• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bedtime reading could disadvantage other children, academic says

X Factor

Anti-Socialist
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
61,606
Reaction score
32,215
Location
El Paso Strong
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Read more at Bedtime reading could disadvantage other children, academic says - 9news.com.au

An ABC Radio National program about whether “Having a loving family is an unfair advantage” has questioned whether bedtime reading is causing an uneven playing field for more unfortunate children.

British academic Adam Swift told ABC presenter Joe Gelonesi the benefits of the time-honoured custom were greater than a private school education.

“Evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,” Mr Swift said.

According to Mr Swift, the “devilish twist” was whether bedtime stories should be restricted.


Uhm, what do you think? Is "unfairly" advantaging their children something parents should even concern themselves with or feel bad about? According to the article, it is.
 
Last edited:
little house on the prairie

the world of pern

anne mccaffrey and laura ingalls wilder.....great stories to grow up with

two mega collections of stories i read to my kids.....

with the hours i worked.....that was my time that i carved out.....

wouldnt have missed it for anything.....and if that gave my kids an advantage.....good

i can feel sorry for the others, but i am responsible for mine
 
Welcome to the age of the internet, where in 4 day's time a discussion about Plato turns into FUD.

Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?

"Plato famously wanted to abolish the family and put children into care of the state. Some still think the traditional family has a lot to answer for, but some plausible arguments remain in favour of it. Joe Gelonesi meets a philosopher with a rescue plan very much in tune with the times."

Is having a loving family an unfair advantage? - The Philosopher's Zone - ABC Radio National (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
 
Welcome to the age of the internet, where in 4 day's time a discussion about Plato turns into FUD.

How did I engage in "fear mongeing"?
 
What is that really from? The Onion?
 
“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.

Really?!

We now should consider how our good parenting actions might give our kids an advantage in life while other kids don't have that advantage? We're supposed to feel guilty about that? Maybe we should feel guilty about feeding our children healthy meals and providing them with warm, functional clothing too.
 
What is that really from? The Onion?

My first thought as well. It's legit as far as I can tell, but to be clear, nobody has advocated it be "restricted" or outlawed or anything. It's just an odd premise. I thought parents usually want their children to have an advantage and that that was regarded as normal.
 
Read more at Bedtime reading could disadvantage other children, academic says - 9news.com.au

Uhm, what do you think? Is "unfairly" advantaging their children something parents should even concern themselves with or feel bad about? According to the article, it is.

This story made my head hurt. I don't see that he was seriously suggesting that bedtime reading be discouraged, but at the same time I think that framing the story in that way to "get attention" was seriously irresponsible and boneheaded.

And even it it does seriously disadvantage those who don't get read to, so what? Stop it, already! Stop trying to drag everybody down to the lowest common denominator. Geez!
 
Really?!

We now should consider how our good parenting actions might give our kids an advantage in life while other kids don't have that advantage? We're supposed to feel guilty about that? Maybe we should feel guilty about feeding our children healthy meals and providing them with warm, functional clothing too.

This was a Brit saying this. Take a look at the welfare state they have going on and this message fits right in.

Then again, it could be the old reverse psychology trick, trying to get more parents to read with their kids. Inspire them through competition.
 
Utter nonsense. nuff said.
 
How did I engage in "fear mongeing"?
Not you, your website source. The news source that's trying to pass off the idea that its competitor (ABC Radio National) is trying to ban bedtime stories.
 
Read more at Bedtime reading could disadvantage other children, academic says - 9news.com.au




Uhm, what do you think? Is "unfairly" advantaging their children something parents should even concern themselves with or feel bad about? According to the article, it is.

One can argue it is unfair.

That is the parent's job. To give his child the best goddamn competitive advantage in the world.

Sucks to suck (whether intentional or not). Now does that mean it's impossible without bedtime stories? No, otherwise my dad would still be in the Ecuadorian slums.
 
Not you, your website source. The news source that's trying to pass off the idea that its competitor (ABC Radio National) is trying to ban bedtime stories.

Ah, understood, and this indeed ripe for blowing out of proportion. I think there's plenty to criticize what the guy actually said without embellishing it to mean that Liberals Want to Ban Reading to Your Kids as will no doubt eventually be suggested.
 
This is a really good idea, there should be regulations to prevent affluent parents from reading to their children or giving them extra books. We could tax them and make it mandatory to have a book pool where whenever they get a book to read they have a week and then it must be put into the community pool for more disadvantaged children to have access. Noncompliance would be met with stiff fines and jail time for repeat non poolers. To enforce compliance we could have RFID tags inserted into each children's book by taxing the upper income brackets and also pay for phones for poor parents to facilitate book pool information.
 
Technically speaking, yes, it is an unfair advantage. There is no fairness when it comes to what family you were born into.

But it would be idiotic to translate that into saying parents shouldn't read to their kids.

It also isn't fair that even the poorest children in the US have access to food when children in other countries do not. Does that mean we should starve our kids?
 
The writer of the article likely couched it this way to attract people to read the article, and not just the headline.

Some parents do try to keep their kids from being the front dog though. I know of people who have done it intentionally hoping to qualify their child for free preschool slots that are based on being slow for their age and I have heard parents express concern that if their child is too smart going into the school system, they will be bored and stop trying to learn because the teachers will be focused on teaching the dumber kids.
 
Read more at Bedtime reading could disadvantage other children, academic says - 9news.com.au




Uhm, what do you think? Is "unfairly" advantaging their children something parents should even concern themselves with or feel bad about? According to the article, it is.

"Concerned with"? Of course we should. We should be concerned that we give our kids every single advantage possible to have the best life possible.
"Feel bad about"?? Only if we don't do it.

Lowering the bar helps NO ONE. We need to be raising expectations, expecting more and doing everything we possibly can to see the next generation rise to the level of it's best and brightest, not accepting that simply meeting level of it's worst is acceptable.

From article:
Professor Frank Oberklaid, from the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, told the newspaper he was “bewildered” by the idea of bedtime reading disadvantaging others.

“It’s one of the more bizarre things I’ve heard,” he said. “We should be bringing all kids up to the next level.”
 
And even it it does seriously disadvantage those who don't get read to, so what? Stop it, already! Stop trying to drag everybody down to the lowest common denominator. Geez!
In philosophy you can use your imagination!

Try John Rawl's veil of ignorance. Imagine before you're born you don't know anything about who you'll be, your abilities or your position. You are the human before the human being; and the world you're entering is one where you've got an 80% chance of ending up in a living condition where you're living on less than $10 a day. (That's a true statistic.)

The other side of this, is the 20% chance of ending up in a family that is not living in poverty; and probably a >1% roulette chance of ending up in even a middle class family.

It would therefore quite rational for this "human before the human being" to want not a world that's regulated by families, but a world where children are raised by the state. That's because the "human before the human being" has much better chance to live a happier, wealthier life in the care of many people pooling their resources and who are all looking out for him, instead of the >80% chance of ending up in the dirt-poor family of which there's no appeal against.

It's a very self-interested argument for the individual to want to be raised not by a family; and not just a "lowest common denominator."
 
I always thought the term "unfair advantage" to be redundant, thats the nature of advantages they make things unfair.
 
Um, how about the people not reading to their kids step up instead of lowering the lives of all?
 
“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.

How about, **** you. Yeah, that seems about right.
 
Technically speaking, yes, it is an unfair advantage. There is no fairness when it comes to what family you were born into.

But it would be idiotic to translate that into saying parents shouldn't read to their kids.

It also isn't fair that even the poorest children in the US have access to food when children in other countries do not. Does that mean we should starve our kids?
I favor lobotomies for kids of affluent parents.
 
How is this breaking news and mainstream media?
 
Um, how about the people not reading to their kids step up instead of lowering the lives of all?

Maybe we could help them "step up" by giving them free coupons for books every now and then or something.

"Two-thirds of America’s children living in poverty have no books at home, and the number of families living in poverty is on the rise. Many public and school libraries are being forced to close or reduce their operating hours. Children who do not have access to books and do not read regularly are among the most vulnerable Americans." from: Literacy Issues


"When we imagine people without books, we think of villagers in places like Afghanistan. But many families in the United States have no children’s books at home. In some of the poorest areas of the country, it’s hard to find books for sale. A study (pdf) of low-income neighborhoods in Philadelphia, for example, found a ratio of one book for sale for every 300 children. Tens of millions of poor Americans can’t afford to buy books at all." from: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/16/a-book-in-every-home-and-then-some/?_r=0
 
Back
Top Bottom