Whither
Family Life?
A paper presented by
David Kilgour, P.C., M.P.
At the International Multicultural
Conference
University of Alberta, Edmonton
July 26 - August 1, 1998
For more than a decade,
Canadians have paid special
tribute to our families
each October during National
Family Week. Last year’s
theme – "Celebrate
Family: Promoting Family
Well-Being" –
was intended to reinforce
the concept of recognizing
family strengths and using
them to build family-friendly
environments in our neighbourhoods
and workplaces.
"Promoting Family
Well-Being" might appear
to some alarmed by the current
state of our families generally
as an understatement, yet
it captures the challenge
facing us all: how to ensure
the continuation of family
as the basic unit of Canadian
and other societies.
The available evidence
indicates that the "smallest
democracy in the heart of
society" is undergoing
some major shockwaves.
How we resolve the problems
of families will determine
in large measure the shape
and quality of life in future
generations. Few
would deny the importance
of the family in either
the inclusive or traditional
sense as a social unit which
makes up the core of our
society. Although the role
of the family has evolved
with contemporary society,
it remains the most important
building block in virtually
every community on the face
of the planet.
It is through the family
in both the broad and narrower
sense of the term that our
destiny as a people is nourished
and that community values
are upheld or discarded.
The upheavals the family
has experienced over the
past few decades serve to
emphasize the need to strengthen
it as an institution and
to ensure that it is given
adequate opportunity to
maintain its vital role
as a societal pillar. "Healthy
children make strong families
and ultimately a strong
country", says my colleague
Paul Szabo, MP for Mississauga
South, who is one of the
most passionate voices on
behalf of family well-being
on the federal level. Can
anyone disagree?
Strong
Families and Strong Nation
Szabo’s 1997 book,
Strong Families Make
a Strong Country, is
devoted to issues relating
to family, children and
marriage. He has been an
active promoter of a number
of measures to promote "family
well-being". We need
more elected people at all
levels with a real commitment
to families; only then we
can find the directions
needed to pursue to assist
them.
Human beings benefit greatly
from being raised in nurturing,
stable and supportive, preferably
two-parent families. Everywhere
in the world we should affirm
the role of the family in
preserving the better interests
of communities. We should
work together – governments,
social advocacy groups,
and academia – to develop
policies that support the
family, rather than contribute
– often unintentionally
– to its breakdown.
Returning to the norms
of the nuclear family may
not appear to be a viable
solution in fast-paced modern
economies and ongoing social
changes and development
of our children must take
priority over all other
social decision. Attempting
The health to reinvent
a better balance between
the needs of children and
youth and those of parents
and adults would, however,
help reduce the destructive
forces threatening family
life.
As we approach the third
millennium, support for
families is weakening in
many lands as a cultural
value; concepts like individualism
and personal autonomy are
growing. The sense of community
seems down in too many places
across Canada. Many authors,
researchers and commentators
on the modern family are
calling for a broad cultural
movement in support of strengthening
families as the core of
society.
The Economist
magazine discussed the "disappearing
family" in Western
countries a few years ago.
"Where marriage is
in terminal decline, most
children are being brought
up by single mothers and
society is falling apart
as a result." This
conclusion, probably somewhat
overdone, summarizes the
problem and defines the
challenges many societies
face.
In too many American
neighbourhoods,
for example, the traditional
family as an institution
appears to have collapsed
completely; in some poor
inner cities in households
with children, fewer than
one in ten has a father
in residence. In Sweden,
about half the babies are
now born to unwed mothers;
half of Swedish marriages
end in divorce and unmarried
partners split up three
times as often as married
ones. Canadians, like others,
have witnessed major changes
in the structure of the
family: increases in divorce
and births outside marriage.
Over the last three decades,
Canada’s divorce rate
has increased more than
fivefold; about 30% of Canadian
children are now born out
of wedlock. Canadian marriage
rates fell almost 40% between
1971 and 1994 – a spectacular
drop by any standards.
State of
Canadian Family
The Angus Reid Group released
a report on the state of
the Canadian family several
years ago. Overall, it found
a strong belief that Canada’s
families are in crisis (63%).
The reasons cited by those
surveyed included the "rate
of divorce and instability
of the family unit"
(28%), "financial difficulties"
(15%), "lack of values
in society" (18%),
"violence and crime"
(13%), and "unemployment"
(12%).
The growth in women’s
participation in the labour
force is the result of both
necessity and preference.
With dual income parents,
a fifth of our children
go home to an empty house
after school. As one Canadian
author on child health notes:
"The bottom line is
that many kids these days
are raising themselves."
Canadians are increasingly
realizing that exchanging
intact family values for
independence and self-expression
exacts a steep price: a
diminished quality of life.
The often-challenging task
of balancing work and family
creates substantial stress
for parents and takes a
toll in diminished family
life and child welfare.
Costs of
Not Caring for Children
The weakening of family
structure has hurt children
generally. Multi-generational
studies in Sweden, Britain
and America all tend to
show that, compared with
their peers of the same
economic level, children
in one-parent families do
less well in school, get
in trouble more often and
have more emotional and
health problems. They are
also more likely to become
single parents themselves.
Another study indicated
a correlation between family
breakdown and increase in
criminal behaviour. Experts
in antisocial behaviour
among young people explain
the increase in youth violence
as a direct consequence
of the destruction of families
and late intervention by
authority figures.
Insufficient parental involvement
in children’s lives
and awareness of their needs
can cause aggressive behaviour
in teens. The past decade
witnessed a dramatic increase
in the number of young female
persons charged with violent
offences. Some sociologists
explain this trend by societal
permissiveness towards aggressive
behaviour in general as
encouraged by commercial
films and television. Dr.
Jalal Shamsie, a University
of Toronto professor and
head of the Institute for
the Study of Antisocial
Behaviour in Youth, observed
that young girls historically
have been aggressive. In
the past, this was demonstrated
mostly through relational
aggression. "What are
we obtaining now",
states Shamsie, "is
that not only are girls
relationally aggressive,
they are showing signs of
physical, overt aggression,
which is characteristic
of boys in the past."
Shamsie sees the increase
of youth violence as a direct
consequence of weakening
family life and late intervention
by authority figures. He
believes that with families
deteriorating continuity
is lost and that instability
in the home leads to aggression
in children.
A recent study by Canada’s
Addiction Research Foundation
examined the link between
family life and smoking,
heavy drinking, drug use,
delinquency, and drinking
and driving. Importantly,
it indicated that the strength
of family relationships
has more impact on child
behaviour than their family’s
structure. "Youth who
feel relationships within
the family are important
and who spend time with
their families, were much
less likely to engage in
drug use and other problem
behaviours", said ARF
scientist .Ed Adlaf. A wise
person told me once that
what our children want and
need most from us is our
time.
Family
Time Famine
The National Longitudinal
Survey indicated that 26%
of all Canadian children
and 41% of those raised
by a single mother experience
one or more emotional, behavioural,
academic and/or social problem.
Dr. Paul Steinhauer a psychiatrist
at the Toronto Hospital
for Sick Children, points
at what he calls "family
time famine" as the
main reason. "Never
before", he says, "in
the sixty years in which
statistics have been kept,
have children spent so few
working hours in the company
of their parents."
One study shows that parents
see their children 10 to
12 fewer working hours a
week than families did 30
years ago. The 1998 studies
by the U.S. Department of
Transportation, the University
of Maryland and Statistics
Canada indicate that we
spend more time commuting
in our cars than interacting
with our kids. Canadian
and American men spend an
average 81 minutes a day
on the road – twice
the amount of time they
evidently spend each day
with their children. Women
are in their cars for a
little more than an hour
a day. Married men with
full-time jobs spend a little
more than six hours a week
on primary childcare. Married
women with full-time jobs
spend over nine hours a
week on primary childcare.
Most jobs are still designed
with a traditional family
structure in perspective.
There is little or no flexibility
in the workplace, especially
in management. The resulting
stress impacts on the mental
health of not only employees
but also on their children.
Some American statistics
indicate that more than
one-third of the children
of executives have psychiatric
or drug-related problems.
Fifteen percent of children
of other employees have
similar problems.
Growing
Up in a Fatherless Society
The observed erosion of
fatherhood as a social role
is often seen as the major
reason for the declining
rate for marriage and the
rising rate for divorce.
The rehabilitation of paternal
influence is viewed by many
commentators on family issues
as one of the important
ways to address key issues
in families.
The absence of fathers
is directly linked to most
social nightmares –
from boys with guns to teen
pregnancies. Social scientists
see a direct relationship
between a father’s
absence and his child’s
likelihood of being a dropout,
jobless, a drug addict,
a suicide victim, mentally
ill or a target of child
sexual abuse. There are
places in the U.S., as a
1995 issue of U.S. News
and World Report described,
where fathers – usually
better at socializing boys
– are so rare that
bedlam engulfs the community.
Teachers, ministers, police
officers and other substitute
authority figures fight
losing battles in these
communities against gang
members to serve as role
models to preteen and teenage
boys It is the direct parental
involvement and influence
that is most effective in
preventing these growing
concerns.
A growing amount of research
indicates that children
raised in families with
fathers grow up to be more
intellectually competent,
socially capable and emotionally
mature than ones raised
without fathers. Those without
fathers tend to display
emotional and behavioural
problems, are more likely
to be suspended from school,
have difficulty getting
along with their peers,
and get into trouble with
the police. A 1996 study
by Statistics Canada revealed
that one in six children
who live in a household
headed by a single mother
have problems ranging from
academic difficulties to
physical aggression. An
earlier study of Ontario
children by Dr. Dan Orford
concluded that 21% of children
in one-parent families had
a psychiatric disorder,
compared to 14% of children
in two-parent ones.
In 1994, in recognition
of the problems of a fatherless
society, U.S. Vice President
Al Gore launched a nationwide
"Father to Father"
program, a non-governmental
initiative to unite men
with one another in the
task of becoming better
fathers. Participating local
communities and agencies
develop their own plans
to expand and enhance existing
father support programs,
create new opportunities
for men to support one another
in groups in their roles
as fathers and rally businesses,
congregations, schools,
and agencies to focus on
the importance of fathers
in children’s lives.
Another U.S. program supporting
fathers is The Teen Father
Program, which encourages
fathers to acknowledge their
paternity, obtain a high
school diploma and become
financially responsible
by establishing a career
path. In the program, fathers
learn to respect their children’s
mothers and interact with
their children. Over 70%
of young fathers who participated
in this program earned diplomas
and 97% are providing support
for their children.
The Divorce
Culture
It is often said that among
the worst calamities in
life divorce is usually
ranked just after the death
of a spouse. Children are
the main victims of divorce
even though in many cases
they are also suffering
in their parent’s unhappy
marriage. Divorce sometimes
offers solutions to adults,
yet it is frequently devastating
for children. One child
psychologist who studied
her clients over a 25-year
period said that fully one-third
of children reported moderate
or severe depression five
years after a divorce. The
hurt may remain hidden for
years. Children of divorce
often grow up wary of love,
marriage and family, and
over a third have little
or no ambition ten years
after their parents split.
The head of a Toronto divorce
support service Rhonda Freeman,
claims that in 25 years
she has yet to meet a child
who has experienced no effects
from divorce.
In Canada, divorce –
a rarity before 1968 –
has become a mainstream,
socially accepted occurrence.
About 30% of Canadian marriages
end in divorce, while in
the U.S. the figure is now
about 44%. An American social
historian, author and critic,
Barbara Dafoe Whitehead,
in her recent book, The
Divorce Culture, dispels
many of the ideas behind
current divorce trends.
Americans have embraced,
she states, the "expressive
divorce" culture, seeing
it as an individual entitlement,
a ticket to personal growth
and a vehicle for social
progress for women and children.
The author, with the support
of extensive research and
30 years of persistently
high divorce rates, finds
this opinion an illusion,
with devastating consequences
for many American children.
Whitehead concludes:
Divorce has indeed hurt
children. It has created
economic insensitivity
and disadvantaged many
children who would not
otherwise be economically
vulnerable. It has led
to more fragile and unstable
family households. It
has caused a mass exodus
of fathers from children’s
households, and all too
often, from their lives.
Helping
Families Help Themselves
Increasingly, family advocates
and social workers in Canada
and abroad concentrate on
devising approaches to preventing
family and marriage breakdown.
Preventing divorce seems
far better than dealing
with its consequences. Community
leaders in many U.S. cities
argue that intervening in
at-risk families is not
just a good idea but a social
necessity. This movement
started in the early 1990s
and involved 50 communities
across that country which
introduced experimental
"pro-active" programs
to reach troubled families
before problems got worse.
In 1997 these programs have
spread to 260 cities in
38 states and formed a national
network called Healthy Families
America.
Marriage programs aimed
at improving relationships
and averting breakdowns
are gaining support in many
communities. In the U.S,
Michael J. McManus, a syndicated
columnist, has become a
great advocate for marriage
enrichment. He has developed
a ‘marriage savers’
program for communities
and churches, which he claims
has already lowered divorce
rates in cities where it
has been taken up.
In Australia, the Howard
Government has demonstrated
that family is a priority
for it. Launching the new
round of funding for 1997,
the Attorney General, Daryl
Williams, reiterated his
government’s commitment
to strengthen and maintain
family relationships through
increased marriage and relationship
education services. The
Australian family support
initiatives include changes
to taxation and greater
flexibility in industrial
relations to support more
flexible and increased employment
opportunities. The government
through its Family Services
Program in the department
of the Attorney General
contracts 44 community-based
organizations to provide
relationship support services
at more than 110 locations
throughout Australia.
One of the more innovative
Australian family services
is assistance to stepfamilies.
It is estimated that about
20% of all families in Australia
are stepfamilies with a
higher incidence concentration
in the outer eastern area
of Melbourne. Research indicates
that partners in these stepfamilies
face a much higher risk
of separation and divorce
than those in a first marriage.
It has been demonstrated
that stepfamilies, like
partners in all families,
can benefit from participating
in quality education services
that develop skills and
understanding to build a
positive, healthy relationship.
In the U.K., innovative
projects aimed at preventing
marriage breakdown and improving
access to marriage support
services have government
approval and financial support.
The Lord Chancellor launched
a Marriage Taskforce in
1995 to identify the availability
of marriage support services,
and how these met the needs
of couples. Funds were made
available for pilot projects
with the potential to reduce
the incidence of marriage
breakdown. In 1997, 13 projects
were selected and began
operation. Those selected
included: marriage preparation
programs, including one
for couples who do not marry
in church; telephone hotlines
and national telephone counselling
services for married couples;
a media campaign on Premier
Radio to change the culture
of marriage and provide
easy access to religious
marriage counsellors and
educators; an African-Caribbean
marriage support helpline;
a drop-in marriage and advice centre; and counselling
service and marriage preparation
and counselling for Asian
communities. The main objectives
are to promote a positive
and realistic image of marriage,
raise public awareness of
marriage support services,
reduce the stigma attached
to seeking help, and to
test the effectiveness of
different forms of intervention
in preventing marital breakdown.
Canadian
Experience
Increasingly, mandatory
parenting and marriage education
appears to be gaining support
across this country. In
Alberta, as in some U.S.
states, parenting courses
are mandatory for all separated
and divorced couples, not
as a punishment but to stress
the importance of the new
challenges in parenting.
In Edmonton, a special six-hour
program teaches parents
seeking divorce how to handle
marital break-up and face
up to the damage done to
children in custody battles.
The program was well received
and 90% of participants
admitted it was very helpful.
Some of the early U.S.
intervention programs indicate
that about 5% of all couples
seeking divorce have found
ways of resolving their
difficulties and have not
proceeded with the divorce.
In Canada, voluntary courses
for divorcing parents are
available but are not yet
very popular. Last December
Paul Szabo introduced in
our House of Commons a Private
Member’s Bill recommending
counselling prior to granting
a divorce. The bill died,
but the issue remains alive
in the Special Joint Committee
of the Senate and the House
of Commons on Child Custody
and Access.
This Committee held hearings
in the spring of 1998 across
Canada and heard stories
of family violence, child
custody and bitter access
battles. In short, the misery
of many children caught
up in post-divorce reality
across Canada was clear.
The Committee has a mandate
to examine and analyze issues
relating to parenting arrangements
after separation and divorce,
and to explore the need
for more child-centered
approach to family law policies
and practices and child-focused
parenting arrangements based
on children’s needs
and best interests. Hopefully,
the input the Committee
is getting from Canadians
is going to result in specific
recommendations that will
lead to legislative changes
that will truly put children’s
interests first during the
painful process of breaking-up
a family.
A number of recent reports
by National Crime Prevention
Council explore the theme
of crime prevention by focussing
on children and their families.
The Council urges intervention
initiatives to view children
in a holistic way. They
support has to be offered
across major areas of influence
in the child’s life
– family, care provider/school,
and peer/community. The
Council states: "This
can be realized by different
levels of government, educational,
social and health agencies,
and community groups working
together to develop an integrated
strategy for crime prevention
that focuses on supporting
children and families."
I met Debbie Morrison of
Edmonton last month. She
is a representative of a
group of Albertans who vigorously
and decisively promote a
strategy to strengthen the
healthy development of Alberta’s
children and youth within
their families and communities.
The group’s proposed
"Ongoing parent education
and support program"
is based on available evidence
indicating that parent education
and support results in positive
changes in families. Ms.
Morrison argues that by
offering ongoing support
to all parents we would
significantly reduce the
number of families experiencing
severe difficulties, thereby
reducing the number of families
requiring intensive interventions.
Indeed, the proven success
of programs focussing on
improving parenting skills
already implemented indicates
effective intentions can
make a difference in the
well-being of the family
as a unit and each of its
members.
"We must focus on
families who are most at
risk today…" commented
Dr. Richard Tremblay, a
recognised University of
Montreal authority on crime
and related issues, "…because
the children in their families
will one day be parents
themselves and will bring
their history to their roles
as mothers or fathers."
The Hawaii Healthy START
Program which offered home
visit, practical support
and education resulted in
significant reductions in
variables associated with
later delinquency Child
abuse decreased by 50 percent;
violent behaviour in children
and adolescents decreased,
and school failure was reduced.
Overall cost savings were
reported to be about $1.600
per month per child.
Canadian programs "Family
S.O.S." of Nova Scotia
and "Mouvement SEM" (Sensibilisition ŕ l’Entance
Meltraiteč) Quebec, targets
parents of young children
at risk and work towards
preservation of families
and the prevention of abuse
and neglect. Permit me to
mention an excellent example
of community-born initiative
that originated in the city
of Edmonton. "Success
by Six" is not a program,
nor service, nor agency.
It is a community wide effort
to ensure that every child
starts Grade 1 ready to
learn. A joint collaboration
among levels of parents,
non-profit agencies, businesses,
police and public health
inspired to action by the
desire to help children.
The programs provided among
others, include parenting
groups and supports, pre-natal
services and pre-school
education to young children
and their families.
As we enter the 21st
century, we can only hope
that our families will adapt
to increasing outside pressures
and successfully face down
forces that tend to break
it apart. Leaders of governments
with family-oriented policies,
as available international
evidence indicates, have
a major role to play in
reducing poverty, unemployment,
violence, divorce and other
negative phenomena threatening
family stability.
Missing
Values
Character and sound values
are best-developed in home
settings; the lack of those
in young people is blamed
often on lack of parental
concern. "The irony
is that we have the best
group of educated parents
in history doing the least
for their own children,"
observed historian, Maris
Vinovskis of the University
of Michigan. The extraordinary
academic achievements of
Asian students are pointed
at, especially the children
of poor and linguistically
disadvantaged boat people
who are "walking away
with fellowships."
Their success is attributed
in part to their culture
of strong family systems
where values like activity,
responsibility and work
are both taught and lived.
Both research and anecdotal
observations indicate that
contemporary youth are less
courteous and increasingly
ruder. The contributing
factors to such behaviour
are usually listed as the
isolating effects of our
computer culture, absent
and stressed-out parents,
and diminishing respect
for authority figures. Parents
and teachers share a responsibility
to socialize children, a
task requiring time, patience
and positive examples. Again,
with a time crunch at home,
parental guidance and structure
is missing.
Ethics
Stone Age?
An American philosopher,
Christina Sommers, charges
that today’s young
people are suffering from
"cognitive moral confusion".
They not only have trouble
distinguishing right from
wrong – which make
them ethically illiterate
– they question whether
such standards even exist.
Dr. Sommers sees a need
for a ‘Great Relearning’
in order to restore young
peoples knowledge and understanding
of moral ideals. She advocates
"moral conservationism"
based on the premise that
we are born into a moral
environment. Just as there
are basic environmental
necessities, including clean
air, safe food, fresh water,
there are basic ethical
necessities like civility,
honesty, consideration,
self-discipline: "We
must make students aware
that there is a standard
of ethical ideals that all
civilizations worthy of
the name have discovered.
We must encourage them to
read the Bible, Aristotle’s
‘Ethics’, Shakespeare’s
"King Lear", the
Koran, and the Analects
of Confucius. When they
read almost any great work,
they will encounter these
basic moral values: integrity,
respect for human life,
self-control, honesty, courage
and self-sacrifice."
No community can allow
its children to remain ethically
illiterate. A primary obligation
of all healthy societies
is to pass along ethical
and cultural traditions
to children. Parents and
educators play a major role
in this generational moral-code
transfer – parents
at home, teachers at schools
and universities.
Families will continue
to change, adopt and respond
to outside pressures, government
policies, economic and social
environments, etc. Ultimately,
the family as the institution
which provides sustenance
and love to its members
will depend on whether it
succeeds to teach and pass
on its values and code of
ethics that made it great
to the next generation.
This is a challenge all
of us might reflect on.
Family
How-To
The June 1998 issue of
Transition – the publication
of the Vanier Institute
of the Family is entitled
"Family Strength: What
makes some families stronger
than others?"
Some answers to this question
are provided in the keynote
article by Ben Schlesinger,
an author and a prefessor
Emeritus of the Faculty
of Scoial Work at the University
of Toronto. Schlesinger
identifies the most important
characteristics strong families
have in common. According
to leading experts on family
issues listed in the article
strong family: communicates
and listens, affirms and
supports one another, spends
time together, teaches a
sense of right and wrong,
respects each family member,
allows children to make
mistakes and face the consequences,
delegates responsibility
and has a shared religious
orientation or a spiritual
direction, to mention just
the most frequently mentioned
ones. Professor Schlesinger
points out that "if
Canadians want to strengthen
our nation’s families,
we will have to do more
to promote the characteristics
and traits of strong families".
The emphasis should be put
on prevention rather than
treatment, equipping families
to deal with that problem
rather than fixing the damage
already done.
With all the outside help
families should be receiving,
the greatest resource of
solving each family’s
problems often lies within
the hearts, minds and homes
of families and individual
family members.
Stephen Covey, the author
of a world-wide best-seller
teaching business people
to be more principled, applied
his concepts to family life
in his most recent book,
"The 7 Habits of Highly
Effective Families".
He says he and his spouse
practised the principles
outlined in his book in
his own family of nine children
and 27 grandchildren.
Covey believes that by
consistently applying the
timeless, universal and
self-evident principles
outlined in "7 Habits"
we can bring about positive
changes in any relationship
or situation. These principles
enable family members to
communicate effectively
about their problems and
resolve them, and ultimately
to create "a beautiful
family culture!" For
Covey, "family itself
is a we experience, a we
mentality. And admittedly,
the movement from ‘me’
to ‘we’ –
from independence to inter-dependence
– is perhaps one of
the most challenging and
difficult aspects of family
life". Against the
background of the priorities
of modern-American culture
that places priority on
individual freedom, immediate
gratification, efficiency,
Covey notes about family
" … there is literally
no road laden with as much
joy and satisfaction as
the road of rich, inter-dependent
family living".
A Commitment
to Children
Last fall, our federal
government launched the
National Children’s
Agenda (NCA) – a comprehensive,
long-term strategy to improve
the well-being of Canada’s
children. The NCA will build
on efforts already underway
by many partners –
federal, provincial and
territorial governments,
community groups, businesses,
volunteers and families
to design initiatives ensuring
that all Canada’s children
have the best possible opportunity
to develop to their full
potential as healthy, successful
and contributing members
of society.
The national agenda will
include among others these
key initiatives: National
Child Benefit system, Learning
Readiness Indicators, expanding
Aboriginal Head Start program
to on-reserve children,
and establishing Centres
of Excellence for Children’s
Well-Being. The Children’s
Agenda signifies a major
commitment on the part of
the government and society
to our children, and as
the near future will show,
it will hopefully bring
a real improvement in the
lives of the most vulnerable
segment of our society.
In March of this year "Out
From the Shadows",
an International Summit
of Sexually Exploited Youth,
in Victoria, British Columbia
took place. Young delegates
with experiences of sexual
exploitation from across
the Americas presented a
declaration and agenda for
action to participating
representatives of governments
and international non-governmental
organizations. A highly
emotional gathering of sharing
painful memories and traumatic
experiences resulted in
hopes and recommendations
that should guide any community’s
effort towards the eradication
of commercial sexual exploitation
of children and youth.
Permit me to quote from
"A Commitment to Children",
a poem read during the conference.
In the most direct and poignant
way this piece sums up the
combined experiences of
children as we move across
the world from country to
country, city to city, home
to home. In my opinion,
the true success of this
and any other conference
on family and children can
be measured by the degree
to which we succeed in translating
this commitment to all our
children into vigorous sustained
effort and specific actions
that will bring a real difference
to the lives of children
everywhere.
A Commitment to Children
We accept responsibility
for children
who put chocolate fingers
everywhere
who like to be tickled
who stomp in puddles and
ruin their new pants
who erase holes in their
math workbooks
who can never find their
shoes.
And we accept responsibility
for those
who stare at photographers
from behind barbed wire
who can’t bound down
the street in a new pair
of
sneakers
who have never counted potatoes
who are born in places we
wouldn’t be caught
dead
who never go to the circus
who live in an x-rated world.
We accept responsibility
for children
who bring us sticky kisses
and fistfuls of dandelions
who sleep with the dog and
bury goldfish
who hug us in a hurry and
forget their lunch money
who cover themselves with
band-aids and sing off key
who slurp their soup.
And we accept responsibility
for those
who have no safe blanket
to drag behind them
who watch their parents
watch them die
who can’t find any
bread to steal
who don’t have any
rooms to clean up
whose pictures aren’t
on anyone’s dresser
whose monsters are real.
We accept responsibility
for children
who spend their allowance
before Tuesday
who throw temper tantrums
in the grocery store and
pick at their food
who like ghost stories
who shove dirty clothes
under the bed and never
rinse the tub
who get visits from the
tooth fairy
who don’t like to be
kissed in front of the car
pool
who squirm in church and
scream in the phone
whose tears sometimes make
us laugh and whose
smiles can make us cry.
And we accept responsibility
for those whose nightmares
come in the daytime
who can never eat anything
who have never seen a dentist
who aren’t spoiled
by anybody
who go to bed hungry and
cry themselves to sleep
who live and move but have
no being.
And we accept responsibility
for children who
want to be carried
and for those we never give
up on
and for those who don’t
ask for a second chance
for those we smother
and for those who will grab
the hand
of anybody kind enough to
offer it.
|
