The notion of childhood
as a social construction and the ways in which childhoods differ around the world
Childhoods differ in cultures both internally and
externally. This means that childhood does not have a universal social
definition. This article will discuss the notion of childhood as a social
construction. It will consider the ways in which childhoods differ, relating to
various theories and ideas of childhood.
Childhood is often compared to
adulthood. In order to define childhood effectively, this aspect must be discussed,
as the social construction of children compared with adults is different from
culture to culture. The main line of argument in this article is that adults are
the primary shapers of social constructions of childhood. However, children are
able to negotiate meanings as they shape and interpret their world around them
(Adams, 2014; Fattore, Mason, & Watson, 2009; James & James, 2008;
Qvortrup, 1994). This will be developed throughout. This article will draw upon
information from academic books and journals in order to present a grounded
argument around the social construction of childhood being compared to
adulthood. There has been a lot of recent research into the sociology of
childhood (Corsaro, 2014). Therefore, there is much grounded information to
draw from. Each section of this article will move further away from the
westernised construction of childhood, comparing and contrasting previous
sections.
James
and Prout, (2014) suggest that childhood is commonly understood as a social
construction. It provides an interpretive frame for contextualising the early
years of human life. It can be described as the variable of social analysis as
it cannot be detached from factors such as gender, class, or ethnicity. Corsaro
(2014) argues that the “socialisation of childhood is the process by which
children adapt to and internalize society”. This suggests that the social
construction of childhood mainly occurs from the children themselves. It does however;
admit that the world built around the child will shape their social
construction. Maynard and Thomas (2009) believe that contemporary sociology of
childhood is distinguished by two central ideas. The first idea refers to the
historical and cross-cultural studies. These studies show that the nature of
childhood is variable according to the context. It suggests that childhood is
socially defined and created. The second idea refers to the increasing
recognition in sociology, psychology and anthropology that children are seen as
social factors in their own right. Therefore, the lack of children ‘s active
presence in society is equal to their lack of active presence in theory.
It
can be suggested that there are four different categories to put contemporary
childhood into a concept. The first category is the socially constructed child.
This means that the child reflects the social, cultural, economic, and
historical context (Pasura et. al, 2012; Crawley, 2011; James et. al, 1998).
The second category is the social structural child. This portrays childhood as
a universal category. As the child gets older, the more universal the
construction gets (Saraceno, 1984). The universal category of childhood
provides a broader understanding of childhood. This makes childhood easier to
define. On the latter, it is much less concise in understanding different
social constructions of childhood on a more local level. This makes is
enormously inaccurate for individual cultures. Manifestos may differ in various
societies but within each society, they are uniform (Pasura et. al, 2012; James
et. al, 1998:32). The third category is the minority group child. This category
portrays childhood as inhabiting an adult-centred world being dependent and
incomplete. Archard, (2003:39) says, “To be a child is to be not yet an adult”
(Pasura et. al, 2012). The forth and final category portrays children as
constructing and inhabiting a separate world from adults (Pasura et. al, 2012).
The
new paradigm of social construction in childhood is to engage in the process of
reconstructing childhood in society. It must be remembered that the social
constructions of childhood vary across and within cultures (Adams, 2014).
It
can be argued that there are two models of socialisation in childhood. The
deterministic model refers to the child playing a passive role in society; and
the constructivist model refers to the child as an agent and an eager learner
(Corsaro, 2014). These models can be applied to many different cultures to
explain different social constructions on childhood.
It can be argued that competence is solely
produced in society. It is based on the moral and sociopolitical values,
beliefs and goals (Boydell, 2008). Children are often seen as help seekers, as
many cultures have decided that children are weak in power. Therefore, the
responsibility and power falls on the adult. In this social construction,
childhood is seen to be the weaker period of life. This supports the argument
that adults are the primary shapers of social constructions of childhood
(Adams, 2014; Fattore, Mason, & Watson, 2009; James & James, 2008;
Qvortrup, 1994). An example of seeing
children as a help-seeker is the refugee crisis, which affects many children
from Syria and surrounding countries.
Children effected by war
and refuge, often suffer from deteriorating mental health.
Refuge is a help-seeking behavior. Therefore, in
order to sufficiently treat and plan for deteriorating mental health and
emotional wellbeing in the midst of war and refuge, the host country must first
understand this behavior (Acknowledgement of Reviewers, 2009). Deterioration of
mental health in childhood is often overlooked in society, as it is predominantly
an adult construction. This means that this social construction of childhood
focuses mainly upon physical wellbeing, rather than mental wellbeing. However,
in western early years’ practice, the emotional wellbeing of the child is focused
on and great effort is implemented in order to maintain a child’s positive
emotional wellbeing through safeguarding procedures.
As
well as being seen as help-seekers, children can be seen as
adults-in-the-making. However, this fails to recognise and value children for
what they can provide modern day society (Adams, 2014). This concept of social
construction comes from the new paradigm. The
social construction of childhood in many parts of the world is that children
are adults-in-the-making; from the perspective of children, adulthood and
childhood have clear distinctions (Adams, 2014). Children are often seen as
“just another human”. This contradicts Hendrick’s (1997) childhood construction
of the Romantic child as children are seen as not being fundamentally different
from adults (Timimi, 2002). Negative behavior and negative attitudes of an
adult(s) in front of children is often repeated in later generations. Some
parents find parenting challenging. This is often a direct result of having
their caring and dependency needs unmet in their earlier life. This becomes a
problem because they are often overwhelmed by the demands of care from their
own children (Reder, Duncan and Gray, 1993). However Best (1993)
suggests that children
are often seen as the redeemers of adult’s failures. Children are the active
construction of their social lives and the social lives of those around them
such as family and friends. This includes their culture (James and Prout,
2014). As Lupton (2000) states, “Childhood is
institutionalised through family, education and the state resulting in
dependence on adults and exclusion from full participation in adult society”.
Packer’s (1994) term “situated accomplishment” is used to describe how
development unfolds as “the product of adults’ and children’s interactions in
everyday settings”. (Lawlor, 2003, Page 260).
An
example of this social construction is the use of children in terrorism. Both
in the media and as fighters, children are a key part of terrorism. It presents the children in the light of an adult in the British
connotation. In
the UK, the construction of childhood is an age of innocence and vulnerability
which adults have a duty to protect (Lupton, 2000). This image of childhood is
clearly depicted in the media, gathering support to help ‘innocent and
vulnerable’ children. It clearly differs in the social context of a terrorist
group as childhood is depicted as having a physical use in war. Although, child heavily involved in warfare may be seen as committing an
act of deviance (Hendrick, 1993), it is not. The children have all been raised
morally adverse to children in more westernized countries.
Children in Britain are protected and shielded
from war. In recent years, it has become increasingly unacceptable for a child
to make war references in play in the UK, and there are even restrictions in
symbolic play.
Whereas in the UK these values appear clear, in
countries which have a presence of ISIS, children are often encouraged by the
group to engage in mock war situations and are even given unloaded guns to play
with in the hope that they will become not adverse to using them in later life
to support the terrorist group.
Children are used as soldiers in wars, which
target civilian populations more than fighting in professional armies
(Achvarina and Reich, 2006). This clearly depicts the differences in the constructions
of childhood in two vastly different cultures. This develops the argument that
adults are the primary shapers of childhood into children having a more
hands-on role as the adults do. Comparing this to the opposite in westernized
countries, where children have very little shaping ability, it can be argued
that this is not necessarily a bad thing. An example of supporting text for
this argument is Lupton (2000), saying “Childhood is increasingly being constructed as a
precious realm under siege from those who would rob children of their
childhoods, and as being subverted from within by children who refuse to remain
childlike.” This portrays childhood as being subverted by both adults and
children.
Many children engage in work that is neither
harmful nor exploitative, solely to aid their families. However, millions of
other children engage in work, which interferes with their education and
deprives them from their childhood. It also interferes with their physical and cognitive
development (Holt, 2014). Fifty Seven million primary school aged children were denied the right
to education in 2011. Worldwide, 36% of boys and 39% of girls of secondary
school age did not attend school. Only 36% of boys and 30% of girls in less
developed countries attended secondary school (Holt, 2014). Child labour is an
enormous issue in the modern world. Children can be
depicted as a “worker”. This is predominantly unknown of in Britain. This links
to Hendrick’s (1997) constructions of childhood as the opposite of contemporary
childhood as child labor was abolished at the end of the Victorian era in the
UK yet it still commonly occurs in countries such as North Korea and Tanzania. The
theme also links to Hendrick’s (1997) deprived child. Although children whom
engage in work are deprived in this image, it is a matter of circumstance, not
choice. Adults are completely responsible and the blame does not in any way
extend to the child (Best, 1993). In North Korea, during
the school term, many children work between two and four hours during the week
and all day on Saturday (The Korea Times, 2015). Although this information is
from an online newspaper, it is well known that child labour is an issue in
North Korea. Famine is a key issue in North Korea, which can
explain their “need” for child labour in order to make up the working numbers.
The difference in nutritional status in early childhood and maternity in North
Korea (10-15%) and South Korea (3%) is vast. (Shim et al., 2007).
This
construction of childhood can be linked as the opposite of children being seen
as help seekers and rather them being the help-providers. This opposes the main
argument of the social construction of childhood, as adults are not the primary
shapers of social constructions of childhood (Adams, 2014; Fattore, Mason,
& Watson, 2009; James & James, 2008; Qvortrup, 1994) in this example.
However, children are under the instruction of adults.
To
conclude, Lupton (2000) says, “Childhood is institutionalised through family,
education and the state resulting in dependence on adults and exclusion from
full participation in adult society”. The social construction of childhood is
changing constantly. A mass event such as the Dunblane shootings, which
resulted in the deaths of many children, changed the way in which people view
children. They became “innocent angels” instead of unruly (James and Prout,
2014).
In
Westernised societies, children are either seen as being social problems, or it
is seen as the social problems of children (Corsaro, 2014). The accuracy
argument that adults are the primary shapers of social constructions of
childhood (Adams, 2014; Fattore, Mason, & Watson, 2009; James & James,
2008; Qvortrup, 1994) is dependant on the precise construction of childhood in
that culture. Although this means that the social construction of childhood
differs from culture to culture with little pattern, it can also be interpreted
that childhood has many levels of power. However, the argument that children
are able to negotiate meanings as they shape and interpret their world around
them (Adams, 2014; Fattore, Mason, & Watson, 2009; James & James, 2008;
Qvortrup, 1994) seems to be fairly universal.
Achvarina, V. and Reich, S.F. (2006) ‘No place
to hide: Refugees, displaced persons, and the recruitment of child soldiers’, International
Security, 31(1), pp. 127–164. doi: 10.1162/isec.2006.31.1.127.
Acknowledgement of reviewers (2009) Transcultural Psychiatry, 46(4), pp. 584–607.
Adams, K. (2014) ‘What is a child? Children’s
perceptions, the Cambridge primary review and implications for education’, Cambridge
Journal of Education, 44(2), pp. 163–177.
Best, J. (1993) Threatened children: Rhetoric
and concern about child-victims. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
Boydell, K.M., Stasiulis, E., Greenberg, M.,
Greenberg, C. and Spiegler, B. (2008) ‘I’ll show them: The social construction
of (in)competence in survivors of childhood brain tumors’, Journal of Pediatric
Oncology Nursing, 25(3), pp. 164–174.
Corsaro, W.A. (2014) The sociology of
childhood. 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA, United States: SAGE Publications.
Holt, K. (2014) THE STATE OF THE WORLD’S
CHILDREN 2014 IN NUMBERS revealing disparities, advancing children’s rights
EVERY CHILD COUNTS. Available at:
https://www.unicef.org/sowc2014/numbers/documents/english/SOWC2014_In%20Numbers_28%20Jan.pdf
(Accessed: 14 November 2016).
James, A. and Prout, A. (2014) Constructing
and reconstructing childhood: Contemporary issues in the sociological study of
childhood. Edited by Professor Allison James and Alan Prout. 2nd edn.
London: RoutledgeFalmer.
The Korea Times (2015) Forced child labor
rampant in NK. Available at: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2015/10/116_187859.html
(Accessed: 18 October 2016).
Lawlor, M.C. (2003) ‘The significance of being
occupied: The social construction of childhood occupations’, American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 57(4), pp. 424–434.
Lupton, D. (ed.) (2000) Risk and
sociocultural theory: New directions and perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Maynard, T. and Thomas, N. (eds.) (2009) An
introduction to early childhood studies. 2nd edn. Los Angeles: SAGE
Publications.
McGinn, L., Stone, N., Ingham, R. and
Bengry-Howell, A. (2016) ‘Parental interpretations of “childhood innocence”’, Health
Education, 116(6), pp. 580–594.
Panter-Brick, C. (1998) Biosocial
perspectives on children. Edited by Catherine Panter-Brick and C.
Panter-Brick. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pasura, D., Jones, A.D., Hafner, J.A., Maharaj,
P.E., Nathaniel-DeCaires, K. and Johnson, E.J. (2012) ‘Competing meanings of
childhood and the social construction of child sexual abuse in the Caribbean’, Childhood,
20(2), pp. 200–214.
Reder, P., Duncan, S. and Gray, M. (1993) Beyond
blame: Child abuse tragedies revisited. New York: Routledge.
Sage Social Science (1998) ‘Editorial: The
social construction of childhood - and its limits’, Childhood, 5(2), pp.
131–132.
Saraceno, C. (1984) ‘The social construction of
childhood: Child care and education policies in Italy and the United States’, Social
Problems, 31(3), pp. 351–363.
Shim, J.E., Yoon, J., Jeong, S.Y., Park, M. and
Lee, Y.S. (2007) ‘Status of Childhood and Maternal Nutrition in South Korea and
North Korea’, Korean Journal of Community Nutrition, 2, pp. 123–132.
Timimi, S. (2002) Pathological child
psychiatry and the Medicalization of childhood. Hove: Brunner-Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment