While discussing the issue of what children owe to their parents, parents often feel inclined to suggest that children who think that they do not owe their parents are simply thinking in that way because they have had a bad experience with their parents.Essentially, it's an attempt to render the opposition invalid by suggesting that they cannot separate their personal connections and attitudes towards their bad parents from an objective view of the situation; essentially, you can only take part in this debate if you have had good parents, because if you've had bad parents you will be biased and you won't be able to look past that when discussing the issue.
Personally, I think that children should be able to and ought to look past their own biases as it makes their argument more rational and agreeable. Similarly, however, because I think they are able to, I invite parents to put aside their biases in thinking that their labour and effort automatically equate to some of like debt which the children owe to the parents. The common view on debt to parents is that parents have laboured for so long and thereby deserve reward. This mindset is often witnessed in people; people think that hard work in the workplace should result in the reward of a raise; that situation, however, is substantially different.
One other point here is that children who have had good relationships with their parents may also be biased, in the opposite direction from those who had bad relationships. Because someone who views their parents as friends will quite naturally wish to treat them well, they may find it difficult to conceive of the idea that they could validly choose not to do so - they think that their wish is in fact an obligation. They may impose their own experience of parent/child relations on everyone else, and as such come to the conclusion that everyone (or most people) are obligated to treat their parents with above-average courtesy and care.
ReplyDeleteIf we accept that this bias is possible, negative bias is also possible, and parental bias is possible, then should we conclude that the only people who can validly take part in the debate over parental obligation are those who have no children and had completely neutral relationships with their parents? I do not think so. Instead, those people who have potential bias (which, I think, means the vast majority of people) should be very careful to ensure that their views are not being influenced unduly by their personal experiences.
P.S. I also posted this on my blog if you'd rather read it there.