then do what we can to manipulate them psychologically into adopting our view of the case. Vegetarians do this with their children and so do people who disapprove of nuclear power stations. Parents who home educate do not give their children the 'facts' about schools, education and the prospects of getting into university, any more than they give them the 'facts' about smoking. They start instead from a position of knowing what the right view on the question is and feeding their children a selection of biased information and black propaganda so that they too adopt the 'correct' view, i.e. their parent's view.

Giving our children the 'facts' is such a ridiculous idea that I wonder any parent could suggest it with a straight face. What we mean by this expression is really transmitting our own particular set of prejudices to our children, ruthlessly editing out all that we disagree with personally in the process, along with anything we think might be bad for our children to know about. If we do this with a life and death matter such as cancer, how much more likely are we to do it with a relatively trivial issue such as the importance of acquiring formal qualifications?

40 comments:

  1. I agree that parents will almost always present facts subjectively. Also, even when we try to be even-handed and present all sides of an issue, the child will often ask, 'Yes, but what do YOU think, Mum?'

    My adult children, even now, like to know my opinions, not necessarily because they still feel family loyalty to my ideas or can't think for themselves, but simply because they wish to evaluate the matter in hand with all the information they can get. Part of that information (one of the facts) is what someone they love and respect thinks about it.

    I'm also interested in other people's opinions about facts I'm learning. It's an important part of my information-gathering.

    One thing your cancer eg fails on though, Simon is that it doesn't present ALL the pertinent facts. One important fact for teenaged girls to bear in mind is that they are potentially at twice the risk of contracting cervical cancer as a result of smoking. Evaluating cancer risk is difficult though because so many other factors come into play.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'One important fact for teenaged girls to bear in mind is that they are potentially at twice the risk of contracting cervical cancer as a result of smoking.'

    This is of course absolutely true. However, it is linked to a number of other factors. For eaxample the age and frequency with which unprotected intercourse takes place. Smoking is one of a cluster of factors and not really a cause as such. Smoking may well be indirectly implicated as part of a general lifestyle. After all, life long virgins such as nuns have the lowest possible rate of cervical cancer. Real life is like that, messy and complicated, which is probably why we prefer to keep things simple by claiming that X causes Y!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Of course we influence our children. Of course our own opinions influence the way we talk to them and how we explain things.

    I'm sure this is more when we have a really deep seated conviction about something. Personally I don't find the matter of qualifications that significant. It's certainly not like talking to my children about something that is extremely hazardous either way - or some great moral matter! I am perfectly able to discuss what courses are on offer at different FE colleges and the qualifications necessary to get onto them - all in a fairly dispassionate way! I also try to recognise my own prejudices in life generally and try to make sure I at least mention it to my children when I think my response it based more on my prejudice than fact.

    I agree with Mrs Anon about the weakness of your cancer example. Lung cancer is certainly not the whole picture!

    ReplyDelete
  4. My children researched and discovered the real facts for themselves when the issue came up. They were home educated by the autonomous method, you see. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi, can you give a reference for the assertion "one must smoke for at least twenty or thirty years to increase the risk of lung cancer to a statistically significant level", please?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Here is a simple mention of the time lag between increased smoking and increased lung cancer rates:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20030217151857/http://press2.nci.nih.gov/sciencebehind/cancer/cancer31.htm

    It is this fact, that the cancer does not develop for twenty or thirty years, which made it hard to spot the connection between smoking and cancer.

    ReplyDelete
  7. and a state school teacher will always give truthfull facts will he Webb?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Then add in the information about cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, bladder, stomach, cervix, kidney and pancreas, and acute myeloid leukemia.

    Plus emphasemia, potentially devastating circulation problmes and heart attacks.

    Not that it will make any diff. to many teens, who tend to feel immortal and think 50 is so old it doesn't matter if they die at that point anyway.

    So I'd tend to focus on poor complexion, horrible personal smell and above all the slavery you create for yourself.

    Cos that is what it feels like when you realise you are turning down good jobs becuase they require you on site for four solid hours and you just can't make it that long without a fag break.

    With the current "you shalt not smoke in public places" laws that slavery is ever more pronounced as a whole range of activities become a less than happy experience because going involves the godawful withdrawal once you hit your personal limit of minutes without nicotine.

    I forgot my gum on Friday and came close to a meltdown in the supermarket as the headache and grinding sensation in my belly set in, followed by irrational anger. It's a shitty restriction on your life and freedom.

    Yes I am going to subjective about this and many other topics, because my whole life expereince has been through a personal filter rather than the expereince of everyman. I'm not sure that is 100% avoidable.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 'and a state school teacher will always give truthfull facts will he Webb?'

    I need to correct a misapprehension here on the part of Mr Williams of Alton. I am not a fan of state schools and did not in fact ever send my daughter to one. I can't understand for the life of me where Mr Williams gets the idea that I think that state schools are a better form of education than home education. I don't. It is perhaps worth pointing out that Mr Williams himself sent his own son to a state school and so presumably he thought that they were a good thing at one time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 'Not that it will make any diff. to many teens, who tend to feel immortal and think 50 is so old it doesn't matter if they die at that point anyway.'

    Good point, Sarah. What teen honestly considers the future to any great extent?

    ReplyDelete
  11. 'you do like state education Webb your always telling children its that or nothing! or do you support the right of a child to have a private education or a home education?'

    This is completely mad, even by Mr Williams' standards! I do not like state education and think it vastly inferior to home education. Unlike Mr Williams, I do not think that a private education is better than home education. The fact that I did not send my daughter to school, but chose instead to educate her at home should be enough evidence of that! I am surprised to hear a home educator saying that he thinks that home education is somehow inferior to a school education.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'you not answered Webb do you support the right of a child to have a private education and a home education or do you belive that a child can only have state school or nothing?

    you do like state school education as you want to send lots of children to it as you refuse to help them get the money for a private education!'

    What on earth are you talking about? Are you really as demented as this question seems to indicate?

    ReplyDelete
  13. "What teen honestly considers the future to any great extent? "

    I'm not entirely sure they are hard wired to think long term. Maybe they need to feel immortal to take those steps into independance, but whizzing around fast and impaired in a tin can doesn't bring home the true level of danger compared to the "rush plus terror" that a bloody great mammoth running after you does.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "why you think those parents pay 20000 pounds plus a year for the fun of it?"

    I expect that at least part of the reason is the connections to be made in public schools that can ease the path in many professions. Then there's the increased chance of Oxbridge. And the sheer snobbery value is probably very appealing to some people. Who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  15. 'Its very simple Webb will not answer if he supports the right of a child to a private education and a home education? i belive he has said it is a state school education or nothing?'

    I hope you will forgive my asking this Mr Williams, but I am beginning to wonder what you are keeping inside your head. Most of us carry a brain around in our heads; we find it helps us to think a little more clearly. I have a suspicion that you are instead using your head to store some sort of large root vegetable, a turnip perhaps. I do not wish to appear discourteous, but if this is the case it is hardly to be wondered at that you are having difficulty following a simple line of thought. Let me try to answer your question in a straightforward way. All children in this country have a right to an education. it is the duty of their parents to provide this education. This can be done either by sending your child to school, engaging a governess or tutor or by educating him yourself.

    I had little faith in state schools, preferring to undertake the job myself. I think that most home educators feel that way. Those with plenty of money can send their children to an independent school. There is no 'right' to this, any more than we have a right to an expensive sports car or a gold watch. These things, like a private education, are available to those who can afford them. You say that the education which Eton provides is superior to a home education, but that rather depends upon the home and the education.

    To recap, my views on different types of education are as follows. At the top, far and away the best of all, is home education. A long way behind this come schools, whether private or state. If you really feel that you are not capable of providing an education suitable for a child of your son's age and aptitude, then you could I suppose always send him to school.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 'And the sheer snobbery value is probably very appealing to some people.'

    Yes, I can believe that. Living as you do near Roedean, you must admit that it would be nice to be able casually to drop into conversations, 'Of course when my daughter was at Roedean..'

    ReplyDelete
  17. 'I'm not entirely sure they are hard wired to think long term. '

    Another reason why the fewer decisions we allow them the better! For many children and teenagers, the future is not a real and concrete place. They do not have the ability to visualise what they will be like in five years or so.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 'why you think those parents pay 20000 pounds plus a year for the fun of it?'

    Er, so their kids don't have to associate with us oiks?

    Or what Allie said. ;-)

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Another reason why the fewer decisions we allow them the better"

    I'm wanting to add an "unguided" into that sentence. I don't think 18 is a magic age when everything falls into place and people magically get all adult about everything they choose to do (mind you...some days I wonder if 42 is a bit early for the magic bit) so keeping them on too tight a rein untill they can just take an axe to them when their birthday comes doesn't appeal either.

    I see it more of a sliding scale as in the older the get the more choices they make, of ever greater importance, preferably with mum and dad being heard when they point out that things are always as simple or easy as they appear and making constructive critisim. (or freaking out about the potential for Vespas in the hands of a speed freak teen who is worried that a helmet might mess up his hair, which is probably a more relaistic picture. Coming back from the supermarket I just saw one of my students take both hands of the handlebars to wave to me so I'm a gibbering wreck right now with all this scary impending tweenage stuff giving way to hardcore teenage stuff)

    ReplyDelete
  20. 'so if the state school is crap you would force a child to go to it would you Webb?'

    No, I would do what I actually did do and educate the child myself. You have made a similar choice and I can't for the life of me see why you are moaning about it. Either educate your child or send him to school, the choice is yours.

    ReplyDelete
  21. What 5 grand?

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  22. Either educate your child or send him to school, the choice is yours.

    'that is no choice and you know it!'

    If you don't believe in it, why on earth are you doing it?

    Are you the guy in the film whose son looked up at you for approval as he said, 'Children aren't important, are they?' Saddest part of the whole film.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  23. 'Are you the guy in the film whose son looked up at you for approval as he said, 'Children aren't important, are they?' Saddest part of the whole film.'

    The very same, Mrs Anon. If only I had £5000 to spare it would be money well spent to help the poor kid.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mrs Anon says-What 5 grand?

    the 5 grand it cost to keep a child at a state school

    ReplyDelete
  25. old Webb says-Children aren't important, are they?' Saddest part of the whole film.'



    do watch the 2nd film webb even better your love it great fun making it! like the film of him with the scouts and the private maths lessons really good it is go watch it webb and will they be a 3rd film?

    ReplyDelete
  26. 'the 5 grand it cost to keep a child at a state school'

    What? You think you are entitled to that money because you choose not to use the place? OK, I'll have back my portion of the NHS costs we paid last year then, since no one in my family got sick.

    {rolling my eyes}

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  27. 'cos you have no real choice its a crap state school education or nothing that is no choice'

    That's life. Two choices. One better than the other.

    I have a choice between bying an old Nissan Micra or....not buying one. I don't ask my neighbours for money so I can buy a Maserati.

    Actually, I haven't tried that, so I can't say it wouldn't work. Shall I give it a go?

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  28. I think that the £5000 to which Mr Williams is referring is the Age Weighted Pupil Unit or AWPU. This amount varies currently from £2152 a year for children in Year 1 to £3530 for those in year 11, so I'm not sure where he gets the figure of £5000. I have been thinking lately of asking for thefund of a portion of my Council Tax. Since I moved here eleven years ago I have been paying for a fire brigade which I have never used! This is scandalous. I am sure that other readers will be able to think of similar services for which they are compelled to pay. Perhaps those who do not take advantage of libraries should be able to claim some money back?

    ReplyDelete
  29. 'old webb said if he had 5000 he send it so if he not got 5000 send anther sum of money say 200 pounds '

    I might with equal justice ask why you are not planning to send me £200!

    ReplyDelete
  30. I might with equal justice ask why you are not planning to send me £200!

    you said if you had 5000 you send it i was helping you by giving you a lower amount to send cos as you keep claiming you care so much about children and they education.

    what do you need the 200 pound for Webb? cant be for your daughter education she gone to college.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Simon (or do you prefer 'Old Webb'?)
    I think you have been a little mean to turnips!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Ah, thanks for the chuckle, everyone. I needed that. LOL!

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  33. Claire roger and the boy say-Simon (or do you prefer 'Old Webb'?)
    I think you have been a little mean to turnips!


    is that supposed to be funny? surly you could come up with a better joke than that? its old like Simon is!

    have you been cooperating with your nice LA man/women have you had your nice home visit yet? how did it go did they want to see the child on its own? did you get they approval because you are doing home education the right way? next time they pop round make a cake for them LOL

    ReplyDelete
  34. 'I think you have been a little mean to turnips!'

    Yes, I think that one might be able to have a more reasoned debate with a turnip than some people!

    ReplyDelete
  35. I also appreciate the giggle. Simon, does "Anonymous (but we all know who it is)" use the same email addy to post? if so, can't you ban it because it's getting very tiresome wading through the garbage. Somewhat similar to someone posting in Japanese - I suspect that the language in which A(bwakwhi) is reading is not English.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I suppose that I am reluctant to block Mr Williams for two reasons. Firstly, whenever I try and do anything in the moderation line, the result is usually diasasterous! I almost invariably end up deleting other people's comments as well as his and home educators being what they are, this gives rise to all kinds of conspiracy theories. You are right about it being a pain to wade through a lot of foolishness though and I shall be deleting his posts in order to thin them out a little.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Get your daughter to block Mr W for you? If she's anything like my kids, she knows much more about computers than you do!

    ReplyDelete
  38. 'Get your daughter to block Mr W for you? '

    Let my teenage daughter loose on my personal blog, Claire? frankly, I would rather take my cahnce with Mr Williams! She would redesign everything, include links to her own blog, comment angrily on anything she saw here and then denounce everybody in sight for being sexist and homophobic. Really, you don't know what you are suggesting. I prefer to keep that particular genii in the bottle.

    ReplyDelete
  39. 'Get your daughter to block Mr W for you? '

    she to busy working for Ed Balls to do that! mind you in a few weeks time she be free as she be looking for a new job due to balls losing the leadership bid fro Labour party!

    ReplyDelete
  40. I have read so many articles or reviews about the blogger lovers but this piece of writing
    is in fact a good piece of writing, keep it up.


    my homepage: increase semen volume

    ReplyDelete