Why children are needed, or the Myth about the instinct of motherhood
The first question that is important to clarify for spouses even before the moment of conception is the question of motivation: why do we want a child? Why do we need children? As a rule, there are always several motives, and they may differ between husband and wife. Some motives are recognized, but many remain hidden in the unconscious, and only a specialist can help discover them, using special techniques, including questionnaires. Answers based on a generalization or categorical statement: “It’s natural - all normal people want it” or “It’s our duty, it’s how it’s supposed to be, without children a full-fledged family is impossible”, from a psychological point of view, indicate the infantilism of future parents rather than their readiness for the birth of the first child. Why? There are many reasons, we will list some of them.
Firstly, the desire to have a child is not a sign of “normality” , and not all “normal people” want to become parents, just as not everyone wants to get married. There are different paths and destinations in life (for example, monasticism), different opportunities and features, and there are situations in which parenthood, although desirable, is not feasible. Therefore, “everything” and “normal” are not suitable as an explanation here.
Secondly, “it’s the way it’s supposed to be” - in this case, it calls into question the freedom of choice of the spouses, and along with freedom, responsibility. “We were told, we did it” - here this is an infantile position, because in order to fully realize your parenthood, it is important to be personally mature: “I am ready, I can, I want, I choose, I answer.”
And finally, thirdly, the usefulness of a family is not determined by the presence of children . Thus, Saints Peter and Fevronia, who are revered in Russia as the patrons of family and marriage, according to legend, were childless. After the birth of Jesus Christ, the Old Testament attitude towards childlessness as God's curse and punishment changed. People's expectation of the Messiah coming into the world was replaced by the desire to implement his commandments in their lives.
Of course, it is wonderful when a family has children born in love, and the Bible says: “And God blessed them, and God said to them: be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it” (Gen. 1:28) . It is only important not to forget something else: in the prayers of the wedding ceremony, the Orthodox Church expresses the belief that childbearing is the desired fruit of a legal marriage, but at the same time not its only goal. Along with the “fruit of the womb, for the benefit” of the spouses, gifts of enduring mutual love, chastity, and “unanimity of souls and bodies” are requested (Quoted from: Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church).
The birth of a child is not the meaning or purpose of marriage, but also not a “means of saving the soul,” as those who prefer to guide their lives by quotes from the messages and sayings of the holy fathers, taken out of context, believe.
There is also a myth about the so-called maternal instinct. Debunking myths is a thankless task, but a noble one, so let’s risk encroaching on the “sacred.” Let's start with a definition: the main feature of instinctive behavior in animals is that it is innate, carried out automatically, reproduced unconsciously, that is, without any participation of thought and will. But man is not an animal. By assuming that a person has instincts, we question his freedom. Based on the above, the first argument “against”: a person, from the point of view of Christian anthropology, does not and cannot have instincts, since this would contradict the idea of a person created by God in His own image and likeness and possessing freedom, will and creative gifts .
Of course, one could say that this argument is only good for believers. But there is another, understandable to everyone: if we consider the desire to have children to be instinctive, how then can we explain the situation with abortion? If parenthood was instinctive, there would be no abortions at all, but this, to our deepest regret, is not the case. Instinct is something that all “individuals of a given species” should have, but then why today does our country rank among the first in the number of abortions as a percentage of the total number of children born? Abortions are performed by both women who do not have children, those who have already given birth, and even those with many children. One explanation for this depressing picture: the generally accepted attitude towards children as an “object of desire” (“I want to have a child”) also implies the opposite pole - “I don’t want to have a child.” It’s as if the life of an individual can be discussed in the categories of “to have and not to have.”
We will not dwell in detail on the description of the destructive motives for having children; we will only list some of them:
• strengthen family relationships (tie her to yourself, bring her husband back, prevent his leaving);
• force a partner to marry;
• improve living conditions;
• force parents to accept the marriage;
• give birth “for health” (“abortion is harmful, but pregnancy rejuvenates”);
• “to give birth to spite everyone”, to take revenge;
• receive material benefits;
• change social status and much more.
Such motives have a destructive effect on marital relationships, on the personality of each spouse, and on the life and development of the child - we hope that this is clear without explanation.
So, all motivations for having children, from our point of view, can be divided into two types: “child-object” (means) and “child-subject” (unconditional value).
A “child-object”, having been born, must provide its parents with satisfaction of their psychological needs:
• in unconditional, selfless love and fidelity (“Having taken the child in my arms, for the first time in my life I felt that someone loved me just like that, would not exchange me for anyone, and this would be forever!”; “At least someone will love me”; “I will always be the best and most beloved woman for my son!”);
• in a sense of self-worth (“I am a mother, and a mother is sacred!”) and usefulness (“I, like any normal person, have children”);
• in the sense of my own life (“Before the birth of the child, I did not understand why I was living”; “If something happens to the child, I will have no reason to live”; “My children are the main and only meaning of my life”);
• in self-affirmation (“My child - I do what I want with him”; “I am a king and god for my children”);
• in self-realization (“Children should achieve everything I dreamed of”; “Children are my continuation, my pride!”; “My child should have everything that I didn’t have”);
• feeling like an adult and smart (“Children are not your toys!”; “Don’t teach me how to live, I’m now a parent myself!”; “First give birth yourself, and then you’ll give me advice on parenting!”);
• in one’s own need (“Children will always need their parents”; “Where will he go without us”; “Now I have at least one close person whom I can take care of”);
• in safety and security (“I will never be left alone”; “There will be someone to bring me a glass of water in my old age”).
It turns out that future parents have some kind of deficit, some unsatisfied desires, ambitions, fears that they hope to cope with with the help of the child, and the baby, not yet born, already owes them something . Inadequate expectations placed on a child cannot be justified by definition - after all, they are initially built on false ideas. Although “folk wisdom” would argue with us here, because the phrases that we cited as examples were taken from life and sound natural to many, their correctness is beyond doubt. But in this case, this is not the voice of wisdom, but of “folk” stupidity, since all the above statements are an example of selfishness, egocentrism, personal immaturity, and not an adult parental position (forgive me if anyone recognizes themselves in these examples).
When a child does not act as an object, but is perceived by parents as a subject, as a person, relationships with him are built on completely different grounds. The emphasis is no longer on expecting the child to give something to the parents (or get rid of something), but, on the contrary, the focus is on the ability of the parents to satisfy the needs of the baby . The “fairy tale about the norm” assumes that by the time the spouses are ready to become parents, they already have an emotional and personal “living wage”: a sense of the unconditional value of their own personality and life; conscious meaning of your life; adequate self-esteem; honest knowledge of their strengths and weaknesses, their capabilities and limitations (therefore they do not need unlimited power over the child to assert themselves); various ways of self-realization, acceptance of oneself, other people and life in its entirety; courage in the face of unpredictability and uncertainty of the future.
That is, these are two adults.
After reading this list, someone will be surprised: if I have all this, I live a full and interesting life, then why do I need a child? And this is the most important thing: it is not the child who needs the parents, but the child who needs the parents; it is not the baby who must meet the expectations of adults, but adults who must have sufficient resources (both physical and psychological) to satisfy all the basic needs and desires of the child.
When parents have an excess of strength and mutual love, joy and they are ready to generously share this, to give their wealth with all their hearts, then their child has a chance to feel like a subject, a valuable person, worthy of unconditional love and care.
But in the minds of many modern people, parent-child relationships are, alas, turned upside down. How wonderful it would be if children were born from an excess of parental love and strength, and not to make up for their deficiencies and heal complexes.
A conversation to clarify the motivation for having a child may not be pleasant. Perhaps one or both spouses will suddenly discover that they are completely psychologically unprepared for the arrival of a baby. “So what now - not to give birth, but to wait for the onset of personal maturity? And if she doesn’t reach old age, then you’ll end up without children?” - This is a typical question at lectures, seminars and consultations. Whether to wait or not to wait, how long to wait and for what - the decision is made only by the spouses themselves, since this decision lies in the area of their personal responsibility, and no one has the right to either allow or prohibit them. It is only important that, when making one of the most important and fateful decisions in their lives - the decision about a future child - the spouses are well aware of their characteristics and limitations, understand which of their own psychological needs are not yet satisfied, and learn to find different ways to satisfy them, without involving children in this “honorable mission”.
Happy, fulfilling parenthood is possible even with imperfect parents (to be honest, we have never seen perfect ones). The main thing is that they do not count on the child as a deliverer from intrapersonal problems and interpersonal conflicts. At the same time, children, of course, to some extent influence their parents’ self-esteem, their sense of the value and meaning of life, their self-realization, etc., etc., but this is not their main task. Every child comes into this world to become themselves to the full potential that God placed in them. And adults are simply obliged to take care of creating the best (based on their capabilities) conditions for the development of personality, which the Lord has temporarily entrusted to their care.
Psychological readiness for parenthood may include the following:
• recognition of the greatest significance of the birth of a new person into the world (instead of treating the child as an object, which devalues the personality);
• awareness of one’s adequate responsibility for the life, health and development of the child (instead of inadequate hyper- or hypo-responsibility - “everything” or “nothing”);
• the ability of parents to show unconditional love and loyalty (instead of expecting to receive it from the child);
• feeling and recognition of the unconditional value of the child’s life and personality (instead of the desire to assert oneself at his expense);
• respect for the child’s personality and own meaning in life (instead of making it the meaning of one’s life or imposing one’s own meanings on him);
• the ability to support the child in his self-realization (instead of self-realization at his expense);
• recognition of the child’s right to identity, individuality (instead of ignoring or denying the child’s characteristics and dragging him into dependent relationships);
• willingness to create a safe and protected environment for the child’s development, to take care of his needs and satisfy both physical and psychological needs (instead of making a child a parent for himself - expecting care, attention, understanding, etc. from him, etc. from an adult).
Difficult requirements, but, you see, the task is extremely complex and responsible.
From the new book by Archpriest Andrei Lorgus and psychologist Olga Krasnikova, “Life after the wedding,” published by Nikea publishing house.
Where do children get tetanus vaccinations?
Tetanus vaccination for children is given intramuscularly, into the deep layers of the muscles. For vaccination, areas of the body with developed muscles, minimal fat and thin skin are selected. If the drug gets under the skin, unwanted inflammatory processes may begin. A tetanus injection is given to children under three years of age in the front surface of the thigh, and for those older - in the subscapular area. Parents are warned that after vaccination, children should not visit public places where there may be people infected with colds and other diseases, since in the first days after vaccination, immunity is somewhat reduced.
