Nature, children and society

[harvestar]

I saw a link to this article,Last Child in the Woods, in Botany Picture of the Day.

I've been thinking about it ever since. I do know that this thinking (children do better when they are out in the country-side) was very popular in the early 1900's (much of the literature of the time is filled with it - see L.M. Montgomery's short stories). Certainly at that time, cities were not pleasant places to be and the countryside was the cure for all sickness, but nowdays are cities really the evil thing?

I do believe that kids should experience nature for many reasons, but "Nature Deficit Disorder"?

I think a lot of the problems with kids today stems from overscheduling and never giving the kids unsupervised play time. There's so much emphasis on "quality time" and getting a head start on school and stuff that letting kids do their own thing, finding their own methods of creative play, goes by the wayside.

I think that can be done whether in a city or in the countryside. Perhaps it's easier in the country since you have less "bad" to worry about (not getting run over by cars since you have a yard, knowing your neighbors).

So is Nature the cure for our children's ailments or society's problems?

Comments

[jamiam.livejournal.com]

Well, actually, I think a lot of the problems with "today's kids," especially poorer ones, are quite similar to the problems of the 1900's -- not enough supervision, and no place safe to play. That's not really true of your average subdivision, or even a nice urban area. There are a lot more over-acheiving parents smothering their kids in wishful thinking and unrealistic expectations, but it's really a function of affluence. I think the kids who would benefit the most from a strong dose of summer camp are from poorer, truly urban areas. Sure, the woods are dangerous, too -- you can very easily shoot your eye out with a BB gun, or break your leg climbing in trees. But in truly urban areas, where large numbers of children from single-parent families are free to roam unsupervised, they are at much greater risk from drugs and gang-related violence. It's something that's difficult to appreciate when you've only grown and only known the tree-lined, grassy-lawn suburbs.

But I think there is a case to be made for all children: they are the future stewards of what nature is left. Our generation and our parent's generation are proving that it's difficult to appreciate the benefits of recycling -- or high-gas mileage vehicles -- without that expereince. If you've had time to learn to love a particular natural environment, then you have a chance to understand what is lost when it vanishes a decade or two later.

At least, every child should be required to spend a couple days a year picking up trash for an adopt-a-highway program...