As a result of layoffs and salary cuts, children and adolescents are impacted on various levels. In fact, some babies are not even seeing the light of day at all, as many couples are postponing pregnancy due to their slimmed down bank accounts. According to Melissa Schorr, birth rate

Children are prone to depression and/or substance abuse when exposed to familial changes like job loss or move. The Henry Ford News describes them as often able to "detect signs that something is wrong at home and if left uninformed about their parents' employment or economic status, [they] may become overwhelmed with negative thoughts.” Similarly, as found in “Youth at Risk,” it is hypothesized that adolescents enmeshed in a struggling economy are more at jeopardy for experimenting with drugs and alcohol (compared to usual circumstances). One reason may be that while under extreme financial pressure, parents care most about making ends meet and tend to focus less on the everyday activities and the whereabouts of their sons and daughters. Robin Testerman, the director of Children Center in Surry County, laments, “We are seeing parents having to leave their young [kids] unsupervised because they cannot afford daycare and have little or no family support.” The outcome is that some are finding themselves involved in unfortunate situations. Says Testerman, “kids are exposed to more things like text messaging and the influence of the Internet. Parents are the anti-drug— [children need] positive parental involvement that deters drinking and substance abuse.” And yet, the entirety of the problem is that parental involvement is what lacks during these hard times. Moreover, what makes the situation even direr is when they themselves turn to drugs such as prescription pills to deal with daily tension. If mothers and fathers indulge in substance abuse, their children may soon follow, viewing it as a coping mechanism that is simply acceptable.
Even adolescents that are not as harshly impacted by the economic downturn still must make regrettable adjustments to their futures. Minnpost.com described yesterday how college-bound seniors are coping with the current state of affairs. While one enthusiastic high schooler once aimed for a racially diverse university that would provide him “flavor,” he is now scouring for affordable schools that grant scholarships. Another bright-eyed senior dreamed of attending college in Colorado, where she would “set [her] own trail.” However, with the price of tuition steadily rising, she is going to have to settle for a cheaper in-state school. Evidently then, adults are not the only ones feeling the weight of the financial crisis bear down on them. With parents being able to give less, their children are even more worried than ever about getting jobs at an earlier age and providing for themselves. Is this a good thing? Some advocates (like Anderson Cooper) argue that yes, it is, believing that the economic slump actually presents positive opportunities for children. John Rosemond of the Detroit Free Press candidly wrote last week that we are a generation of consumers not contributors, and perhaps the economy will “force parents to

Essentially the financial crisis we are currently experiencing has a dark and light side, a yin and yang of both positive and negative factors affecting children, depending on the individual situation of each family. Some may thrive under the neo-simplistic nature of current living, while others may bear the brunt of these struggling times. Unfortunately though, the latter situation is probably more realistic given the amount of stress that families are under due to the failing nature of our once glorious economy. While it would be fantastic if all parents could use their withering budgets to get their children to engage in more activities outdoors (rather than purchasing pricy videogames for them), and spending more time as a family unit, this is probably only a possibility for a small minority of the population. The rest of the country will have to hang on tightly until the future starts to look brighter.
Farrah,
ReplyDeleteYour post takes a careful look at a problem that we seem to forget about when talking about the very adult issue of economic duress. It is true, as you say, that the media has focused so entirely on the schizophrenic ups and downs of the stock market, the monthly increases in unemployment rates and the proposed political solutions, that information networks often forget to examine how this crisis has affected our most vulnerable population: children and young adults. You present a very healthy argument for both sides, as we understand how the current situation could prove even more disastrous on a social level or be a sort of golden opportunity for estranged families to reconnect. I would have liked to hear what position you take on this question. I was recently reading an article in a French newspaper that examined how the entire nation’s consuming patterns had changed (presumably for good). Families now spend their money on basic food products that they then make at home instead of more expensive already-prepared items. This would then signal that families are in fact eating more healthily and perhaps spending more time together preparing and sharing a meal, something that had become quite rare in our fast-paced and activity-filled lifestyle. This, I think is not a French phenomenon but a global one. If indeed one parent is staying home because of unemployment and spending more time with his / her children, it may prove to be a time of frugality in spending, but enrichment in the quality of familial relationships that develop. Do you think that this possibility outweighs the dangers of economic instability? You mention drug abuse and suicide throughout your post, and though the latter will no doubt become more prevalent (or perhaps simply, more publicized?) drug abuse is a realitu during times of plenty, too.
I would suggest revising some of your phrasing and grammar, as it makes for some awkward phrasing here and there. In addition, the significant section on how the recession has impacted college-bound seniors, detracts from the argument in my opinion and seems kind of lukewarm in comparison to everything else you are bringing to light. It is no doubt an issue of significance, but I think it would have been better to perhaps address it in a different entry, making this one more focused and coherent.
Farrah, I think this post is extremely well written as has some very well supported arguments. However, I think the fourth paragraph could be tweaked a bit to help it fit more seamlessly into the rest of the post. You start the post out with “On the other side of the spectrum” which implies that college bound teenagers do not fit in with whatever you were writing about before. I think that changing that would help argue your point that the younger generation is also feeling the negative consequences of the economic shift. I would also split that paragraph into two. The first half of it speaks about how teenagers are affected and the second half goes into how children may benefit from learning the value of a dollar. I think these are two separate points and would benefit from further explanation. If you do choose to keep it as one paragraph, I would start with the second half and segue into how children are forced to learn the value of a dollar by limiting their college choices. Another critique I have would be to further explain the “resilient and allowing them to learn to connect and appreciate more” point that you make in the last sentence of the first paragraph. In this case what do “resilient” and “learn to connect” mean? Despite my criticisms, I think the rest of the post was strong and sufficiently supported. I only wish I read more about your thoughts, which seem to have been saved for the very last, brief paragraph.
ReplyDelete