fbpx
Articles

What we need most for hard choices in parenting

Smartphones, sports, and wisdom

/
May 26, 2021

Recently, I wrote a short post on Facebook about some of the difficult decisions my husband and I are facing in parenting, echoing conversations I’m having with other parents. Our kids are 13 and 10, and like every parent for all of time, I frequently hear myself saying, “Things are just so different than they were when we were growing up.” And while this has been true through the ages, it does seem especially difficult to raise children in an era when technology is advancing so rapidly and contributes to a vastly different childhood experience than the one in which we grew up in the 80s and 90s. 

In the Facebook post, I reflected on a recent conversation I had with a friend in which I joked, “If we could just get all the parents in a room and agree to not do cell phones or travel sports for kids, we could solve all the problems.” While this was a joke, it was also my simplistic way of expressing some of the difficult decisions we face at this stage of parenting. And judging from the responses from friends, we’re certainly not alone in wrestling with these things. There are unique challenges facing parents right now, and we need wisdom to parent our kids well.

Kids and phones

There’s a scene in the 2008 film adaptation of Dr. Seuss’s Horton Hears a Who in which one of the daughters of Whoville’s mayor pleads with her father, “Can I please have a Who-phone, Dad? Everyone else in my class has one.” Like so many parents, myself included, the mayor responds with sarcasm, “Oh really? Everyone?” The daughter then presents him with photographic evidence — a picture of herself standing alone in the midst of 11 other students, all of whom are happily talking away on their phones. Most parents can relate to this scene. It is no exaggeration for my child to tell me she’s the only seventh grader without a phone. In fact, it’s only a slight exaggeration for my fourth grader to say the same. 

The statistics back up our childrens’ claims. The website SellCell surveyed 1,135 parents in the U.S. with children between the ages of 4 and 14 in 2019. They found that:

The study also reported that 42% of kids are spending 30 hours each week on cell phones.

You have probably seen the statistics on the links between smartphones and anxiety, depression, lack of sleep, and other issues in kids. The past year has only exacerbated many of these things. Parents who were holding off on phones have made the decision to give their child one during the pandemic because of the combination of the child’s need for socialization and the parent’s difficulty managing working from home. I spoke with a counselor who said his practice has seen a dramatic increase in children who have been exposed to pornographic content through device usage in the past year. 

Looking at the statistics, it seems like a simple decision to just say, “No phone until 16,” or some other age in the distant future. But as with most parenting decisions, it’s not that simple. Decisions around safety and the ability to stay in communication during after school activities cause many parents to allow phones. Some are intentional about starting with phones that limit access to the internet or social media. Others use smartwatches for the same purpose. For some parents, the gradual exposure to phones allows them to teach their children how to use technology responsibly. You can read more about making decisions like this here

I have spoken with parents who have allowed their children to have phones in middle school or earlier, while others have waited until high school. Some have had good experiences, although most admit it’s an additional burden to themselves as parents to stay on top of their children’s tech use. They have their kids sign contracts and treat a phone much like they would a car — as a tool that is a privilege, and one that can be taken away with irresponsible use. Other parents have admitted they regret giving in to their children’s pleas and wish they had waited longer. 

There are no easy answers when it comes to our kids and phones. 

Kids and sports

Another area in which parents feel pressure is that of youth sports. Studies consistently show that kids involved in athletics develop long-lasting skills helpful beyond the court or field such as confidence in relationships, empathy, problem-solving, and accountability. Most of us who have children in middle or high school grew up in a time when you could try out several different sports, and even play two or three in high school. It was rare for an athlete to specialize in one sport from an early age, and club or travel teams were the exception, not the rule.

I went to volleyball tryouts at my high school as a ninth grader in 2000 having never played before. Without any club experience, I was able to make a small NAIA college team four years later. If I could transport my ninth grade self to 2021, I wouldn’t have been able to make most middle school teams. Friends whose daughters have played on their schools’ sixth grade teams have received a lot of pressure to have their daughters play club ball. It’s common knowledge that they won’t be able to play in high school unless they spend time and money playing year-round. This for a sport in which less than 4% of high school players go on to play in the NCAA, with only 1.2% playing in Division I. 

This problem is not unique to volleyball. The statistics are similar for most sports. (Although, if you want your daughter to play college sports, ice hockey is your best bet; 26.2% of female high school ice hockey players go on to play in the NCAA.) 

As the popularity of travel sports has risen, the overall participation rate in sports has declined. Families who are able to pay are funneling money into more elite teams, while those who cannot pay are forced out of competitive athletics. A 2017 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office revealed that the overall student participation rate in sports is now only 39%, with rates the lowest in urban (32%), high-poverty (27%), and charter (19%) schools. 

It can feel a bit like a chicken and egg scenario. We don’t want to do travel sports, but we want our kids to have the benefits of playing competitively. Because it’s so hard to make teams or get playing time, we pay the often exorbitant costs and sacrifice our time to ensure our kids get the experience of playing the sports we loved at their ages. For some families, it’s about setting kids up for college scholarships. But for many, they see the benefits of discipline, commitment, and team building — things we all want for our kids. Of course, the sacrifice often includes missing things like gathering with a local church family. And what we prioritize as a family speaks volumes to our kids about what’s important in life.

Where is wisdom?

These are just two out of many issues we are wrestling with as parents. Each generation has its own struggles, and in that way there’s nothing new under the sun. But even as we encounter new challenges, we need timeless wisdom.

I remember sitting in a Bible study as the mom of a 1-year-old when a new mom shared that she had been convicted to go to God in prayer, asking for wisdom in parenting decisions rather than just going straight to Google. It was as if a lightbulb went off in my mind. I was a Google mom. My kid wouldn’t sleep through the night, so I went to Google. She would only eat orange foods, so I went to Google. She wasn’t walking yet, so I went to Google. 

I didn’t solely look to Google for solutions; I often asked friends. We would compare notes on milestones and tips on what was working for us. Often, both the internet and my friends were helpful. God has given us the common grace of wisdom through experience and the research conducted by experts.

The problem I’ve found with looking to these conventional methods first for obtaining wisdom is that I’m prone to make and justify decisions based on what my peers are doing. In that way, I’m not much different from the children I’m trying to raise. We can easily find people arguing for one side or another of a difficult decision, and it’s convenient to look for opinions and evidence that confirm our natural inclinations. 

Twelve years later, I’m still trying to learn the lesson my friend taught me in that Bible study. James 1:5 says, “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.” It’s such a comfort to know that we can go to God first with all our needs for wisdom, and to know that he doesn’t reproach us for not already knowing the answers. 

God will often answer our prayers for wisdom through the words of Scripture, the words of another person, or through circumstances. As we wrestle through the challenges of parenting, there will always be new issues that arise, and we will frequently lack the wisdom we need. Statistics, firsthand reports, and the words of friends can be helpful and wise, but we need wisdom to sift through the noise and determine what is best for our individual children, and the grace to not fault our friends for the decisions they make. 

I am trying to learn to respond to my children’s requests with this statement: “I need to pray and ask God for wisdom about that.” Whatever the decision, I hope this reminds my children and myself that he is the ultimate authority in our lives and source of wisdom. I also hope it reminds my kids that we’re on the same team and that their parents want God’s best for them. 

As we prayerfully submit our decisions to the Lord, we can trust him to guide us in the right direction. And we can trust that he will do the same for our children when they leave our home one day. This is, after all, the message of the book of Proverbs: Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight (Prov. 4:7b).

Whether our kids have phones or become college athletes, may our greater desire be that they get wisdom. And may God give us the wisdom that we need to impart to them. 

Catherine Parks

Catherine Parks writes and lives in Nashville, Tennessee, with her husband, two children, and a cute dog named Ollie. She's the author of Empowered and Strong, collections of biographies for middle-grade readers. You can find more of her writing at cathparks.com Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24