Monday, September 03, 2007
The family and the state
My father, who said many wise and interesting things in his too-short time on this earth, once said that a difference between the left and the right came down to their respective attitudes about the family. Leftists, he said, believed that one purpose of the state was to protect you against the depredations of your family. Conservatives, on the other hand, believed that the family was, or at least ought to be, the last refuge from the encroachment of the state.
Discuss with reference to this story.
6 Comments:
By 
GreenmanTim, at
Mon Sep 03, 09:07:00 PM:
Actually, leftists are more concerned about your family, not the depredations of their own. But also about what the state might do, particularly when they are not the ones in power, or when the regime is a totalitarian one. At least, old school leftists like our Gr-great Aunt Het the suffragist felt that way in the 1930s.
Officialdom, whatever persuasion the ruling party may have, is prone to being officiously asinine.
By 
, at
Tue Sep 04, 01:35:00 PM:
"Discuss with reference to this story."
They used to do the tar & feathers thing in England?? Dang, I always thought that was an American invention.
The things you learn on the Internet!
As far as the article goes, I want to hear the other side. While I appreciate all of the bias used as a form of argument, it was bias just the same.
And as far as discussing what your dad said, the problem is that we're getting the information second-hand filtered by good writing and political ideology. That is, while "the last refuge from the encroachment of the state" looks simply fabulous when written down, is that what he said or meant?
If it was, then, quite frankly, it sounds a little fantastical. The family doesn't provide any 'refuge' against the State, except in regards to emotional support. If a law is passed, then it affects everyone equally, and 'family' has nothing to do with it.
Nor does it particularly provide any refuge or haven in an ideological sense. Your agreeing with your father, politically, was probably an anomaly. (And did you agree with him then...or later?) Most kids, just because of the rebellious nature inside humans, tend to go the opposite direction. Plus there are innumerable familes (like mine) that are split down the middle, with half being Lefties and half being Righties. There's no inherent ideological succor in the family's bosom.
I would also argue his (your?) claim that an ideology can come down to one single point, such as the family, is too constrictive. There are too many issues and too many personal priorities at play. The top of one person's list is "the family", but the next guy is single and could give a damn about "the family", but is seriously concerned about health care or global warming.
It could also be argued that your father's point is dated, and I certainly don't mean that as an insult. It was true that "the family" was at the center of the liberal philosophy years ago, but times change. I don't read any Leftie blogsites, but I'm kept up to speed by the right-wing bloggers and the articles I see on the news sites, and it doesn't seem to me that liberals are talking much about family (which I guess includes abortion) much at all these days.
If I were going to boil it down to one, single point, I'd say it was political power. Hasn't the recent main right-wing meme about the Lefties been that they're willing to sacrifice our nation's security for political power? Bash the Iraq War and get elected!
Sacrificing a nation. It's hard to get more main-pointish than that.
By Buce, at
Tue Sep 04, 07:57:00 PM:
Could not agree more about the importance of the family. Indeed, perhaps like your father, one of the reasons I chose an academic career was that it helped to insulate me from the depredations of the marketplace that do so much to undermine family life. Were I a dictator, Platonic or Stalinist, I would do my best to destroy individual family life to leave the individual naked before my totalitarian power. Of course, I would do the same thing with labor unions. Join me?
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Tue Sep 04, 10:31:00 PM:
I'm with Dr. Mercury. I want to hear the other side of that story. I will acknowledge that child-protective workers can jump the gun, believe myths of their own making, be incompetent, etc. I don't automatically assume they are nice people and correct in their judgment. Many do tend to be over-willing for the state to step in. I traditionally err on the side of wanting children to be raised by natural parents unless the danger is clear.
However...
As a person who has worked in an acute psychiatric setting for 30 years, the following facts jumped out as red flags for me:
She worked for a non-profit named "Borderline."
The author tried to make it appear that Munchausen By Proxy is a thoroughly discredited diagnosis.
Munchausen By Proxy is an unusual diagnosis that would not occur to treating professionals in the normal course of evaluation. Something triggered it.
There is no mention of the child's father and what possible rights or involvement he might have.
Her education, not her stability or productivity, was stressed.
The confidential hearing is described as being "in secret." Confidential hearings are not unusual in mental health, and have their own developed rules for rights-protection.
We are not told anything about why the other two MD's thought she was a risk because they cannot, by law, reveal that info. The reporter neglects this.
She is described as having eating disorders (plural) and self-harm, but her ex-psychiatrist claims there is no evidence of risk. That's simply impossible.
Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! We are clearly not being told the whole story here.
I admit there are many functional BPD's who bring up their children - hmm, if not well, then at least no worse than a lot of other folks. I have an additional bias of having adopted two sons who were physically and emotionally abused by their bio parents. I see only the most intense borderlines, so that greatly affects my perception here. But I have watched the lengthy custody battles unfold after a child has been damaged. I've been doing this for long enough that I have treated some of those children in turn. Maybe this woman does deserve a shot at raising the child.
By , at
Thu Sep 06, 12:58:00 AM:
The liberal left oppose the traditional american family why else do their junky TV shows have such hostilities towards the traditional american families i mean crappy movies like MONKEY TROUBLE and FLY AWAY HOME and HOOT are examples
By , at
Fri Sep 14, 12:20:00 PM:
Late to this party, so not sure if anyone is reading this, but....
Terry Schiavo. Kinda turns that formulation upside down.
