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)? Ętes-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.