Are we setting our kids up to fail?

[Solopower1]

Do you think young people are more fragile than previous generations?

Apparently, because parents in the last 20 years have been over-protective, young people are more vulnerable. Kids have not learnt how to deal with insults or be excluded, partly because their parents prefer them to spend more time at home on their devices, where they are ‘safe’.

Apparently, young people don't get as many driving licences or have as much sex or get as drunk as we did. They spend more time indoors on social media. They have far more anxiety disorders, mental illness and suicide - up 25% for boys but 70% for girls.

If you do agree that young people are more fragile than they used to be, why do you think this is?
Or is it a good thing that this generation drink and have sex less, and are so caring and protective of each other??

This is a clip that got me thinking about this:

‘The suppression of free speech on college campuses isn’t a new thing, says Jon Haidt, social psychologist at New York University Stern School of Business. In the past, however, it seems to have been guided mostly by the professoriate and administrations rather than the students.

Haidt says student-driven speech suppression is a relatively new phenomenon. … . “The thing people were not expecting, was that the students are the ones who are demanding [political correctness] now,” Haidt says. “Before, it was typically the students who were demanding more freedom.”

This can have a chilling effect on discourse at universities, Haidt says. “At some schools, the men feel they can’t speak and then they go and vote for Trump.” ’

(25 minutes -

Also

'NYU social psychologist and author Jonathan Haidt discuss[es] how good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure,.

(8 minutes)

Well - what do you think? Or are you on a deadline?

The curtailment of free speech has been getting considerable push back, leading to organizations like this:

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education

My teenagers are definitely less adventurous than I was at their age. I think we had excessive social pressure back then to go a bit crazy, and I'm not concerned that it's lessened now.

I'm surprised to see this on MN. I thought it (particularly the free speech issue) was mostly an American thing.

I’m concerned about why being less accepting of insults and exclusion is a bad thing.

I also suspect that suicide rates and similar statistics can be skewed from lack of or incomplete reporting. Suicide especially among males is one of the most common causes of death among men under 40 - so not just very young men.

I think the increase in anxiety and suicide in this generation is cause for concern, and there does seem to be some sort of connection between over-protective parents and over-exposure to social media at a young age and mental health problems later.

I think it's a parent's duty really, to allow their children more freedom as they grow up, but I know how hard it is to gauge when and how much. I gave my own kids a lot of freedom and autonomy, but now I am a grand parent, I have rather lost my nerve ... I have great faith in my children's parenting, but I do wonder if it's OK that my grandchildren are left in the house on their own sometimes, or allowed to come home to an empty house. At the same time, I know that they need to learn how to be responsible.

What do you think?

VanillaBeans, yes, I agree, being less accepting of insults and social exclusion must be a good thing, and it's important to raise awareness of how hurtful things can be. But people also need to be resilient and responsible, don't they?

Has social media been around long enough to confirm a causational effect on mental health in young people? I know there are studies that indicate it messes with reward responses and can leave people feeling envious and empty due to the showcasey and posed nature of it, but has the same thing been shown in young people, definitely?

In terms of parenting, I only have young kids but I use a mix of attachment parenting and independent parenting - it works pretty well so far! Basically, if there is anything wrong I comfort them right away and give them lots of affection, but I expect them to play independently and invent there own games. I can’t comment on your GC being left alone because my kids just aren’t old enough for me to have any experience to say. I’d say I wouldn’t be comfortable with them coming home to an empty house until the youngest was about 14 - how old are they?

In terms of overexposure to social media - despite my first paragraph I absolutely agree it should be Avoided for youngsters personally. I’m not sure what the correlation/relation is between over cautious parenting and over exposure to social media is though - I’d have thought the more cautious you are the less exposure they would have? IDK though.

Are you from the USA OP? I think some issues are more culturally relevant than others. I do from afar agree that toxic masculinity and the pressure of perceptions about masculinity effecting young men and that leading to the kind of ideologies that Trump represents, which is really bad - for everyone.

Hi, VanillaBeans.

The connection between overexposure to social media and over-protective parenting is, afaiu, that parents would rather their children spent time at home, where they know where they are, rather than out interacting face to face with other kids. So the children avoid issues to do with exclusion, and dealing with insults - which, according to the researchers, is why they are so badly equipped to deal with these issues when they get to uni.

I found that a bit confusing, because I always thought that social media were full of dangers, so the over-protective parent would be more likely to limit their children's exposure to them! But these researchers say that boys tend to spend most of their time playing video games, (which, according to them, in spite of the violent scenarios, are group activities and teach them other skills), so they are less harmful than what girls do, which is post something and then wait anxiously for someone to respond. That is why the researchers think the suicide rate for girls is up by 70%! That's a massive increase, isn't it? But I don't know how trustworthy their research is , and I doubt that they can do more than indicate a correlation, rather than a direct cause-effect relationship.

I'm not from the US, but so many things that crop up there float across the pond to us.

“Apparently, young people don't get as many driving licences or have as much sex or get as drunk as we did.”

I’m struggling to believe that. DD is 18 and taking a gap year. Far more of her peers drive than any of mine did when I was her age. Her friends who have gone to university all drink worryingly huge amounts of alcohol. I don’t know about the sex.

I think young people are under far more pressure academically than we were at that age, so maybe this is why they are more “fragile”. I also think that social media has a lot to answer for.

... and about my grandchildren, the nearly-10-year-old has just started being allowed to go home to an empty house, but she is not on her own for long.

LoniceraJaponica, I agree about the alcohol consumption. You always know when the university term has started by the pools of vomit on the pavement ... Also, the students from overseas are astounded at the amount the home students drink. Maybe it's different in the US. I think they have to be 21 to drink over there.

These guys wrote a book called The Coddling of the American Mind which I have just finished, really interesting and may give you more of a background

The only student I know really well is DD's boyfriend, and his alcohol consumption is out of control. He is still drinking like it's freshers week.

Also, the students from overseas are astounded at the amount the home students drink. Maybe it's different in the US. I think they have to be 21 to drink over there.

Correct. It used to be 18 but they upped it decades ago. It's been very effective in reducing drink driving accidents.

My son just started university here in the US and is in a "healthy living" residence hall. No drinking, no illegal drugs, no tobacco use, fairly strictly enforced. That was his choice, by the way.

Teenage pregnancies are down in UK but I'm not sure that necessarily means teenagers aren't having sex. I grew up in Sweden. My contemporaries were at it like rabbits, but teen pregnancies were virtually unheard-of: people used contraception.

As for lack of resilience in younger generation- I'm not sure. Statistics of anxiety and depression are up, but that might just be because young people seek help precisely because they don't want their problems to stand in their way.

My mother and my dd both have anxiety/depression, inherited from my grandfather, has run in the family for generations. My DM spent most of her life as a SAHM, took an undemanding part-time job and never had the career she had dreamt of, because her anxiety just wouldn't let her. My dd got herself to a doctor, got her meds sorted- and is at stage school pursuing her dreams! Now which of the two would you say is displaying resilience?

As a university teacher I spent far more time on pastoral support than I did 30 years ago. But I am also seeing a type of student who would never have made it to university 30 years ago: severely disabled students, students with mental health problems, students with dyslexia or other SEN who have been written off by teachers as stupid and still fought their way to university. Of course they need a bit more support, of course that shows up in the system! But that's because they were resilient enough to get her.

Corythatwas, I think what you have written is very reassuring, and it also chimes much more with my own experience, than the idea that young people have become so worryingly fragile. I think your explanation of the apparent rise in depression and mental illness is very plausible too.

Maybe it is a North American phenomenon then, because the young Chinese people I see every day seem very resilient, and if we're talking about feeling excluded and being insulted, they probably have to deal with that more than a local student.

... So if young people are as tough as they ever were, while also trying to avoid causing offence to others, then I'd say job done! Strong but kind - perfect combination!

However, suppressing free speech, which is what the researchers suggest they are doing, might be a step too far ...

I haven't read the book, but I wonder why Haidt did this particular research.

... and there's still the question of the role of social media in 'coddling' young people's brains.

I don't think for a moment they are suppressing free speech: what they are ime trying to do is to cut down on the number of right-wing hate speakers who tell black students that they are inferior and have no right to be there.

And the same people (Jordan Peterson springs to mind) who shout the loudest about free speech will jump to threats of suing the moment they themselves get a poor review in a newspaper. It's only black students who are snowflakes if they are not prepared to put up with a constant barrage of hate, white lecturers don't even have to put up with ordinary criticism.

Ditto the complaints about lecturers signalling triggers in their lectures. I intend to teach about suicide next year. I will not be cutting out references to painful things, nor do I signal triggers so students can avoid my lectures. I will be signalling triggers so that brave students- who may well have attempted suicide themselves or found family members dead from suicide- can prepare themselves in advance to face my lecture. It's about encouraging tough people to carry on. Which is what I do. Because in every class I have ever taught there have been brave students who have dealt with things I could never even imagine and are still keeping going.

"Probably have to deal with more than a local student"- what does that even mean? I've had students who've come home and found a classmate hanging dead from the ceiling. I've had students with severe physical disabilities. I've had students with bipolar disorder. I've had students in constant, severe, incurable pain. I've had students who have been refugees or who have spent their childhood dealing with a traumatised parent. I've had students balancing their studies with nursing a chronically ill child. I've had students nursing dying parents or partners. And incidentally, I give pastoral care to Chinese students too; they are not immune.

Points taken, Cory!

About the international students having to deal with exclusion and insults - it's not a competition. I just meant that they are also away from home, and some of them have language difficulties and culture/learning shock issues, on top of the sorts of traumas you mention in your last paragraph. They are not immune from those, either, sadly.

I think I was a bit naïve about posting this discussion. You have made me think that there may well be some far-right agenda behind all this: the sort of thing that has people defending hate-speech in the name of free-speech The idea that you have to toughen up young people, because you can't have them all being nice to each other is quite threatening to people who see the world in terms of them and us, maybe.

There is a lot of no platforming that goes on in British universities and I think free speech is an issue. Of course it’s a fine balance. Should you give a holocaust denier a platform? Perhaps not. Should Germaine Greer be no-platformed because some students disagree with her? I think that’s wrong. Students need to be encouraged to question their own point of view and to appraise evidence dispassionately.

You do realise that universities are required by the Govt to report any students "at the risk of radicalisation" (Prevent). Yet at the same time they are supposed to keep control of the Student Union so the students don't refuse to invite any lecturer they may find too radical or distasteful. I've never quite understood how this is supposed to work: do we put pressure on students (how?) to invited radical Islamists and alt-right proponents and then report everybody who turns up?
And btw, as it so happens, Germaine Greer was not no-platformed: she did deliver her lecture in the end.