In class we discussed the influences of globalization on families throughout the world. As the economy continues to globalize, women from less affluent countries choose to migrate alone to more developed nations to improve their families’ financial means by working as nurses, nannies, and housekeepers for affluent families in
Read this article and discuss the impact of increased globalization on families throughout the world. Specifically, what does this mean for children in less developed countries who grow up with their mothers and/or fathers being hundreds or even thousands of miles away because they are participating in this globalized economy? Do the positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world to improve their families’ economic positions outweigh the evident darkness of families being separated for years at a time? Finally, speculate on what might happen as the global economy experiences a downturn—in what ways might these global families be impacted?
54 comments:
It is very unfortunate for any child to grow up without their parents. A child requires the love, guidance, and care of both the mother and the father. However, I do believe that a child can receive all this, not only through their parents, but through others as well. For example, an aunt or uncle may take the role of a caregiver.
When children in less developed countries grow up with their mothers and/or fathers being hundreds or even thousand miles away because they are participating in globalized economy places a heavy burden on the children. Such burdens can cause negative outcomes. For example, like the child in the article, he ended up hanging himself.
Being able to work anywhere has its ups and downs. Not only do you get to provide for your family, but you also get to experience the working world for yourself (assuming that you haven’t already). However, being far away from your children, so far that your children are not able to see you can cause harm to not only the children, but everyone who has some sort of relationship with those children. Stefan Ciurea’s death opened the eyes of many and also brought sorrow. Therefore I think that just because a mother or a father is able to work anywhere around the world, that does not mean they should be allowed to completely leave their child. I do feel like there are other ways to avoid tragic results, such as a child’s death. To me, the darkness of families being separated for years at a time outweighs the positive aspect of globalization and the ability to work anywhere in the world.
If the global economy experiences a downturn, families, such the million of Romanians, would be impacted in a negative way. Things are already bad for them. They are not well off and they do not have enough to provide for their families or even for themselves. So if the economy takes a spiral turn downwards, families won’t really have much left.
I think these are extremely sad situations. The fact that family members, mothers and fathers who are the leaders, are leaving their children behind is in one way generous and thoughtful. However, on the other hand, I feel that it is selfish and cruel that a parent would actually consider this. The article shared a sad story of a young 12-year-old boy, Stefan Ciurea. The impact of his mother was strong and for other children, a mother is the caregiver, the overall most important thing in a young childs life. Having his mother leave to pursue work and make more money for "the family" tore apart Stefan. The idea of a mother leaving her children behind is devastating and almost leaves the children with no direction or guidance. Without this mother figure in Stefans life, his life had no guidance or point of living causing him and his family to now suffer. On the other side of the story, viewing from the mothers point of view, I can see how a poor mother would want to take part of this globalization. There are many positive aspects for these types of parents who are working abroad. They are not only making more money and living better lifestyles themselves, they are also trying to give back to their children and provide better opportunities for them. But where does it actually stop? This sort of globalization has the same sort of affect like a drug would on a person. Once you get a taste of something you like and it makes you feel better, you always want more and more until it is too late. The mothers and fathers who participate in this sort of work and who are affected by globalization don't realize how it really is affected their family and children. Mothers and fathers (such as Stefans mother) wanted to work to provide for her children. Little did she know, she was really tearing apart her children and her family's lives. Stefans mother continued to work even though he dreaded the idea, and he killed himself. She is still in the mindset of working and making more money to provide for Stefans step brother, Gheorghe. And just like Stefan, Gheorghe begs and begs her to come back or he go there to be with her but that does not faze the mother. She is blinded by the beauty of wealth and has almost forgotten about the importance of family and her role as a mother (but what is their actual idea and view of a mother figure, one who leaves for money and just never returns??).
Overall, I feel that the Romanian economy has already experienced a downturn and despite it turning around, if the mothers continue to vanish out of their children's life's then that has more of a negative impact on the family as a whole than the downturn of an economy. Families are stronger with parents guiding them and when they're there to support. This type of globalization is just disrupting the value of a family and the importance of sticking together "through thick and thin"
The previous comments discussed how difficult it is for parents to leave their families behind because they are trying to make money for their family. I disagree and agree with the previous statement. I agree because it is good that parents would do anything to make money and support their families but, leaving for such a long period of time could be very hard on the family being left behind. I also disagree with this statement in many ways. It's hard on the family because they will never know what it will be like to be raised or grow up with their parents in their lives. By the time their parents return their country, the children will probably be adults. They will never have that motherly or fatherly bond with their parents which is very sad. In the article, "In Romania, Children Left Behind Suffer the Strains of Migration," it talks about a young boy who hung himself because his mother left to go work in another country. This shows that parents leaving to go work in other countries can be very straining on children. However, the mother did make three times her normal salary than when she was in Romania. In the article, it also states that children abroad are more likely to do poorly in school, smoke cigarettes, and drink alcohol.
Although it is extremely hard for parents to leave their children behind, they are doing it to support their family so they can get out poverty. It can be really hard on children sociologically and emotionally such as in the case like the Romanian boy. However, it is necessary in cases where families are leaving in extreme poverty.
The issue of Globalization is such a complex issue. I believe that a parent’s primary responsibility is to be providers for their children. Although providing for a child does include providing financially for their children, the meaning also encompasses building a sound foundation for the child as well; including guidance and emotional support. I do believe that the parents are looking out for the well-being of their children, consequently, the children are the victims in the matter; they are the ones that receive the short end of the stick. They will not have the same opportunities that others have by growing up with their parents available for them to just ensure that their EVERY need gets met.
There was something that another blogger posted that I completely disagree with. He or she stated that the parents who participate in Globalization are selfish and cruel. I think that if someone is forced to work outside of the country in order to provide for their families, is a choice that that individual has to make and not really for us to judge. If the only way a person can sustain a decent form of living is to travel miles away, then the issue should not be with the parents, the issue should be with the lack of financial or job opportunities afforded to them. To me, I do not see this situation being any different from single- parent households in the United States where the mother or father has to work several jobs at once in order to provide for their family. Can you really ensure the child is getting the all that they really need from their parents?
I do not believe that the positive or financial benefits that come from Globalization does not outweigh the negative impact that it has on a family. However, the reality of it is that Globalization the only way some people feel is the best way to make a decent living for their families.
If the Romanian economy experiences a downturn then, unfortunately, the number of families experiencing poverty will continue, as well as globalization and the negative impacts that it has on their families.
Overall, the issue of Globalization is a difficult situation but for some this is the only way for a family to get out of poverty.
Children in less developed countries who grow up with their mothers and/or fathers being hundreds or even thousands of miles away due to their participation in the globalized economy are sadly most likely going to lead unstructured and unstable lives due to the lack of guidance and direction from their parents. Unless these children have alternative strong authority figures to substitute for the absence of the physical presence of their own biological parents, they may find it increasingly difficult to lead healthy and satisfying lives. Children need the physical presence of their parents because they need and yearn for love, rules, support, advice, as well as a sense of permanence in order to maintain the right control of their lives. Case in point, the article shared a story of how a Romanian boy named Stefan Ciurea committed suicide due to his mother’s decision to move to Italy in order to financially provide for her family more sufficiently. Because Stefan’s father was a heavy alcoholic, he saw that there was no longer any reason for living especially since the only person who he loved and knew loved him back would be leaving for an indefinite amount of time. It is clear that Stefan and his father had a strained relationship since he had gone as far as killing himself when his mother informed him that she was planning on leaving to work in Italy. As a result, I personally don’t believe that the positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world to improve their families’ economic positions outweigh the evident darkness of families being separated for years at a time. The main reasons for having children and having a family are to first and foremost act as a unit and then to provide each other with a wealth of knowledge, love, care, and support. Although providing the basic means of survival are equally as important for their development, I believe that children would much rather have their parents by their sides for nurturing perhaps even more so than having some of the essential necessities. Furthermore, I believe that working at a lower wage job in your home country and having the ability to interact with your children at the end of the day greatly outweighs the amount of money you could have had working abroad except for cases of extreme poverty where working globally is the last and only resort. If the global economy experiences a downturn, this will negatively impact global families who depend on globalization as their only way of financial stability. The rate of these global families in extreme poverty will increase dramatically. However, on the other hand, these global families will be then able to reunite and to restore core family values, which will greatly aid in paving the right path for these children.
Participating in a globalized economy seems to be having a very negative effect on families. Marriages are crumbling; children are turning to dangerous, illegal activities, and in some cases choosing to end their lives because they cannot deal with the stress that the lack of a parent can have on someone. For thousands of children in this situation it means that they do not have the nurturing guidance that mothers and fathers provide. The article mentioned that some parents will go on shopping sprees and send their children a bunch of material things to try and make up for the social and emotional loss they are experiencing. It is hard to decipher how a brand new bike or cell phone could replace a human being. Some of the other bloggers were right in saying that children need the physical presence of their parents. Money and material things are just not enough.
The article also mentioned that the global economy may just experience a downturn. If that happens then all of those parents who left their children just may have to go back home. When they do it will be interesting to see if they are welcomed with open arms. After years of pent up feelings of depression, abandonment, and sadness these children are going to be adults; Adults who are going to probably resent their parents for leaving them. Not only will that happen but the economy itself will probably in turmoil with an unemployment rate that is too high to be legal.
Increased globalization has greatly impacted families throughout the world. There are both positives and negatives to this impact. The benefits include better incomes for families in the poor countries because the provider of the family can go to a more developed country to earn better income while his or her children stay in their home country. The disadvantage is the separation that occurs when the parent leaves and the child is devastated to be left behind. This was talked about in the article about the Romanian family where the son actually committed suicide because his mother had to go to Italy to earn money to support the family. I disagree with blogger .211 that it is selfish and cruel that a parent would consider doing this. It is really hard to say if the positive aspects of earning a better living outweigh the harms of leaving one’s family behind and I think it depends on each family’s situation. It also depends on who would be the caretaker of the children after the mother leaves (father, grandparents, aunt, etc) as well as the age of the children. It is a sad situation for the children to grow up without the parent, but the parent is doing what he or she thinks is best and doing what they have to do to provide for their children. As the global economy experiences a downturn, these global families will be negatively impacted because less jobs are becoming available in developed countries due to the recession. Also, there are more people getting laid off so these people who are working the low wage jobs may also be laid off as people begin to cut back on spending.
I think this is very sad and unfortunate that adults think having money is more important than raising their children. This story deals with what is happening in Romania and the fact that families are being torn apart. I think this story could be done in any developing country where adults and even older children move away to work and send money back to support the family. In this story this crossing of boarders is allowed because of the need for these workers. If we look here at our own country we can see the other side of this story. There are thousands of illegal immigrants in this country doing the work that Americans do not want to do or that American employers don’t want to pay the cost of hiring legal workers. The biggest industry where this happens is in agriculture and farming migrant workers work for cash and less hourly wages and most work very hard and take nothing for granted and send the money they do not need to live back to their families. I am not trying to down play the terrible tragedy that happened in this story and how this affects the families that have people move away for jobs. I would agree with 313 and say that the parent thinks this is what is best for the children and in many cases it maybe but in some cases it can lead to the tragedy that was told in this story.
After reading the article about the Romanian families, I felt quite distressed. Growing up in a poor country without my mother or father is very traumatizing for a young child and sometimes even for teenagers. Your parents are the backbone of your family and knowing that you must be thousands of miles away from them, especially not knowing when you will see them again, can have negative effects on the growth and stability of children and parents. Globalization is something positive from an economic viewpoint and can bring in up to three times more income for families as it did Ciurea family of Romania. Being able to provide financially, socially, and psychologically for your family are essential. It is very difficult to make the distinction between providing financially through globalization or being there emotionally for your children. Looking at the downfalls of the Romanian children after their parents, especially their mothers, left, it was evident that having their parents around allowed the children to grow more effectively – at least until the children are at a decent age, possibly as a responsible teenager. If the global economy was to take a downturn, these families could either be further effected by parents having to move further away or they will have to return home and suffer even more financially.
I see nothing wrong with parents doing whatever it takes to provide for their children. Is it difficult to go extended periods of time without seeing your family members, yes. But what these individuals in Romania are doing is no different than individuals from the US who work extended, 60 hour weeks to provide for their families and children. From my own personal experiences when I was younger, I rarely saw my dad because he left our house before the sun came up and returned after I was already asleep, but he did this to provide my family with everything we need or wanted. The same goal that the Romanians are trying to accomplish for their families.
If the global economy experiences a downturn, the impact on these families will be negative. The will lose their new, revenue generating jobs and be forced to return to a job similar to their previous job which didn’t provide enough money for their families.
.235 said...
.227 said “I think this is very sad and unfortunate that adults think having money is more important than raising their children.” I could not disagree more. Adults who live in situations where they are not able to take care of their children, whether or not it was a smart choice to have children, they are already part of the family and for a parent to see their child suffer must be one of the hardest things they have to go through. I feel that every parent wants the best for their children and even if they have to sacrifice their own needs or desires to try and make that a possibility for them are the reasons why they leave their children behind to a place where they can be part of the global economy and bring food and clothing to their children back at home where it is not possible.
children in less developed countries who grow up with their mothers and/or fathers being hundreds or even thousands of miles away because they are participating in this globalized economy may have a greater chance of financial stability. Although, it is not guaranteed that the parent abroad will succeed and bring the children out of poverty but I feel like it is an economic decision that has to be made that could potentially help the children and family members left behind.
I feel that the potential positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world does help to improve their families’ economic positions although there are negative results such as families being separated for years. It goes back to being able to provide for a family. There if there are no opportunities where a person lives and they have to support their families in some cases this is the best and sometimes seemingly only option that they have. With families come sacrifices and those sacrifices have to be taken seriously and outweighing the negative aspects. I think it’s more important to provide food and shelter than a presence when if a parent stays and doesn’t leave for the global economy they can only provide a presence but no food and shelter.
Unfortunately, there are downturns to the global economy. I feel that it does experience a huge downturn these families that have been abroad or plan to go may not be providing, creating an absence in the family and possibly create a bigger economic problem than the one that they were facing before.
The effect of globalization seems to be a Catch 22. On one side, a mother or father can leave to a more prosperous country and send their children money for food, education, housing, etc but on the other side families experience the struggle of being apart for many years. Stefan’s mother would be considered a transnational mother who leaves to a different country and parenting becomes more of an instrumental role and emotional duties are limited to being done over the phone. A child may feel they are being deserted and many do not understand why their parent(s) cannot return or why they cannot be joined with their parent(s). This winter I experienced this on my study abroad trip to El Salvador. An eight year old boy told me his parents both left when he was just one in a half and now lives with his grandmother. He would ask himself ‘why did they leave me?’ or ‘why don’t they want me?’. This was heartbreaking to hear especially when he asked us if he could come on our airplane so he could finally see his parents. In El Salvador, when you ask children what they want to do when they grow up they do not say I want to be a lawyer, a teacher, or a doctor. Most just say when I grow up I want to live in the United States. I imagine this is what Stefan felt. He questioned why his mother would leave him and why they no longer could be together.
Although it is hard to take one side, I believe the ability to work outweighs family separation. Mothers and/or fathers do not leave thinking they will be living a prosperous and glamorous life. Ms. Ciurea left to be a cleaner in Rome, which yes brought more economic gain, but by no stretch of the imagination can it be considered a lavish life. Immigration to me is the solution to our natural instinct of surviving and protecting for our young. Blogger 322 argues that there are other ways to avoid tragic results and that parents should not be allowed to completely leave their child. However, one has to consider if this is a cultural or a structural problem. If Romania or less developed countries had the ability to living in a prosperous economy then they would not face the problem or in fact ever question leaving their children. Ms. Ciurea did not want to leave nor did she ever want her child to be so affected by the change that it would cause Stefan to hang himself. But when you can barely put bread on the table you naturally act to change the situation. I think it is also important to remember that suicide also occurs in intact families and suicide is not only particular to this one group of families.
As the global economy experiences a downturn, I believe developing countries will experience more poverty, but the instinct to leave will still continue. Families will still keep looking for opportunities and resources for survival. Families historically have always moved and adapted to demands of labor changes, and I believe that this trend will continue in global families.
Children in less developed countries who grow up with their mothers and/ or fathers being hundreds or even thousands of miles away at times feel left behind. Yet I do not feel that this has to be the case, I believe that it really comes down to each family. There are children with their parents being far away who can still deal with their situations and develop normally without the feeling of depression. A parent should consider how their children feel if they were to leave to work in a different country, and I feel that it is important for them to discuss this. In these countries families should consider finding a job in their own country before leaving to other countries for jobs. There are still jobs within their own countries that they should be able to find. I do not believe that the positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world to improve their families’ economic positions outweigh the evident darkness of families being separated. With children it is important for them to have a sense of security which would mean having their parents there. Everyone needs company and children especially need to feel loved and leaving them at times makes them feel like they are not worthy or that they have done something wrong. In leaving the country to work in a different country can have a negative consequence if and when the global economies experience a downturn, because this would put these parents out of job which would lead to no income for these families. These parents are hundreds of miles away and are usually unable to find a job which makes it even harder for them to go back home because they would not have the expenses, and it would be even more difficult for them to find a job back at their home countries.
I agree with what 322 says that leaving a child behind have a negative impact, and that the death of a child can do more harm than good for working a making a better income in a different country. Yet they state that the child can receive love and care from someone other than their parent such as a relative. I do not feel this is the case for all families, because some families may not have relative or if they do there are times when these other people are not fit to take care and provide the same love as their parents.
When I read the article, I felt bad because I was not suprised to read about such conditions, I almost expected it to be as bad as young suicides. Children experience a lot emotional and physical changes during their years of adolescence. Kids like Stefan, need their mother and father both their to help them through one of the roughest times of their life, as well as for emotional nourishment and guidance. while I agree with 322 that they can receive this from other relatives if their parents decide to migrate, I moreso agree with 381S10.246. They made a very valid point in saying that these relatives sometimes are unavailable. They could even migrate themnselves to help their own immediate families. Like 322 made obvious, there are so many negative aspects to parents seperating themselves from their children. And I completely agree when 322 said that just because the parents have to seperate themselves, does not mean they should be able just up and leave for good. I believe that in cases such as these, there should be laws protecting the children. But with such a poor country, such as Romania, sometimes this is impossible.
As a child already growing up in a poor environment, if the parent/parents needs to leave them it only takes more from thier environment. Like I have said before, othis is a crucial time in a child's life for parents to be present for, and when they are forced to choose work over the care of their children, it can be tolerated. However, in a different country like Stefan's mother, the results can lead to suicide as the article shows. I think that the years lost in the time that this important family member is gone can never be replaced by the new money they will acquire. I agree with the article 100% in that the benefits to such a thing as globalization providing the ability to work countries away from home is short-hand. While it can provide more opportunities for work and more money, years are lost with family, and when they return home, they are still in the poor environment/economy they left. The conditions in their home economy could have even gotten worse since they have left, and they have to consider that this effects their whole family and not just them. As we have seen, the economy in America has taken a turn for the worse, which has effected many families in and out of the country. With globalization's economic down-turn these effects we see might only get worse. Through this, these global families, such as the ones in the article may cease to exist as a whole. They will either lose what little they have and be forced to move, or their families will need to seperate and move toward working independantly to survive. The Romanian economy is already in a detrimental condition and I think that with an economic down-turn, the ability to transfer out of the country to work will disappear and the remote possibility of maybe supporting a whole family will cease to exist as wel know it. Globalization has helped in a lot of ways but if the economy takes a turn for the worse, all economies that gained together, will lose together.
Children in less developed countries are growing up with no discipline, no guidelines, rules or any structure. They tend to find new role models, who, for the most part, are negative influences in their lives. Parents NEED to help support their family in some way by travelling thousands of miles where they will make more money. Fathers or mothers travel from their home countries and come to America to work, and send money back home. Children may get the money and may be able to support themselves, but what if the money sent back isn't enough? I think many children find money through negative influences such as being drug dealers or even joining a gang. They may quit school to work other jobs, therefore not being able to receive adequate education and robbing themselves of their childhood.
I think the positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world doesn't outweigh the evident darkness of families being separated for years at a time. Children grow up without a mother or father figure. Their relationship with their non-living parent diminishes and ultimately becomes non-existent. Having parents away from the children for so long can have negative and detrimental effects on children. Many of my friends who live here in the U.S. who came here to study have parents living in their home country. The kids can't go home every break so they either live in a home their parents had bought for them or they live with extended family members. They become very independent, but also lack discipline and respect; more so to elders. When they do eventually unite again with their parents, they often rebel against what their parents want for them, especially in terms of educational, career and relationship goals.
Finally, if the global economy experiences a downturn, it would be much more difficult for families to re-unite. Children back at home may be forced to quit school and work. Parents who do live at home may be forced to leave the home as well and work. Or they may be forced to migrate far to find better paying jobs as well. Families will be non-existent. young children may have to live with extended family members and there would be no cohesion within the immediate family.
I think parents are constantly worrying about how they could support their family the best way they could. If that means travelling far, they are going to do just that. This may pose detrimental factors to the family, but depending on cultural values, the members of the family may understand, try to help in other ways, and may stick together. But, for the most part, reading from the article and other resources, it has shown that the children would rather be together no matter what. They fall into pits by getting involved with people who offer them money but people who also can influence them in negative ways.
I feel that parents need to be very fragile with their decision of leaving their family or not. Globalization has brought many poor families the opportunity to improve their family’s lifestyle and live a better life. However, at the same time, it is tearing families apart and adding more problems to an already troubled life. When parents decide to move hundreds or thousand miles away from their children, they are taking many risks. A child needs at least one of their parents in their life to have the unconditional love, care and support that parents usually give. As for the young boy Stefan in the article, his father was a heavy drinker, which probably made his mom being gone even harder for him. This can be the situation for many families. There may be one unfit parent, who is an alcoholic or abusive, and the child may have a worst upbringing with that parent, then they would have poor with the other one. Also, if there is only one parent and they leave to work, a child may be forced to grow up as an adult at a very young age.
On the other hand, globalization can be very beneficial to a family. If the family is very large and has a strong support system, then the children may be able to live a better life, and not be as lonely. But its even more beneficial for the parent working because they get to experience what it is like to actually make money. They will get to travel and see other parts of the world, and get a sense of what their life could be like. Many people are happier when they know that their work is supporting their family. Even with the few positive aspects of globalization I feel that it is important to evaluate the family and children and if working in another country would help or hurt the family more.
Now that the economy continues to experience a downturn, families are at lots of risk. For the families that did have members working in other countries, they are going to feel the downturn the most. They now got the feel of what it is like to make money, and then it’s going to be taken away from them. As for the Romanians they are already extremely poor, so if the economy still spirals downward then they are going to be left with nothing. This may even lead to more depression in the country and deaths if people continue to become more and more poor.
The story of the Ciurea family and the rest of the Romanian families that have fallen victim to migration was heartbreaking. Romanian parents, specifically mothers, are put in the very difficult decision being unable to financially support their families in their home country, or leaving behind their families to take a job many miles away where they have a chance to escape poverty.
Some posters have said that a parent migrating for a higher-paying job is selfish, and others agree that it is acceptable. Considering that I have never been placed in a desperate financial situation as the Romanian families, I cannot agree with one side or the other. In my opinion, there are two ways I would respond to this situation. Firstly, I think that if you are so poor that you are unable to provide your children with the most basic needs – food, clothing, and shelter – you should not be judged for migrating. Most parents would be willing to do whatever it takes to obtain these necessities for their children, even if it means moving thousands of miles away. The circumstance is a very horrible one to be put in, but it means survival for you and the rest of your family. However, I think that if you are able to support your children, but migrate in order to live in luxury, it is not worth it. In my opinion, parents give children more love, joy, and support than any material item can give. Because of this, I think children would rather live by a lesser means in order to spend more time with their parents. I have acquaintances (here in the United States) whose parents showed their love in the form of credit cards, rather than to encourage their academic achievement, attend their sporting events, and spend quality time with them. Sure, having the latest and greatest of everything is nice, but it will not give you the emotional support that your parents can. Stefan Ciurea, at twelve years old, made the decision to take his own life because he was not receiving this support. We also see from the article that globalization can be a very bad decision because it can generate a cycle of migrant works. In the case of the Ciurea family, Gheorghe dropped out of high school and begun working odd jobs. Without a furthered education, chances are Gheorghe will forever work low-skill and low-paying jobs, and quite possibly might turn to migrant work to support his future family, rehashing the pain he felt onto his children.
As the global economy continues to downturn, I think more and more Romanian families will be forced into migrant working. Currently in the United States, there are an increasing amount of people losing their jobs, due to the poor economy, and therefore being forcing into accepting jobs that they are overly qualified and/or educated for. I can see a similar situation occurring in other parts of the world, including Romania, who are experiencing economic turmoil, and unfortunately will only create more emotional distress in the lives of many children.
This article was very sad and unbelieveable the circumstances these families are under. This article began with the suicide of Stefan Ciurea. He was so devisated at the fact that his mother had to go work as a maid in Rome, this made his world fall apart. Even though these parents are goin thousands of miles aways to be able to feed their families, the effects are extremley harsh. These children do not have their parents by their side to guide them and nuture them as children naturally need. The article states the migration of these workers destroys families and in extreme cases the children become abandoned, oprhans, prositutes, and criminals.
There are some positive to this situation such as a sense of empowerment because ultimately these parents are working to feed there children and that is a respectable thing to do. Obviously, these parents are also making more money which is also a plus to this situation. However, despite these positives I still believe these children are being effected way to much and I thinkit would be better if the families stayed together.
The global economic downturn for countries like Romanina will just get into harder times. The fact that these parents already have to be away from their children the thought of things getting worse unthinkable. I think in the hardest times families should stick together and try to surive as a whole because these children are not making it with out their parents present.
In response to .259 I agree with what he/she said about how if the global ecomony hit a a downward sprial those who will be effected the most are the one who do not have people working outside their own countries. Even though my thoughts are for families staying together I see the point .259 was trying to make.
In Romania and other developing countries, family structure is being destroyed by the departure of parents who are working abroad. Since working in their own counties do not provide sufficient amount of money to support for the family, a lot of parents did not have much option but to leave their children home. The article says that those parents working abroad do shopping sprees to fulfill their children with material needs. They often do this out of guilt. It is important to meet the basic material needs. However, the emotional supports seem to play a huge role in child development as well. Seeing Stefan’s death shows how desperate he was to see his mother. In traditional family settings, it was the father who supported financially while the mother provided their children with emotional needs. The lack of interactions among family members did bring detrimental result. Often times, children show the resentment toward their parents and they were feeling rejected for being left alone. Being able to work outside of the country may seem be opening the doors for family who are financially suffering. However, they usually worked in terrible conditions where no one wants to work and undocumented workers can be exploited easily. I believe the positive aspects of globalization economic does not outweigh the evident darkness of families being separated for years at a time. When I was in my childhood, I could always turn to my mom since she was a stay at home mom at that time. I felt safe and accepted and I was able to develop a healthy relationship with family members. Fulfilling material need itself is very important when sustaining their lives. However, love of a family cannot be substituted. Money is something that comes and goes. If the economy experiences a downturn, those global families will be negatively impacted since those people valued more on gaining financial stability and they are basically going back to the same poverty level. As blogger 381S10.223said,to obtain satisfying lives, children need to be provided with love, rules, support, and advices from their parents or authority figure who can guide children’s lives. If Stefan’s mother was present and playing a proper role as a mother, he could have not chosen the extreme decisions in his life.
After reading the artilce in the New York times, it is evident that parents decision to go elsewhere for extended periods of time to better their family is hard for their children. In the article it talked about how children deal with their parents leaving their country for years at a time to gain money for their family. These children feel lonely and often get involved with drugs, crime and alcohol, while some even committ sucide. This is very unfortunate for these children, because they are growing up without their parents because their living situation is so hard, that their parents are forced to leave the country to find work that can put their family in a more comfortable living situation in a couple of years. Although the parents are trying to better the family, financially, I feel that this is causing the child psyhcological problems. In the article one young man, ended up hanging himself when his mother left to Italy to better their family. It is a lose-lose situation for these families, because the parents are leaving to gain financial stability and these children are left alone, and some can not even cook for themselves. The children become involve in crime to survive while their parents are in another country. It is hard for these children to survive without their parents. If the global economy experiences a downturn, these families will have an even more difficult time trying to survive and it is unfortunate that they have to go through these extreme conditions to survive.
“Globalization describes an ongoing process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a globe-spanning network of communication and trade. It’s usually recognized as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological factors.” (Wikipedia). Globalization has revolutionized the way we do business in the world by initiating a colossal increase in the global exchange of goods, services, and technology. In practice, the main goals of firms and investors moving towards globalization of markets and production are to cut costs, increase trade, develop new technologies, and ultimately to increase profit. These goals often lead to greater importance being placed on making money than the livelihood and well-being of other people.
I think this article was really touching and upsetting. It’s very unfortunate that children in less developed countries grow up with their mothers and/or fathers being hundreds or even thousands of miles away because they are participating in this globalized economy. It’s very important for children to have the love and support from both parents when they are growing up. If the children are away from their parents, this can lead to negative outcomes. For example; in the article, the boy hung himself. Being away from his parents caused him to make this rash decision. I don’t think children are capable of taking care of themselves and working on their own. I think that the positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world to improve their families’ economic positions absolutely do not outweigh the evident darkness of families being separated for years at a time. Yes, globalization has many positive aspects and it’s great that people can work anywhere however; this is very detrimental to their families. It’s a shame that families have to get split up because of this. Overall, I feel that the Romanian economy has already experienced a downturn and despite it turning around, if the mothers continue to disappear out of their child's lives then that has more of a negative impact on the family as a whole than the downturn of an economy.
Having to leave your children especially young childre who cannot understand the situation is extremely difficult. I cannot imagine having to make a choice between the better of two evils. The children are left to feel abandoned, but the parent's are made to feel as though this is their best option for providing for their children. I am sure that the children growing up in less developed countries are extremely jealous and resentful of developed western nations. This causes them to develop a negative mindset at an early age. This is a horrible way to grow up because children need their mother's care and presence to grow up in a healthy and positive way.
In regards to whether the economic benefits outweigh the absence of a parent in the home, I feel that they do not. Perhaps in the short run it may be nice to have a new cell phone or bike, but overall the lack of guidance a child receives will end up having a bad implication on the child in the long run. You cannot replace the parent with a material item. That is not an equal trade-off.
If the global economy experiences a downturn this could have huge negative repercussions on migrant workers and their families. By forcing them to return to their families after a long depature could cause major family issues in the home. Since the parent's were not really in a parental role while they were abroad this could cause some problems when they would have to adjust to. Also if the parents have returned and they are out of work this could put a lot of stress on the family and lead to lots of negative outcomes such as violence and abuse.
It is very sad that there are so many children out there that have to grow up without their parents. I understand that parents leave their children so that they can give them a better life. But is it really a better life for them growing up without the care and love of their own parents? The increased globalization has impacted many families because it seprates them and causes negative outcomes for the children. When children in less developed countries grow up without one or both parents, they have a high risk of dropping out of school, hanging around criminals, getting involved with prostitution and drugs. It may also lead them to death, like in Stefan Ciurea's case. Some children actually blame themselves for the depature of their parents. Some of them, in order to get their attention back try to do well in school. I believe that if a parent leaves their child to give them a better life and if they actually do give them a better life than that outweighs the separtation of the family. But if the family is like the Ciurea family where the family is basicaly lost then I think it is not worth it. Because instead of giving them a better life, it has destroyed the family. As the economy has experienced a downturn, the families who don't have nothing already will suffer even more. Maybe some parents might return to their families, hopefully to restore what they have lost. But maybe others will move even further to find more and better jobs, making the hope of reuniting with their families impossible.
The importance of escaping poverty and globalization were two important factors portrayed in this article. Many individuals and families are impacted by globalization but who is really benefitting from it? Globalization is an evolving issue that is continuing to affect more and more people in our society and our nation as a whole. Families in particular are being affected both negatively and positively. I come from a culture where some parents are accustomed to leaving their children in their countries because the need for money over powers many things. There are various mothers I know that have one or two children in Central America waiting for them to return home but came to the United States on a mission. Children, whose parent is not with them to raise them, could be affected both psychologically and physically. Knowing that your mother or father is not there physically to offer affection would really affect a child’s life in the present and future. Although the parent probably left to better the financial well being of the family, it is essential for children to have that affective relationship with their parent. In the article, it was evident that many children become angry towards their parents if they are left and could easily cause a tragic ending like Stefan’s. Personally, I don’t think it is worth leaving your family or children behind to try to escape poverty. I strongly believe that in every nation, there is an opportunity to earn some kind of income that will better your living. Seeking assistance could be another option but maintaining unity with your family should be your first priority. If circumstances do push you to move to another country, you should consider taking your children with you right away or soon after you are forced to leave. As the global economy experiences a downturn, the families who are already globalizing will loose more opportunities because of the competition there will be for job opportunities.
I am in agreement to numerous blogs regarding the reconstruction and modernizing of the poverty threshold. As one classmate clarified, the Bureau uses virtually the same formula that it adopted in 1965 which bases the poverty threshold solely on the basics. With that being said, the analysis does not take into account the ascending costs of health care, child care and transportation. Likewise, the calculation pays no attention to the geographical variations in costs with regards to housing expenses, unrealistically expecting that a family making do in New York will have the same standard of living as a family living in rural Georgia on the same income. Therefore, the consideration of these additional distributions of funds thus revamping the formula for measuring poverty, would allow a better universal understanding of poverty this world faces. In addition, necessary repairs and restorations to TANF would help impede the measures for families on the brink of destitution. Given the scale of the problem facing us, we must address the structural issues that frustrate our efforts to help poor families worldwide. As a result, migrant families, Ciurea family included could have other alternatives to achieving and maintaining financial stability without having to separate. Recognizing the economic downturn will help alleviate more families in economically dire straits.
Increased globalization is having a great impact on families throughout the world in both positive and negative ways. It’s highly unfortunate and heartbreaking that parents are leaving their children behind and not being present to directly be there for their family, but on the other hand, they are leaving the country and trying to support them with the best opportunity that they have and in the best way that they can. However, it is hard for children in less developed countries to look at these situations in a more positive light, because it has more of a negative impact on them, for example, what happened with Stefan. Children who are living in poorer conditions may feel as if they have lost all hope or get angry at their parents, without truly understanding the reason for why their parents are doing what they’re doing. I do believe that the positive aspects of globalization and the ability of people to work anywhere in the world to improve their families’ economic positions do outweigh the darkness of families being separated for years at a time, but only if there aren’t circumstances in which one of the parents end up leaving their spouse, splitting up the family, and forgetting the real reason why they left in the first place; also in other circumstances, like that of Stefan’s family, if the parent departing has that much of a negative effect. Other than those kinds of circumstances, I believe that parents going to great lengths to help out their families no matter what, definitely prevails over not doing as much as they can to support their family in the long run and living in poverty. As the global economy experiences a downturn, it will definitely affect the global families in a negative way because jobs will be cut back and the parents who left their children will not be able to do what they planned to do; the reason that they left. It would be extremely unfortunate for the parent, knowing that their leaving their children and causing heartbreak might have all been for no reason.
After, reading this article I was really saddened. When I read the story about Stefan I almost cried. It is very difficult for a child to grow up without parents. It is also difficult for children to grow up with a single parent. Although, a mother or a father may leave a child with an aunt, uncle or grandmother it is not the same as having parents. A mother or father’s bond cannot be replaced. Children who grow up in poverty without their parents are left to fend for themselves. Sometimes the caretakers they are left with are unable to care for them which means they have to prepare their own meals, and do everything for themselves. In a sense these children are left alone and forced to become an adult.
Although, globalization has a good impact on families financially, it has a negative effect on the children and sometimes spouses. It is hard for a child to grow up without having the love, attention and support from their mothers. In the article it stated that, “children with parents abroad were more likely to abuse alcohol and cigarettes, have problems with the police and underperform in school”. Not only does globalization affect children due to the lack of support and love they receive from parents, it also affects their performance in school. Children who do not receive love from their parents are usually persuaded to engage in violence and other dangerous behaviors. This puts them in danger and does not allow for much advancement in life. Without a good academic background it is hard for people to get good jobs and benefit themselves. Globalization not only affects families in the short term it affects them in the long term. Children grow up missing one of the most essential things in their life which are parents. Globalization also weakens families. Spouses may not return to their country and may leave their children and spouse behind, to live in poverty.
Although, I believe it is essential to be financially stable, I also believe that being financially stable is not as important as keeping a family intact. Being away from parents is detrimental especially for younger children. Other options should be weighed before leaving families behind. Although, families may be benefiting their children in the short term they are not benefiting them in the long run.
If the global economy experiences an economic downturn, families will be left without a job and most importantly without their families. Some families may suffer greatly from this downturn. For example if a child commits suicide like Stefan did, not only would a family have lost their financial means but they would have also lost their child to death, drugs or violence. Also if the global economy experienced a downturn it would increase the number of families in poverty.
I understand both points of view about globalization on families throughout the world. Families who live in poverty would do almost anything to create a better life for their family. By moving to a different country to find work, parents think they are doing what is best for their children. It's understandable why a mother or father would move to a different country to make a living, even if it means they are separated from their children. Coming from a family of immigrants myself, I have several family members in which one of the parents lives in a different country most of the year, only coming back to his native country a few times a year. Although the separation is difficult, the parent does this with hopes of providing a better life for their family. On the other hand, globalization could also have a negative effect on the family. It's important for the child to grow up in a stable home environment. Separation from one or more parent could cause severe emotional damage, as it did for Stefan. With one or more parent being away, they miss out on watching their child grow up. And it's unfortunate because by the time the parent returns, the child will most likely be grown up and won't need the parent. The parent may be faced with resentment from their child, for missing out on most of their life. Globalization negatively affects the relationship between the child/parent. If it's absolutely necessary that the parent go off to a different country to earn a living, I believe it's important that the parent make sure that the child is in good hands. If they are left with relatives, who will provide the care and nurture that they need, the child will be fine. However, the article mentioned certain cases in which children commit suicide because they are depressed or they have to drop out of school so they can work in order to survive; these are the risks the parents face when deciding whether or not they should leave their family. Globalization can ruin a parents relationship with their child, but would the child be any better off if they were living in severe poverty where each day was a struggle to survive? In my opinion, I don't think so. As long as the child is left in good hands, I believe globalization is a good thing.
On this issue, I see both sides of the fence. Globalization particularly impacts children in less developed countries whose parents are working hundreds or thousands of miles away in order to improve the family's economic situation. Families in developing countries can generally pride themselves on stronger family ties since they are not necessarily as materialistic as families in developed countries. In the past, families used to be able to get by without riches and luxury, and yet were still content since they had one another. In today's globalized world with advanced technology and higher standards of living, it is vital to earn a sufficient living in order to support the family. As the mother in the New York Times Article stated, she had to feed her family, which left her with little choice but to look for work in another country. It was a tragedy that the children had to be left behind, but it also needs to be reinforced within the family structure that separation for the right reasons(better income elsewhere) may have to be a bonding experience from afar. Military families experience separation all the time, and parents in the military have signed up and are prepared to support their family, even if it means traveling to various locations for extended periods of time.
In my opinion, the first choice for parents should look first for local careers and jobs near to their children. Realistically, this is not possible for all families to achieve. As another classmate posted, I also have experience with immigrant parents and relatives who have participated in the globalized economy. In the long run, the negative effect of the separation of the family for long periods of time does outweigh the positive aspects of globalization. My cousins in my native country of Guinea have mentioned several times how much they missed their mother, when she left Guinea to come work in the US as a nurse for several years. As with the family in Romania, younger children tend to take the separation harder. They want, and do need, both mother and father, to be present and involved in their lives. Sure, there are relatives, and extended family who can help raise the children, but the memory of separation from biological parents is strong and long-lasting.
Finally, I would expect that a downturn in the global economy would force these global families to figure out a way to make things work in their own country. Families in the past have struggled to make a living in a city block. I believe in many traditional values that teach individuals and families how to be resilient, hard-working, and supportive of one another as a community.
Growing up with out parents can be tremendously difficult on children. Parents provide love, support and guidance to a young child and as they develop they will continue to need such love and support. However, as globalization continues, and parents abandon their children, it forces children to search and find such love in other places. Searching for love in other places when a stable figure is no longer around can result in negative outcomes. Such outcomes can lead to illness, trouble with the law, and even death. Like the child in the article, the young boy decided to commit suicide which showed how lonely he was and how he believed he had no one to turn to in his darkest hour. Such an outcome could have been prevented if there were individuals in that child’s life that expressed love and support for him. A mother’s love can not be replaced with money. However, it is very understandable why mothers and father decide to leave their families to work abroad in order to provide a better life financially. Despite, the financial pressures that may be lifted when these parents leave, there are still emotion struggles that these children deal with daily in their lives. It is very hard to decide whether the positive aspects of globalization and ability to work anywhere in the world to improve families’ economic circumstances outweigh the unmistakable darkness of families being separated for years at a time. However, when one truly thinks about it, I believe the negatives of being separated from your family definitely outweigh the positives of working abroad to provide for your family. With these families in less developed countries already struggling to make it, if the global economy experiences a downturn, life will become even more difficult. Opportunities for jobs will unquestionably become limited and due to this these families will not have much left but each other.
In response to .316, I totally agree that it is detrimental to younger children when their parents are absent from their lives. This absence can effect a child’s growth and development in the log run. While a parent believes that they are benefiting their family and children at that point in time, they fail to realize that there can be a very negative impact on their child in the future.
Also to respond to what some other bloggers have been saying about whether a parents should relocate to provide their families with better economic means or stay together as a family, I would have to agree with those that say the family should stay together. After reading the article it appears that families greatly suffer from being seperated when a parent moves away to work. The costs appear to completely outweigh the benefits.
The fact that children grow up without their parents is a tragedy anywhere. Children growing up in third world(developing) nations are in a far worse position than those in developed nations because if children are abandoned in the US the foster care, and adoption system are much better than in developing nations. The people who take care of the child in a developing nation while their parents are gone have burdens and financial issues of their own to worry about besides taking in a relatives child. The money may not always get to the kids or be spent on the kids because of this therefore the children may essentially still live in squalor.
The darkness of families being separated for years only outweighs the benefits of a global economy if the parents leave and still cannot provide for their child or children. If they can provide for their children and give them better lives by being away then it is a good thing. They care enough about their children's well being to leave and find work even though it is probably very painful not to see your own child and take care of someone else's child.
If there was a downturn in the Global economy it is possible that even leaving their native land parents who go abroad to find work will not be able to find it. Another more plausible option is that some of the jobs that they are working in the US like factory jobs might be exported back to their country of origin because the labor is cheaper and they may still have to return to their native land and be in poverty.
When looking through all these comments, I definitely noticed a lot of disagreement on what is considered good parenting and what is not. I have to agree with blogger 311 on this current issue because I also do not believe that it is the parents fault if they have to leave the country to find a job. In this current job market, people are lucky to find jobs period and the main concern of a parent is to be able to take care of their child. Coming from a house with a stay-at home mother, I know the importance of having a parent there physically to listen and to care for you. But being able to take care of your family financially, I believe, is equally important. If there are no current job opportunities in that country that will allow for the parent to care for their family, they have to look elsewhere. It is not the fault of the parent for leaving, it is the fault of the country for not having a strong enough economy to allow for parents to stay with their children.
I can only imagine how hard this is for the children. Growing up without parents is something I cannot even fathom. The negative outcomes are obviously something that has to be acknowledged but so are the negative outcomes of being homeless when the parents cannot provide for their children. There is no positive solution to this problem of a globalizing economy, except for countries to continue to work on their own economies and allow for parents to stay with their children.
The need to improve economic situations in a family can lead to many decisions. For the parents located in impoverished countries, not having money is not an option. Mothers or fathers leaving their family behind to create better economic opportunities seem somewhat normal for some. However, in the case of Stephen Ciurea it turned out for the worst. Like blogger 322 states, family or friends could step in to help raise their children when they decide to leave the country. This could have more positive outcomes than just all-out abandoning the child and leaving them with no close relatives. Family and friends could help lessen the impact of not having maternal or parental figures to be involved in their life. Children do not understand the need for money that parent’s lack, and can become depressed from not having their caregivers around. Participating in the globalized economy can mean many things for these children, especially having to sacrifice not having their loved one around. My uncle moved to the United States when his son was only 4 years old and decided to do this for economic reasons. He does wish he was there more for his son; however being in the US has created a greater possibility of being able to support his child, even though it is thousands of miles away. He feels that he may not be there physically but at least able to support his child financially. From the story of Stephen in Romania, it is obvious he did not see the financial gain that his mother was trying to create, but rather the abandonment so it was very difficult for him to grasp. If the economy experiences an economic downturn there may be even more of a negative disruption in the family household. Parents may take even more extreme measures and children may be left to fend for themselves. I think Romania is already an economic downturn, any more of this would create emotionally and mentally disrupted children, since parents play a tremendous part in the growth of their children.
Globalization has positive as well as negative aspects to it. It helps, yet destroys families around the world. Most parents who struggle in less devleoped countries look for work in developed nations to earn more money in order to provide for their family. However, it means that many children in less devloped countries will have to live without their parent(s). Such a change in family structure can be harfmul to the children. A few children have commited suicide after having their parents leave them. Some children do poorly in school or misbehave. But, for some children, having their parents leave them can be a good experience. Many of times, parents feel bad for leaving, so they "make up for it" by buying their children different items such as cell phones. But is it worth leaving your family behind? It's hard to say that the benefits one gets from working elsewhere outweighs the fact that they'll be separated from the family for a long time. Most migrants don't want to leave their family, but their position as a parent leads to doing so to provide for their children. However, their role is to also provide nurture for their children. So, whether the parent stays or not, they will suffere. They will either continue to struggle and barely be able to support their family or they will be able to support their family, but having to do so from a distance. However, as the global economy experiences a downturn, those migrants may be forced to return back to their home. This may help refine the family structure, but this process could also be very difficult if the parents have be away from many years. And the struggle will be greater because there will be a greater population of people struggling. As for families in developed countries, they will make ok alright, but some would have to find replacements, for many of migrants took on nanny roles. And it will probably cost these families more money because migrants generally work for less pay...although it's good pay to them.
Blogger 322 believes that the darkness of families being separated outweighs the positive aspects of globalization. I would have to disagree. I'm not saying it's more important for parents to move away from the family to provide for them rather than staying and fulfilling their parental roles. However, you have to imagaine being placed into such a situation. WOuld you rather stay at home and watch your children suffer or would you rather go work and know that they are doing okay? As a parent, you must do what's best for the child. And staying home and struggling could be harmful as well. It could cause many illnesses in children, which could also lead to death as well. Making that decision is a difficult one to make because there are consequences either way. How one individual or family reacts may totally differ from other reactions. Plus as you mentioned, the child can get care from other figures such as aunts and uncle and even child care facilities.
This is a lose-lose situation. The parents have a choice. They can go and work away from their families and provide them with some financial means.
However, while helping their families financially, they are depriving their children of significant emotional and developmental support provided through the structure of a family. When these parents are absent from their homes often times the children are engaging in risky behavior such as prostitution and alcohol and substance abuse.
The parents have to make a choice-- will I help my family financial knowing that they may endanger themselves physically and emotionally, or do I stay to watch my family suffer through poverty? the choice isn't simple at all!
In my opinion, the global economy is very risky to engage in. Risky in the sense, tat they have very little control over it. If these parents are fired from their jobs abroad they could be forced back to their home countries where they may not have even a low paying job, but in fact no job at all. If the globalized economy were to diminish at an accelerated rate, massive numbers of parents and adults would be forced back to their home country to compete for a sparse number of jobs. This would cause a great deal of families to be in even worse financial shape in then they were before.
Overall, this article sends a strong message on how delicate the family structure can be and how truly impacted a family is by the global economy. Stefan Ciurea took his own life when he received news that his mother would leave. What a hard decision for a parent. They can choose to help their family emotionally or financially, but so often it can't be both.
I think often in the United States as we are surrounded by wealth and resources and usually family, we forget about this delicate balance, and how many families do not have the luxury to have all of it- the family structure, the emotional support, and the finances. I hope that these third world countries can find ways to find a healthy balance. Perhaps one way is to implement programs for young people to keep them off the streets and engaged in activities that are safe and healthy while their parents are away. Groups that are providing them with the support and structure that they need from their absent parents.
In response to 246… there are some points in your article that I certainly support. I am in agreement that leaving children will have negative affects that may outweigh the financial detriments. Children engaging in prostitution and drug use would be worse in my opinion—creating a generation of children who lack morals, who lack structure, who lack appropriate development. Yes, that could be much worse for a society.
However, in your response I don’t think that it is so simple. You expressed that parents should discuss their choices with their children and consider how their children feel. I would argue that most adults acknowledge that this is detrimental to their child- extraordinarily painful, but it’s not so simple. A parent wants to feel that they can always provide for their families. And when they are unable to do this they feel hopelessness, shame, and extreme sadness. Perhaps these parents can’t have these discussions with their children because they feel so ashamed to leave them.
Also, I have never been in personal poverty. However, I imagine the job search is quite difficult. I think there are times when parents literally are forced to go to other countries because they truly cannot provide for their families in their current situations. These families are much more limited in their choices, far more limited than one would think.
Although families benefit financially from global economies, it is detrimental to the family structure.In my opinion,Finding economic gratification should not be placed before the family structure. Children who are used to the small intimate family structures are experiencing a sudden shock when the families are torn apart. Having kids grow up in wayward ways does to prove beneficial, although money is tight, it should not overcompensate for the family. Without the family structure all else fails.
I agree with .259 with the importance and significance of family and how globalization could easily affect it. As you mentioned before, families should really be fragile in leaving family members behind especially when they are young in age. When family members leave to another country, they usually go with the intentions of bettering the lives of their families but many times they end up making things worse. The lives of many are left at risk besides the financial well-being and I agree with you that children are very vulnerable and need to have that love and affection from their parents. The downturn of the economy is not only affecting our citizens but also the ones who are coming to our nation to seek jobs. These individuals are leaving their families and now are entering a nation where the economy is at a bad point in history so they may feel like they have nowhere to go because whatever move they make will be bad. Overall, it is up to the individual to balance out their pros and cons to make the right decision for them and their family.
I found the article about globalization and the globalized family sad. It is clear that these parents, mostly mothers are doing this because they feel that they are left with no other choice. I was shocke at the number of families were one parent decides to leave in hopes of being able to provide a better life for their children. In most of these cases the income increse is substancial compared to what they were making before. Although, after reading the artcile it made me question, do the con's outweigh the pro's in regards to leaving your family behind. In most of the example cited in the article it seemd that the outcomes were more detramental then beneficial. I cant imagine any parent in this situation coming to an easy decision about globalization and choosing to seperate from your family.
The idea of globalization has positive and negative impacts, which makes it a complex issue. It is great that people of less fortunate countries could find better jobs in another country, rather than their own. This is why there has been a significant movement of people from one country to another for trade and work. This a positive impact for families because they are able to provide for their family and give them the assistance they need to survive.
However there are so many more negative impacts to globalization. Such increases in globalization and in the progress of goods, labor, and services have weakened national barriers and restrictions that are supposed to be forced by a nation state. This can cause lots of issues in the countries the people are migrating to and from. For example in the article it says, “Economists warn that the benefits of working abroad may prove short-lived, especially if the global economic downturn forces workers to return home to an economy that can no longer absorb them. There are shortages caused by the migration by importing workers from Turkey, China and India to fill jobs in construction, agriculture and textiles. Tens of thousands of Romanians are already out of jobs in Spain and Italy, and a fear is growing that a mass return could overstretch an already shaky Romanian economy.” This a negative impact because as mentioned in the article, both countries in the long term could be affected by globalization. Not only will they be affected but they might be worse off as a family than they already are because eventually their mothers or fathers may have no job at all. Another negative impact is that parents are responsible for making sure that their children are taken care of in every aspect, this should be their number one priority. With parents being many miles away you cannot give children the emotional support and guidance so they can grow up to be an successful adult. This means that children are going to have a hard time surviving in their country because they don’t have the support of their mother or fathers and are at more of a risk to be affected by their environment. Similar to how Stefan was affected by the environment of Romanian. He couldn’t survive without his mother so the distance affected him. Therefore, he decided to commit suicide out of fear.
All in all I feel that having the opportunity to work anywhere in the world does not outweigh children growing up in darkness because globalization is a short lived thing. It does not have long term cost because eventually everyone suffers.
I agree with 381s10.250 this is a lose-lose situation and I believe that was a great way to describe the situation. You are either helping your family financially and hoping the significant emotional and developmental part doesn’t suffer too much or you’re having the emotional and developmental but you can’t pay to keep the heat on or provide food. The parents do have a choice but it is a difficult and I feel as a parent you don’t know which one will affect your family worse. Again agreeing with you that it is a lose-lose situation and the choice isn’t simple at all.
I like how you brought up negative impacts of globalization like I did but I never thought to bring up this point. That when these parents are absent from their homes often times the children are engaging in risky behavior such as prostitution and alcohol and substance abuse. It totally slipped my mind the negative behaviors the children of globalized economy families could be involved in. I just thought about how they would be affected emotionally and guidance wise.
I also agree with you saying that if the globalized economy were to diminish at an accelerated rate, massive numbers of parents and adults would be forced back to their home country to compete for a sparse number of jobs. This would cause a great deal of families to be in even worse financial shape in then they were before. I mentioned the same thing in my post. I definitely feel that many families could be worse off than they were before in the long term.
There are positives and negatives to global families. Parents of global families go to countries where they can make a better living because they were not able to make ends meet in the country that they live in. The money that they make is a lot more than they would make in their home countries. Families from countries of poverty benefit from globalization from an income standpoint. The problems comes when you talk about the childhood of their children. Though the parents send things to the children to take care of them while they are away, it is very difficult for a child to make it without their parents. I would think that it would be especially difficult for children that were with their parents for a long period of time and the parent had to leave because of lack of reasonable income. I believe that the boy, Stefan, committed suicide not because times were hard, but because he had a hard time dealing with things without his mother. I think that parents being away from their children hurts the child more than being in poverty because at least they are still with their family. I think problems will come with this globalization when the countries that the people go to in hopes of making a better living get too crowded and the people are sent out. When this happens, the countries that they were originally from will become crowded with the people who left and it will be even harder to make ends meet. This is a very serious issue that is present all over the world today.
I agree with Kirstan on the risks of the children being left behind to take care of themselves. They are introduced to things that their parents would be the ones to protect them from because they don't have their parents there to guide them into making the right decisions. It is true that without parents, children are subject to risky behavior because it is the nature of a child to want to do things that they see other people doing. Without the positive influence of a parent who is there for the child and has the child’s interest at heart, there is a huge risk of the child getting into bad situations. I also agree with the fact that since globalization has been going on for so long, if it were to be diminished it would make things worse the countries with the most poverty. The people that left the countries to find better jobs would be force back to their old lifestyle and be in competition with more individuals for the scarce amount of jobs available and the amount of poverty would increase. Thought the families would be united, their financial situations would be worse due to more people coming into a country that was all ready predominately consumed with poverty.
I completely agree with .335 and see the many affects economic globalization has on families throughout the world. Not only are these children whom are left behind, confused and not nurtured, but can very easily head down the wrong path. It is scary to think these children will feel so neglected and unloved that one story has a young boy committing suicide. Parents are supposed to be there for their children unconditionally and raise them to teach them and help them grow. If parents are working around the globe and unable to teach their children what is acceptable in society and the differences between right and wrong, then what does this do for the future generations? What is the point of going off to provide for your family, when your son sadly commits suicide and you don’t have that family member anymore to love and provide for? Being a family science major, this topic is very important to me, and it is proven that children need their parents to raise them, they can’t raise themselves. The emotional and social support, outweigh the economic stability. I also agree with .335’s statement that if the global economy were to take a downturn, would these children, whom are older and wiser, take back their parents? Or would they reject them because of all the pain and suffering they had caused them throughout the years for money? I would think it would be very difficult for these children (now adults) to fully understand why their parents abandoned them to work. I think the family could stay together and work in order to provide for themselves.
I agree with what blogger 322 has said, it is very unfortunate when any child has to live with out their parents. Every child deserves and needs love and guidance both parents. Though a child can receive this from other family members, I feel that it is never the same. I also feel that this feeling can sometimes be compared to being an orphan. Sure, most children understand that their parents are doing this for them, for their well being, but as shown in the news article some children just cannot handle the burden of being away from their parent. Not only could there be negative outcomes for the children involved, but also for the parents. The whole families relationship can become strained from the lack of communication between each family member, and when the parent does come back, the relationship they had, will never be the same. As 322 has said, though it is a great opportunity for the whole family, that doesn’t mean that they should be allowed to leave. There has to be some kind of work where they live, to reduce such negative outcomes as shown in the article. If the global economy experiences a downturn, global families that are already in economic hardship, will fall deeper into the hole. Therefore, causing their need to find work to skyrocket, forcing them into a corner where they will have no other choice but to leave their children.
Post a Comment