TheChez.net

I wrote this paper the first semester of Freshman year.  I decided to post it. –A schizo asian:

I have a different background than most people at the University of Scranton.  Both my parents emigrated from Vietnam, a country that strongly believes in filial piety.  That region of Asia believes that a son has an ultimate debt to his parents.  No matter how old he gets, he should always listen to their decisions.  He should be there for his parents every day and care for them into old age in the hopes that his children will take notice and do the same.  That was the way my parents were raised, and, looking back on it, that was the way they were raising me.  It was a system that has worked for thousands of years. Every moment that I wasn’t studying or practicing karate, was just another opportunity to lecture about how I should conduct myself in the future when they grow old.

Throughout my life, for instance, my mother has always tested my piety in the form of questions.  This particular one is her favorite.  She asks it in a somewhat playful but also serious kind of way.  “Years from now, our family will be on a boat.  The boat will crash.  You and the others will wash upon the shore.  Yet, your mother and your wife will still be in the ocean, slowly drowning.  You only have enough time and energy to save one.  Which one will you choose?”  I hesitate every time she asks this and groan.  Can’t we talk about something else? I mean, c’mon, I am only seven years old.  She sighs and replies, almost yelling.  “You will save your mother!  You can have many wives in your lifetime, but only one mother!”

Although I was surrounded by the Asian culture and its philosophies, I grew up in the American one instead.   I watched the American shows, read the American books, and listened to the American music while subtly rejecting the culture of Vietnam.  This fact is evident in my language.  I cannot speak Vietnamese, nor can I read it.  (At best, I can understand simple sentences and can only respond in a yes, no, thank you, and where is the bathroom?) Because of this ignorance to her culture, my mother has this crazy idea that I am going to put her in a nursing home because I am an integrated American and that was what Americans do.  They don’t care for their parents.  Children hate their parents and the constant fighting, divorce, drug abuse, and neglect are a result of this.  She isn’t stupid or blind. She has observed these occurrences over the many years that she has been in the states.  Although they are extremely inaccurate, her observations are justified and I do not blame her for her beliefs.

I think that no one will argue that parents are the most important factor in a child’s life.  I remember when I was in grade school, I went on a weekend campout with a friend and his parents. His mom and dad were really cool compared to my parents.  They were easy going and fun, so I was looking forward to the trip.  When we got there, my friend and I found a frog and he started to chase it.  I told him to leave it alone, but he wouldn’t.  He grabbed it, pulled at its limbs, threw it, and poked it with a pointy stick.  His parents saw what was happening, but they overlooked it and went back to doing whatever they were doing.  How could they condone the slow torture of the frog?  My parents would have disowned me if they ever saw me doing that to another living creature.  I realized just how well my parents were raising me.   At that moment, all I wanted was to go home again.  In retrospect, the parents’ ignorance to an obviously violent act could explain why this former friend was so physical during school and had to be expelled. (Needless to say, I never hung out with that guy ever again.)  In conjunction, I have heard on many occasions, children calling the act of receiving a family a game of chance.  Fortunately, I got extremely lucky in the parent lottery.  Although they were strict, my mother and father did their best to raise me.  They brought me up with love and devotion.  It is because of their positive influences that I have become a confident, young adult who can think for himself and write a paper that somewhat goes against their own beliefs.  I appreciate what they have done for me.  I feel as though I am indeed obligated to give them something in return.

One philosopher argues that children owe their parents “absolutely nothing” because parents raise their children out of love and do not see them as a monetary investment. On one hand, I agree with the part that says parents should not see children as monetary investments.  It is common understanding that bringing up children costs money and that children will hopefully grow up to have a job of their own.  Yet, children should not be treated like mutual funds, and it would be wrong (and extremely stupid) if they did.  There is no guarantee that the child will give money back to parents with interest, or even have a job which pays better than the parents’.  In addition, with this market, children may be worse off than their parent’s ever had been and might struggle to just stay alive.  Thus, raising a child for gain in money is unsound.

On the other hand, I completely disagree with the component which says that children do not owe their parents anything. In respect to that philosopher’s thinking, it is true that a parent raises a child from an innocent infant protecting it from the dangers of the world.  Parents try to instill in the child love, a sense of purpose, and values.  This is an arduous task, both time-consuming and tiring, but they still do it because they want their child to grow to be a well-balanced and moral person.  Since we have already established that parents do not raise their children for monetary gain, why would they go through the trouble of rearing a child?  The above philosopher answers the question: love. Parents do what they because the level of love has become so deep that the child becomes a part of them.  Human nature is to protect oneself, and so a parent must also protect his child.  My father told me one time, he hated to watch me spar in karate because every time I was kicked, he was kicked too.  This example supports my belief that a parent’s love can be a connection greater than logic.

Beyond this, love itself is not a one way street.  There must be love coming and going from both sides. If a parent and child truly love one another, than the materials of the physical world should not come between them.  A son should not care if he gave money to his parents because they are more important than cash.  Most importantly, it must be noted that parents are family.  They are the reason why a child was given life, was able to grow up, and is still living today.   Because of this, there are moral obligations in which the child needs to fulfill. I do believe that children do owe their parents respect, love, and honor.  Even if parents did not choose to have the child (sadly, in many cases) they still decided to keep him.  Their decision is a life-changing move and it reveals the kind of character that parents possess to make such a choice.  A child must care for his parents because they cared for him.  It is indicative that a child pays them back.  I mean, if someone was to lend you money, wouldn’t you want to pay them back in some way or another? It is common courtesy, and with parents, this courtesy should be amplified.  Therefore, a child does owe the parents a great amount.

Nonetheless, the term “owe” is a somewhat broad term.  In the sense of a child to parent relationship, I think that both sides owe the other at least something. The parents owe it to their children to do their best to protect, feed, clothe, shelter, and provide for them.  In return, the children should do their best to do the same when the parents get older.  People might believe that there are different levels of owing. I agree.  I think of the parents as the initial “ower.”  They are morally obligated to care for their child.  However, if they neglect the child and do not nurture him, then the child owes the parents just the same.  It is my belief that the child should give back as much as the parents gave to him in the first place, and even more if they have raised them with love.

Yet, it is important to keep in mind that a child is his own person.  It is no doubt that the first years of a child’s life solely depend on his environment and the care that the parents give to him.   However, as a child grows older, he is able to choose who he becomes.   If he was raised in hardship, he can choose whether or not to build his character to overcome this adversity.  If raised with a loving environment, he can choose to embrace it for the better, or reject it to counter the norms of society. As a free, separate individual, a child can choose to follow the path his parents laid out for him, or he can take a different one.  It is the parents that lay the foundations for life, but it is the child who chooses where to build the framework and place the bricks.  It is because of this reason that I admit children do not owe everything they have to their parents.  The child’s decision and paths they walk are a result of themselves and themselves only. Still, the parents still plays the monumental role of the giver of life.  Without them, a child would not have the opportunity to choose one path, or reject another.  It is because of this, that I believe children owe a lot, but not everything they have.

Many people might have objections to my belief.  For instance, the Asian culture would call me a disloyal and bad son.  The son should owe the parents everything he has because they gave him life.  Others might point out that parents might have children to “fit in.” It may be possible that some parents do not raise their children out of love, but because the law requires they have to, or they want gain the approval of their neighbors.  This gross misinterpretation of parenthood is another reason why children may feel as though they do not owe their parents anything.  Do children still need to owe the parents if they raise them for the wrong reasons?  Again, I respond that they were the people who did give you life.   The fact that you can argue whether or not you owe them anything proves that you do indeed owe them at least something.

Other critics might point out that if a parent truly loves a child, that parent would not care for the material things.  They would not want the money or the gifts.  Although I do agree with this, the child should recognize that it is the gesture that counts.  When a son gives a parent a gift, it shows that he cares and has been thinking about them. This notion is far greater than anything money can buy. The physical commodities that a child gives to a parent assures the caretaker that love is not a one way street.  This is the real moral obligation of the child: to show that he cares.

Growing up with the contrast of ideas, the American culture vs. the Asian culture, I have developed a hybrid of thinking.  Nothing in life is always black and white, but mostly grey.  I believe that children do owe their parents much of their lives.  They are the origin of his life and his sole provider in the first years of his life. However, we must not overlook that a child is his own person and that his choices are what made him who he is.  But again, without his parents, he would not have the opportunity to make those choices. Therefore, helping out parents is morally obligated.  If the parents are struggling and the child has excess prosperities, then it is morally contracted that the child helps them out. In terms of debt, children owe their parents as much help to, but should give beyond what is necessary to life to their parents because if they truly love each other, the material things in life won’t matter.  It is the gesture that matters most.