Well... since no one has said anything yet I guess I should say that everyone seems to agree on what they think a good parent is: loving, caring, wants their children to be happy, is responsible for their children's well being, etc. But I guess mostly everyone said loves their children.

As Rebecca said, both the American responses and the French responses have a lot in common (love ...). However, the French reponses mention education while, on the American side, we find that students like parents who allow children plenty of freedom and who finacially support the children.

I think this brings basck the issue of individualism: American children are more individualist. (I imagine most American students answered as if they were answering "I was my parent was / I'm glad my parent is"...)

Love/care and education/discipline are most popular answers both on the American side and the French side. Love/care is given more significance on the American side; education/discipline is emphasized more strongly on the French side.

One interesting observation is that one finds the answer "money/finance" only on the American side (a couple of times). I think that this might reflect the fact that it is more expensive to raise a child in America although there is no stong evidence for this; after all, money/finance is mentioned only a couple of times.

Question to French students: I think that it is generally less expensive to raise a child in France; for example, education is free in France. Do you think that this is a correct observation?

However, even if it is less expensive to raise a child, there will be much expenditure involved in raising a child. Do French people think that raising a child is a significant financial burden? If so, are there many people who want a child but try to avoid having one due to financial concerns?

I think you guys are right that loving is emphasized on both sides. But I think you might be missing the point a little bit in terms of the word "eduquer" on the French side. In this case it is not simply to educate a child and to make sure the child does well in school. In fact, it doesn't even mean that you should help your child get into a good university. Actually, I believe "eduquer" implies that parents should impart a good value system unto their children. The word "valeurs" is often mentioned on the French side, and it seems that this is actually the type of education we should be talking about. Also, to discuss the question of financial burden in having a child in France, we talked earlier in the semester about taxes. Professor Furstenburg mentioned that parents receive a tax relief of 10% (I think) for every child they have. I'm not sure if this is enough to offset the expenses but it probably helps a lot. By talking to some friends here lately, I have found that some people don't want to have children because they are afraid that they will be a bad parent. Is this also a concern in France? Do you think that a person can learn to be a good parent during their childhood, or is it all based on experiences after having children?

Maggie a tout à fait compris le sens que nous donnons au terme "éducation". Nous dissocions énormément les deux environnements : maison et école. L'éducation faite par les parents se fait à la maison. C'est là que nous apprenons toutes les règles que nous devons avoir pour évoluer avec facilité en société. La société est un monde codé et il est absolument nécessaire de connaître ces codes... Par conséquent le laxisme est une valeur négative chez nous. En est-il de même chez vous ?

J'ai l'impression que vous êtes un peu autodidacte et que vous apprenez les leçons de la vie tout seul : Est-ce le cas ?

In response to Rebecca, I think that parental laxity is also seen as a negative value in our society. You can see examples of it everywhere: in literature, in film, even on television. Lynette on Desperate Housewives for example, doesn't spank her children, but because they behave like demons, she was labelled as bad mother. She was too soft on them, and they took advantage of her.

You can see examples of this notion on the American side of the responses as well. Some people said that parents have to "discipline" and "know when to be strict." These responses imply that the American students view having lax parental skills as a bad thing.

What I found interesting is what all the responses imply about parenting in general. Why are we blaming the parents, and not the children? I believe that some kids are just horrible, no matter how hard their parents try to set them straight. It's as if some children enjoy disobeying their parents. If you've ever seen the "troubled teens" on talk-shows like Maury, Jerry Springer, or Montel, you know the kinds of teens I'm talking about.

I think everyone would agree that parents have the responsibility of teaching their children right-from-wrong. But I don't think a parent should be held responsible for all the wrong things a child does.

What do you guys think? Are French parents held liable for their children's actions like here in the US? Do you think French people are more or less critical of parents with misbehaved kids? Do you think it's just America that has a "troubled teen" epidemic or do you think this problem exists everywhere else aswell?

Pour répondre à la question de l'argent, c'est vrai que l'argent peu parfois dissuader les gens de faire un enfant mais je ne pense pas que ce soit un aspect très important. L'état propose beaucoup d'aide pour encourager les naissances en France et avec une éducation "gratuite", je ne pense pas que l'argent est quelque chose de déterminant dans la conception d'un enfant.

Sinon pour répondre à Gerardo, je pense que la majorité des actions d'un enfant est de la responsabilité des parents. Le problème est qu'en générale lorsqu'un enfant commence à être un délinquant, il est déjà trop tard. L'éducation des enfants est quelque chose de très compliqué et il n'y a pas de solutions miracles mais c'est un travail de tous les jours qui demande beaucoup d'attention. Beaucoup de parents n'ont pas les solutions aux problèmes de leurs enfants mais je pense qu'avec un dialogue avec l'enfant (avec possibilité d'une psychologue) on peut régler la majorité des problèmes. Il faut juste s'y prendre très tôt.

Je ne pense pas que la délinquance soit un problème unique aux Etats-Unis. Tout les pays connaissent des problèmes sur la jeunesse décadente. En France, beaucoup de personne critique l'éducation Nationale qui, selon eux, est responsable de l'éducation des enfants ce qui à mon avis n'est pas vrai. L'Education Nationale s'occupe de l'enseignement de connaissances et ce sont les parents qui doivent éduquer leurs enfants. Un des gros problèmes est le fait que souvent les deux parents travaillent et l'éducation est faites par la télé ou maintenant l'ordinateur. Que pensez-vous de cela (je crois que la télé joue un très grand rôle dans les foyers américains)? Êtes-vous d'accord sur l'idée que la télé est la cause de la violence juvénile?

Pour répondre à Gerardo, je pense que jusqu'à un certain point, les parents sont responsables du comportement de leurs enfants. En effet, je pense que les enfants ne naissent pas "naturellement" mauvais. L'éducation et surtout l'exemple que leur donnent les parents pendant la petite enfance est à mon sens déterminant. C'est vrai qu'ensuite, lors de l'adolescence, il est parfois plus difficile de contrôler ses enfants parce qu'ils sont moins à la maison et qu'ils ont beaucoup de tentations. C'est à ce moment là que les parents doivent être très vigilants à mon avis. Un père présent est à mon avis très important : il représente l'autorité et la limite à ne pas franchir. Dans certaines situations, je crois que les parents doivent savoir se montrer fermes. Mais dans tous les cas, je pense que le meilleur moyen de réussir l'éducation de ses enfants est de leur permettre de grandir dans un climat d'amour : une famille soudée est très importante.

Enfin, je suis tout à fait d'accord avec Charles pour dire qu'on a trop tendance en France de tenir l'Education Nationale pour responsable dans l'éducation des enfants. Un professeur n'est pas un père ni une mère, son rôle n'est pas d'éduquer mais d'instruire.

Vivez-vous une telle situation aux Etats-Unis ?

In response to Charles, I think television and video games are some what related to juvenile violence. There are kids that will be violent whether or not they watch too much violent shows and there are kids who watch a lot of violence on tv but don't act on it. However, I believe we are all becoming more numb to violence. We see it so much, that nothing really surprises us, sometimes it doesn't seem like a big deal. I think it is very important for parents to keep their little children from watching violence because they don't have any understanding of death and the consequences of violence. I see kids as young as 2 hitting each other and pretending to shoot each other, and one can only wonder what they will be like when they grow up. Their parents have to teach them moral values early because once they start going to school, they are going to come across a lot of bad influences.

In response to Louis, we do have the same situation in the US: mothers are more often career-driven, and fathers are the bread-winners, which leaves children in schools or day cares all day. These parents do not have the time to teach their children societal values, so this chore is left up to schools or day cares. However, societal values cannot be taught properly in a group setting (especially to young children), so the children grow up without ever being "educated." I think that it's a huge problem, and I am really against both parents working when their children are young.

I agree with Rachel, I think that both parents working is a recipe for disaster. I know that some people might think I'm crazy, but I think one of the parents should really focus on taking care of the children while the other works. I'm not saying that either parent should have to give up their careers, instead I really think parenting should be balanced act. Maybe a mother could stop working until her children are old enough to go to school, and then she can go back to work, and the father could take some time off work to take care of the kids. I just think that there needs to be a parent at home all the time, even when the kids are teenagers, because otherwise some of them get out of control (bad teens -->jerry springer, maury, etc..) I think children should be a parent's #1 priority, and if you feel your career is more important than taking care of your kids, then you shouldn't have any. My mom gave up her career to raise us, and I know she kicks herself everyday for not going back, but at the same time, she's happy that she raised three kids who (up to now) turned out okay.