Comments on: Honest Teen Paternalism

By: John

John — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:32:12 +0000

I think Paul Graham had a good explanation for why parents’ advice tends to err on the side of safety:

>All parents tend to be more conservative for their kids than they would for themselves, simply because, as parents, they share risks more than rewards. If your eight year old son decides to climb a tall tree, or your teenage daughter decides to date the local bad boy, you won’t get a share in the excitement, but if your son falls, or your daughter gets pregnant, you’ll have to deal with the consequences.

http://www.paulgraham.com/love.html

By: paternal

paternal — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:00:26 +0000

Honest Teen Paternalism

Bookmarked your post over at Blog Bookmarker.com!

By: Ben Jones

Ben Jones — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 18:58:53 +0000

My thrust was simpler than a few people seem to make it out. I see no reason to make the assumption that adults know better than adolescents, particularly when a value judgment comes in.

Robin – I’m saying the exact opposite. When it comes to judging risk against something as subjective as pleasure, there is no right or wrong. There’s what you do and what you don’t do. By all means educate kids on the risks, just don’t presume to have any divine adult-authority. This isn’t just theoretical, this is good practice in trying to educate young people to do things. Anyone ever tried telling a kid not to do something? “I know better, because I use a different part of my brain to you. And I say wait till you’re married!” Good luck with that one….

Be rational, explain the risks, and if you’ve done your job properly, I think most people would be surprised at how rational (most) teens actually are – see the original post by Robin for some evidence! There are as many stupid, irresponsible adults as there are stupid, irresponsible kids. The only difference is that the latter don’t seek election to office.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:46:47 +0000

Paul Crowley, an emotive argument need not be constraining or dishonest. Even as they seek increased independence, many teenagers are quite loyal and respectful to their elders and superiors: if one understands that excessively risky behavior may cause emotional distress to one’s parents, it’s quite admissible to take this into account.

By: Paul Crowley

Paul Crowley — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 12:34:10 +0000

James Bach: I would much rather have kids who were able to make a sober assessment of risks and rewards than ones constrained by nakedly emotive arguments. Not least because it would be very sad for them to miss out on the rewards of drinking and doing drugs.

By: Maggie's Farm

Maggie's Farm — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 10:59:15 +0000

New Years Day Links

From last January, The Hybridization of America by Vanderleun George Will loves McDonald’sDon’t let the bedbugs bite.Record industry goes after personal use of music. Lots of iPods out there with lots of music on them.Do Dems desire failure in Iraq?Betsy,

By: Dr. Zeuss

Dr. Zeuss — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:56:55 +0000

Many commenters (not Robin in the post) are assuming that teens take too much risk.

There is no good reason to believe this.

By: mako

mako — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:34:20 +0000

Your post was insightful and interesting. Please don’t feel the need to spoil it with just-so conjecture about the evolutionary basis of these behavioral traits. It might be true, but it might not. It’s going to be extremely hard to prove this either way and I don’t think that this speculation adds much.

By: jack lecou

jack lecou — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:29:24 +0000

All I see are estimates of the odds, not the costs. Young people are, more or less by definition, lacking in all sorts of life experiences, both painful and pleasurable. That makes it pretty difficult to really get a handle on the personal costs and benefits of actions.

It’s all very well to say that a teenager thinks the chances of getting pregnant from unprotected sex are, say, 50-50 (greater than 1/12). But do you really think most are capable of forming any kind of accurate intuition about what that pregnancy would really mean? All the potential hardships and heartbreaks and joys? I couldn’t have. And the odds are pretty meaningless without it.

Insofar as consequences are seriously considered, the complexity and distance of it all tend to wash everything out, so it’s often easy to end up on, “oh, f— it, let’s have fun.”

All of which is to say that continuing attempts to educate teens about the actual consequences of things, as opposed to just the numerical odds, is at least somewhat helpful, not entirely “dishonestly paternal”.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 22:11:17 +0000

Remember how it was to be adolesent : fun is here, now, immediate, and intense. Risk is abstract, remote, elsewhere. The NYT authors, Reyna and co-workers, make this point strongly in this paper :
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/pspi7_1_7-16.pdf
The bias is not related to estimating probabilities, it’s timescale related. Adolescents live in the present.