In very many sociological studies, social scientist attempt to explain certain aspect

of family lives albeit culture, history, time and place. These studies outcome are
important and contribute to family life in a big way, at the very least they attempt
to provide some guidance on how families within different cultures do things. As
important as the finding of these studies are they must not be looked upon as a
“one size fits all” model. They do not always apply to every family and often time
what make sense in one culture, would be totally absurd in another. In “Invisible
Inequality” Author Lareau challenges a ten years old study by Kingston who argues
that social class does not distinguish parents’ behavior or children’s lives. Miss
Annette Lareau claims that “social class does indeed create distinctive parenting
styles.”

In “Invisible Inequality”, Miss Annette Lareau claims that “parents both white and
black differ by class in the way they differ their own roles in their children’s lives as
well as in how they perceive the nature of childhood.” She feels that Middle-class
parents tend to conform to a cultural logic of childrearing she calls “concerted
cultivation.” And the childrearing strategies of white and black working-class and
poor parents emphasize the “accomplishment of natural growth.” Wikipedia defines
class as “structure as group of people according to wealth, income, education, type
of education and membership in a specific subculture or social network.” Although it
helps to be economically fortunate to be able to provide better opportunities for
your children but I believe to a large degrees how you raise your kids will be base
more so on the values that your parents passed on to you.

In my family, my mother – a single parent raised my sister and me on a home

attendant salary. We lived in NYC housing project, where her rules were you do
what I tell you and that is all, it was her way or the highway. I consider myself to be
middle class, I work for a prestigious financial firm, I make over six figure salary,
and I own more than one home. The immediate values I am passing on to my son,
is not exactly that of a “concerted cultivation.” I see what Mrs. Lareau is saying
intellectually and ideally I wish that I knew better to raise my son on some of those
principles she mentioned in the study pertaining to the Williams family. In reality my
methods and motivations were quite different. Being that I made more money than
my mother did not automatically change those values she passed on to me from
Frederick Douglas housing projects. I did not always know the resources I needed
or what I should be enrolling my son in or how significant these things or lack of
them will eventually impact his life. I don’t believe the study take into account
where the family comes from – a middle class family who migrated from Haiti like
my family did will not have the same values or attitude toward family life as an
African American middle class family.

I believe that nouveau middle class parents like myself, who were raised by working
class or poor parents, unconsciously will adapt a hybrid model of concerted
cultivation with somewhat of a laissez-faire attitude. What about working class
parents who suddenly come into some money either by inheritance or by winning
the lottery? Would they suddenly shift their values because of the money? They
may move into a more affluent neighborhood, buy and nicer house, drive a nicer car
and associate with more wealthy and affluent people, do their values attitude about
how they raise their kids will suddenly change, I don’t think so.

The Williams family—one of the middle class family that use in the “Invisible
Inequality” Mr. and Mrs. Williams feels that the strategies they cultivated with their
son Alexander would result in his having the best possible change at a happy and
productive life. In this study Miss Lareau would have you believe that money cures
it all, the more you have, happier you will be. Miss Lareau seems to discount the
human element. Alexander is being raised for the most part without any form of
entertainment. He can hardly plan for himself, when his mother was out of town for
one evening, he did not know what to do with himself. He grew accustomed to
being busy all the time, will that make him happy? I am not sure. The word happy
is such a subjective word, I know too many people with ton of money who are so
miserable, they would give all their money at least a good chunk of if it would buy
them just a little bit of happiness.

Psychologist Daniel Gilbert from Harvard University, in his best-selling book

“Stumbling on Happiness,” he said, Psychologist have spend decades studying the
relation between wealth and happiness, and they have generally concluded that
wealth increases human happiness when it lifts people out of abject poverty and
into the middle class but that it does little to increase happiness thereafter” In fact
sometimes being denied certain things earlier in life could be the catalyst to propel
one to one might call wealth and happiness. case in point, pro athletes like Ron
Artest who grew from the rough neighborhood of queens bridge and Lebron James
who her 16 years old mother was forced to raise him alone after his ex-convict
fathered Anthony McClelland left. Ron Artest in his rap lyrics, he says that being
raised from queens bridge, he had to dodge bullets to get to and fro and now he has
money now he is subject to search by the police because he drives a nice car as a
black man. Like Biggy Smalls says “more money more problems.” I don’t believe
solely because the Williams have money, the concerted cultivation approach alone
will lead to happiness, I believe the intangibles like family, going out to play without
your parents always monitoring everything you do, sometimes just being able to
watch TV, I believe that contributes to someone overall utility meter of happiness s.
A discourse between Bentham and Philosopher John Stuart Mills –an influential
contributor to social theory proves how subjective happiness is. Bentham treats all
forms of happiness as equal whereas Mill argues that intellectual and moral
pleasures are superior to more physical forms of pleasure. Philosopher John Stuart
Mill an influential contributor to social theory, political theory and political economy,
he distinguishes between happiness and contentment

Another point that I also disagree with is that Middle-class parents also stress
language use and the development of reasoning and employ talking as their
preferred form of discipline. Working-class and poor parents issue many more
directives to their children and, in some households, place more emphasis on
physical discipline. In my experience, this will also depend on how progressive a
parent is in raising their kids. The other day during a train ride, I was sitting across
a few young ladies chatting loudly among themselves. An older Haitian man with his
heavy accent sitting next to me said “in the USA, kids are loud and the seen, not
heard thing is long long gone.” I believe that again is going to depend. So far what I
have noticed in both middle class and working class black family, they still practice
this ancient model that kids are seen not heard. I can totally see the benefit of
encouraging your kids to be able to express themselves as the article mention, “Not
all middle-class parents are as attentive to their children’s needs as this mother and
none are always interested in negotiating. But a general pattern of reasoning and
accommodating is common”. Again intellectually that makes sense however they
level of democracy parents use interacting with their kids will depend the kind of
relationship he or she had with their parents or nurturer. I believe there is be a huge
disparity in attitude on how parents raise their kids if one middle class family is
immediately raised by a working class family compare to a middle class family who
was raised by two or three generation of a middle class family.

My girlfriend Wendy she’s a very successful attorney who was raised by a single
mother who work 3 jobs just so she can afford the small apartments they all live in
with Wendy 2 other 3 other siblings. In her home just like it was in my mother’s
house, you did what you told; there was no negotiation or even asking for
clarification. Her mother model is if I have to be called by a teacher or the principal
of your school, and have to lose a day’s pay, she would get a butt whooping…
Wendy says that her mother practiced the “Just in case licks” philosophy – she
would get a lick at times for something that she did not do. Her mother believed
that if she made her fear her then if and when she is about to engage in mishaps
behavior she will remember what it will be like if and when her mother finds out.
Although today, that is considered abuse, most Caribbean family believed that you
have spank your kids, even the bible makes mention that “spare the rods spoil the
kids” and being that Caribbean folks then to be religious, they believe in that
mess… Even to some degree, she practices the same thing with her daughter. She
gets upset when her daughter who is very inquisitive is asking twice more than
once. When she has company, she really does practice that her daughter should
stay in her room and play quietly. That form of discipline clearly shows that it has
nothing to do with the fact that she now consider herself a mother class parent
raising her daughter, it points that she is transferring exactly what she was taught
by her mother even though intellectually she strongly disagrees with her mother’s
methods,

In conclusion, I feel it is very difficult to predict what method parents choose in

childrearing, disciplining base on what social class--rich, middle class, and working
class poor or otherwise they belong. I also believe if you are raise in a middle class
family that will not necessitate that your will live your better and happier lives in
your adulthoods. In my experience social class has not been a predicates of what
model of rearing, what form of discipline that family chooses to raise their kids or
that the particular model they use is exactly what decided their kid’s happiness or
unhappiness. The method I have noticed families chooses to transfer values to your
children is more closely tied to what values were transferred to them by their
parents. I believe no matter what social class home you happen to be raised in, all
parents aim to transfer to their kids the best they felt that was transferred to them
by their parents in essence they believe it’s their duty to do the best job they know
how with whatever resources available to them either tangible or intangible to raise
theirs as happy and productive member of their society. Intellectually I understand
what Miss Lareau study set out to prove but I think she falls short that the approach
parents take for raising, disciplining and communicate with their kids is as simply
due to their economic status.