Minding Fences

Fences. They're everywhere. Robert Frost said, "Good fences make good neighbors." Fences are good. They have their purpose. I'm wondering, though, at what point they become a problem. My particular pondering is about children.

We are fencing fiends when it comes to children. There are fences around pools to keep them out. There are fences around yards to keep them in. We put fences on stairs to keep them off. And we use a plethora of devices to control access. There are child-proof bottles (which, as we all know, can only be opened by children) and child-proofed homes. We put locks on drawers and cabinets and anything we don't want them to access. We install child-proofing on our computers to keep them from going places they shouldn't go. We put up fences everywhere to protect our children.

The basic function of a fence, whether it be an actual fence or some of these devices I've mentioned, is to mechanize restrictions. The function is to be there when you aren't and do what you won't (because you're not there). Of course if you're standing there you will prevent the child from running into the street, but what about when you're not? Of course if you're in the kitchen and the child tries to get under the sink and drink Draino you'll stop her, but what about when you're not there? And the problem is that parents are present, but not omnipresent. Turn away for a second and children are quick little beauties. They'll be into that stuff in the blink of an eye ... almost literally. So we construct mechanisms to block them since parents can't be everywhere at once.

And I begin to wonder ... is that good? I'm torn. I see the necessity. It is saving lives -- little lives. That's good. But how much are parents relying on devices to do what they are supposed to do? Think of it this way. Before they came up with handy child locks on door knobs, drawers, and cabinets, what did parents do? How did any kid survive homes like that? I'm thinking that parents weren't any more omnipresent then than now, so how did they manage to get by? Well, it seems that they trained their kids. At a very young age, as these little cuties started to become mobile, parents would keep a close eye on their children and start to train them. They would train them to avoid certain dangerous places. They would train them to obey. This one is of particular importance. They would train them that "No!" meant "Stop now!" and they would count on that child stopping when that command was shouted. It was work, sure. It took early vigilance. It took some inflicting of pain on occasion to seal the point. It wasn't easy. But what they ended up with was a child-proofed ... child. This child would not go places she shouldn't because she was trained not to. This child wouldn't be in the steak knives or the refrigerator while mom's back is turned because he was trained not to. And as Dad talked to a neighbor out front while Johnny toddled around the yard, a barked "Stop!" command would actually stop Johnny steps from the street instead of requiring Dad to sprint madly across the yard to snatch him from the road because he ignored his father's words.

Mechanical protection for children may be a good thing, but this is what I wonder. At what point do they learn to avoid these problems without mechanical devices? At what point do they learn to respect the authority that God has put in their lives? At what point does a parent start developing their character to reduce or eliminate the need for such devices? Maybe it is supposed to happens someplace, but based on the majority of kids I see today in our stores and parking lots and neighborhoods and all, it doesn't seem to be. Instead, we just have to keep inventing better fences. Is that really how we want to equip our children?