Chinese Mothers Are Indeed Superior (but So Are American Mothers)

It’s time I jump into the fray on Professor Chua’s contention, asserted in her book, that Chinese mothers are superior.

To begin, the very notion suggests that there is a competition between Chinese mothers and American mothers. I find this highly suspect. There is already enough competition between China and the United States to inspire a whole library section of books. I don’t think that American mothers should concern themselves with whether Beijing mothers are better. As interesting as it would be to have parenting as a new Olympic sport, I think we should avoid making this into a contest.

However, let’s examine the argument, presuming that there can be such a thing as a superior mother.

Chua contends that American parents—represented by the primary caretaker, the mother—are essentially too wimpy. American mothers spend too much time tiptoeing around their children, fearing that they might damage their child’s self-esteem and creating conflict with their child. On that count, Chua is preaching to the choir. As I assert in my book, American parents are guilty of this ridiculous pattern.

Chua praises the directness and stark hierarchal structure of the Chinese family. Parent says; child does. Period. There is no sass, defiance, or negotiation. So far, so good.

There are some questionable extremes in Chinese (and many Eastern) family structures. She recounts a daughter being forced to practice a piano piece for three hours. It is justified when the child finally masters the piece and exudes pride for having accomplished her goal. In some ways, this could be an enormously powerful experience. The child’s abilities are respected and an important lesson is learned: hard work must often be lengthy and arduous and even significantly uncomfortable. This lesson will certainly help the child in future endeavors. This kind of parenting could cure our ADHD epidemic. Hurray for Eastern medicine!

These examples delineate some of the superior aspects of non-Western parenting. If more American parents moved to a parent-first philosophy with stricter discipline, respecting children’s fortitude and the necessity of challenges to build character and endurance, then I would be pleased.

But there is another side of the ledger in this equation.

Let’s look at WHY Chinese parents tend to parent this way. It is consistent with the Eastern view of children and family. The communal view of children is that children exist to serve the family; their accomplishments and behavior directly reflect the esteem of the family. In Eastern families, there is no such thing as individual self-esteem. There is family esteem. Each person is expected to subjugate their will to that of the family. When they do this, they are good.

It is consistent, then, for Eastern parents to have extremely strict expectations of their children. Play dates, sleepovers, and other experiences are not simply luxuries; they are a colossal waste of time.

Contrast this with the parenting philosophy of American parents. Children are, by and large, considered individuals with equal value, will, and self-determination. Even in strict families, children are trained toward an individualistic lifestyle. Children are taught to discover themselves—for their own good.

In Christian families, this is amended by the idea of finding one’s individual gifts and talents and to perceive them as traits that can be used to further the Kingdom of God. But still the emphasis is on the individual.

There is an additional contrast between Chinese and American families that must be noted. China is a Communist regime that has a one-child policy. That one child, it could be hypothesized, holds enormous pressure to continue the family’s aspirations. Any thoughts of this are dispersed among multiple children in most American families. If Johnny doesn’t get a Harvard law degree, maybe Suzy will. We’ll make sure Johnny can at least dunk or make a video that ends up on YouTube.

The religious difference between the two nations is not minor. What is the value of a child whose nation believes that the child belongs first to the state, then the family, contrasted to the value of a child who belongs first to God? It’s something to think about.

In the end, Chinese mothers do a magnificent job at raising their children—in many ways. But to measure successful parenting based on a child's accomplishments reveals more about the values of Chinese mothers far more than their skill at parenting. Similarly, the way American parents raise their children reveals a great deal about their own values. Each set of parents is simply living out their beliefs and values—and quite successfully.

That is both scary and encouraging.

Psychiatry Kills

Many have seen or read the advertisements for Abilify and other antipsychotics* as a treatment for depression. The advertisements suggest that if one’s antidepressant is not doing an adequate job, one should consider adding another psychoactive drug to the cocktail. (Note that the ads don’t suggest stopping the drug that isn’t working but adding MORE drugs. The new psychiatry mantra: "If it's broke, whatever you do, DON'T FIX IT").

One thing people need to know is that neuroleptics/antipsychotics cause diabetes. That’s right; they CAUSE diabetes.

An interesting study in the January Archives of General Psychiatry found that women who have diabetes and depression have a significantly higher risk for mortality and cardiovascular disease. In case you didn’t catch that, this means that depression + diabetes = more death.

So psychiatrists are recommending that people who are depressed—who already have a higher risk for diabetes than the general public—take a drug that is known to cause diabetes, which then, in combination with their depression, is likely to result in a higher mortality rate.

One can only speculate as to how a psychiatrist could prescribe any of this in good conscience. Either they know about the risk and ignore it or they are plain ignorant. In either case, it is no wonder why psychiatrists are among the most loathed of medical professionals.

There are plenty of reasons to avoid neuroleptics like the plague. Actually, this stuff is worse than the plague; at least the plague killed you quickly.

*Actually, the term “antipsychotic” is not a scientific term. It is a marketing term for the class of psychoactive drugs called neuroleptics. Drug manufacturers and psychiatrists HOPE and believe that neuroleptics can remove or reduce psychotic symptoms. This does not mean that they do.

Feeling SAD This Season?

Guest Blog by Jaclyn Pistorio, M.A.


Snow, sleet, and sub-zero temperatures? Yes, it is officially winter time! Many of us seem to be a bit more “down in the dumps” during these darker and colder months of the year. Ever wonder why you feel low around the same time, every year? Although SAD is not officially accepted as a distinct psychological disorder, it is a seasonal condition that impacts individuals every year.

Usually, SAD symptoms appear during the shorter, darker months of the year and tend to go away during the sunnier months. Winter-onset SAD symptoms include: depression, hopelessness, anxiety, loss of energy, social withdrawal, oversleeping, appetite changes (increase in craving for carbohydrates), and difficulty concentrating.

Unfortunately, the specific cause of SAD remains unknown. Like with many mental health conditions the causes may include genetics, environment, and health condition. A few specific factors that may come into play include your biological clock, melatonin levels, and serotonin levels. The reduced level of sunlight in the shorter seasons may actually disrupt your body’s internal clock, leading to feelings of depression. The changes in season and sunlight have also been shown to disrupt the normal levels of serotonin (a brain chemical) and melatonin (a natural hormone).

So why are we talking about SAD? Well, the prevalence of this disorder actually increases as you head north from the equator! Studies have actually shown that only 1 to 2 percent of all people who live in Florida suffer from the disorder, compared to 5 percent in Maryland and 10 percent in New Hampshire. I knew I should have moved to Florida.

Most of us have experienced these symptoms at one time or another so, how do you know if you have SAD or not? It is normal to have some days when you feel down. But if you feel down for days at a time and you can’t seem to get motivated, it may be time to see your doctor or therapist. Fear not, because there are several things you can do at home to alleviate your mild symptoms! Several treatments have also been shown effective in reducing severe symptoms.

Just because the seasons have changed doesn’t mean you have to change along with them.

TSA: The Government Arm of NAMBLA

Parents, I know I don’t have to convince you that government agents feeling up your children should make you uncomfortable. I especially don’t have to convince you that government agents who barely make minimum wage and have no advanced education should be the last persons who should be putting their hands in your child’s pants. That’s right, INSIDE your child’s pants.

The North American Man/Boy Love Association must be enjoying a very special Thanksgiving, courtesy of the TSA. One of their chief objectives is to break down the barriers between adults and children so that adults can enjoy sexual relations with children without incrimination. TSA is making their dreams a reality by breaking down these barriers—right in front of their parents.

One of the holiest missions we parents have is protecting our children’s innocence. From the time they can comprehend, we say, “No one should ever touch you in your privates except Mom, Dad, or your doctor when Mom or Dad is there. You say ‘no’ to anyone else.” That explicitly drawn line in the sand is now being backed up. Now parents have to say “OK, now government agents who are total strangers to you and me get to touch your privates if they say so.” This is making our job far more difficult.

I can just see NAMBLA amending their “How-to” manual: “Simply tell the child that you are a government agent and that it is for national security that I touch your privates. Say, 'I’m part of a special agency that also requires you to touch our privates. If you don’t, you’ll have to go through the scanner, which has dangerous x-rays, which could give you cancer. So, which is it, little girl?'”

Federal agents can tell me that this is for national security, but so would anesthetizing every passenger during flights. It wouldn’t make it right or acceptable or tolerable.

Strangers feeling up your children is never OK; it’s not OK here. Parents should not tolerate it. Ever.

A special message to the TSA: bite me.

An even more special message to any government official who supports the TSA molesting my children: you’re fired.

Why Psychiatry is Irrelevant, Part IX

There is a principle in science called the law of parsimony. The law essentially states that if there are competing hypotheses to explain a phenomenon, the one that has the fewest new assumptions should be the presumptive hypothesis. The common reduction of this law is that the simplest explanation for a phenomenon is likely the correct explanation.

In the mental health field, we have had reasonable explanations for depression and anxiety for millenia. The explanations we have had have been perfectly adequate. Biological, economic, social, cognitive, and other causes are plentiful and more than enough to comprehend depression and anxiety. We do not need additional explanations, any more than we need another explanation for why it appears that the sun goes around the earth (the heliocentric explanation).


If you begin with the presupposition that depression is a normal response to the often overwhelming experiences and choices of life, then you can presume that the causes of depression are intelligible and discoverable. Then they can be comprehended and controlled.

If you begin with the presupposition that depression is a disease, you will not feel compelled to search as diligently for humanistic/existential/relational causes. This is ultimately dehumanizing. Therefore, psychiatry is dehumanizing.

We do not require a medical or even a scientific answer to why people become depressed.

Common sense is sufficient. Common sense is more than sufficient. Common sense, therefore, is where we should look when dealing with depression and anxiety. The answers aren't in a SPECT scan or the synaptic cleft; they are in LIFE and our HUMANNESS.

Why Psychiatry is Irrelevant, Part VIII

In case you haven't been following (or your reading comprehension is really poor), this series demolishes the idea that one even needs to look at a broken brain as a likely reason for depressive or anxious symptoms. There are far too many more sensible and universally experienced alternatives. Psychiatry really is irrelevant.

Today, we look at socioeconomic factors that could cause or exacerbate depression and/or anxiety. Some of these would be enough for even the most resilient person to slip into depression.

Socioeconomic factors:

--Poverty (both abject poverty and relative poverty)

--Oppression

--Injustice (e.g., being unjustly accused/convicted of a crime or witnessing a member of your group experience the same

--Prejudice/Bigotry

--Racism, Ageism, and Sexism (experienced or witnessed)

--Religious persecution

--Politicism (being mocked, ridiculed, devalued for one’s political affiliation or opinion)

Essentially, any social or economic forces that communicate to a person or group that they are less valuable, worthwhile, or lovable because of their social or economic status creates an emotional vulnerability that, without great resilience and sufficient health in other areas, is likely to result in depression and/or anxiety.

Just another set of human beings for whom the psychiatric model is not only irrelevant, but demeaning, dehumanizing, and worth ridicule.

Why Psychiatry is Irrelevant, Part VII

Are you a worthwhile, valuable, lovable person? No matter what you answer, the next question should be, "Says who?" Do we determine our own worth, value, or does someone else? The answer to this question determines a great deal of our emotional well-being.

What do we use as the standard for worth and lovability? Popularity? Skill level? Beauty? Money? Success? Or is it something else--something that has little to do with what you are or do? Is there something inherent in us that has value? Or does value have to be infused in us from an outside source?

Persons who are confused about their value or who misperceive their value have a difficult time experiencing joy and peace. Yet another cause or contributor to depression and anxiety.

I loathe the term "self esteem". In its place, I use self worth. Here are some threats to one's sense of self worth:

• Focus on personal qualities rather than inherent value
• Focus on looks
• Focus on ability
• Focus on money
• Focus on status
• Focus on achievement or success
• A reliance on others for view of self (e.g., friends, family, co-workers, the public)
• Allowing hurtful or ignorant people to be authorities or arbiters of your value

If one has to possess certain traits or abilities or things in order to have real value or be lovable, then life becomes a neverending treadmill of working for worthiness. This cannot bring real peace or joy, no matter how talented or wealthy or beauty one possesses.

Equally fleeting is putting ones value or worth in the hands of other people. People are fickle and sometimes self-serving--even downright evil sometimes. Why would one trust deeply flawed human being for their ultimate sense of value and worth? That's pretty scary for many.

Rather, when a person recognizes that his or her value comes from the Almighty--the only perfectly loving Creator who made each human being in His image. In that way, He infused each person with a value that is infinite, a worth that is hardly communicable, and a lovability that endures. Those who put their reliance on that as their worth--and remain conscious of it--can rest.