|August 30, 1989||Volume 1 Number 3|
The Destruction Of The Nuclear Family
There is much talk in American society today among politicians, sociologists and people in general about the breakdown of the nuclear family system, and the loss of basic human values and ideals. Each year, more and more couples and families seek counseling to alleviate family problems, including marital troubles, drug and alcohol-related difficulties, and a vast array of family conflicts. Our research shows the American family life has been slowly deteriorating lice the introduction of organized, compulsory education. In fact, we have come to believe that modern education may be the single most destructive influence on family life that has ever been introduced into any society.
Think of it this way. When the early colonists first settled in this nation, they faced decades of hardships and threats to their very survival. Yet, no where is it written that these difficulties threatened the preservation of the nuclear family. Similarly, the Revolutionary War and later the Civil War brought great loss of life and property and untold human suffering. Yet, the nuclear family system still endured.
Only over the last 50 or 60 years--since most people in American society have been subjected to compulsory education--has the American family system been destroyed. Furthermore, these same difficulties in the breakdown of the nuclear family have begun to appear in those societies which have adopted the American educational system. Japan is but one example.
It appears that human beings naturally and instinctively preserve their family systems under all kinds of stressful circumstances. Even today, African people wander their lands suffering from starvation and disease, but they do so as families. Some Third World societies live in constant war, surrounded by violence and chaos, but they still maintain and preserve their family systems. Our research shows that modern education is an extremely destructive system, one that is in some ways more harmful to human beings than starvation, disease, war and violence. It is a system that so perfectly destroys the individual human being that anyone subjected to it for even a year or two is rendered incapable of functioning in the most natural, universal social group--one's own family.
There are many "experts" who want to blame the destruction of the nuclear family on parents. However, we would have to assume that parents have been raising and interacting with their children in similar ways for probably thousands of years. We could even say that it appears very few parents over the centuries have been able to provide their children with proper care, and that some degree of neglect has been prevalent in childrearing practices for centuries. However, there is no evidence to show that this neglect has ever threatened the breakdown of the nuclear family system. In fact, research shows that families tend to remain intact even under the influence of very bizarre and deranged parenting practices.
It has been over only the last fifty years or so that the American family system has broken down. So, we would have to assume that something more than just the standard neglectful childrearing practices, which have been present for centuries, has caused the family system to collapse. Our research shows that the deterioration in the American nuclear family system can be directly correlated with the introduction of compulsory education, and that as more and more people have been exposed to the educational system, family problems have been steadily rising.
We would agree with the "experts" who say that parenting practices in American society are in need of improvement. However, we would also say that the major difficulty with American parenting practices is parents' disinterest in their children, which is a direct result of the type of damage which parents incurred while they themselves were being educated. And, again, we point to the fact that as more and more people have become educated, parents have become increasingly disinterested in caring for their own children. The rise of day-care facilities over the last twenty years is but one manifestation of parental disinterest. How the current educational system has fostered parents' disinterest in their own children will be discussed throughout this article.
[The single focal point of this newsletter can be found in a block entitled "Natural, Logical Occurrence." Please stop here and read the information contained in that block. Then go on.]
The fact that children are sent to school and separated from their parents at too early an age (before the age of nine) has been discussed throughout these newsletters. Premature separation of parents and children is probably the single most destructive thing happening to American families today. (See feature article for further discussion.) Children between the ages of four and five are just beginning to talk and communicate their own ideas and feelings. Children of these ages are just becoming capable of establishing the kinds of mental and emotional bonds with their parents which will become the basis of family relationships and interactions. Children between four and five years are just becoming capable of forming real and lasting friendships with their parents. But, just as family life is beginning to blossom and flower, the children are taken out of their homes and away from their parents, and forced to attend school.
If schools offered children a natural environment in which healthy mental and emotional bonds could be established between and among human beings, this separation would not be as devastating and harmful to children. But, schools are void of almost all forms of healthy human interaction. Children are not allowed to talk, to laugh, to cry, to yell, to share ideas or to express any normal human emotion. Children are not allowed to interact with one another or with teachers in any way that would help to establish a natural, healthy human relationship.
The violence and chaos seen among children in a schoolyard is an example of the kinds of social skills children are learning in schools. For parents to say that they are keeping their children in school so that their children can gain social skills is the poorest excuse for neglecting children and refusing to homeschool them that we have heard yet.
Teachers, who are expected in some way to fill a parent's role in the child's life, have no interest or emotional investment in children as individual human beings. Relationships between teachers and students are generally void of any form of healthy mental-emotional contact. In fact, many of the types of interactions found in the classroom are what one would expect to find between and among lower animal forms--not human beings. Studies done by educators on themselves demonstrate that teachers are far more negative with their students than they are positive. One study noted that the average student endures 60 days a year of nagging, reprimanding and punishment. This same study indicated that the average high school graduate has heard 15,000 negative comments over the course of his or her education, which is three times more negative statements than positive. Human beings cannot establish proper mental and emotional ties under these conditions.
Existing psychological research clearly indicates that all children require healthy, positive emotional contacts, with adults who genuinely like children, in order to grow and develop properly. A successful family life obviously depends on healthy mental and emotional interaction. The message that children receive in schools is not to express any emotional need. Young children are not allowed to ask to be picked up or hugged or physically comforted in any way. When was the last time you saw a first grade teacher carrying a young child around in his or her arms while presenting a lesson? Children are forbidden to talk out their ideas and feelings in a way that would allow the ideas and feelings to be released naturally. Most people have learned not to express their emotions so well that they end up having to go to psychotherapists in order to express normal thoughts and feelings. People end up having to pay someone, who is probably not even interested in them, $60 an hour or more to listen to feelings and ideas that should be expressed as a normal part of everyday life.
Educators, in defiance of both their own research and obvious reality, insist on relating to children as if they were nothing more than mindless, emotionless machines. The types of relationships established between teachers and students are much more like those found between prison guards and inmates than the types of relationships you would hope to find between parents and children. in short, schools fail to offer children any model for healthy human interaction. Furthermore, classrooms are extremely hostile environments, in which children are subjected to the constant threat of public humiliation and punishment. Our research shows that the psychological duress of classroom life causes the natural human systems for mental and emotional interaction to break down. Human beings cannot survive life in the classroom and keep these systems intact.
We are always incredulous when parents write to us saying that the reason they are sending their children to school is so their children can learn to socialize. All research evidence indicates that children learn socialization and interaction skills from the adults in their environment and then test those skills out on one another. Children learn from teachers to be uninvolved and disinterested. They learn to be negative, punitive, demanding, hostile and critical to other human beings. The violence and chaos seen among children in a school yard is an example of the kinds of social skills children are learning in schools. For parents to say that they are keeping their children in school so that their children can gain social skills is the poorest excuse for neglecting children and refusing to homeschool them that we have heard yet.
Now parents and educators have decided that the sooner children start school the better. This new attitude insures the complete and certain breakdown of the nuclear family and the permanent mental destruction of the child. Children at three years of age are even less capable of dealing with separation from their parents. The idea of getting children off to an early start developed in the 1960's, when Operation Headstart was introduced into American society. From its inception, people failed to see that Headstart was an attempt to improve upon a destructive and bankrupt system. People failed to see that the ideas upon which the current educational system is based are not ideas that promote the individual well-being of any child. The ideas upon which the educational system is based are very negative, destructive ideas that view children as machines or lower animal forms, rather than recognizing children as living human beings.
It is not possible to improve a system that is so inherently destructive because this system is corrupted at its very core. Even the most well-intentioned improvements can lead only to further destruction. Trying to improve upon education with programs like Operation Headstart is like trying to improve a toxic waste dump by planting vegetables in the contaminated soil. The vegetables may grow and even look attractive, but they are still sitting in a bed of poison, and if eaten, will prove to be very harmful.
Operation Headstart opened the door for even greater destruction of children. The same thing is true of programs such as "Sesame Street." "Sesame Street" invites and encourages young children to engage in certain types of mental activity long before their mental circuits and brain cells have had time to fully develop. In order to participate in this program, children must go to mental circuits not designed to perform the specific functions of reading, writing or memorizing letters and words. In the process of doing so, children's mental circuits are permanently destroyed. So while parents and educators contend that by starting children in school activities earlier they can get more data into them, and therefore produce smarter children, our research shows that the opposite is true. Starting children in school at younger ages breaks down their mental systems faster and actually produces children with diminished mental capacities. Test scores for American students in almost all subject areas have been dropping since the 1970's, when the first generations of children subjected to preschools began to be tested. As children have started school at younger and younger ages, academic results have been increasingly on the decline. If this system of starting children in school at three or four years old were working as educators claim, American students would be achieving increasingly superior results in every academic arena. But this is clearly not the case.
It should also be noted that programs such as "Sesame Street" became popular because parents, having been subjected to the educational system, where all their systems for healthy mental and emotional contacts were destroyed, were and still are looking for ways to amuse their children, so that they as parents will not have to be bothered with them. Teachers -- the adult role models in every classroom -- demonstrate continuous disinterest and non-involvement with children. As children, parents observed this type of disinterested, non-involved relationship between adults and children for 11,000 to 12,000 hours minimum. Once exposed to this type of relationship for so long a time, all parents today can do, with a few rare exceptions, is demonstrate disinterest and noninvolvement with their children. The fact that so many American children watch so much television is a direct result of education. Television entertains children and frees disinterested parents to do other things. Furthermore, watching television is all that most families can do together once their mental and emotional systems for healthy interactions have been destroyed in the process of schooling, because it is an activity which can be done in isolation, while in the presence of one another.
Video games, like television, provide children with an activity they can do in isolation from their parents. Video games, like most toys, are popular because they keep children amused so that disinterested, broken-down parents are free to do other things. Most children today have ten to twenty times as many toys and games as children of fifty years ago. But with the introduction of compulsory education, and the accompanying breakdown of the mental and emotional systems needed for healthy interaction and involvement between parents and children, toys and games have become more prevalent. Parents try to use toys and games to fill the places in their children that would ordinarily be reserved for interaction and involvement between parent and child. This is done partly because parents are disinterested and partly because most parents have been bankrupted by their own school experiences. Even parents who have managed to retain some interest in their children find they do not have the mental and emotional resources required to involve themselves in their children's lives.
Most parents in American society, because they were damaged in school, are constantly telling their children to go away--to "go out and play" or to "go play with your toys" or to "go find something to do." In healthy societies, where parents and children are naturally involved in one another's daily lives, children do not require toys or video games or television sets. Children naturally want to be involved with their parents and with the real world. When children are involved with their families, they are too interested in what their parents are doing to require empty, mindless forms of entertainment.
[The single focal point of this newsletter can be found in a block entitled Natural, Logical Occurrence Please stop here and read the information contained in that block. Then go on.]
A Special Note To Prospective Parents
Our research tells us that educated Western societies are creating a generation of orphans, a generation of children whose parents are either not interested or not able (or both) to care for them in a proper way. In natural reality, children need complete continuity in their care until they are about nine years old. Anyone who will not make a commitment to stay home and take care of a child for at least nine years should not have children. Because of the advancements in birth control information and the availability of a wide variety of birth control methods, women no longer need to be breeding cattle. If people do not like children, do not want them, have important career plans, want to earn lots of money or need time to themselves, they should not have children.
Day-Care centers would more accurately be called foster homes. Modeled after the kibbutz system, parents who do not want their children can dump them off for ten or more hours a day. Day-care centers in Western societies are daytime foster homes for unwanted children Our research shows that children who are dropped off at daytime foster homes every day develop the same view of themselves as orphans have. They are unwanted children who have been born to parents who cannot or will not provide them with care, usually because the parents themselves did not receive proper care and tending. Day-Care centers are only one step away from boarding homes where parents could get rid of their unwanted children for weeks or months at a time.
There are many people who, on reading this, will write us complaining that they must work; that they would stay home with their children if they could. Most will write because we have exposed the fact that they are neglecting their children. We recognize that "Ronnie-nomics'' has left many American families in difficult financial straits. We also realize, however, that those parents who are committed to providing their children with proper, continuous care have made their children the single most important priority in their lives. These parents (who are quite rare) are willing to make whatever financial, career, or personal sacrifices must be made to provide care for their children. They are willing to be inconvenienced, and set up their lives around the well-being of their children. There are very, very few parents who honestly must work at jobs that take them away from their children. We have received dozens of letters from welfare mothers, as well as divorced and widowed women, who manage to stay home and care for their children on the most minimal incomes because they have made the well-being of their children their single most important priority If you do not want to commit yourself to taking care of a child for nine years, then do not have children, because, in reality, children need a minimum of nine years of consistent, continuous care. We already have enough neglected orphan children being raised in day-care (foster home) facilities.
In our opinion, day-care centers are products of the destroyed nuclear family. They are clearly becoming the new destructive rage of the 21st century. Daytime foster homes for children are exactly what you would expect to find in a society that promotes emotional disinterest in children through its educational system. We believe that, thanks to modern education, Americans are destined to produce generations of unwanted, orphan children.
It appears, from our research, that cultural and national family background may also influence how a person responds to the educational system. Our results in this area are not conclusive because we have not been able to work with enough subjects from all the various cultural and ethnic groups. However, it appears that the children of Italian parents, for example, have the most trouble adjusting to school. Italian families in our research ranked very high in the area of caring for their children. As parents, they tend to become both mentally and emotionally involved with their children, and establish healthy relationships with them. Schools are devoid of all forms of healthy mental and emotional involvement, and are set up in a way that prohibits the establishment of healthy human relationships. The children of Italian families have a particularly difficult time handling the enormous discrepancy between life in their families and life in the classroom, and the break-up of the nuclear family is very difficult for them to endure.
German and Swedish families also tended to rank at the higher end of the scale as far as the care and nurturing of their children was concerned. Their children also have great difficulty managing the discrepancy between the mental and emotional involvement of their home lives and the uninvolved, disinterested relationships that are common to classroom life, so the break up of the nuclear family caused by education is more painful and difficult to manage. On the other hand, the children of both Irish and Jewish families generally adapt more easily to school and have less difficulty adjusting to classroom life. Neither Irish nor Jewish parents are apt to become emotionally involved with their children. As ethnic groups, they usually rank on the lower end of the scale as far as caring and tending to the real needs of their children. Both groups of parents most often relate to their children only in a mental way. Both tribes readily give their sons over to war, and have been involved in ongoing wars for centuries. They do not, in general, form strong emotional bonds with their children, which may account for their children's being likely to adjust better to the non-emotional, disinterested environment of school. Children of Jewish and Irish family backgrounds usually do better in school than children of Italian descent.
Again, we would remind readers that what has been said here is far from conclusive. Enough preliminary evidence has been gathered, however, to warrant further study in this area. The limitations of our resources will not allow us to follow these leads, but we mention them here for anyone who would have the resources and the interest to do so.
In order to give their children over to the educational system, parents must sever any mental and emotional bonds they have established with their children. Schools are hostile, destructive environments for children. All parents know this to be true. Handing a child over to a school is the same thing as placing your child in the hands of a known child abuser who has consistently demonstrated Ill-will and intentional harm toward children. In order for parents to hand their children over to known child abusers, parents must sever their emotional ties with children. Otherwise, parents would not be able to bear the emotional pain of watching their children be destroyed.
Children depend on their parents to protect them from harm. For the first few years of life, most parents do a reasonable job of protecting their young, and most children trust their parents to keep them safe. Then, when children are three or four or five years old, parents stop fulfilling their protective function and turn the children over to a system that obviously intends them harm.
Starting children in school at younger ages breaks down their mental systems faster and actually produces children with diminished mental capacities.
For all children this is an extreme betrayal, one that, according to our research, can never be reconciled, except in rare cases where parents discover what has happened, remove their children from school and teach them at home. Our research also shows that most children believe, for at least two to three years, that their parents will one day come to rescue them from school. Then, sometime between first and third grade, depending on how young the child was when he or she started school, the child comes to the devastating conclusion that the parents are never, never going to save them.
Before arriving at this conclusion, most children try to tell their parents that something very bad is happening to them in school. Many children beseech their parents to save them from a tyrannical teacher or to help them overcome what they are witnessing in the classroom every day. But when children complain to their parents about a teacher or about something that took place in school, parents almost always side with the teacher. They betray their children even when they know that what their children are saying is true. When little Jimmy tells his mother that Mrs. Greene is a mean teacher who hates children, Jimmy's mother tells him he is wrong, and that Mrs. Greene is a good teacher, even if Jimmy's mother knows from first-hand experience that Mrs. Greene is a beast.
This final betrayal is the ultimate blow to the nuclear family system. Children discover that their parents are never, never going to rescue them from school and that they are doomed. When parents refuse to come to the aid of their children, children conclude that their parents cannot be trusted, and parents lose their authority over their children. Parents refuse to listen to what their children say or to pay any attention to what their children feel. Once this occurs--once parents stop listening to what children have to say--children stop listening to what parents have to say. Children do not choose or decide to stop listening to their parents, they just do it, because it is the way human relationships work. It is just a natural law of balance. When parents tell their children to be good, to be careful, to drive safely, and not to use drugs, children do not listen to their parents, because when they needed their parents to listen to them, the parents refused. When parents say be honest, be responsible, do not smoke cigarettes, dress in normal clothes, treat other people decently, children do not listen. Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" anti-drug campaign is a massive effort to get children to listen to someone in a parent role. But it is too late. All the children can do is say "no" to Nancy.
Although many of the problems now found in American nuclear families seem to erupt when children enter their teen-age years, the groundwork for all these difficulties was laid during the early schooling years. The problems become more evident during adolescence because children have grown into large enough physical bodies to be able to express openly the fact that they cannot and will not listen to their parents, without fear of being physically punished by the parents.
Drug usage is just one of the bizarre and freakish things that happens to children who have been betrayed by their parents. The grotesque and freakish clothes and hairstyles worn by teenagers is another result. Drugged-out rock star heroes and angry, violent music also express the hurt and harm done to children in schools. Most teen-age idols, no matter how empty, drugged-out, bankrupt or screwed up they are, are admired by teenagers because they represent human beings who were subjected to the devastation of the educational system and somehow managed to be successful. In fact, thanks to modern education's destructive effects on the nuclear family and the loss of basic human values, American youth have developed a whole new set of "specs" and standards for their heroes. American youth's new version of reality can be found in "Freddie" from "Nightmare on Elm Street," a very popular movie among ten to fourteen-year-olds. "Freddie" is a guy who has been completely destroyed, yet who still manages to take over everything. Freddie is void of all human qualities. He is hurt, angry and disconnected from reality. Yet, Freddie is the educated young American's new idea of success.
Starting children in school at younger ages breaks down their mental systems faster and actually produces children with diminished mental capacities. [Yes, this box was repeated]
Americans have begun to idolize the most damaged and corrupt personalities and have lost sight of honesty and integrity. It must be noted that while "Freddie" embodies the hero of the over-eight set, Ronald Reagan was and still is the hero of the over-forty set. Ronnie is a completely incompetent but nice man who had to be told where to stand, when to smile and what to say. He has left a trail of ruined projects and messes behind him in everything he has ever done. The scandals and corruption found in the Pentagon, HUD, the IRS, Congress and the Senate, along with an insurmountable budget deficit, are but a small reminder of his legacy to this nation. It must be noted here that none of this information is meant as an attack on Ronald Reagan's character. In fact, people who have been fortunate enough to call Ronald Reagan a friend, have found that he is a true friend, indeed. He appointed many of his friends to government positions, and he remained faithful and loyal to his friends, no matter what they did in government. Ronald Reagan stood by all his friends--even some who later mocked his loyalty and friendship by writing books that revealed personal and private matters that true friends would never have revealed.
When we speak of "Ronnie," we are referring to the overidealized hero who became president of this nation primarily because people saw him as the kind and benevolent, story-telling cowboy from "Death Valley Days." "Ronnie" never demonstrated competence or skill in government. He was only elected because education has so disconnected people from reality that they do not know the difference between the cowboy on "Death Valley Days" and Ronald Reagan, the man.
If Ronnie is the hero of the over-forty set and "Freddie" is the hero of the over-eight set, imagine what could become President of this nation in just twenty years. "Freddie" is going to grow up. Imagine what today's eight and ten-year-olds will vote for in twenty years!
Once parents have betrayed their children by turning them over to known child abusers called educators, and by then lying to the children about what both parents and children know to be true, the family system is completely and permanently lost. Educators can then proceed to drain both parents and children of their remaining resources, which will insure the total and complete bankruptcy of both the parents and the child.
Children must expend an enormous amount of energy every day just to survive the unnatural, hostile classroom environment. This system is so unnatural and so inherently incorrect for human beings, that most children use up all their personal resources during the first few years of school. Most parents can see that this is true by observing their children. Furthermore, many people can recall how tired and drained they felt after attending a conference for five or six hours on a subject they had no interest in hearing about, where they were required to sit passively in an uncomfortable chair, listening to a speaker. Add to this the extreme psychological duress and public humiliation inflicted on children in schools, and multiply by 5 days a week, 180 days a year. Very few adults could hold up under such conditions.
Once children's resources are consumed, they begin to drain their parents' resources. When children become too weakened to sustain their interest in school, educators encourage parents to prop children up, to help children with their homework and generally to use up their own resources in order to help children in school. By the time most children reach junior high school, all the family's resources have been consumed, leaving family members so bankrupt that they have no resources left to ward off illnesses, solve family problems or manage any kind of emergency or crisis. Once bankrupt, parents have no energy to deal with marital problems when they arise. Family members are left without the resources to care for sick and aging family members. Everyday family life, with all of its normal human stresses and possible problems that can arise, is already difficult, even for people with their resources intact. But once drained by the educational system, parents and children have no hope of maintaining a stable family unit. The issue of schools totally bankrupting families and how this is accomplished has already been discussed in detail in an article entitled "Bankrupting Children," which can be found in Volume 1, Number 2 of this series.
If what we have said about the future of American society sounds too negative, we could not agree more. Our research has taught us that American society is in grave and serious danger. Our research shows that it is not possible for anyone who went past the third grade in the current educational system to recover from the damages which they incurred. There is no form of psychotherapy, new age "healing," religious ritual, medication or treatment of any kind that can repair tile harm that is done to children's delicate mental systems during these early, vulnerable years.
The only good news is that ordinary human beings, parents, have a chance to improve mankind. They do not even have to try to improve anyone or anything. All parents have to do is not destroy anyone. All parents have to do is keep their children out of schools. In doing this one simple thing, parents will not destroy their children and they will not destroy their nuclear families.
When we say that in order for parents to improve mankind they would need to keep their children out of schools, we mean all schools. We realize that there are many so-called alternative schools now in existence. Although we have not investigated all these schools, the ones that we have looked into are as destructive to children as any traditional, organized public school. In fact, in many of these "alternative" schools, the destruction of children proved to be even more insidious because it was cloaked in more desirable classroom environments and more frequent field trips.
The problem with "alternative" schools is that the people who are running the schools have themselves been subjected to the current educational system. In the process of being educated, they were subjected to extremely incorrect ideas about how people learn and they were filled up with wrong and often negative ideas about children. Most educated adults in American society today have spent anywhere from 11,000 to 20,000 hours in school. Human beings cannot spend this much time in a system without being filled up with the system, even if they find that system to be abhorrent.
We have found that "alternative" schools often are organized by people (some well-meaning) who are trying to overcome what was done to them in school by offering something better to children today. The problem is that they cannot overcome what happened to them as children in schools. They can only succumb to all the negative, incorrect ideas about learning and about human beings that caused them to be damaged in the first place.
We have realized, both in doing our research and in publishing these newsletters, that the harm that has been done to people by the educational system is so widespread and so debilitating in its nature that very few parents will be able to perceive what is happening to their children in school, or to act on behalf of children by removing them from school. Home schooling will never become an acceptable mainstream form of educating children. But if you want to save your child from permanent, irreparable harm and you want to prevent your family from being permanently destroyed, teaching your children at home is the only way to accomplish this no matter who or what you are as a parent.