I keep an
eye on news articles relating to family life and education, and this was one
from the BBC several days ago, regarding the role of fathers:
The article
reports a study showing that children whose father’s interact well with them at
three months of age have better behaviour at 12 months. (It should be commented
that this is based on a questionnaire regarding elements of behaviour such as
sleep, feeding etc; it is susceptible to bias since what one parent considers a
problem, another may view as completely normal. Also, I know I find the more
challenging elements of parenting are greatly alleviated through having a
supportive and involved husband; I often reflect on how a single parent must
feel the task is relentless at times, and through exhaustion and isolation may cope
less well with certain behaviours).
What
astonishes me is firstly that such studies can attract research funding in the
first place, and secondly, that the findings are considered newsworthy. Why is
it surprising that children with fathers who interact with them and who take an
interest in their development tend to do better? Why do we need to fund research
to demonstrate that children need two parents who have complementary roles, in
order to have the best chance of thriving? I find it sad that it is necessary.
On the
other hand, perhaps I should not be surprised. How often is it assumed that
things relating to raising children are the domain of the mother? Even within
Christian circles where marriage is highly valued, it is frequently the mother
who tends to assume responsibility for the children. One of the most frequently
cited sections of the Bible relating to parenting, Ephesians 6 verse 4, is addressed to fathers, ‘And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring
them up in the training and admonition of the Lord’. Elsewhere it is made
clear that the God given order for family life is for the husband and father to
have a position of headship in the home. ‘Feminists’ react strongly to this
suggestion, and object to the verses such as Ephesians 5 verse 22: ‘Wives, submit to your own husbands as to the
Lord’. But what they neglect is the parallel command to husbands, three
verses later: ‘Husbands, love your
wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her...’? What
does that second verse mean? How did Christ love the church? Christ loved the
church sufficiently to face every manner of human abuse and ultimately die for
people who at that time, rejected and hate Him. As Jesus Himself said, ‘Greater love has no one than this, than to
lay down one’s life for his friends’. (John 15:13). Given the choice – to submit
to my husband’s God-given leadership, or to love another person to the degree
that Christ loved the church – I know which seems humanly possible! What does
submit mean anyway? I caused controversy among some family members at our
wedding when I chose not to say ‘obey’ as is tradition in the Scottish wedding
vows, but rather ‘submit’ as I felt this to be more biblically correct. Dictionary
definitions of the two verbs are below, with the main difference to me being that
submission is a willing surrender, and reflects an respectful attitude of
heart, whereas obedience just refers to doing the will of another person.
Obey: 1. To
carry out or fulfill the command, order, or instruction of. 2. To carry
out or comply with (a command, for example).
Submit: 1. To
yield or surrender (oneself) to the will or authority of another. 2. To
subject to a condition or process.
But
perhaps I digress slightly into a discussion of Biblical marriage. Or is it
really a digression? It seems clear that many problems arise in modern society
as the family structure degenerates and many children are raised in broken
homes, perhaps where a succession of other adults come for a time and then
leave. Is it surprising that these children may struggle to feel secure, and
may find ways (often interpreted as ‘rebellion’ or ‘behavioural problems’) to
express their uncertainty?
Of course,
practically, it often does make sense for one parent to have the greatest day
to day involvement with the children, and the more typical or traditional
situation is where the mother remains home, or works part time, whilst the
husband works longer and more demanding hours. It is not a question of time
spent with the child, but rather the degree of involvement and commitment, and
the ultimate responsibility. And alternative approaches are possible; I would
love to see more families seriously consider these. My husband and I both work
part-time, allowing us each to spend quality time with the children and have an
equal, although very different, input into their education. When I say ‘different’,
I refer not to our motivations and principles, but rather to the different
strengths and weaknesses we both have. We believe our children will benefit
from the broader education that we can offer them as a team working in this
way. We are considered a little unusual, both in the workplace, and also within
the church. But we remember that ultimately we are the ones who will have to
give an account before God of how we have raised the children He has given us.
No comments:
Post a Comment