Interview was prepared by Ivana Gradisnik and Anja Cotic Svetina
One of your main ideas is that children are competent. What do you mean by that?
The fact, that children are competent is actually a very
important discovery done by the American psychoanalyst Daniel N. Stern and his
associates in the eighties, when they studied the early relationship between
mother and child. His findings corresponded
with my own experiences as a family
therapist and I chose the title “Your competent child” because I wanted to
underline that children are not “half-competent” as earlier developmental
psychology had taught us.
What we found was among other things that the
reactions/behavior of children always are meaningful – i.e. the are to be
understood as valid feedback to the adults; That children are born with the
ability to be emphatic and the ability to take responsibility
for their own person. These are the
most interesting competencies as they are completely opposite from what I
learned in my education and as a father 35 years ago. It means that there is good reason to regard upbringing and
education of children as a mutual process
where parents can and must learn along with the child. As the child is learning
about the world, his family and himself the parents are learning about their child
and themselves as human beings. It
also means that raising children is no more a one-way-street, where adults are
doing something to children, but a mutual process
of personal growth and development.
So, children are competent, parents are competent – why do
we then need so much »professional advice«, so many books on parenting,
parenting manuals etc… When one reads through your work one of the thing that
become immediately apparent is that you don't fall into that »method« trap –
giving »cook-book recipes« that are supposed to work for anyone. How come?
I thing there are two reasons. The first is that this new
insight creates a whole new
perspective on children and their personal and social development for which we
have not yet developed a corresponding
adult behavior. The second is that the world and our societies have changed tremendously over the past
generation so that young parents actually are faced with the challenge of
re-inventing not only partnership but also how to raise children with respect for their personal integrity. The fact that children are competent does not mean that they know or are able to do
everything. They still need adult leadership, but a very different kind of
leadership that respects their
individual existence and personal integrity instead of just forcing or
manipulating them into copies of
their parents or to adapt to society as it is.
Children are just as different as “real people” and the ideas
that there are techniques or methods
that works with all children is simply outdated. Family life must be based much
more on dialogue in the future and we must learn to regard also the behavior of
children and adolescents as valuable
feedback instead of as insubordination.
What you are proposing is »the third way« - the way that is
neither autocratic nor so called permissive. How would you describe this
alternative way and why do we need it?
It is actually a lot like the way we now regard the
relationship between men and women. Women might not yet be politically,
socially and economically equal to men but they deserve
(and demand) to be regarded as independent, autonomous human beings. My own
generation was the first to face this enormous challenge and we are still
learning every day.
My term “Equal dignity”, when used about children, does not mean equality in a political sense. It means
that parents (as well as pedagogues and teachers) must regard the emotions, reactions, thoughts and dreams of
children and young people as just as important and valuable to the fellowship
as those of adults and that they should be included .
But contemporary families have been actually trying to base
their family life on democratic principles. Democracy is supposed to be good,
but you say that it just doesn't work in the context of family relations. Why
is democracy in family life not enough or better said not good enough?
The principles of
democracy are very important also within families.
What I have said is that they are not enough to form the basis of values. It has to do with the fact, that adults are and
must be responsible for the quality
of the relationship between adults and children. Children are simple not able
to responsible for that. (This is a
competence they do not have).
Let’s take an example: parents can discuss the plans for the
summer holidays with their children and the decision can be shared or
democratic in nature. But how the family is functioning and how everybody is
feeling during the holidays depends solely on the quality of the parental
leadership.
Or to put it in another way: the wellbeing of each family
member is far too important to vote about. The decision-process in families cannot be based on opinions and attitudes alone. It must include mutual empathy and a desire
to be of value to each others lives.