Nature vs nurture and "raised to be that way"

[Elisabet1]

This debate is going around our house big time right now.

 

It started with, my husband is adopted. His adoptive parents are big partiers. There are a lot of divorces and remarriages in the family. No one is terribly bright. Everyone is in business type jobs, of those who have employment. There is a fair amount of money so some just chose to party their way through life, not even completing college. They are the loud, holler it up, heavy partiers complete with drunk driving and lack of accountability. "Everyone does it" and getting offended when we don't join in. There are a lot of affairs too, and like I said, repeat divorces. SO...my husband used to be a partier, but he was always an introvert. So he never got in to the loud out-there stuff. His birth parents were accountants and other close birth relatives were engineers. My husband was very successful in school and he is a very successful software developer with one of the most major software companies. My MIL was always disgusted that my husband and I are quiet and value books over loud music and parties. She has always been angry that DH would not get involved in her heavy partying, calling him rude for not "spending time with family" and such. But this was defined as heavy party times where I was excluded (not that I am interested in partying, but..) and other women would be there for my husband to be with, while I was kept away. Not ok. My husband would refuse to go and MIL would scream at him "I didn't raise you this way" and "this is about family, you need to honor your mother and father and come to our family events." Also, we would not allow them to babysit, because of their lack of good judgement and sobriety. Crazy stuff, but from attending Alanon years ago, seems this distorted thinking can be quite normal is substance abuse. Substance abuse is rampant with them. 

 

So this brought up the whole debate of...did she raise him this way? Or is he taking after his birth parents bit? Well, it is a mix, that is what I said. My husband says it is all nurture. He says they must have raised him this way, or he would not be this way. Except, I say, we know his birth family and they are all introverts. Some go to Mensa and they seem to enjoy spending their time dabbling in the exact sort of things my husband loves. I read a ton on their FB pages about everything from Archaeology to anything else people here would be in to. There is not one engineer or non-business career (of those who have careers) in his entire adoptive family. On the other hand, my husband and I are quite conservative, and shave, where as his birth family is quite liberal, and even the women don't shave apparently. 

 

Then my own family. My mother grew up in a well off family basically (not wealthy like my inlaws) and very well educated. Most people on my side are engineers or scientists, with a couple of accountants, one lawyer, and a doctor thrown in. Doctorates are common on my side, in the sciences, but most pursue research, not medicine. But my own mother was a feminist who wanted nothing to do with me when she had me. She says she knew when she found out she was pregnant with me that she didn't want me, but abortion was illegal. So when I was born, she handed me over to my grandparents. She had moved far away from her parents when she was 17 yrs old for college. When she had me, she said her career was too important to waste time on me. When her career did not make a good excuse, she faked illness. I went back and forth between my grandparents, foster parents, and parents. My grandparents were wonderful people. I lucked out with very nice foster parents and never had to switch foster homes (until I was older, but even then, that was just a second set of foster parents, wonderful people too, I know I was lucky there). I do not feel my grandparents raised my mother to be such a hateful, abusive, parent. I can see how they encouraged the hypochondria because they always ran to her side and gave her everything when she faked her illnesses. But that would not explain her abuse. Her abuse was so bad that even back when courts did not recognize abuse, she was still found in family court to be an abusive parent and an unfit parent. I think it is very possible/likely that she was raised to be self centered. Females as the head of the household and such were common going back in our family (Danish on that side). But I do not think she was raised to be cold hearted and abusive. And the abuse was extreme. 

 

 

 

SOOOOOOOO......to our own children. We have 3 children with autism spectrum disorder. And our 18 yr old has depressive mood disorder, which has already been said to more likely be bipolar disorder but they reserved that judgement for later. But they said likely. Oh, and bipolar disorder runs heavily in my husband's birth family. I suspect my biomom has personality disorder, which is something else my daughter's counselor is suggesting about her. I see a lot of my biomom in her. 

 

My husband says our daughter was raised to be how she is, the running away and mouthing off and nervous break downs. He says we must have spoiled her. I say she is pretty good, except when she is cycling and I have grown to be able to see when a meltdown is coming. And I wonder if there could be a connection between the ASD with the other kids and the bipolar and her issues. I do not think we raised her to flip out and treat us this way. And none of her siblings are like this. I could see signs in her when she was a toddler. Without going in to a bunch of details, there were a lot of issues even in preschool.  But our children are studious, read a lot, and are more interested in chess club than football. My daughter is not a complete mess. She does have her emotional issues, but in between, she does extremely well at work, at school (when she was there), and was well respected by many, including her tons of volunteer work. She also does work very hard at her academics.

 

There are many other examples....my birth sister only wanted her children to be popular. She is pretty extreme. She encouraged them to dress "sexy" as small children and dating by ten years old, complete with heavy makeup and heels. She never wanted them to have books and would openly make fun of my kids for being geeks and tell them the worst thing that could happen is turning out like my children. Now her children are in high school. Both have been kicked out of regular public school for truancy and drug use. They go to alternative school. Neither is willing to do their homework. She had transferred them schools frequently when they were younger, blaming the schools and teachers for mistreating them. She tried to get them out of school work by claiming learning disabilities that the schools all said did not exist. Now they refuse to do their school work, skip school to hang out with boyfriends, and sleep around. To me, this is a clear case of raising them to be that way. I feel like if those same kids had been in a home environment where they were not constantly bombarded with these mixed up ideas and such, and their dad is a pothead at best, for sure. Don't know what else he does. Maybe things would be turning out better for them. Maybe they would be willing to read a book or not skip school. 

 

So what do you think? I say it is nature AND nurture..and wildcards thrown in. But my husband says it is all in how you raise them, barring a few special situations, like Autism (but he seems unwilling to recognize the mood disorder in our daughter).

[Tanaqui]

I think you're not  going to be able to convince your husband. An interesting question to ask might be WHY he believes this, what evidence he has to bring to the table.

[Elisabet1]

I think you're not  going to be able to convince your husband. An interesting question to ask might be WHY he believes this, what evidence he has to bring to the table.

It is because of what his adoptive mother would say. When he would refuse to do things she wanted him to do, she would throw at him "we didn't raise you to be this way" and so eventually, he started coming back with "of course you did, or I wouldn't be this way." It is definitely a defense mechanism. She would go in to explanations anytime she did not like his or his adoptive sister's actions that they act this way because they were adopted and "you never know what you will get when you adopt." Stuff like that. So he is definitely defensive. Maybe he just needs to realize he is BETTER than how they raised him and he rose above it. We are not materialistic people. They see themselves as better because they have more money. But, we do not see them as better (and we are not even competing) because I do not see how being under the influence and cheating on your spouse and having many divorces is a good thing. His YOUNGER sister is getting married for the 4th time today. 

[AimeeM]

Crapshoot?

I have no clue. There is no way to tell which way it will swing and one would drive themselves mad trying to do so. 

My husband was born to uneducated (but wonderful) Italian immigrants. While lovely people, they aren't a high IQ lot (on paper; I personally think they are incredibly intelligent, in ways that matter far more than a paper test could ever indicate); whereas my husband has very high "on paper" IQ, and several degrees. DH was not raised to value education (although he was raised to value hard work, so I guess one could say the two go hand-in-hand, at least these days). Then again, it's obvious my husband's musical talent is nature - his father, despite not having a formal education beyond grade 5, is a self taught musician and has been a successful music shop owner and private music teacher for 60-some odd years; then again, perhaps it was that DH was RAISED in a musical home - who knows if it was "in his blood", or just the environment he was raised in (same token: BIL doesn't have a musical bone in his body, despite being raised in the same home, and having the same bio parents).

See what I mean? 'Round and 'round.

 

 

[Dory]

I refuse to be simply a victim of whatever my upbringing was. That doesn't make any sense. That would mean that humans have no free will, no personality, and no ability to change. We don't live in a bubble either, things outside out home can influence us and teach us. I am not the person my parents raised me to be. I have some things about me that I have carried forward into adulthood. I have some habits deeply ingrained that I will probably carry to my grave, but I have many things that I have purposefully chosen to do differently and some things that I discarded simply because they didn't fit with who I felt I was. In other words, my personality didn't fit perfectly with what my parents raised me to be like.

[Farrar]

I feel like in the examples you're giving, some of the things you're talking about are usually more influenced by nature, such as introversion and depression. Those are traits that are determined in a larger part by genetics, as I understand it. Other things are more influenced by nurture, though by nurture, I don't mean just parental upbringing, I mean by the total environment, such as political views and deciding whether or not to shave. It's already a cloudy, difficult to tease out issue, but I think by tossing all these traits in together that you're making it even cloudier.

[regentrude]

Seeing that introversion/extroversion is a trait that manifests itself often in very young children already, I am pretty certain parents can not raise a child to be an introvert.

A propensity for mental illness is also often genetic and not something parents "did". People do not usually entertain the notion that parenting can be responsible for a physical illness (aside from obvious abuse). Why are parents blamed for causing their child's mental illness?

 

Nurture only goes so far. I think we tend to overestimate the effect our parenting has on our children - as long as it is somewhere in the "normal" spectrum. Abuse and neglect certainly can have severe consequences.

 

ETA: on the topic of substance abuse: being vulnerable to developing substance addiction is a genetic trait.

[gardenmom5]

It is my firm belief, there are three kinds of children. 

 

those that are strong personalities and will turn out reasonably well, even in poor circumstances.  (i.e. your dh - he was taught to party hard, and not respect marital vows - but he doesn't party hard, and he does respect his vows.)

 

those that will be influenced by their nurture - re: coming from a dysfunctional home with very unhealthy patterns.  they will have to activitely work to overcome unhealthy patterns.  there are many who do recognize something isn't right, and work to change their own lives and 'break the pattern'.  and those with healthy families generally following along the family style.

 

and those that will give the very best parents in the world a run for their money.  (dare I say your mother was probably one of these.  you have my condolences.)
 

anyone who thinks it's all nurture hasn't spent enough time with babies and small children.  

the goal for me with nurture - is to help them be the best they can be with who they already are. . . .

 

I know bio-kids from each catagory.  so your dh breaking the dysfunctional pattern in his family isn't *just* beause he's adopted, but it is a reflection on who he is.

 

you have chosen well.

[MistyMountain]

I think they both are important but probably nature more so. I think in extreme forms parenting can have a very negative effect but it can be overcome if there is some positive influence in that child's life. I think some traits are influenced by nature more and some by nurture more. I think conditions introversion, bipolar, adhd, a tendency towards depression and autism etc are influenced by nature more.

 

I even think things like intelligence does have some influence from the environment. Poor kids in general are exposed to less words then kids who are wealthy and that has a multiplying effect. I don't intelligence it is quite set in stone that some people make it out to be.

 

Parenting is definitely not to blame for how kids turn out in all cases. Some parents are good parents but they have challenging kids who do things that are bad despite them being taught good values.

[Storygirl]

My two siblings and I were raised by our biological parents. While growing up, the three of us couldn't have been more different from each other. My brother was rebellious and non-academic; my sister was an athlete who had decent grades; I was rule-following, non-athletic, and studious with excellent grades. Same parenting. Same genetic pool. As adults, my siblings and I share some values and have differing views on other things.

 

My four children are all adopted, so no biological connections. They have very different personalities and respond to our parenting differently, but we are teaching all of them the same values.  I expect that they will not follow the same paths in life, but I hope that they retain the important things I teach them. 

 

Both nature and nurture play a part. I'm not sure you will change your husband's mind, though.

[gardenmom5]

one thing to remember with your dh's family - they are dysfunctional.  as you said - his telling his mother how he turned out is how she raised him is his way of dealing with things.  it is a huge paradigm shift to rebel against unhealthy parenting.  not only must it be recognized, but then you have the waves that come from rocking the boat.  his replies sound like his way to keeping the seas somewhat calm.

[Farrar]

It is my firm belief, there are three kinds of children. 

 

those that are strong personalities and will turn out reasonably well, even in poor circumstances.  (i.e. your dh - he was taught to party hard, and not respect marital vows - but he doesn't party hard, and he does respect his vows.)

 

those that will be influenced by their nurture - re: coming from a dysfunctional home with very unhealthy patterns.  they will have to activitely work to overcome unhealthy patterns.  there are many who do recognize something isn't right, and work to change their own lives and 'break the pattern'.  and those with healthy families generally following along the family style.

 

and those that will give the very best parents in the world a run for their money.  (dare I say your mother was probably one of these.  you have my condolences.)

 

Not so much your final category, but in Quiet, that popular book about introverts, she talked about a number of studies about "dandelion" children - kids who turn out okay (okay not being necessarily doesn't enjoy socializing and parties, but simply able to cope and be reasonably successful in life) no matter what environment they're thrown down into (get it, because you can't keep a dandelion down). And how other children are much more susceptible to nurture.

[justamouse]

they're also finding out that epigenetic has a lot to do what what genetic traits get expressed. 

[Storygirl]

Also, who we are at 18 is not always who we end up being when we are older.

 

My brother, who was rebellious and disrespectful toward our conservative parents and all they stood for, who couldn't wait to graduate and get away from home, and who almost flunked out of high school and did flunk out of college turned into.........a CPA who got straight A's in college; works in the family business with his father, sister, and daughter; is ultra conservative socially and politically; and is a devoted husband, father, and grandfather (at age 47). He still has the same often caustic personality, however.

 

In his case, he turned toward what he had learned from his parents when he was older, even though he rejected it when he was young. In the same way, some children will embrace their parents' teachings when young but go a different way when they are grown.

 

People are complex. We are shaped and influenced by many things.

[PeacefulChaos]

I think it's mostly nature.  'How you were raised' may come into a few things, but even those tend to fade over time, IMO. 

[Slache]

I never knew my father until I was 26 (?). I am EXACTLY like him. We made the same decisions, have the same handwriting, and make the same jokes. We're both strangely comfortable with wild animals and have touched deer. I've pet a coyote and he's pet a wolf. We both traveled the country in our late teens with no money. We hitch hiked and worked for food. We also both got into construction and volunteer a lot. I didn't know any of this about him, and it's definitely not the way I was raised. My mother does not travel, hates animals and would never do anything to help anyone.

 

The only difference between us is that he's an alcoholic and has more body hair. He doesn't drink anymore, which is why I've gotten to know him so well. Every time I see him I realize something else we have in common. It's fascinating.

[albeto.]

Editing my post because I think I misunderstood your question.

[Joanne]

The mental health issues and substance abuse are primarily genetics; no question. You can't raise a brain to have the disease which craves more alcohol/drugs although you can trigger or manifest the disease by making use normalized.

 

Trauma (divorce of parents as a child, abuse, neglect) can make the brain more vulnerable.

[PinkInTheBlue]

I have a story closely related to a fictional story I've heard before. My mother was the youngest of five in an abusive, hateful, drinking, affairs, generally rotten home. Her 4 older siblings have followed that trend passed down and worsening for many generations. I mean my uncle's wife has had an affair with very nearly all of my aunts' husbands. My cousin's wife had an affair with my other cousin so 2 of my aunts share grandchildren. Good grief!

 

Anyway, in different ways at different times all my aunts, uncles, and grown cousins have lamented their life is the way it is because of the life around them.

 

However, when I ask my mother why her life is so completely different and my brother and I are nothing like our cousins, she says it's because of the life that was around her. She moved away very young just to doubly try and be sure we didn't live it.

 

Both groups had the same life growing up but with different decisions but both "blaming" the life they were raised to be.

[Tsuga]

1. Autism has some genetic components. These have been identified. However this is only for some of the most common symptoms of autism, many of which overlap with symptoms of other disorders. Autism may be a syndrome, and it may be a disorder with a unique cause. It's not fully understood. 

 

2. As others have pointed out, there's nature the genetics and there's nature the environment in which we live. We just are nowhere close to understanding the connection between genetics, the environment in which we live (man-made and not man-made, all of which, incidentally, are part of nature, as much as a beaver's dam is part of nature, or a conch shell), and social part of the environment in which we live (family, culture, schools). Nowhere close. We know more about black holes.

 

3. Moreover, some of the behaviors that you are describing are among those that are not expressed by all people on the autism spectrum, and some are even exhibited by people who do not have any disorder, but who only engage in those behaviors in particular. So in her case, it would be impossible to tell if the behavior was learned or inborn even if you knew about autism.

 

4. Most importantly, does it even matter? She's 18 and she needs your help. Who cares if you "made her that way"? Find the best possible counselor and mentor for her and fork out. End of story. Stop worrying about the blame game and start thinking about what your child needs.

 

In addition, I know plenty of normal, healthy adults who ran away as teens. Still others had breakdowns. I myself have never been clinically depressed as an adult and have never exhibited violent behavior but as a teen had depressive episodes that were just light enough that I was able to keep up, even though I wrestled with hopelessness and thoughts that expressed indifference towards my own life. They could have bundled that up with a bunch of other personality traits and called it a diagnosis. In my case, I was functional so that did not happen, and the behavior eventually changed with the environment, the motivations, etc. but particularly with my hormones. I believe that people with mental health issues need help BUT I want to emphasize that not every negative behavior can be attributed to this or that disorder.

 

She's 18. She's a teenager. Her behavior is not okay but it's not a death sentence, either. Some love, compassion and firm boundaries will help her become the best person she can be no matter what.

 

"Everyone is in business type jobs, of those who have employment. There is a fair amount of money so some just chose to party their way through life, not even completing college."

 

This seems very odd to me. Are you outside of the US / Canada? Because where I live, with the behavior you're describing, you'd end up quite soon without much of anything at all. You can't have a business and be stupid and a crackhead. You CAN be someone who is good at making money and smokes pot on the weekend. You CAN have skills that allow you to drop out of college, which is useful for careers which have long training and apprenticeship periods but not so much for business.

 

Not saying I recommend that lifestyle, but that to me is not having a debilitating substance abuse problem. But then, we drink occasionally and I have no problem with legal drugs that are not linked to cancer. We're not super loud but we don't mind being around people who are. So what is this story, anyway? Are we talking low-level royalty or very old money and socialites?

 

Or are you just tossing some business people who wheel and deal under the bus because they spend their fun money on parties and not on going to the opera?

 

 

 

Finally, and I am seriously asking this, what the heck does SHAVING have to do with being liberal, conservative, or anything? Well, don't answer that because that's already getting into politics.

 

Let me just say, on behalf of socialist heathen liberals everywhere, shaving is an extremely unreliable way to identify pinko-commies. I should know, I'm one and I've gone through all sorts of different phases and they haven't kicked me out of a Woody Guthrie sing-along yet!

 

So whatever your issues are with that, there is no need to attribute it to political beliefs. It more likely has to do with preferences that have no business being discussed on a family-friendly message board.

[gardenmom5]

I have a story closely related to a fictional story I've heard before. My mother was the youngest of five in an abusive, hateful, drinking, affairs, generally rotten home. Her 4 older siblings have followed that trend passed down and worsening for many generations. I mean my uncle's wife has had an affair with very nearly all of my aunts' husbands. My cousin's wife had an affair with my other cousin so 2 of my aunts share grandchildren. Good grief!

 

Anyway, in different ways at different times all my aunts, uncles, and grown cousins have lamented their life is the way it is because of the life around them.

 

However, when I ask my mother why her life is so completely different and my brother and I are nothing like our cousins, she says it's because of the life that was around her. She moved away very young just to doubly try and be sure we didn't live it.

 

Both groups had the same life growing up but with different decisions but both "blaming" the life they were raised to be.

 

I have a irl friend who says the reason her father didn't turn out like his parents/siblings (there's a pedophile in there) is because when he was an adult - he took a job on another continent - and stayed there for many years.  when he did return to the states, he lived on the other side of the country.  he wanted to keep his kids away from his family, and it shows.

 

while I think my grandmother would have been happier if she'd stayed near her family - I think it was much healthier for her descendants that she left.  I've had some small amount of contact with my mother's cousins/second cousins . . . oh, my, goodness. . . . I guess it was good I grew up with no extended family.

[AimeeM]

I think it's mostly nature.  'How you were raised' may come into a few things, but even those tend to fade over time, IMO. 

But, then, wouldn't things like "generational poverty" be non-existent (or less a problem than what it is)?

[Tsuga]

But, then, wouldn't things like "generational poverty" be non-existent (or less a problem than what it is)?

 

Generational poverty is often has to do with access to services, linguistic markers and behavioral traits that have nothing to do with whether or not people are making good or bad choices.

 

You can be a great person, but if you're a slave and you talk like a slave, your kids will too. People won't let them in the high-class clubs. They don't have access to the investors who have money to fund a startup company.

 

You won't know how to fill in the forms, you won't take the right tax deductions, I could go on and on.

 

In fact, drug use, just to name one example, is the same between rich and poor, white and all other races.

 

They have done multiple studies confirming this, based on what people report about themselves and what is observed among people in, say, emergency rooms.

 

But it's black people who get arrested, followed by poor people of all races. Gee, I wonder how that could be...

 

That is not generational poverty coming from bad behavior getting passed down. It comes from what is known as institutional racism.

 

Likewise, many first-generation college students (of all racial and ethnic backgrounds) have a very hard time making it through college in spite of high SAT scores and even parental income. They don't know how to work the system. That is not immoral or bad behavior being passed down. It's about not having the keys to success, not knowing that you can talk to the prof about making up a grade, all kinds of things.

 

Mental illness is worst at the very far end of the poverty scale, yes. But leaving aside those who are so unwell they can't even function with medication, it exists at every level in our society. Same with substance abuse.

 

Generational poverty is not about failure of a family to nurture. It's about failure of society to nurture or to provide a fair playing field so that all people have equal access to services.

 

/soapbox

[SKL]

It's both, and there is a lot of margin for error.

 

My mom was born to a criminal, abusive dad and a very negative, abusive mom.  Her dad's dad was also abusive and a criminal.  Not really sure about the other three grandparents but they sound more normal based on family stories I've heard.  My mom was raised by her bio parents so she went through a lot of ugly experiences.  For example, one winter when their dog was having puppies, the dad made the children put them outside and all the puppies died.  She (along with her brothers) was beaten frequently, sexually abused by her father, and emotionally abused by both parents.  Her 3 younger brothers were delinquents.  Two ended up in prison at young ages; the third (middle son) got his head on straight and went on to become a doctor.

 

My mom rose above the yuck (genetic and environmental) that she was born into.  Got married at 17 (no, not pregnant), bought a house at 19, started a business at 23, went to college despite being a high school dropout, held responsible jobs, kept a decent house, raised 6 kids who are all well educated and reasonably behaved.  Did she always carry baggage, yes.  But she was very determined to rise above it.  (My dad had his own baggage due to severe LD and low self-esteem and alcoholism.  But he was a nice guy and gradually rose above his issues with my mom's encouragement.)  As she got older, my mom started to show signs of some mental issues such as depression, agoraphobia, maybe others.  (So have my siblings.)  But never anything close to her parents' behavior.

 

My mom's parents gave their kids both good and bad genes.  Between their parents and extended family and school teachers etc., they experienced both good and bad influences.  The bad presented more in some, the good presented more in the others.

 

I think that in general, genes are more powerful than what a kid sees every day.  However, some traumas can change the trajectory of a child's growth.  Severe abuse, disruptions of parental custody, severe illnesses, seeing horrible things as in war.  But sometimes the effect of those things is to make a person more determined to control outcomes, more afraid of failure, more tenacious in difficult times.  So it can look like they have not been "messed up" even though they have been changed.

 

My kids are adoptees from different birth families.  Since before they could walk, they've been raised by the same parent and done the same things together.  They have very different personalities, strengths, and weaknesses.  Some of these could have been roughly predicted just from the little I know about their birth families.  Other personality traits might be due to adoption trauma.  Some are a complete mystery.  I can't think of too many that were determined by my parenting.  Even the things I try to instill don't work equally on both girls, and some don't seem to work on either.  :p

 

I think "you raised me to be this way" may be a defensive comment meant to shut the parent up and/or avoid uncomfortable introspection.

[DawnM]

Both my mother's and father's sides have addiction......alcohol mostly, but some prescription medication.  Most of the ones who have displayed any forms of addiction are highly educated but have lost jobs due to addiction.

 

I know they all aren't addicted by any means, but it does make me thankful I am adopted.  I can take or leave alcohol (usually have a drink or two of wine at the beach with my girlfriends but don't keep it in the house.)  And I rarely take any medication.

 

 

 

 

[Spryte]

This is my favourite post of the day :)

 

Mine, too!  

[HS Mom in NC]

Life is not a controlled experiment.  Since there is no way to isolate each factor, we have to admit there are no definitive answers. Sorry, there just aren't. This is many more times true in your background with your parents and his background with his parents because both are so dysfunctional.  Anyone taking a hard line one way or the other is just ignoring reality. Both can be an easy way out of personal responsibility for some people looking for an excuse.  It's just as easy to say, "I'm not responsible for my thoughts and actions because I'm a victim of my upbringing." as it is to say, "I'm not responsible for my thoughts and actions because I'm a victim of my genetics." The reality is we don't KNOW.  We may think or guess or suspect, but we don't KNOW.

Keep in mind the history of explanations for behavior.  In the early 20th century many people in the western world were obsessed with genetics as an explanation for outcomes.  At the end of WWII the world wanted to move on to something else.  Skinner was famous for going the other way with behaviorism.  Lots of Baby Boomers were raised with this as the prevailing thought through the mid 20th century.  Now we have the technology to do real brain research, we've mapped the human genome and we have computers that can process tremendous amounts of sophisticated information.  It's all very new from these angles and will take a lot of time to figure these things out.  We just have to say, "We don't know but we're learning more and more every day."

Read The Telltale Brain if brain research in layman's terms interest you.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Tell-Tale-Brain-Neuroscientists-Quest/dp/0393340627/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1414950653&sr=8-1&keywords=telltale+brain

 

There are several chapters in Freakonomics that related to outcomes too.

http://www.amazon.com/Freakonomics-Economist-Explores-Hidden-Everything/dp/0060731338/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1414950572&sr=8-1&keywords=freakonomics

 

 

[Guest]

I have not read replies. It is both. If one side weighs more heavily, it is nature. By nature, I do not mean purely DNA. Things like in utero effects,, some of which may be an effect of the mother's environment (which is nurture by proxy), some of which is not within the mother's control (hormones in pregnancy, exposures in pregnancy, blood flow through placenta, etc.). I believe that a very significant amount of behavior is, in fact, organic in origin. It is already known that brain damage can affect a person's behavior, such that a previously nice person could become surly due to a brain injury or illness. I believe a large amount of difficult behavior is influenced by hormonal disruption, nutrition, environmental exposure (i.e. Air pollution, second-hand smoke), illness and injury. It is not enough to say, for example, that a non-nurturing mother who abandons her child is simply a bitch without her head on straight. There is always more to the story.

 

Genetic tendencies are remarkable things, though, which has been well-documented in studies of identical twins raised apart. Also, adoption in general indicates that environment is not everything and, quite often, it can have a very nominal impact on what an adopted child grows up to become.

 

I do find this a fascinating topic.

[PeacefulChaos]

But, then, wouldn't things like "generational poverty" be non-existent (or less a problem than what it is)?

 

You know, I really don't have a clue.  

 

I guess I think that people can get stuck in what they think is the norm based on what they've 'always done' (the family, I mean). 

My guess is that is more of a personality thing, though - still a nature thing.  Because there are those who won't accept the status quo and instead try to rise above it.  

IMO, most people, when they  really think about it and are really trying to be true to themselves, end up not necessarily caring all that much 'what the family does'.  It's more of an excuse to get by with not doing something than something to live up to.  Sometimes it isn't a bad excuse - like, if all of ___'s family goes to medical school, and they've literally raised ___ his whole life to be a doctor, and everyone expects ___ to be a doctor, ___ may still decide not to be a doctor.  And then the family could get upset because it's what they had planned for ___ and what they raised ___ to be.  I think it's better not to worry about family expectations/ how one was raised - it's much more important and realistic for each person to live their life individually.  Does that make sense?  

 

I would consider genetics to be nature, not nurture.  

[Pronghorn]

I tend to think nature determines your potential, but nurture influences whether or not you reach that potential. We adopted our daughter from an orphanage, and, at the time of adoption, she was very delayed in her motor skills. Given a chance to move freely, she became a good dancer. She also developed many other skills, particularly in music. And she learned to feel secure, to sleep without fear, to handle difficulties mostly without emotional upsets. In many ways, she thinks just like I do. But she will always be more outgoing than her father and I are. And we never turned her into a lover of hiking. So, some things in her home environment just won't take hold because they aren't natural to her, even if they are present in her environment.

 

But I will never think nurture does not matter. I have seen my girl unfold under our nurture, and it has been an amazing experience.

[Guest]

Generational poverty is often has to do with access to services, linguistic markers and behavioral traits that have nothing to do with whether or not people are making good or bad choices.

 

You can be a great person, but if you're a slave and you talk like a slave, your kids will too. People won't let them in the high-class clubs. They don't have access to the investors who have money to fund a startup company.

 

You won't know how to fill in the forms, you won't take the right tax deductions, I could go on and on.

 

In fact, drug use, just to name one example, is the same between rich and poor, white and all other races.

 

They have done multiple studies confirming this, based on what people report about themselves and what is observed among people in, say, emergency rooms.

 

But it's black people who get arrested, followed by poor people of all races. Gee, I wonder how that could be...

 

That is not generational poverty coming from bad behavior getting passed down. It comes from what is known as institutional racism.

 

Likewise, many first-generation college students (of all racial and ethnic backgrounds) have a very hard time making it through college in spite of high SAT scores and even parental income. They don't know how to work the system. That is not immoral or bad behavior being passed down. It's about not having the keys to success, not knowing that you can talk to the prof about making up a grade, all kinds of things.

 

Mental illness is worst at the very far end of the poverty scale, yes. But leaving aside those who are so unwell they can't even function with medication, it exists at every level in our society. Same with substance abuse.

 

Generational poverty is not about failure of a family to nurture. It's about failure of society to nurture or to provide a fair playing field so that all people have equal access to services.

 

/soapbox

I wish I could "like" this post double! I got into an argument with a friend who posted on his blog about how he pulled himself up by his bootstraps and made a good life for himself all by himself. His overall message was, "Everybody can escape a poor past." While I am a big believer in self-direction, his post made me furious! He is blind (and IMO, ungrateful for) the gazillion advantages he has enjoyed in his lifetime. He had intelligent and good-hearted parents and siblings. He enjoyed relatively good health. He had access to nutritious food his whole life. He had medicine when he was sick and dental care when necessary. His parents taught him, implicitly and explicitly, good speaking skills and social behavior, like dressing in clean clothing and pronouncing words correctly. He played on sports teams, had music, movies, literature provided to him. Not to mention the subtle benefits of being a tall, white, male. And on and on [ad infinitum[/i]. He had NO IDEA all the benefits in his favor that made pulling himself out of the proverbial gutter possible.

 

Generational poverty continues because when that's all you know, you don't know what you don't know. In my family growing up (not desperately poor, but very bottom of middle class), there was always the sense that, "those good things are not for us." I was not taught to dream of a day when I could have a college degree, or have a nice house, or a swimming pool, or take a great vacation. Even now, I struggle with feeling undeserving, as if I am not allowed to have something much nicer than my parents ever would have or ever will have.

[Guest]

So I guess my question is this...what can I, as a rather privileged white woman do to rectify this? It is hard from my own biased point of view to differentiate between helping people and yet not wanting them to abuse the system. Does that make sense? I don't want to give a hand out, but a hand up. So how can I do that? How can we level the field? What would be helpful for me to do?

I think a large part of it is in simply recognizing that you do enjoy privilege. Allow yourself to be overwhelmed with gratitude for all the good things you have access to, and which you enjoy. From a standpoint of volunteerism, there are many organizations that are a hand up, not a hand out. Also, realize that when you are helping to meet someone's basic needs, you free up their resources to consider growth and moving beyond getting by, KWIM.

 

Poverty is a complex problem and is never going to be solved in a day, but a large part of helping is realizing that it is NOT a level playing field in which anybody can enjoy the success of anybody else.

[Elisabet1]

So I guess my question is this...what can I, as a rather privileged white woman do to rectify this?  It is hard from my own biased point of view to differentiate between helping people and yet not wanting them to abuse the system.  Does that make sense?  I don't want to give a hand out, but a hand up.  So how can I do that?  How can we level the field?  What would be helpful for me to do?

 

Race should not play a role. My boyfriend in college was biracial-not white. And he came from a wealthy family. I was white and came from poverty. One can be a privileged black person, Hispanic person, Asian person, any race, and can be a poor black person, white person, anything. As a privileged person, of any race, it is good to recognize not everyone, regardless of race, has had the advantages you have had and not expect them to be accordingly. Like, we do not have tons of money and I have a ton of student loans from going through college myself. So some people seem a bit intolerant that I did not simply smack down full pay cash of Texas A&M or UT Austin when my daughter got in. Just recognize you cannot judge someone by their looks, hair color, eye color, etc. And teach your children this too.

[Guest]

Race should not play a role. My boyfriend in college was biracial-not white. And he came from a wealthy family. I was white and came from poverty. One can be a privileged black person, Hispanic person, Asian person, any race, and can be a poor black person, white person, anything. As a privileged person, of any race, it is good to recognize not everyone, regardless of race, has had the advantages you have had and not expect them to be accordingly. Like, we do not have tons of money and I have a ton of student loans from going through college myself. So some people seem a bit intolerant that I did not simply smack down full pay cash of Texas A&M or UT Austin when my daughter got in. Just recognize you cannot judge someone by their looks, hair color, eye color, etc. And teach your children this too.

It shouldn't, but it does. There is "White Privilege" in the US (I can't speak to our Canadian, Australian, or European boardies). Yes, there are privileged people of every race, but Whites have advantages very disproportionately.

[SharonM]

I can see how much my brothers and I are alike physically and emotionally. We have the same sense of humor and like to do a lot of the same activities. 

One of my younger brothers adopted an infant girl, raised her, but she is most definitely not their child. She acts so differently, but has followed her birthmom and bio siblings( we know who they are, she does not). She has really been like them since she was old enough to have/show her personality. She has been nurtured in a household that is fairly quiet and conservative, but is living on and off the street, selling herself for drugs, and living with anyone who would give them to her. She had a daughter and the courts took her away from my niece and my brother adopted her. She is just like my brothers older daughter. even looks like her. Weird.

I think that there is a strong genetic link, that governs how we live, or prefer to live. i.e. introverted not extroverted,  some stuff is learned partying, but not the inclination. I think.

 

[Tsuga]

So I guess my question is this...what can I, as a rather privileged white woman do to rectify this?  It is hard from my own biased point of view to differentiate between helping people and yet not wanting them to abuse the system.  Does that make sense?  I don't want to give a hand out, but a hand up.  So how can I do that?  How can we level the field?  What would be helpful for me to do?

 

Your question makes sense. I think education for most is the key. Mentoring young people, particularly talented young people who are at-risk to give them the language, the tools, the knowledge to get the FAFSA in, to encourage them through the rough spots of college, all kinds of things, is a great help. For me, I work in education and work overtime.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about people abusing the system. I know there's a lot of talk about it, but seriously, it takes an amazing amount of work just to get WIC. Really. They have done tons of work to knock people out of welfare, and many just ended up on the street.

 

But if you're worried, don't worry about education. Sitting down and helping people study is never going to result in them abusing anything because it's very hard work. Most of them will have to walk on an empty stomach to a tutoring center to get to you. They'll need to skip out on their families who want them to sit around and watch the baby,  or endure teasing about thinking they are so smart. I guarantee you, tutoring people and mentoring someone by being a Big Brother or Big Sister carries almost zero risk of causing someone to abuse the system.

 

Moreover, I work in the public sector and I can tell you that there are very, very few programs that do not have onerous requirements on the people receiving them. Those individuals who cheat by double-dipping, as we call it, do exist, but they are few and far between and easy to spot and they do get reported. And it's easy to filter them out. Just provide something in-kind (like tutoring) and non-transferable. Set personal limits, like, set the schedule and if they miss a meeting, you always set a make-up time or no make-up. Boundaries are good for kids who have lived chaotic lives.

 

It's great that you are thinking about this. I really believe that if everyone just did a bit more we could have so much more justice in the world.

 

(Edit to add: I think that this question makes sense because so many non-white people are more likely to see some of the institutional discrimination that can come their way, than white people, just like rural whites are more likely to know what it's like to be treated as a country bumpkin. It's not that anyone here is suggesting that only white people need to participate in social justice! No way--it's all of us.)

[Laura Corin]

Seeing that introversion/extroversion is a trait that manifests itself often in very young children already, I am pretty certain parents can not raise a child to be an introvert.

 

This is my observation too (I have one son of each kind) but I do wonder about country-wide/regional introversion/extraversion scores - they vary quite markedly.  Some of it can be put down to patterns of emigration (it's entirely likely that, for those given the choice, the more extraverted ancestors were more likely to get onto a boat to a new world).  Can overall/family culture moderate these traits?  I suspect that Hobbes would be much more extraverted in a different family.

 

L

[maize]

This is my observation too (I have one son of each kind) but I do wonder about country-wide/regional introversion/extraversion scores - they vary quite markedly.  Some of it can be put down to patterns of emigration (it's entirely likely that, for those given the choice, the more extraverted ancestors were more likely to get onto a boat to a new world).  Can overall/family culture moderate these traits?  I suspect that Hobbes would be much more extraverted in a different family.

 

L

 

I wonder though what definition of introverted/extroverted you are using here. Do you mean that Hobbes might be more socially outgoing if raised in a different family (certainly possible) or that Hobbes might find social interactions less draining/need less solo time to decompress after social time if raised in a different family? My working definition of the introversion would be the latter, and I am not sure family environment would have much impact. I was raised by a very extroverted mother in a large family; my nickname at home was "hermit" because I needed a lot of time alone. My dad was the same way, but if extroversion/introversion were environmental my mom would have had a much larger impact.

[Laura Corin]

I wonder though what definition of introverted/extroverted you are using here. Do you mean that Hobbes might be more socially outgoing if raised in a different family (certainly possible) or that Hobbes might find social interactions less draining/need less solo time to decompress after social time if raised in a different family? My working definition of the introversion would be the latter, and I am not sure family environment would have much impact. I was raised by a very extroverted mother in a large family; my nickname at home was "hermit" because I needed a lot of time alone. My dad was the same way, but if extroversion/introversion were environmental my mom would have had a much larger impact.

 

Mine was the latter definition - the same as yours.  He's the extraverted one in an introverted family.  I think that being in this family has habituated him to needing more downtime than if he was in an on-the-go social family all the time.  I see his need for downtime to regroup increasing over the years.  He didn't seem to need it at all when he was younger - instead the social time used to energise him and he would get 'flat' without it.

 

I have no proof, of course, but I feel as if there has been a gradual personality change.  It's entirely possible that this was always going to be his natural trajectory though.

 

L

[maize]

Mine was the latter definition - the same as yours.  He's the extraverted one in an introverted family.  I think that being in this family has habituated him to needing more downtime than if he was in an on-the-go social family all the time.  I see his need for downtime to regroup increasing over the years.  He didn't seem to need it at all when he was younger - instead the social time used to energise him and he would get 'flat' without it.

 

I have no proof, of course, but I feel as if there has been a gradual personality change.  It's entirely possible that this was always going to be his natural trajectory though.

 

L

 

Perhaps he is more of a balanced or mixed type, though it is interesting that he has changed over time. My mom did comment quite recently about discovering that she now needs down time away from people, when she didn't seem to in the past. My guess in her case is that this is just a natural progression, though it could also be related to actually having a quiet home and a chance to be alone for the first time in many decades--the youngest of her ten children just went off to college this fall!

 

Nature and nurture certainly interact in most facets of people's lives. I find it interesting that my husband, while overall the more extroverted of the two of us, is the more easily overwhelmed by a houseful of noisy kids. He grew up in a family similar in size to my own, but was one of the younger rather than the older children so there was not as much little-kid-chaos for most of his remembered growing up years. Does that play into his lower tolerance level, or is it mostly temperament? Hard to say.

[DawnM]

After reading this thread, I did a few google searches.  There was a (horrible) study done where scientists adopted out twins to different families to study this very phenomena.  What they found out was the the twins were more than just a little alike their entire lives, even without knowing the other one existed.

 

I think there is certainly an element of both.  

 

Nurture certainly in terms of opportunity, motivation, etc.....

 

But nature plays a HUGE roll.  My adoptive parents are nothing like me.  Really.  My personality is so very different.  I realize that can happen in families as well, but typically I hear people say, "Well, Mark isn't like us, but he sure is like Uncle So and So."  They do find some family member trait in there.

 

[gardenmom5]

This is my observation too (I have one son of each kind) but I do wonder about country-wide/regional introversion/extraversion scores - they vary quite markedly.  Some of it can be put down to patterns of emigration (it's entirely likely that, for those given the choice, the more extraverted ancestors were more likely to get onto a boat to a new world).  Can overall/family culture moderate these traits?  I suspect that Hobbes would be much more extraverted in a different family.

 

L

 

and more likely to take a wagon west.  (or a train once the tracks were laid.)

 

[maize]

and more likely to take a wagon west.  (or a train once the tracks were laid.)

 

 

This could explain why my family tend to be of the restless and nomadic sort--long lines of immigrants and pioneers.

[SKL]

I wonder if the opinions of adoptive parents/families will tend to be different from those who are raising their biological kids.

 

I used to think that nurture was more important than I currently think it is (as an adoptive mom).

 

And I'm not saying that to excuse myself for not having perfect kids.  Actually my kids are pretty delightful most of the time, like every other kid.  But there are some traits that I can't imagine ever coming out of my family.  For example, my eldest has always been very interested in appearance / fashion.  It's like her favorite thing - but I'm the exact opposite (see the "frumpy" thread from some months ago).  There are lots of other examples too.  In comparison, my family of origin was somewhat diverse, but within a limited range, and you could always find some fairly close relative to attribute a behavior trait to.

[Elisabet1]

It shouldn't, but it does. There is "White Privilege" in the US (I can't speak to our Canadian, Australian, or European boardies). Yes, there are privileged people of every race, but Whites have advantages very disproportionately.

I have never in my life seen any evidence of white privilege. Never. I have seen plenty of privilege for other races. We all have. If the Romeikes had been anything but white, they would not have been put through years of fighting and all the Hell they went through to come to the US. Back to my biracial boyfriend in college. He was a great guy, but no better than me. He had wealthy parents. But based on race alone, he was given a full ride to Iowa State. I came from poverty and had no legal parents and am still paying off the student loans. His parents bought him a nice car for in college and he took vacations and such, because his college was free, based on his race, so they threw his college money at tons of spending money. I had times where I could not afford to eat. And my own daughter. Same PSAT score.. 216, and her college would have been covered at her top choice school which was Texas A&M. She got in, and in the honors program. And because she was white, she got nothing. Same test score, and black or Hispanic instead, she would have been paid for. So what privilege is that? I think the term "white privilege" is thrown around to try to push an entire race back and make them feel bad about their skin color. It is a racist term.  Also, the black man had the vote before the white woman. The black man had the right to own property before any woman of any race, including the white woman. That is about gender, not race. White, Irish slaves were sold for far less than black slaves. No one even concerns themselves with what was done to them.

[SKL]

I don't deny that white privilege exists.  But I don't buy into the idea that white people should feel guilty or owe a debt because of this.  I think the best thing that can be done for people of all colors is to treat all as equals.  I know many black parents, and those who have high hopes for their kids do not want them to be treated as if they have special needs.  They want them to be treated with dignity.  How much dignity is there in being told they can't succeed without props?

 

My girls are nonwhite and they might qualify for some breaks.  I would not request race-related preferential treatment.  But many people in our community believe in using these "benefits."  Personally I think it is unethical unless the child actually has special needs.

[Tanaqui]

I have never in my life seen any evidence of white privilege.

 

Black teens are 21 times more likely to be shot by the cops than white teens.

 

Black males with no criminal record have as much chance of getting a callback for a job as white males who DO have a criminal record.

 

The mortality rate for black infants is double that of white infants.

 

These are all examples of white privilege - and they're not based on anecdotes, they're based on numbers.

 

If the Romeikes had been anything but white, they would not have been put through years of fighting and all the Hell they went through to come to the US.

 

If they had been Hispanic, fleeing for their lives, they might have been put in inadequate detention centers.

 

And because she was white, she got nothing. Same test score, and black or Hispanic instead, she would have been paid for.

 

 

How do you know? What policy is this that pays for some students and not others?

 

The black man had the right to own property before any woman of any race, including the white woman. That is about gender, not race.

 

 

Having privilege based on race does not mean you necessarily have privilege based on gender. Male privilege is a different thing. It is possible to be advantaged in one way and disadvantaged in another.

 

[SKL]

Black teens are 21 times more likely to be shot by the cops than white teens.

 

 

Really?  21 times?  When I researched figures, there were more white people than black people killed by police.  (Those figures did not break the numbers down by age, though.)

 

That is too complex an issue anyway.  For it to have any weight, you'd have to get into the details of the criminal situations that gave rise to the shootings etc.  You'd have to get into whether black teens are more likely than white teens to get themselves into that kind of situation in the first place, and that would open a whole can of worms, which I'm not suggesting we open.

 

I would agree that cops are probably more trigger happy when black teens are involved vs. white teens, but 21 times more, I really doubt.

[Tanaqui]

When I researched figures, there were more white people than black people killed by police.

 

There are more white people than black people in this country. What, exactly, do you expect?

 

http://www.propublica.org/article/deadly-force-in-black-and-white

 

White teens are killed by cops at a rate of 1.47 per million. Blacks at a rate of 31.17 per million.

 

You'd have to get into whether black teens are more likely than white teens to get themselves into that kind of situation in the first place

 

 

What kinds of situations are you talking about? The sort where they happen to be walking down the street? Shopping at Walmart? (Even if you agree with the claim that he was shoplifting, that's not usually a hanging offense.)

 

But you're right. When talking about widespread trends, quibbling over individual details is about as productive as arguing about skirt lengths when it comes to assault cases.

[Guest]

I have never in my life seen any evidence of white privilege. Never. I have seen plenty of privilege for other races. We all have. If the Romeikes had been anything but white, they would not have been put through years of fighting and all the Hell they went through to come to the US. Back to my biracial boyfriend in college. He was a great guy, but no better than me. He had wealthy parents. But based on race alone, he was given a full ride to Iowa State. I came from poverty and had no legal parents and am still paying off the student loans. His parents bought him a nice car for in college and he took vacations and such, because his college was free, based on his race, so they threw his college money at tons of spending money. I had times where I could not afford to eat. And my own daughter. Same PSAT score.. 216, and her college would have been covered at her top choice school which was Texas A&M. She got in, and in the honors program. And because she was white, she got nothing. Same test score, and black or Hispanic instead, she would have been paid for. So what privilege is that? I think the term "white privilege" is thrown around to try to push an entire race back and make them feel bad about their skin color. It is a racist term. Also, the black man had the vote before the white woman. The black man had the right to own property before any woman of any race, including the white woman. That is about gender, not race. White, Irish slaves were sold for far less than black slaves. No one even concerns themselves with what was done to them.

Respectfully, you don't see it because you aren't looking for it.

 

I am a white woman. I am confident that nobody ever looks at me while I am walking about and suspects I am in this country illegally. I can walk into any shop or store without people wondering if I am a criminal, a drug dealer, up to no good. If I walk into an upscale store, the staff assumes I am there to purchase things, not to steal them, or case the joint. If people make assumptions about my background or heritage based on how I present, they will almost always overestimate positive things about me, such as assuming I have obtained no less than a bachelor's degree.

 

Statistically, there is a shocking discrepancy between average white income and accumulated wealth vs. black income and wealth. A young, black male with no criminal record is less likely to be hired than a white male WITH a criminal record. Black unemployment rates are higher than for whites. Why is this? Are blacks just lazy moochers who won't work? Or is it more often they are shut out from many jobs when they leave a message and their voice indicates they are black?

 

I do not feel bad about being born White, but it is naive to think I have enjoyed NO privileges because I am white. Hell, I am plainly aware that I have enjoyed some privileges because I am slim and reasonably nice-looking.

 

In re: the bolded - you have no facts to assert this. You are merely assuming that your dd would have gotten money if she were a racial minority. Racial minorities are statistically less likely to gain admission, never mind paid for. Once in college, racial minorities are less likely to complete a degree program. Also, as I already said, blacks are less likely to accrue familial wealth. If you have no familial wealth, you are more likely to obtain grants, no matter what race you are.

 

Gender inequality is a whole 'nother subject, but in no way does it make it acceptable that black men were not permitted to vote or own property when white men were just because women of any race were also unfairly treated. The advantage has still belonged to whites of any gender, because if you were a white woman and your husband earned a lucrative living, you could still enjoy the benefits of his freedom and pass that benefit on to your children. If you were a black woman and your husband could not get reasonable work, because he was shut out by his skin color, you have now no wealth to enjoy, no leg-up benefit to pass to your children, AND you can't even go work yourself because of gender discrimination.