Most of us are familiar with the African proverb – “It takes a village to raise a child”. We are also very cognisant that in today’s world the village has very little or no authority over a child – and if a member of the village seeks to assert authority, over a child, that is not sanctioned by the child’ parent that villager is likely to face the unending wrath of the child’s parent. Clearly, parents must sanction the raising of their children by the village, if action on the part of villagers is to manifest itself.
In Anguilla, today, while some still subscribe to the view that it takes a village to raise a child far too many Anguillians choose to do it on their own. Sadly, having dispensed with the assistance of the village many parents then fail to honour their responsibilities to their children. These children, without the guidance of their parents or the village, often choose a path that is destructive to them and society generally. At this juncture, when it may be too late or at the very least, require significant effort to rescue lost children, help is sought, not from the village but from governmental institutions. Even at this stage some parents frustrate governmental institutions when they seek to steer their children back to a socially acceptable path.
It seems to me that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that cutting the village out of the equation is only serving to negatively impact the moral fibre of our community. Despite this, I suspect that many reasons can be offered by a parent for not wanting to grant others authority over his or her children. The primary reason is likely to be that any authority granted may be abused. How real is this and, if real, is the answer really to totally cut the
village out of the equation? The available evidence suggests that removing the village from the equation is not working.
We need to return to the days when villagers corrected children without fear of attack by the children’s parents; when teachers did not hesitate to correct a delinquent student because they were assured of parents’ support for the efforts of teachers to discipline their children; when a look from an adult was the only warning a child needed to correct his or her deviant behavior; when children understood that the report of their deviant behaviour would reach home before they did – and they would be dealt with accordingly when they arrived.This culture resulted in children immediately correcting their deviant behaviour when an adult appeared. Children did not dare to swear in the presence of an adult. The teachers’ word was law because it was accepted that they assumed parental authority while the child was in their care. Students engaged mainly in acceptable behaviour in school because they appreciated that they would be punished by the school and their parents for any infractions they committed at school. This was the time when Tranquility was truly experienced in Anguilla.
Are we content with the absence of discipline displayed by many of Anguilla’s children, today? Is it acceptable for children to abuse each other and adults without restraint? Are we content to have Magistrates and Judges seek to instill qualities that we failed to instill as parents or as villagers? As Anguillians, there must still reside in some aspect of our being the desire to secure the wellbeing of our fellowman. That starts with a desire to see our children grow into adulthood with the capacity to positively impact our society. The village can and should play a role in securing this realty. The village, however, has to be invited to participate. The invitation to participate is extended every time a parent accepts and encourages the involvement of others who seek to ensure that his or her children develop attitudes and habits that will be beneficial to the communities they live in.
Parents extend the invitation. Villagers accept that invitation. Together let us raise our children.
