Why Chinese Mothers are Superior WSJ 8 Jan 2011

Amy Chua's article, (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html),  has sparked a debate in the Wall Street Journal, as well as in parenting and psychology literature. There is an articulate rebuttal by a Jewish mother http://abcnews.go.com/Health/jewish-author-responds-wsj-chinese-mothering-controversy/story?id=12623592. Parents have a hard job and as this psychologist suggests, : http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/what-the-wild-things-are/201101/chinese-parent-western-parent-superior-parent-have-we-figured-i, a balance between disciplinarians and laissez-faire is necessary for optimal results

As someone who was raised with "Asian values" along what I will call a cultural faultline (Caucasian-caribbean-indian) and lived to tell the tale, the story she tells is pretty accurate (minus the 3 hours of piano a night), but one-sided. The problem with her model is that it is traumatic for children to live with the culture-bashing, allegations of assimilation and berating between parents and parents and children. Is it worth it to yell til you're hoarse just to demonstrate to the world that you can mimic antiquated hallmarks of elitism? I don't think so. And when does telling your daughter "stop eating so much fatty" stop exactly? From my experience it doesn't because those horrible things live on long after they're said and because parents have diffculty distinguishing their grown 22 year old daughter from the 7 year old in their mind, they feel like they can 1. always say those things and 2. get away without consequences from saying those things because of parental immunity. Kids in this environment grow up accepting and not questioning until they are pushed to their limit; living in perpetual fear, irrationally seeking control, and self-flagellating with blame and guilt. This manifests itself in eating disorders, higher suicide rates between the ages of 15-24 (as the rebuttal cites), obsessions with materialism, and an inability to adapt and deal with the chaos  intrinsic to human life. By understanding the cultural differences and deconstructing them, I have overcome this behaviour and have banished the shame and silence it requires to be effective. There are constructive ways to raise children to be determined, thoughtful, self-sufficient confident members of society, and this isn't it. What's more is all that yelling is in vain: the parenting research illustrates that parenting has very little to do with how your child turns out; personality and friends determine that, and forbidding friends, striking down sense of self-worth have the reverse effect (ie. kids go running to the wrong types of people who give them what they can't get at home). Secondly, in order to curb adolescent rebellion and inspire self-sufficiency, we need to give children a meaningful stake in contributing to society.

Also striking to me is her willing stereotypical bifurcation of cultures, although she tries to smooth it out by combining Asian values with Indian, Caribbean and irish values. But these mothers exist in all races, in all cultures in all eras and I think she sets up a straw man argument that is easily dismantled with ethnography and longitudinal surveys.

Finally, I think parents should be aware of the assault scheme in Canadian criminal law if they are going to use some of the tactics advocated by Ms. Chua. Section 265 of the Criminal Code states:

265. (1) A person commits an assault when

(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;

(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or

(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.

Application

(2) This section applies to all forms of assault, including sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm and aggravated sexual assault.

Consent

(3) For the purposes of this section, no consent is obtained where the complainant submits or does not resist by reason of

(a) the application of force to the complainant or to a person other than the complainant;

(b) threats or fear of the application of force to the complainant or to a person other than the complainant;

(c) fraud; or

(d) the exercise of authority.

Accused's belief as to consent

(4) Where an accused alleges that he believed that the complainant consented to the conduct that is the subject-matter of the charge, a judge, if satisfied that there is sufficient evidence and that, if believed by the jury, the evidence would constitute a defence, shall instruct the jury, when reviewing all the evidence relating to the determination of the honesty of the accused's belief, to consider the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for that belief.

Appealing to parental authority is not a defence, as evidenced by subsection 3(d). Furthermore, parents should also keep the principles outlined by the Supreme Court in Canadian Foundation for Children, youth and The Law v. Canada in mind when punishing children. Punishment or parental strongarming must be corrective but reasonable and not be "outbursts of violence motivated by anger or animated by frustration" and must be the "education or discipline of the child". The child must be able to benefit from the application of force; if incapable of doing so, the application of force is void. Any force, verbal or physical, must be reasonable. Parents can also be sued for battery and negligence for tortious conduct in childrearing. Parents should and must be accountable for the choices they make in raising their children and I disagree with the parental immunity Chau implies and supports.  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 37 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child  "requires state parties to ensure that '[n]o chld shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." These are important limits and guidelines for parents to remember as they impose their own limits and guidelines on their children.

Re-engineering how we manage the swine flu pandemic

As the swine flu pandemic descends upon the province of Ontario, officials and health practitioners are scrambling to vaccinate and advertise prevention strategies. Flu pandemics appear to be increasing in frequency and the more information that is available, the better. However, I believe there are a few structural changes that need to be made that greatly affect human behaviour and, consequently, the spreading of contagious disease. I make these recommendations not as an epidemiologist, or an architect or even a social anthropologist. I am a legal anthropologist. I am interested in how people react to new policies, how they understand and navigate contracts and how they respond to new legislated forms of control and power.

Since the bubonic plague, public health has been a justification to exert social control and invasive yet performative surveillance methods (Hörnqvist 2004; Elden 2003). Public health is a utilitarian approach to reconfiguring social bonds: it undermines the individualist bases of risk and harm that underpin western society by instilling peer pressure or a sense of responsibility to one's larger community. It justifies, to a certain degree, compromising personal liberties to protect the whole: we see this in campaigns encouraging hand washing, condom usage, compulsory vaccinations, regular STD testing. These are not bad things - merely behaviour modifications that result in better quality of life and lower mortality rates. In the age of large scale rapid migration in small confined spaces, like airplanes, it is time to think beyond just the development of chemicals and products and examine how germs and the people that carry them interact in space.

From the grocery store, to the lobby of the building I work in, to every bathroom I visit, there are signs posted about proper hand washing. This is good, but it is not the whole story. Entire departments are drawing up Swine Flu policy strategies about how to handle absenteeism. How many of them are changing the taps in the washroom to motion censors to avoid people touching them with clean or dirty hands? Anything that requires a switch should be changed to motion-detection systems to avoid hand-germ-surface contact: lights, doors. What good is it to wash one's hands, if one still has to touch the swinging door handle? I recommend replacing doors with open, maze-like entrances that are still private but avoid hand-germ-surface contact that is easily spread. And what about doors to cars, steering wheels and homes? We need to innovate new solutions that is not only about changing human behaviour, but minimizing its impact. This image, from Information is Beautiful blog is an effective visual tool for understanding disease control. This shows the fatality rate associated with infectious disease and the maximum survival rates outside of the body (how long they can be infectious). As you can see, swine flu is low on the scale. If I understand this correctly, this means that there are few fatalities and that the disease has a short span of survival outside of the body.

I mentioned earlier that hand sanitizer is proliferating everywhere I go. Most people don't know how to use it. Again, here we see the asymmetrical distribution of information: we are told hand sanitizer that is alcohol based can protect us by killing germs on our hands, but we are not instructed as to how or why it works. When using hand sanitizer, the rubbing action loosens bacteria on our fingers. Allowing the alcohol to evaporate is what kills the bacteria, though, so taking the time to allow your hands to dry is the only way to kill the bacteria properly. We are also told that hand washing will kill bacteria and to avoid anti-bacterial soaps because of adaptive capabilities of bacteria. We are not told that we need to wash our hands in running water with regular soap for at least 30 seconds and to rub our hands vigorously to wash bacteria and dirt out of wrinkles, nooks, or folds - or the worst source - under our nails. Knowledge to change behaviour is only effective if it is complete. It is not enough to tell people to use hand sanitizer or wash their hands.

Voice-over technology has also advanced rapidly and should be considered a major ally in combating the spread of germs in the workplace especially. Assigning individual, unshared, headsets and having to speak, rather than type, at computers would also minimize hand-germ-surface contact. I share a keyboard at work presently because I work shifts. Voice-over technology would be a great way to protect myself and my colleagues from spreading disease.

Air quality and air transfer is another area that needs addressing. I read an article a few years ago that said air quality has deteriorated on airplanes since smoking was prohibited (for an example and larger discussion, see Hocking and Foster (2004)). I get sick every time I fly. The lack of sleep, confined space, the high passenger-bathroom ratio and lack of fresh air are definitely contributing factors that facilitate airborne germs. Removing carpet on airplanes and having pressurized doors on bathrooms would be a good way of minimizing bacteria growth and transfer. We also hear that hospitals are full of air borne or surface-borne bacteria. I haven't found any information about changes to hospital ventilation architecture or even altogether redesigning first response delivery (people who enter clinics or emergency rooms with virus symptoms) sharing the same building as women giving birth or people having heart transplants. Part of fixing the health care system is addressing how architecture organizes mechanisms of triage in order to prevent vulnerable patients and care-workers from infection.

Social pressure, as I mentioned before, makes public health work effectively. People are full of advice and admonishments, and while they may not like being on the receiving end, they certainly don't hesitate to pass it on. How many of us haven't glared at the person who didn't wash their hands when they left the bathroom? We need people to be better informed about which germs spread which way in order to better protect themselves and minimize the spread of disease which takes a toll on the health care system. Part of this is changing popular perceptions about what is acceptable behaviour. My parents used to scold my brother and me if we coughed into our shirt. Now, this is the practice health practitioners are recommending to stem the spread of the flu, rather than coughing into one's hands. We are also a culture that is used to shaking hands or kissing to greet each other. These are socially difficult or awkward behaviours to change or relinquish, but it is much appreciated when I hear someone decline a physical greeting due to illness. The more we take responsibility for ourselves and our behaviour, the better off everyone will be.

Lastly, we need to reassess our economies of risk as well as how personal risk affects our economy. What I mean by this is that people weigh their choices. Risk compensation is one problem when we are talking about health care and infectious disease: people will engage in more risky behaviour if they perceive they have taken "adequate" precautions. If people think hand sanitizer is more effective, they may be more likely to not wash their hands. If these "adequate" precautions are based on misinformation, then we have people taking higher risks with little or no real precautions, which can definitely lead to widespread infection.

How does the flu pandemic affect our economy? This is an easy question to answer: it comes down to the numbers. The Economist (30 April 2009) cites costs to the Mexican economy at $55 billion a day because of cancelled schools, sporting events and decreased consumer sales. According to research by the WHO in 1999, a pandemic affecting 15-35% of the population would cost $71 billion and $166 billion. In 2006, Warwick McKibbin and Alexandra Sidorenko found in a study for the Lowy Institute for International Policy in Sydney that even a mild pandemic could shave 0.8% off world GDP (The Economist , 30 April 2009). This is a lot for an already faltering global economy. If we compare this to the costs of vaccines, resources (like body bags, hand sanitizer, coffins), we need to realize that encouraging people to take a few days off work will be better in the long run because they will not spread the flu. In order to do so, we need better compensation packages for people who work, especially in jobs where there are no benefits available. I suggest a tax rebate for businesses that continue to pay their workers when they are off sick due during an officially recognized pandemic. The system goes into effect from the day the public officer of health issues advisories. Short term costs of paying people will mean overall long term productivity. People need to stay home and rest, for the sake of public health and a recovering economy. Earlier, I made recommendations about changing the architecture and tools in a workspace. This sounds expensive. The fact is that it will save money in the long run because it will minimize the spread of disease.

Managing the flu pandemic is difficult and expensive. There are some costs that cost more in the short run, but deliver stability and growth in the long run. These are the changes we need invest in, and they can only be done with complete knowledge and a reconfiguring of how germs and people interact in space.

References:

Magnus Hörnqvist (2004). "The birth of public order policy." Race & Class. 46(1). pp. 30-52.

Stuart Elden (2003). "Plague, Panopticon & Police." Surveillance & Society. 1(3). pp. 240-253.

Martin B. Hocking, Diana Hocking (eds). Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces. Berlin: Springer, 2005.

Martin B. Hocking and Harold D. Foster. (2004). "Common cold transmission in commercial aircraft: Industry and passenger implications. " Journal of Environmental Health Research. 3(1).

Further Reading about Medical Anthropology:

Didier Fassin. (2001). "Quand le corps fait loi: la raison humanitaire dans les procédures de régularisation des étrangers." Sciences sociales et sante. 19(4).

JP Dozon et Didier Fassin. Critique de la sante publique: une approche anthropologique. Balland, 2001.

Didier Fassin. (2005) "Compassion and Repression: The moral economy of immigration policies in France." Cultural Anthropology. pp. 362-387.

Miriam Ticktin. (Feb. 2006). "Where ethics and politics meet: The violence of humanitarianism in France." American Ethnologist in France. 33(1). pp. 33-49.

Margaret Lock and Nancy Scheper-Hughes, (1996). "A Critical-Interpretive Approach in Medical Anthropology: Rituals and Routines of Discipline and Dissent." in C.F. Sargent and T.M. Johnson (Ed.), Medical Anthropology Contemporary Theory and Method: pp. 41-70. (Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.), 1996.

Image: colorized negative stained transmission electron micrograph (TEM) depicted some of the ultrastructural morphology of the A/CA/4/09 swine flu virus, Photo Credit: C.S. Goldsmith and A. Balish, CDC. Source:

http://www.cdc.gov/media/subtopic/library/diseases.htm

via Wikimedia Commons, images, "flu virus." (Accessed 27Sept09)