Life looks good when we have chosen our partner well and established a home on sound principles of human reciprocity. We certainly feel that we were made for this life of adventure and pleasure. Provided the participants continue to respect each others' dignity and do not abuse the privileges of friendship, the marriage has every chance of deepening into a very rich relationship.

The event of the birth of children can bring new problems which were not thought of before. People have different ideas as to how a child should be raised. The new grandparents may also be keen to advise. We can get very emphatic about those special little people who are our own children.

I have never thought that bringing up children was an easy job, especially in our cities. After all a child is dependent on the parents for practical and emotional support for many years. Sometimes a parent needs a lot of wisdom- All of us make mistakes in our ignorance from time to time. Fortunately there are rewards in parenthood which compensate for all the work and cost of the venture.

In this chapter I would like to look at the family relationship using the same principles we have been discussing. I believe that by understanding it is possible to break the vicious circle of demand and violence which is so prevalent in the world today. I do not believe it is desirable or necessary to live as adversaries in human relationships. Yes, yes, the system has been in operation a long, long time, too long indeed.

In our personal lives and our homes it is possible and very rewarding to live as persons of dignity respecting and co-operating with our fellows. If we can establish a mini-culture in our homes devoid of demand and violence we will have contributed in a small way to a better and more peaceful world.

The European society of Australia was partly founded in the I8th Century by British victims of a harsh penal code. Persons judged guilty in the law courts of England could find themselves being deported to the colonies. Many were banished for quite trivial offences. Those were the days when property owners, the rich and strong, controlled the masses with unbending severity. The poor who offended property laws had very little chance of real justice.

Today those who hold the power are a different section of society but the philosophy of might is right still persists in a large section of our community.

The same philosophy of might is right is seen today in the strength of the voting power of business share capital when fifty one per cent of the voting power controls the other forty nine per cent. The same group power is seen in unions who strike to force results from a reluctant management. It is the same old power philosophy of feudalism. If results are not forthcoming willingly then the use of force seems to follow automatically- In this kind of thinking each faction, capital or labour is looking only at its own side of the picture, each trying to get a bigger share of the cake from the other party.

Whatever we may think of this bulldozer power tactic among industry or politics, it does not work successfully in the home situation. On the surface it may appear to work but in the long run it can blight the lives of developing children. It will also ultimately deprive the parents of the affection of their family.

At one time we lived near a family who were very tough on their little three-year-old son. They were continually shouting at him, locking him up or smacking him for disobedience. He just did not seem able to avoid their disapproval, indeed he had given up even trying. One day his grandparents arrived from the country for a holiday and the same day they also were shouting at him and smacking him frequently. Later on the same day there was serious crying outside one of our windows and there was little three-year-old laying into the neighbour's two-and-a-half year old daughter, with absolute sadistic delight written all over his little face. It was as if he was saying "I'd like to hit those who hit me but I can't they are too big for me, but I can hit a little girl instead." He was expressing repressed anger.

It is unfortunately true that in many homes children are controlled in a feudalistic manner "Do as I say or else." It is a method passed down from generation to generation,

I suspect that obedience usually has a one-sided interest, weighted more to the benefit of the parent than the child. The word discipline has a strong scent of force about it. It is like pollution, a habit which is very difficult and slow to eradicate. Children brought up in a violent or forceful home tend to become violent or forceful parents. I have often met parents who hated the way they were brought up, yet in most cases they will treat their own children in exactly the same way.

In their book "Child Rearing Pattern in New Zealand " Drs. Jane and James Ritchie tell us the results of a careful study of one hundred and fifty families. They say "It is perhaps a theme of our culture (among others) that we believe that aggression can be used to make others less aggressive, and to that view can be ascribed much that is tragic in our time. in our country and in its families." "We do not wish to deny to parents the right to express their own feelings. If anything we would urge that they should do so more. In this way the child might begin to learn to find less crude and disruptive forms of expression for himself as well as how better to read the signs of emotions in others. The helplessness of so many or those mothers, their paralysis in the face of the anger of children is what we find so disturbing as well as the loss of control that the chronically aggressive families demonstrate." "Against popular belief the non-punishing mothers were not cranks and did not live in a chaos of child demand and domination- They used reasoning, affection, distraction, isolation, modeling , tangible rewards, every possible technique except punishment and were assured and consistent in their relationship with the children."

Control and counter control is a very important aspect of home behaviour. The parents try to restrict and direct the actions of the child. They may demand that a child come straight home from school and be home by a certain time. The child may have other ideas and wish to play cricket with his friends or go swimming, so he may try to change the parental control by at first being five or ten minutes late and then extending the time. Or he may give excuses as to why he is late or argue with his parents that he needs to play cricket after school to gain success.

Children meet parental control with a counter control. Indeed they gel very quick in anticipating the likely reaction of the parent. They may counter control by staying out of sight ar the right time or pointing out to the parents what the neighbours' children are allowed to do or have. At times they may perform conciliatory acts to soften the parents' control. Counter control is a form of protection. The child needs to develop it and should be allowed room to practice using it.

Among both his elders and peers a child is using control and counter control all the time. It is a necessary part of growing up. He is learning about the actions and reactions of his fellow beings, and how to fit into the social structure. How to gain an advantage or to avoid another person gaining an advantage over him. He is learning self direction, building up his own Strength of character, discovering his own qualities. Those control and counter control manoeuvres constitute a learning experience which goes toward developing leadership, courage, fortitude and social amiability. Without them man could not develop the diversely interesting achievements he is capable of. A child growing up is not just putting on weight and size like a vegetable. He is developing knowledge through experience of how to orientate himself to his own advantage within society. He is forming opinions, attitudes and skills for later use. To do this adequately he needs an atmosphere of tolerance where he can best develop himself into a fully functioning adult. White doing this, every child needs protection and accep tance within his own family. Not the feudalistic inflexible bulldozer power method of control, but understanding and loyalty, care and attention. He needs to have his point of view listened to sincerely.

Behaviour psychologists have repeatedly proved that rewards are more successful in effecting desirable change than punishment. Punishment may postpone the undesirable act but it very seldom prevents it from happening nor does it change the attitude or the offender. He is more likely to say to himself "next time I won't get caught." The extremely low success rate of our Borstal and prison system seems to prove that discipline does not cure the anti-social person. It merely hardens him for more anti-social feelings.

"If your roses fail to bloom" says Bertrand Russell "it does not occur to you to whip them, but you try to find out what has been amiss in your treatment of them. If your children fait to bloom, you should treat them as you would the roses" and again- "It is not by hostility that good things are achieved . . . there is almost always a way, though sometimes a much slower way, of doing things without violence."

Yet children need to have boundaries, and indeed are more happy and secure within them. Lack of control can be interpreted by the child as tack of caring-Those boundaries should be consistent in nature, not one thing one day and another the next. A child should learn to come to meals when ready because by disregarding such convention he puts a burden on others and distracts from the family's enjoyment of his company. He will not destroy rhe habitat for much the same reason. Boundaries should be broad and as few as possible so that the child can practise responsibility and self direction within their limits.

Parents should not pass to the child the responsibility of deciding his limits of behaviour before he is ready or capable of understanding the results of his actions.

Effective Means of Co-operation:

The most effective control, by far, is the loving and caring communication which can develop between parent and child. This can be very rewarding for both parties. We once had a housekeeper looking after the family while my first wife was in hospital. This charming woman came to me one evening with a long face complaining that one of my boys had stolen some of the housekeeping money. I took the offender into another room to talk about it. Very soon he blurted out that everyone in his class at school had a certain kind of toy gun except himself and he was feeling bad about it and did not have enough money to buy one. I realised that he was not nearly as much at fault as I was. I had been too busy at work and had not listened enough to him. So I apologised to him and increased his pocket money. The result was a very surprised housekeeper but I am also convinced that it cured the problem of my son's desire to steal. It was the last time he stole from the housekeeping. On that occasion punishment could only have had the opposite effect and made the offender more subtle and devious. Instead, we were able to look at the problem as a problem and find the answer, and the child gained the feeling of being understood and cared for.

Children are often taught to respect their elders. Adults should also respect their children. I have often witnessed adults being very rude to children. They seem to feel that they have a right simply because they are older. Respect should be a two-way thing and for the dignity of the individual regardless of age.

statement. The second is more complex and has many facets of expression but is just as important.

The first is Love and Protection. Every child has the expectation and right to be loved and protected by his parents at ail times. A mother who says to the child so that a child could suspect that the statement could be true "Don't do that or mummy won't love you," or "I'll run away and leave you," or "I'll give you away if you do that" is threatening withdrawal of love and protection. No dependent child can genuinely fear rejection by the parent without damage.

The second basic emotional requirement of every child is to be accepted as a Person of Worth. Misguided attempts by the parents to control behaviour by placing doubt on the child's dignity as a person of worth, can, and usually does cause considerable damage to their emotional development- Small children find it almost impossible to counter control parental attacks to their dignity as a person of worth by such statements as "let me do that, you'll only spoil it." I have often heard statements from adults, such as, "I felt that anything I attempted to do was never good enough," or "I was the youngest, and was picked on, laughed at and continually made to feel stupid, just because I hadn't yet learned as much as they." A child has little defence against this kind of personal rejection by those who are supposed to be his protectors. Every child needs to feel approved of as a person of worth and accepted for himself.

Part of accepting this child as a person of worth is to have faith in his integrity. In other words trust and believe him. He will know it and will honour that trust and grow up to be an honourable and trustworthy citizen. Trusting a child encourages him to accept responsibility for himself. Distrust removes his opportunity co practise personal responsibility. The child who has been continually trusted will be better equipped to make personal decisions in adult life.

A child who has been mistrusted for most of his life will not suddenly respond to being believed and trusted without a few lapses. He will need to know and prove the trust given him is genuine before he can increase his own trustworthiness. The more he is trusted the more he is likely to become trustworthy- If you must criticise, criticise the act but not the person. In other words deal with the problem as a problem without downgrading the person.

Another hindrance to accepting the child as a person uf worth, is to insult his intelligence. Perhaps I feel Strongly about this because of my own experiences while living in an orphanage many years ago. I now, never ever, find it necessary to call a child stupid or silly. It horrifies me the way some parents repeatedly insult their own children's intelligence. It is easy to thoughtlessly insult a child's intelligence, dignity or honour. By doing so we make a judgement upon him as a person and hurt his sense of personal worth. Of course children build up defences and adjustments to assuage and escape the hurt. The fact remains, however, that very many never ever get over the damage to their self confidence.

The greatest forces within the family are the attitudes of the parents. The real attitudes are recognised by the children, not by words but by acts. Attitudes uf mutual acceptance, tolerance, listening and caring, the wife who thoughtfully turns on the garage light for the husband who is expected to come home after dark. The husband who phones when he is going to be late for a meal. Both are installing positive attitudes of co-operation within the whole family.