The Freakonomics Guide to Parenting

I find it constantly amazing how people keep “rediscovering” things that we already knew, or perhaps more importantly, were already communicated to us through the Bible. 

I just finished reading a book called Freakonomics, a well-written and intriguing book that addresses a wide range of topics that are loosely related to each other. The underlying theme of the book is that economics’ study of numbers and trends offer insight into the behaviors and motivations of people, as well as reveal or at least theorize about certain societal issues. 

For instance, one of the most shocking revelations that the authors proffer is that the decline in crime in the 1990s was a result of Roe v. Wade and legalizing abortion, which allowed lower income, single, teenage mothers to avoid bring children into an environs that is conducive to a life of crime. Whereas previously abortions were prohibited and prohibitively expensive, so that only the wealthy could afford them, the new availability and legality reduced prices and stigma (somewhat) to the point where unwed mothers in high school with poor prospects could avoid bringing their sons (mostly) into such a situation. This transpired in the early 70s, which meant that when those aborted babies would have reached the late teenage years/early twenties when most burgeoning criminals began their careers, aka the 90s, those criminals simply weren’t there. Less criminals means less crime. Crime prevention through abortion, a solution that eerily harkens back to the Eugenics movement that led up to WW2 and the Holocaust. 

The authors, however, are not agitating or advocating abortion as crime prevention, merely following the data. This discussion led to the age-old question of nature vs. nurture in the formation of a person’s identity and behavior. And herein lies the issue that I wanted to share my thoughts on. Through demographic studies in California over the last 50 years, a wealth of information was gathered about babies and their mothers, specifically their socioeconomic, educational, etc. background. To make a long story short (TOO LATE!), the authors were able to compare different factors about the children’s development academically (admittedly a limited measurement) and show that parents matter not in what they do, but in who they are.

For example, if a family is in a higher socioeconomic it will lead to better test scores for the child than if the parents are still together. A higher income bracket suggests better educated parents who value and exhibit hard work, and therefore model it overtly or implicitly to their kids. It matters more if the parents are well-educated and have books in the home than if they take the child to museums or spank them. Spanking does not negatively affect test scores; reading to children does not positively affect test scores. A low birth weight does affect test scores years later because what it indicates is that the mother had the birth prematurely or did not have ample and appropriate prenatal care, which suggests that she was either uneducated, poor, or indifferent, if not all three. It is not a great leap in logic to assume that the child’s home life after birth will not significantly improve, which will then negatively affect the test scores. 

Make sense? That’s kind of the idea of the book in a nutshell: taking hard data and seeing where the connections are. Not necessarily that low birth weights cause bad test scores, but the correlation between the two can provide clues as to the common factor, the actual cause.  The point to this section of the book claims that children derive their behavior, work habits, etc from their parents’ lives, not teachings. “Do as I say, not as I do” is a proverb in the converse; it’s basically wrong and most people know it. 

And herein lies the brilliance of the Bible. “The sins of the father are passed down to the third and fourth generations,” the Old Testament states several times. And what that has usually been taken to mean, what I take it to mean, is that the consequences of the sins of the parents reverberate down to their children, shaping their children’s lives and affecting their behavior and decisions. My own thoughts and feelings toward alcohol were inherited from my father, who was deeply affected by his mother, whose personality and behavior was impacted by her drunken and abusive father. Four generations affected by a parent, almost a century of rammifications. And who knows if his father was the same way? Too often sons grow to be their fathers, or else the polar opposite of them; either way, the sons are inextricably affected by who their fathers are. 

As insightful and interesting as their observations have been, the authors of Freakonomics are covering old territory when it comes to understanding human behavior. For all that, their empirical approach lends credence to the proverbs and beliefs that have been passed down through generations. Consider this a recommendation to pick up that book, though everything you’ll ever need to know is to be found in the Bible.

The Upside of Selfishness

I was ruminating in the shower the other day about my freedom. As a single male with adequate financial means and no relationship of a romantic nature, I am unencumbered in the pursuit of my pleasures and entertainment. Is this always a good thing? No, but as I reflected on my friends, most of whom are married and have children, I realized how much freedom I truly have. I can go to a movie anytime I want; I can dine out or drive around town for hours on end. Should my health and weather permit, I can indulge my chief pleasurable activity, golf. Aside from work and a small group I am leading that meets at my apartment, my social calendar has no requirements. I can do anything and go anywhere (within reasonable bounds, of course) that my interest and means allow.

It is not lost on me how undeniably selfish this attitude is. Lest you write me off as hopelessly self-involved, I do care about other people, and seek their company. I willingly endure discomfort or inconvenience for the greater good of fellowship. And I think that I am not unduly selfish with my time. It cannot be denied, though, that I have much freedom. This occurred to me in the context of the unlikely event I should ever procure a wife and family. My life would not be my own, my responsibilities would immeasurably increase, and my freedom would completely vanish. I would have to consult with my wife about any social engagement which I might wish to attend, or when I could choose to arrive or depart from said engagement. I would undoubtedly have to fulfill obligations to her family or friends, to accommodate her wishes and desires as I hope she would accommodate mine. But no longer would I have autonomy over my life. 

And when children come? Pah! Farewell peace and quiet, adieu solitude and freedom. My schedule would fill up with activities geared toward their appetites and activities. The relative freedom of a married couple would diminish to an even greater degree than when I first joined forces with my spouse.

Not, of course, that there wouldn’t be compensations. I have often commented on the desolate loneliness I experience, the devout wish for someone whom I can completely entrust my life and heart, inasmuch as is possible with another human being. And I do cherish a hope one day to hold my son or daughter in my arms. Additionally, the greatest counter to this is the presence of God in my life, who banishes loneliness whenever I am wise enough to turn to Him for comfort and consolation. But this entry is primarily about the lack of freedom such entanglements, blessed though they may prove, would entail. 

As I mused on this subject, it occurred to me to be thankful, therefore, for the season of life in which I find myself. If and when I find a mate and start a life together, then everything will change. I will no longer have the freedom to go and do what I want, to spend my money on things I choose solely because I choose them. The present is a gift, enjoy it while I can, was the message that deluged me as lightly as the droplets from the showerhead. 

And herein lies the lesson. God tells us in His word to live in the present. The past is done and cannot be undone. It has been paid for and put aside; wounds may not fully heal but Christ can provide solace for them. Memories are, well, all in your head. And the future? Anyone’s guess. No good worrying about what might happen, any more than you should worry about whether you can grow a couple inches or change the tenor of your voice. It’s beyond your control, by and large, and again, Father knows best. We walk through this life one step at a time and one day at a time. All we need is strength and grace and love and kindness and patience for one day. And we live each day one hour at a time, one minute at a time, one second at a time, so we really only need grace and mercy and gentleness and self-control for a second at a time. When you look at it that way, it’s not as daunting as when you think about how to live the rest of your life. 

The point of all this is to cherish each moment, each minute, each hour, each day, each week, each month, each year in that order. The present is a gift, because it is Life, and we can live Life with the Life/Truth/Way. In fact, it’s the only way to live Life, capital L, and not trudge your way through life.

One final note: isn’t it amazing how God can take something as egotistical and selfish as my initial musing, and twist it into something good and beneficial? Only God can do that. Just imagine what He can do with your life, if you let Him.