[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: article citation
Hello, John--
Thanks for responding to my thoughst. Please see CAPS for clarifications.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
[mailto:owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu]On Behalf Of
John M Price PhD
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:25 PM
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: RE: article citation
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Thomas R. Chibucos wrote:
> 1) The author must provide the reference.
>
> 2) I find the anecdote, in any case, to be of limited usefulness, at best;
> misleading and prejudicial, at worse. Children have fat or nonfat
parents,
> ugly or beautiful parents, competent or incompetent parents, cool or
uncool
> parents, etc., etc. All of these things "make a difference," none is a
> sole determinant of anything. Skin color, of course, has never been
> emprically demonstrated to be a determinant of the quality of parenting or
> of the quality of childhood .
It really isn't skin color, per se, as you would have us believe, but
rather a match or nonmatch of same between parents and child. That is a
different issue altogether.
GOOD POINT. ACTUALLY, THERE ARE TWO ISSUES: 1) THE PARTICULAR
CHARACTERISTIC UNDER QUESTION; AND 2) THE MATCH OR MISMATCH ON SAME BETWEEN
PARENT(S) AND CHILD. I REALLY WASN'T TRYING TO MAKE ANYONE BELIEVE
ANYTHING, EXCEPT THAT DATA MIGHT TELL US SOMETHING. GIVEN MY VIEWPOINT
THAT MANY PEOPLE PAY NO ATTENTION TO DATA IN THIS AREA, I SHOULD HAVE BEEN
MORE CAREFUL IN MY OWN STATEMENT. IF YOU ADD "NOR HAS MISMATCH BETWEEN
PARENT AND CHILD SKIN COLOR" AFTER "QUALITY OF CHILDHOOD" ABOVE.
LET ME BE CLEAR: DO YOU THINK WE WOULD BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION IF 2
SKINNY PARENTS ADOPTED A FAT CHILD? ASSUMING THEY WERE NOT ABUSIVE PARENTS
(E.G., MAKING FUN OF THE CHILD, ETC.), I DO NOT THINK WE WOULD BE HAVING
THIS DISCUSSION. IT IS THE RACIAL MISMATCH THAT INTERESTS PEOPLE--NOT THE
GENERAL MISMATCH BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILD ON ANY ONE OF MANY OTHER POSSIBLE
VARIABLES.
> Much of the "debate" about transracial adoption is, in my view, not about
> 'the best interests of the child.' It is about political agendas. I
think
> this is so patently obvious that it leads to a rather bold empirically
I'd agree, and include your comments in that boat as well.
I SEE NOTHING IN MY STATEMENT THAT INDICATES A POLITICAL AGENDA WITH REGARD
TO TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION. MY AGENDA, IS MUCH MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD: I MUCH
PREFER DATA-BASED DECISION-MAKING TO DECISIONS DRIVEN BY OTHER PERSONAL OR
POLITICAL MOTIVES, AND ALWAYS ATTEMPT TO MAKE OTHERS SEE THE LIGHT!!
> testable hypothesis: In a ranking of any 5 potential influences on
quality
> of parenting and quality of childhood, racial/ethnic disparity between
> parent and child will be the least influential factor.
I don't know, and when asked recently about this by a friend (the agency
was 'pushing Asian kids' per his story), I stated as much. There should
by now be some data available. Is there? Or have all these agencies
avoided collecting it?
I CERTAINLY DON'T KNOW EITHER--IT'S NOT AN AREA OF EXPERTISE THAT I LAY
CLAIM TO. GIVENT THE APPARENT LACK OF DATA DIRECTLY PERTAINING TO
TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION, HOWEVER, THERE ARE NONETHELESS STRONG THEORETICAL AND
EMPIRICAL REASONS TO ASSUME THAT MISMATCH ON COLOR IS NOT VERY RELEVANT TO
CHILDREN (THIS IS CAPTURED NICELY IN STEVE MARTIN'S PORTRAYAL OF A WHITE
PERSON RAISED BY A BLACK FAMILY--IN 'THE JERK').
Of course there is the related issue of role models where it is thought
that boys need effective male role models, and black boys need effective
black male role models especially, and so forth, to more easily avoid a
life of crime. At least that seems in vogue now with all the mentoring
promotion.
What is your take on that issue, and do you divorce them one from the
other?
WHEW--NOW I REALLY AM OUT ON THE THIN FROZEN POND! BUT, HERE GOES. MUCH
EARLY WORK ON MODELING (DERIVED FROM SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY--ALBERT BANDURA
AND OTHERS) FOUND THAT MODELING OF BEHAVIOR SEEMED TO BE STRONGER WITH A
'CLOSER MATCH' BETWEEN MODEL AND OBSERVER. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE MATCHING
CHARACTERISTIC HAS TO HAVE RELEVANCE TO THE OBSERVER (AND SKIN COLOR DOES
NOT HAVE RELEVANCE TO YOUNG CHILDREN, IN PARTICULAR). IN TERMS OF
POTENTIAL RESEARCH ON THIS--THE THING YOU MENTION ABOUT MENTORING--THERE
SEEMS TO ME TO BE A PERFECT CONFOUND BETWEEN RACE OF MENTOR AND AMOUNT OF
ATTENTION GIVEN TO A CHILD. THE 'ASSUMPTION' SEEMS TO BE THAT IT IS THE
COLOR OF THE MENTOR THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE--WHEN IT COULD JUST AS WELL BE
THE LEVEL OF ATTENTION THAT THE MENTOR PROVIDES REGARDLESS OF COLOR THAT
MAKES A DIFFERENCE (IF IT DOES). THAT'S MY 'TAKE,' BUT IS THERE RESEARCH ON
IT? DON'T KNOW.
--
John M. Price, PhD jmprice@calweb.com
Life: Chemistry, but with feeling! | PGP Key on request or FTP!
Comoderator: sci.psychology.psychotherapy.moderated Atheist# 683