on abuse

The children in this story may have been removed by child services for reasons beyond their parents' obvious beliefs. Regardless, the media flurry last month likely sparked interest to look into this family.

So now the obvious, albeit tangential question: When does cult affiliation and cultlike behavior become child abuse?

Less obvious and admittedly anecdotally-informed answer: More often than you think.*

This is a gnarly knot for those of us (read: me) of the classical liberal persuasion. At what point does "I don't agree with your parental beliefs/convictions but I'll defend your right to raise your children in the manner you wish" become, "I don't agree with your parental beliefs/convictions but I'll defend your right to abuse your children"? Egad! Yes, I really mean to stipulate that beliefs, in and of themselves, can be a form of child abuse. Irrespective of whether more traditional child abuse is taking place by the parents or while under their care.

Now as my mother drafts an email renouncing having spent 18 years of her life homeschooling me... let's dig into why this is such a tricky minefield for tepid-to-ardent advocates of the harm principle.

When does the collective "we" determine that a parent's convictions are causing immediate or developmental harm to his child? Even with society's many conflicting belief systems, an anemic objective measure is possible. A rigorous standard... well that's the sort of thing that starts wars. And for good reason. Point being, this is a pretty touchy subject.

How does one even decide which set of convictions to use as a benchmark for all others? My tentative answer is "can't be done." At least not without sacrificing huge swaths of individual autonomy. It would, probably, also violate the US Constitution.

And now I arrive at my inevitable conclusion that this is an economic calculation. How much child abuse are we (the people) willing to tolerate to permit a free-thinking heterogeneous country? And how much parental choice are we willing to cede to avoid a brutal one?

My personal (and highly cynical) stance: If every succeeding parental generation screws up their progeny a little less than the preceding parental generation, well that's a pretty good deal. After all, future generations will be wealthier and better able to afford psychotherapy. If I am any indication, they'll need it.

*Unless you think it takes a village to raise a child -- in that case, about as often as you think.

o lost

This is not a political statement nor moral judgment. I assign no villain.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7812885.stm

For you who have witnessed “real” modern war, whether in the Balkans, Middle East, et al., these images must lack the surprise element. You already know. You have lived among death and destruction of this sort.

Over the years, the collective ‘you’ have told me of your experiences. This long minute of filmed deformity peals away my visual imaginations. My fairy-tale picture of horror, gore, wreckage, and carnage loses its reality. And is exchanged for a world of a stone, a leaf, an unfound door.

O lost.

“O waste of loss, in the hot mazes, lost, among the bright stars on this most weary unbright cinder, lost! Remembering speechlessly we seek the great forgotten language, the lost lane-end into heaven, a stone, a leaf, an unfound door. Where? When?

O lost, and by the wind grieved, ghost, come back again.”

old song for a new year

My wish for 2009 is a chance to visit the bonny bonny banks of Loch Lomond.

Smile, its Runrig, circa 1989.