I have run my private liberal economy for the last 40 years. to wit, I and my wife raised six children. We could not give them every advantage but we were supportive. I preached the gospel that we raised them into adulthood and now it was their turn to finish the job properly.
These children did not take our good gifts and burn them up in riotous living, they used them and built upon them to make their lives better.
As a blazing liberal, that is what I want people to do with my liberality: use it to build upon. Take control of it and make lives better because of the base I have given. I hope this philosophy underlies all of liberality: use our generosity and pay it forward.
43
It's admirable that this writer was able to pull himself up against a stacked deck. It's also great that this conservative is able to acknowledge the essential help of loving parents, albeit they are far from a conservative's pick for poster parents.
Bottom line, though, this man is working through some issues. I just wish the NYT had not elected to waste readers' time before those issues were actually more fully thought through. If I want to wade through contradictions and gross presumptions, I'll . . . not read the Times.
52
Wouldn't it be even better to have three or four people raise a child though? Then there would be even more care and attention, and we could lower population growth.
9
I’m speechless. Mr. Henderson claims a conservative identity because, having experienced different family structures, he only thrived in a traditional two-parent household. Blink and you’ll miss that the two parents were unmarried lesbians.
Mr. Henderson admits to “cynical interpretations” of his liberal classmates’ politics. Here’s my cynical interpretation of his essay: He chronicles the sequence of (truly) awful childhood environments into which he was forced in order to disarm a skeptical audience. The climactic revelation that his journey ended at a two-parent household (where he finally found a chance at success) is meant to cinch his credibility and justify his conservatism. However, he knows that his parents’ sexuality and marital status dramatically undermine his argument, so he tucks them away in ambiguous language (“my mother and her partner”) and an oblique reference (“homophobia”).
Hostility to gay rights—the kind that would have given his mothers the dignity and legal protection of marriage—is integral to modern American conservatism. It is disingenuous to claim otherwise or to fall back on an obsolete, romanticized definition of conservatism a la David Brooks. Here is the truth: Mr. Henderson’s fellow conservatives think the foster system that failed him is better than the gay parents who ostensibly inspired this essay. What kind of mental gymnastics does he perform to reconcile these diametrically opposed facts?
114
There are no mainstream Democrats who attack the idea of a two parent family, the main thing that Democrats argue is that children who come from single parent households shouldn't suffer for it.
102
Just getting older makes one a conservative.
21
I respectfully suggest the author spend another year at Yale learning critical thinking. And this time engage in some in-depth discussions with your liberal classmates, because your politics are based on nothing but conservative stereotypes about liberals.
Your very presence at Yale is the result of the liberal belief that being born into dysfunction and poverty should not prevent a person of talent and ambition from attending college. Conservatives historically considered college a privilege reserved for men whose families could afford it. (And they did not want them to have to compete with poor kids for admission.)
Religious conservatives took it a step further, arguing that you were born to a drug addict and placed in foster care because that was where god wanted you. Any attempt to help you ran counter to his plan.
Consider, too, that most of your liberal classmates are probably not from conservative families. Apparently liberal parents are fully capable of raising kids who qualify for Ivy League educations. Meanwhile, the opioid/heroin crisis is hitting hardest in the heartland, where conservatism reigns and people were ostensibly raised to be responsible citizens.
Finally, understand that what might look like coddling is simple good manners. Liberals are all in favor of personal responsibility. But they also recognize the real obstacles some people face--and they do their counseling in private, knowing that public shaming never did anyone any good.
85
It amazes me that liberals thinks that they can somehow be the champions of personal responsibility while at the same time supporting policies that define everyone who isnt white as victims not responsible for the condition of their lives regardless of life choices. Meanwhile, white people are not only supposed to be super-responsible for their own lives but also responsible for all the bad decisions everyone else makes.
For example. We keep hearing about how gang violence is the fault of everyone but the gang members who pull the trigger. Its policy brutality. Its poverty. Its lack of affordable housing. In Chicago it's almost like black people have no agency and are just puppets on the strings of others.
Yet I recently went to Rock Island Illinois and met a black woman who had left Chicago to get away from the violence and was happy with her new life. She told me.she grew up in a bad area but used her self agency to find a better life. She was responsible for her life and managed to make a change.
Liberals never seem to talk about this. It feels like black people are trapped in Chicago and are waiting for a sufficiently woke savior. Chicago has been run by white savior Democrats for a long long time and gangs are still killing people everyday.
If I was a black person in Chicago I'd move out. You can take a train for nothing to anywhere outside a city and suddenly have jobs and affordable housing and safety.
Personal Responsibility is what makes individuals succeed
26
The line that sums it up for me - “Along with taking accumulated wisdom seriously, I understand conservative philosophy to mean that the role of the individual in making decisions and undertaking obligations is paramount. Individuals have rights. But they also have responsibilities.”" In this day and age most conservatives are just the opposite. Now if he had said, well, 30 years or so ago, I might have given him some leeway. Most conservatives the days vote out of ignorance, believe without research, and actually act against their own needs. Womens rights, civil rights, Gay rights, social safety nets for the disadvantaged, fair pay, clean water, loving families - either conventional or otherwise - without judgement, clean air, sacrifice for others - not just lining the pockets of themselves and/or the wealthy - these are liberal values. Sorry, to identify in the era of Trump as a conservative in is to be on the wrong side of history.
26
Placing conservatives on a pedestal of family values is a joke. Barely a week goes by when one our elected conservatives are outed for such non-family activities such as having affairs (while married), or even while the wife is having a baby. (Trump). Or after a life of railing against gays, they are caught being gay. Or denying abortions, then demanding a subordinate get one. Or child molesting in public bathrooms. Take your pick but conservatives are hardly the exemplars of family values, no matter what your background.
46
So, liberals don't believe in personal responsibility? They don't believe in families with two parents? I think that you have the wrong idea about liberalism.
59
What is the matter with the New York Times lately? And what on earth makes the idea of a two parent family conservative? The writer fails to make the connection between that and what most of the people who call themselves conservatives believe.
Your lack of a two parent family makes you willing to tolerate the racism, greed, and contempt for the poor that is emblematic of modern conservatism? You're fine with your fellow conservatives looking past the president's criminality as long as they can get another rightwing radical on the Supreme Court? You're fine with selling off our National Parks?
I ask because I lost my parents when I was five, and was handed over to several sets of relatives who didn't want me, and couldn't afford another child. Somehow this didn't make me a conservative, and deafen me to what's being done to the poor and people of color.
50
I'm really at a loss to understand your viewpoint in this piece, Mr. Henderson. Having worked professionally with society's most vulnerable people, including youth in foster care, my work has never been about assigning people victim status and keeping them from moving forward. Quite the contrary - my coworkers and I work with youth to identify and develop strengths, capabilities, and motivations so that they will be able to weather adversity, have successful relationships, complete education, and achieve in life.
People like you, who are fortunate enough to have at least one positive parental relationship and some periods of relative stability, are often able to overcome challenging conditions and succeed in life. I have seen many who were less fortunate, in that they did not have that crucial amount of love, support, stability, and opportunity at formative times in their development. They don't know what a happy, secure family and life even looks like, and they are unlikely to stumble on it by accident while living in an environment of shame and despair. Without intervention and support, they are at high risk for drugs, exploitation, unplanned pregnancy, poverty, homelessness, abuse. We are able to offer so little, and the so-called political conservatives want us to reduce our ability to help children and families even more. There is nothing genuinely pro-family in their agenda or their actions.
Regardless of politics -- congratulations & best wishes.
21
It’s a little horrifying to read so many comments that (1) insult the author’s ability to construct an argument but rely on conclusory insults to make the point; or (2) take him to task for failing to make clear what he means by “liberal” and “conservative” without addressing the paragraph where he says the following.
He said, “Along with taking accumulated wisdom seriously, I understand conservative philosophy to mean that the role of the individual in making decisions and undertaking obligations is paramount. Individuals have rights. But they also have responsibilities.”
I agree that doesn’t describe the center of gravity of what passes for conservatism today, but it does clearly describe two hallmarks of a type of conservatism.
If the quoted paragraph also describes the intellectual and emotional reflexes of many liberals then y’all might consider making that fact more clear to the rest of us on a going forward basis in our ongoing political arguments. The insulting and conclusory comments I’ve read don’t convince me that the quoted paragraph is central to the thinking of most liberals.
BTW, pointing out that many liberals are in stable families does not prove that liberals aggressively promote the formation of stable families other than by addressing economic inequality.
12
hey jack, the line"He said, “Along with taking accumulated wisdom seriously, I understand conservative philosophy to mean that the role of the individual in making decisions and undertaking obligations is paramount. Individuals have rights. But they also have responsibilities.”" In this day and age most conservatives are just the opposite. Now if he had said, well, 30 years or so ago, I might have given him some leeway. Most conservatives the days vote out of ignorance, believe without research, and actually act against their own needs. Womens rights, civil rights, Gay rights, social safety nets for the disadvantaged, fair pay, clean water, loving families - either conventional or otherwise - without judgement, clean air, sacrifice for others - not just lining the pockets of themselves and/or the wealthy - these are liberal values. Sorry, to be a conservative in 2018 is to be on the wrong side of history.
4
Had this article been titled "How I Define My Personal Conservatism," this argument would make more sense.
Instead, the title as written establishes the intent of asserting a moral superiority of judgement through background...identity politics, if you failed to notice it. The title provides the context through which the article is seen.
If you adopt the "I am a Proud Conservative" mantra in a public forum of any stripe, you are using a label with a widely understood shorthand meaning that is pretty well entrenched, though oddly not conservative in the slightest. If you mean something else, re-title the argument.
But the point of the article and its mismatched headline is in fact to provoke. So it worked. Click bait.
8
Thanks for disagreeing agreeably, lastcard.
For me it was actually about 40 years ago. I don’t know if I was actually a conservative in 1980. I like Ike. But the Rs lost me in elections for federal office by 1980 when by my lights they married the Southern Strategy to the WSJ editorial page. I’m not going back until they come back towards Ike. Jerry Ford’s about as far right as I care to go.
6
You might be surprised that many liberals have two-parent families and are socially conservative in their own lives, with the caveat that they still want Social Security and Medicare to act as a safety net for our entire country. As a liberal with many conservative relatives, I've seen these same conservatives take advantage of liberal policies and advances, such as equal treatment of people of color, and women. Honestly, I think you ran into some very class-privileged people at Yale and they are not representative of most of the US population.
15
Interesting that political affiliation has a lot more nowadays to do with identity than it does about policies you prefer. Call yourself a conservative, and it evokes ideas around responsibility, self-reliance, time-honored traditions...virtually none of these being embodied by the GOP.
As a gay parent myself, I was shocked to read Mr Henderson's parents were a gay couple. Does he not know that it's conservatives in this country that are trying to deny gay couples the right to parent?
25
Conservative does not mean Republican.
8
Congratulations on your graduation. Keep reading though, because you maybe aren't such a conservative. I'm a progressive and strongly support 2 parent families, especially if the parents are professionals. I know many who fit this image, and even though they work, there's no question children are the priority. The hard part is what to do when people make bad choices on life and families. I vote for a safety net.
7
I completely understand what this author is saying. As a transgender woman I experience the same problems. Liberals always want to label me a victim, and then tell me that my victimhood is somehow essential for for legitimizing my opinions. Being a victim gives me power in liberal land. Since I'm not a white Male I am somehow better and wiser and more important. Now this situation is obviously better than being called a deluded child molester by conservatives, which is why I am an independent.
I just want to be Jacqueline McGrane. With liberals, I feel like an educated white atheist transgender woman. I feel like liberals are telling me that the only people that can know me are other educated white atheist transgender women, and quite frankly there aren't that many of those. I also dont believe that. I believe any human being can come to know fully any other human being given time and desire through the unity of the human condition.
The thing that really bothers me though is personal responsibility. Liberals NEVER talk about personal responsibility and I believe that is a huge mistake. I am responsible for what happens in MY life and I'm not a victim. I've been assaulted but I I refused to have that event define my life. I immediately called the cops and got the person arrested and 86ed from the bar forever.
I got into MIT and I got a degree and now I run a successful business with my wife. If I was a victim I dont think I would have done any of those things.
13
Liberals don't want you to be a victim. To say they do is absurd. We want you to be considered an equal. Try living in 1950's America as a transgender. Do you know why you can live the life that you have now? That is because liberals fought for equal rights for the LGBTQ community against the conservatives that wanted them institutionalized. Without liberals you would be a marginalized victim that had no chance to live the life that you have now and deserve. Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth.
27
This liberal agrees with pretty much everything you say. (And many social conservatives would NOT like two lesbians parenting a child.) I imagine that, at Yale, you are reacting to the overly PC world of high end academia and the sophomoric naivete of your less experienced, more pampered classmates. I have a nephew facing the same issues at Vassar. But when you leave that hothouse of same-think and enter the larger culture, you might find you're less a conservative than you are a thoughtful realist.
139
I 'am' confused by the article. I don't see the connection between being conservative and your life path and preferences. Humans need support and stability in a combination of emotional, social, financial forces. I think it's 'conservative' to abhor abortion and yet ignore the existance of orphanages and the foster care crisis. I think it's 'conservative' to dismiss the issue of birth control drug addicts have abandoned a child. I asked a friend if his addicted daughter had her tubes tied after abandoning her baby in the hospital. "No, we probably should have asked for that." He takes care of the baby full time at least while they are still alive.
I have equated ignoring these sort of "realities of the human condition" with 'conservatism' , which is probably as wrong as equating the drug problem with 'liberalism' (which I think is the leap you are making). But this is where we are.
3
The comments here suggest that there is quite a schism over the meaning of the word "liberal." On one side there are those who think that being liberal means believing in the public welfare and supporting social safety nets, and on the other there are people like the author who feel the need to distance themselves from the (not so much liberal as) leftist notion that overarching, impersonal forces are the primary determinants of individual outcomes.
Many of the commentators here emphasize that they, proud liberals, are not against the imperative of personal responsibility or the proven benefits of two parent family, and that the author has created a false dichotomy. I entreat those with this view to take the author's points seriously: especially on college campuses, right-thinking liberals know that nearly all outcomes are the result of societal (i.e. public policy) failings, not individual ones. To challenge this view is to commit heresy, which is equivalent to being seen as a conservative.
I am pro-choice, pro-science, and (within sensible limits) pro-social welfare, but I consider myself a centrist rather than a liberal, because to me a liberal is someone for whom group identity precedes individual agency. I hope those of you who identify as liberals will prove me wrong in time: perhaps we'll see liberals begin to challenge the anti-individualism that has become orthodoxy in our most liberal institutions.
11
Mr. Henderson...your understanding of liberals and liberalism may broaden as you gain more experience of the world after college.
Being liberal doesn't mean sitting idly by, waiting for your next welfare check. And I know plenty of conservative idlers who might actually have to work for a living sans government benefits - I'm related to some of them, in fact. The liberal wings of my family are actually more industrious than the conservative.
Your particularly understandable yearning for a different, better childhood is secretly shared by a surprisingly large number of us, raised in all different circumstances. Fortunately, post-childhood, we all have agency over our own lives. Carpe Diem.
Ponder this...would you be the man you have grown into had your birth parents, ill equipped as they were, raised you as their son, in the life they would likely have had together? I think your adoptive mom and partner did an pretty amazing job in however they helped you find your footing to get you where you are today. I suspect your birth parents together might not have done as good a job.
10
Many liberals believe in 2-parent families, and many liberals put their children before their careers. Many liberals take accumulated wisdom seriously and many liberals feel that the role of the individual in making decisions and undertaking obligations is paramount. In fact, as a liberal woman, I feel that the role of the individual in making decisions regarding my own body and whether or not to have children is paramount. I see nothing in this article which convinces me that you are destined to be a conservative. If you are a conservative, it is an intellectual choice you have made. Because one person at Yale told you that you were a victim and because most people at Yale are liberals, it does not necessarily follow that liberals view the world through glasses which categorize many people as victims to whom the government needs to provide social services. Both liberal and conservative ideology are much more complex than this article, or this author's viewpoint, would imply.
23
I wonder why the NYT editorial board chose to run the piece. It is facile and begins with a very shaky premise. (Two parent upbringing is a conservative value!) While I congratulate Mr. Henderson and wish him continued success in life he should consider a post-graduate course in critical thinking.
25
What a silly supposition! We liberals believe in two parents households just as much as you. But reality is different. Some marriages break and some should. The children should never be neglected neither by parents nor by society. This has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism.
19
All I see in American "conservatism" anymore is reactionary religious nonsense and taking responsibility for nothing.
10
This article either does Yale an injustice or should prompt them to reevaluate their attempts to teach critical thinking skills to students. I suggest the author hold off on facile partisan generalizations and study how red and blue states compare in terms of metrics around family cohesiveness.
16
"My adoptive mother and her partner.....experienced homophobia." This is the strongest case in this essay that you should continue to examine and think about what it means to be "conservative" and whether you even have to worry about having a label like that. I can imagine, and know from other articles, that students at Ivy League institutions who come from backgrounds filled with disadvantages, often feel disconnected from the clearly privileged students around them. This might just be one of the reasons you have decided you are unlike them and have interpreted this to mean you are conservative. Sorry if this sounds matronizing.
6
I have no idea what you are talking about here. I came from a stable family upbringing, My mother was a conservative Catholic, my father a liberal atheist. They both loved me and I them. I am a lefty progressive that would make Norm Chomsky blush and make Michael Moore look like DJT. Your inference that somehow liberals make poor parents or are ambivalent toward the concept of two parent households is absurd. If you want to know why you are conservative I'd suggest first to knock that chip off of your shoulder and look a little harder.
14
Conservatives spent the last 20 years trying to keep loving parents like the ones who raised you from forming stable families. They spent years promoting homophobia and fighting gay marriage and adoptions. Liberals fought for your family to be a family. Pence still won't say he supports two parent families if the parents are gay.
14
All for more personal responsibility and two-parent families here, but as Mr. Henderson must have realized while he was writing his piece, his lesbian adoptive parents (whom he credits with having made a significant difference in his life) would not have been able to adopt him if conservative forces had had their way. (At least he has the intellectual honesty to acknowledge their lesbianism.)
8
I am curious to know how your conservative friends responded to the fact that the best home you had was with a same sex couple.
9
This is not the views of conservatism in 2018...of Fox News, Trump, or white evangelicals.
2
The author is angry. He had a challenging life. He's very proud he beat the system of wealth.
1. He's an anomaly
2. His "conservatism" isn't a political commentary, just generational values
3. Most of the commentators grossly distorted his essay into a neocon vs liberal debate
101
You claim to be a conservative yet you were raised by lesbians. That's a conservative heresy right there. You believed you could alter your future and you took responsibility for your life. Great. Nothing about that is inherently conservative. Frankly, it's insulting to suggest that liberals don't want you to take responsibility just because they want tax payer dollars to help people like you. Without people like them pushing for government programs to receive more funding (including Foster care btw) people like you would be much worse for wear. Who knows, sounds like you had to struggle and made it by the skin of your teeth. Just a few more conservative cuts here and there and someone like you might not have made it.
8
This piece is incredibly poorly written. It is not clear, at all, what the ultimate takeaway is supposed to be or what two-parent families and conservatism have to do with each other.
8
Congratulations on proving that liberals aren't the only ones who can (occasionally justly) be called smug and self-righteous.
6
Goodness, what a self-congratulatory article. Yes, it's harder for people from broken homes to succeed, but some do anyway - perhaps because of luck (had that teacher not said to you that day--had she been out sick, say--that you can succeed no matter what, would things have been different?), perhaps because of a combination of circumstances and genes, who knows? So, you were one of the ones that did succeed. Well, we'll give you a medal, if you like. All hail the great Rob Henderson, who overcame adversity to get into Yale! (Might I ask, was your college essay about being a foster child, and were you therefore let in with lower grades than, say, a kid from an intact home? College admissions officers eat that kind of thing up.)
Meanwhile, what twaddle about the belief that two parents being able to provide a more stable home than one is somehow a conservative value. Rubbish. I'm a far lefty, and I think this too.
Perhaps what you really mean, but couldn't quite bring yourself to say, is that marriage should be between a man and a woman, and the woman should stay home with the kids. That's a conservative (and idiotic) value. But believing that kids benefit from stable homes with two parents (of whatever gender, and however they decide to divide up the work/childcare) is just common sense.
This article is uninformed, disingenuous, pompous nonsense. For all your Yale education, Mr. Henderson, you haven't actually learned much, have you?
6
If the NYT's felt the need to balance their Opinion page with Mr. Henderson's piece, they failed.
2
The thing is that I didn't read anything here that make me think that you are a conservative. Maybe this liberal and you have more in common than you think. Maybe I'm not a liberal? Is it that you think that if you had known that you were a victim that your sense of resolve would have been taken from you? You have done well. Please pass that on.
1
The author is not a conservative because of his upbringing. He's a conservative because he is...
*I often think it's comical – Fal, lal, la! How Nature always does contrive – Fal, lal, la! That every boy and every gal that's born into the world alive is either a little liberal or else a little conserv-a-tIve." -W.S. Gilbert
1
No it doesn't - responsibility make you an adult. There are more important issues for you to address - like whether you use your judgment to navigate your way or to punish others. Or whether since you did it, you can require others to do what luck has enabled you to do. Or whether you become committed to seeing that others have a road easier than the one you had.
The issue isn't whether your experience made you a conservative; the issue is whether your experiences made you a jerk or a worthy co-citizen.
82
And what in conservative politics makes you think it is good for two-parent families? Their access to free or low-cost health care? Their proposals for unlimited addiction treatment? Their post-natal care plans? You are just another deluded conservative dupe, played by rhetoric and blind to facts. Good for you.
2
Your personal triumph over adversity is astonishing. Congratulations !!!! But if it were up to conservatives everyone would be like you. Except they aren't and you're the exception.
54
I don’t disrespect conservative thought and in your case it’s survival. But does that make you support this clown circus running the country?
I don’t care how many Yale’s he went to, the man is a fool to be a “conservative,” whatever that’s supposed to mean. He can’t even identify the only warm stable home he ever lived in was a home of lesbians! Conservatives oppose same sex marriage. Conservative nowadays is someone whose philosophy justifies not helping others. I bet he got a lot of left wing help to get to Yale. He is also an ingrate.
2
You grew up in Red Bluff and went to Yale? Well good on you! Where to next?
2
You need to define "conservative".
In DC it now means - anti-choice; pro-assaut weapon; tax the poor; lick the boots of the rich; underfund schools; trash the planet ; stay mute in the face of a liar; build even more bombs.....
You just sound like you think all kids should have 2 parents.
I think almost all people,regardless of labels, would agree that's a good thing.
4
What's so conservative about these attitudes,as opposed to being liberal? This person seems to have a chip on his shoulder. Seems like a typical college paper.
2
I think Rob Henderson should be made a columnist at the
New York Times.
As usual the vast majority of commentators really don't
understand what he is speaking about and why he is
saying it - but being Liberal they roll out all the sociological
claptrap and gives themselves pats on the back for not
being "Conservative".
7
If almost all your Yalie peers are from 2 parent households and 90% are liberal, therefore, liberalism = supportive 2 parent households.
5
And mostly weathy, privileged liberals.
Your a priori notion that if you had been told you were a victim you would have given up and never have made it to the Air Force (as if there are no victims in the military) is fallactious, and the fault of this American tendency to winner takes all thinking.
You can acknowledge your pain, have empathy for yourself and others, AND apply yourself, altering your future.
And liberals did not invent the notion of what it means to be victimized. On the contrary, its at the core of liberalism to try and help victims "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps."
My question for you is, ok, you served and now you have been in Yale. Are you happy? Are you conscious of your feelings and motivations in real time? Do you have awareness? Are you mindful?
Just serving in the air force and getting a degree from Yale really mean very little when it comes to the inner life and self actualization my friend.
Who says your parents were liberals, btw, or that your mom's drug addictions was any more due to liberalism that Rush Limbaugh's or all the Oxyaddicts in the Red States?
2
Wait, what? Two lesbian mums experiencing homophobia has given this guy the idea he's a conservative?
5
This largely anecdotal article really does nothing to explain why the author is a conservative, except that apparently he feels having a two-parent home is central to that belief.
My 1,000 yard amateur psychoanalysis would give a different result. Conservative is simply a nicer way of saying selfish. And, if applied to current prominent conservatives, it also means fearful, opposed to change, with just a dash of hate mixed in.
As a veteran myself I couldn't help but to laugh about his frequent references to serving in the Air Force. All it takes to serve in the Air Force is to walk in the recruiting office and sign on the dotted line. The author should be much more proud of matriculating from Yale, instead of damning it with his faint praise.
104
But how many liberals sign up for duty?
18
If the conservatives have their way and defund Planned Parenthood, limit access to contraceptives, and stop Roe v Wade; there are going to be a lot more foster kids. Not everyone can support more children financially or emotionally or have any love to give. More children will be abandoned.
I supported a foster child for a number of years. His life had been hell in other foster homes. He had been beaten, forced into robbing others, started smoking marijuana when he was seven, never encouraged to attend school, never loved and the list goes on and on. He told me that he wished he had been aborted.
And, conservatives do not want to spend any money on caring for children once they are here. Social workers often have too many cases so that they cannot follow up on how foster children are doing as often as they should...not enough funding. Conservatives do not want to fund food stamps, nor health care, nor affordable housing, nor education and the list goes on and on. Too many children grow up in homeless shelters.
When I think of the conservative move to control women's bodies, I think of what happened in Romania under the rule of Nicolae Ceausescu. He eliminated contraception and choice and there were so many babies given to orphanages that they couldn't take care of them in any sort of reasonable manner.
I'll take the liberal approach toward children any day compared to the conservative ideal.
4
My family was liberal as hell, but we were also close and stable. We just believed that the social system shouldn’t allow some people to starve for the benefit of the top 1%.
8
Thank you for serving your country. Congratulations on earning your degree from Yale.
I was the oldest of four children when at age seven my father, a drunk and a womanizer who lived on other people’s money, abandoned us. I don’t blame him for not wanting to live with my mother, I did not either. One cannot choose parents.
We were poor. We lived in “Section 8 housing.” with the attendant financial status implied.
You said, “… if someone had told me I was a victim when I was a kid, I would never have made it.” Agree! Being a “victim” was not de rigueur in the 1950s. This is a status concocted and perpetuated by Progressives who, as you state, “… do not like placing blame on ordinary people. They prefer to blame ideologies, institutions, abstractions.”
I never saw myself as a victim. I learned early on from more than one source, “… if I applied myself, I could alter my future. This advice changed my life.” I sought out loving families with better financial circumstances in order to learn from them what I might do to effect changes.
At age 19, I enlisted in the Army and became a pilot. After six years, I enrolled in a university obtaining a B.S. in Accounting. As a CPA, I am now a retired business executive.
I was not a victim! Truly, “… the role of the individual in making decisions and undertaking obligations is paramount. Individuals have rights. But they also have responsibilities.”
4
I guess all families where there are two parents are the same.
And all other families are a mess. This is one individuals narrow experience of life. I come from a family of 8 children. Today 6 of us are in the moderate to progressive camp politically, one is on the extreme right and one doesn’t give a damn. We all had the same upbringing. It wasn’t easy. There was never enough money and never enough time for everyone. Somewhere around middle school I realized I was from the wrong side of the tracks. I too served in the military and put myself through University. All of my siblings have done well in life. All of us were responsible for our own educations and careers. With all of this said, my parents generation survived the depression, WWII and many, due to poverty and the financial crises of their days suffered much worse childhoods than this gentleman. They, for the most part, were Roosevelt Democrats. Their struggles didn’t make them conservatives. I respect your story, but your rationale for being a conservative is pretty lame. One can be a liberal and have conservative values. We didn’t have much, but we were taught the invaluable lessons of hard work, honesty, caring and responsibility. You appear to believe that those things are exclusively the property of people with conservative political opinions. They are not. Sorry about your Yale experience. I guess you scar easily. Most of us don’t give a damn about Ivy League nonsense. We live in a large, diverse community.
136
Everyone is a product of the environment. Darwin's evolution by natural selection is a scientific fact. It works on all living things, turtles, chimps and humans. Just like plants flourish given the correct mix of genetics, soil, water, sunlight & air, a loving family with multiple nurturing parents, financial stability, safe neighborhood and good school give any child a stronger head-start. Karma means different thing to different people, but "you reap what you sow" is obvious enough. That's just the general rule. Outliers can be found in any population.
Yet it's noticeable that many conservatives shunt scientific evidence, more so than liberals. Wonder if Rob Henderson studied that in his psychology classes. A degree from a Ivy League or any other university is no guarantee for immediate wisdom, but it is a good start. Maturity needs time. Nevertheless it is so unnecessary to wear a label and fall into identity traps. Blind tribal loyalty is insidious. For example, not all gay people are immune to bigotry and hatred. Many choose to join the military go kill people overseas. Every individual is multi-faceted. Not all good, not all bad. Identity is the bane of humanity, whether political, religious, ethnic, sexual or any other label.
2
Both liberals and conservatives believe in the value of a two-parent household.
Which is why California liberals fought so hard to pass AB 205, which legalized adoption by same-sex couples in 2003.
The only reason Mr. Henderson was able to be adopted by a supportive and loving lesbian couple in the early 2000s is because liberals fought to give them that right.
Liberals also believe is the wisdom of those who came before.
Maybe Mr. Henderson needs to acknowledge that the people who came before him, the wise ones who made his life possible, were liberals.
5
Do you think maybe your foster parents had the resilience and bandwidth to look after you well because they eschewed traditional notions of gender, marriage, and family? Maybe, if they were traditional and conservative, they would not have been with each other but likely married men, and would have subjected their biological children to misery for their pent up rage for living a life that was a lie to their hearts.
1
Is the author making a point that liberals don't support intact families ? But the fact that majority of Yale students come from intact families and majority of Yale students are liberal would seem to disprove that. And the use of "they said" and "many people said" is nothing more than an attempt to set up a straw man and then use it to discredit liberal ideology, without actually defining the term "liberal". I am rather surprised that a Yale graduate would write such an incoherent essay.
6
What does this have to do with being a conservative. I agree it’s best not to be in the foster child care system. I consider myself progressive. I guess. Who cares? I don’t know what this article has to do with being conservative? Do liberals believe broken families are better? NO!! Nobody does.
146
I always get the “wow” reaction when reading or listening to conservatives explain what a conservative believes. R. Henderson cites that’s 12% of Yale students call themselves conservatives. Then the first thing he says about what it mean should to be a conservative is that two parent families aren’t “fashionable” for liberals. What hogwash. Just because I recognize different family organization does not mean I can’t see the value in a tradition Rockwellian two parent family. Then he states “It’s no accident that most of my peers at Yale came from intact families.” One would then think that the majority of these students would the. BE “conservatives”.
2
Why did the Times feel the need to publish such a simplistic, superficial essay by a recent college graduate? Trying to fill the conservative quotient for the week or something? I hardly know where to start. First of all, he didn't have a "life" as a foster child. He was adopted at 7 and spent most of his formative years in a loving two person household. Second, what is new or original in this piece? The earthshaking revelation that people in two parent households fare better? Finally, does he realize that 59% of his fellow conservatives would like to discriminate against his mother and her partner and not allow them to make their bond formal through marriage? Or that many conservatives, especially Christian ones, oppose gay couples' right to adopt? Perhaps some more life experience will teach him that conservatives actually oppose many policies that affirm and strengthen families.
4
"The role of the individual ... is paramount" "… I ...blame individuals rather than a nebulous foe like poverty" rather than blaming ideologies or institutions -- yet your piece is mainly about the vital role of the oldinstitution of the 2-parent family in the success of children.
You believe personal responsibility is paramount -- yet you insist your success is NOT due to that, but is an exception! But overcoming "a nebulous foe like poverty" ONLY requires personal responsibility?
You're all over the map here.
Your reasoning is muddled beyond what one would expect from an ivy-league grad.
"…people who came before us weren’t stupid. They were stunted in many ways. But not in every way. Older people have insights worthy of our attention."
"Stunted"? "Older people"? You think the 2-parent family comes "from" "older people" who have "insights"? This sounds like grade-school, not post-Yale.
"Prioritize" kids over "career"? Career? How about the millions working 2 jobs with uncertain hours at minimum wage or maybe $10/hour & trying to raise kids?
And finally, your description of the vital role of having 2 adoptive parents is weak & unconvincing. You ate dinner together & chatted. Were they well-off? Was one stay-at-home? Anything else germaine to your point that 2 parents are necessary? "And we loved one another." A single parent could not have dinner with you, chat, love you?
I am very disappointed that Yale could produce a piece as flimsy as this.
92
Eheheheh. I would give a million to hear any HBCU (historically black colleges and universities) freshmen take a philosophical sledgehammer to this weak mess. But given that this is obviously a shot at a right-wing think tank/mag/Fox slot, I would expect no less.
13
ah,
One can only wonder if you applied to Yale and did
not get in and thus your envious rant.
Mr. Henderson wrote a very fine essay expressing his views in the context of his life.
Sadly there are too many parents who put their careers ahead of raising their children.
The fundamental flaw of Liberals is their lack
of insight about their true selves.
9
excellent analysis!
2
Mr Henderson,
I hope in the coming years, you spend some time exploring your history and the experience of those like you. Most people who actually do anything for foster youth and the poor skew liberal. These are the very people who run the fostercare system and looked out for you when your own parents failed you. They understand that a good, moral society steps in for children and families when individual decision making fails. They understand that the individual cannot stand a chance when the environment and policy conspire to push them into no-win situations and undesireable decisions.
You are young, apparently intelligent, and have much more to learn about the world and where you came from. And I hope you spend some time looking into the evidence base that deeply contradicts your line of thinking.
1
If Mr. Henderson's confused thinking and leaps of logic are at all representative of the intellectual rigor of the typical Yale graduate these days, then all I can say is, "New Haven, we have a problem."
4
There are 74 million children in the United States. In 2015, 670 thousand were in the foster care system, a little under 1%. Thus, the number of former foster children at Yale is indeed low (only ~10 versus ~40 expected).
By comparison, 27% of children are from single parent households, a much larger figure. And only 2.1% of Yale undergrads come from families in the bottom 20% of family income.
I think we should question whether 20-30% of households are irredeemably ill suited for raising academically accomplished children. Should America tell the many promising youths in low income families or single parent households or foster care to just 'apply themselves'? Or should America stand firmly as a land of opportunity for all? Can you settle for the 50% or 10% or 1% of children given the optimal childhood experience?
Choose wisely.
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/trends_fostercare_adoptio...
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045217
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-192.html
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/yale-unive...
From all I read from Mr Henderson, his experiences make him a realist, not a conservative. There is nothing conservative about believing that a two-parent family is ideal, or that hard work and optimism lead to stability and financial sucess. He should remember that someone cared enough to lend a hand when no one else in the world cared, and that act defies conventional labels. Winners and losers are a fact of life, and sometimes policies and attitudes victimize people. I find many if not most of those who call themselves conservatives think they are entitled, which I as a confirmed liberal, reject.
4
I agree with the sentiment that, while nicely written, this piece lacks substance in explaining the conservative nature of the writer. If anything, it focuses on one argument that has traditionally been a banner of 'conservative' politics, that is, that raising kids with two parents is better than not.
There is a tremendous amount of context that is missing in the presentation of this argument. For example, the writer is blissfully uninterested in the fact that the very same conservatives that he proudly sides with usually recoil at the prospect of two same-sex parents raising kids like Mr. Henderson.
Ironically, the facts give little support to his final salute "If today that makes me a conservative..."; a simple assessment of the family structure of the last two White House residents shows how shallow an argument it is to wrap oneself with the banner of conservatism, only on grounds of a two-parent family upbringing.
For whatever is worth: I was raised by two parents (Mom and Dad); and I am a white male who, along with my wife, is parent to two young children... and yet I am a liberal.
4
This article looks like it was written in 1980 in response to second-wave feminist rhetoric about defending women's choices of divorce and single parenthood. I applaud Rob Henderson for all his achievements, but his paeans to two-parent households and resisting victimhood don't mean a lot in policy terms. It's all well and good for people to yearn for two-parent families and stability, but remember that social policy prior to 1970 or so stipulated two-parent families even at the expense of spouse and child abuse and abandonment and idealized family life at the expense of real need. To that end, today's "conservatism" seeks to return to a mythologized past and not to confront a present that, for all its flaws, is leagues better than the past. You can just ask Rob Henderson's lesbian foster-parents about how well traditional social attitudes were to people like them.
70
Kudos to surviving a challenging upbringing. You are one of the lucky foster kids as you were adopted. Foster care in this country is an abomination, where most are ill cared for at best, and abused at worst.
I don't if taking responsibility is a 'conservative' view, but in today's progressive ideals, talking points for taking responsibility has become a dog whistle (their opinion, not mine) for racism or xenophobia. That pushes many to one or the other side of extremism. Neither conservatives or progressives have great policy ideas as they seek to divide and isolate the 'other' guy.
But you are right - taking responsibility and learning that early on, where consequences and problems are usually small, is paramount to not only a successful and happy life, but to building independent individuals that have a sense, and care about, community. This made America great.
27
He would have been as roght to say "eating tuna " made me a conservative. In other words, its all nonsense. Hows does being a foster child and seeing first hand how the conservatives abhor any social nets make being a conservatve a better choice? I would have thought the opposite. The armed forces mnake one more conservative I might add as you are then put into a structured order taking non free thought based society. Just mu opinion.
3
I'm sure this won't be an original argument here, I didn't read the 500 comments, but conservatives are fighting to stop same sex adoptions, right? It's great that the author values his two parent household, but his "conservative" agenda would have likely kept him in the foster system. His mother and partner would not have been allowed to adopt a child. Define it how you will, but I'm not sure how his idealism can represent a "conservative" view.
6
Rob Henderson,
Thank you. As a foster youth not much younger than you I agree with you. But probably for slightly different reasons. I was abused and neglected and unwanted from the people who I was expected to love. Because of this, when I was adopted I made the choice to speak out. But the people who were suppose to support human rights activists (majority of liberals) tried to squash my voice telling me that since I was not a minority (visibly that is, biologically I am however I am lightskinned so people assume my race) that my voice and story did not matter. The school I attended gave me the chance to tell my story during an assmebly but then turned around and gave the story I wrote... my story, to a latina girl because "people wouldn't be able to empathize as well with me". The people who are about "change" and "human rights" were not even willing to support me when I wanted to speak out. In fact the people who have supportted me have been mostly conservatives.they believe that where I came and my story is why reform needs to happen. as do I. I have yet to commit to a political party, I don't believe that I know enough about government to align myself, and that may never change but I do know who has supportted me versus those who do not.
Seeing the agenda that the liberals push is only detrementrial to foster youth and the foster system. Single mothers? Stats show that most foster youth come from single mother homes. And etc.
Thank you,
A foster kid
26
Dear foster kid,
I’m so sorry to read your story and I’ve really never met a liberal who actually behaves in the way you describe (though, admittedly, I live in a different part of the country). Can you please share more of your story so we have some more context?
Thank you.
14
Please, would some Yale alum explain how this individual graduated with such poor ability to compose a coherent argument? Not only does he fail to establish any kind of working definition of “conservative” — bouncing from rejection of being a victim to “taking accumulated wisdom seriously” to individuals making decisions and undertaking obligations to some convoluted conflation of two-parent families and individual agency — he unwittingly contradicts these very notions.
Henderson doesn’t tell of an Artful Dodger childhood, making his own way in the world. Instead, he describes help from (anti-accumulated wisdom) gay foster parents (connected to him through a government system of social aid for children who indeed are “victims” of parental neglect). And by clicking on the link, you can read how he was aided by the Warrior-Schlolar Project that not only helped him get into Yale but gave him needed preparation to handle its courses. Further, he was admitted under a special program for “non-traditional students” that seeks to “enrich Yale College through their life experience, sense of purpose, and character” — sort of affirmative action for soldiers and the like. Of course, telling about his difficult childhood in his college essay didn’t hurt — he played the victim card he now rejects.
Yale abetted the worst kind of conservative, telling others from his very high perch that they don’t need help after receiving it all along the way up. They should be ashamed of this essay.
10
In publishing this, the NYT isn’t exactly covering itself in glory, either.
1
I am a single mom and I am also a liberal it does not mean that I cared less about my daughter's education or well being. Being a single parent does not mean that you can't carry on intelligent conversations around the dinner table or wherever you may be seated. Being a single parent often times mean that you don't want to put up with physical abuse, mental abuse, drug abuse or just plain stupidity from the person you created a child with. My best example is Gerald R. Ford's mother, back in 1913 she left her husband because she didn't want the beatings. Imagine that a woman with a child willing to be alone when women were expected to stay for the sake of the children. Please carrying on a conversation around the dinner table with two parents is no more conservative than saying all liberals believes in free stuff.
8
It is a shame that the writer had to wait so many years in the foster care system before he could be adopted. While I appreciate the need to give bio parents the best chance to reunite with their children, too many kids wait in limbo, without the sense of security that kids need to thrive, while their bio parents violate one parenting plan after another. Sometimes, by the time the system gives up on reunification, the kid is old enough that his/her likelihood of being adopted is quite small.
The writer is lucky that he ended up in a good place with good influences for enough years that it positively shaped his life. Whatever the politics of it are, the author is right that a good, supportive family makes a huge difference.
A lot of conservatives think of themselves as victims. A lot of liberals believe they are personally responsible for whatever circumstances they find themselves in.
I would love for the author to clarify what he means when he says he is a "conservative". Is he opposed to legal same-sex marriage? Does he favor small and limited government? Is he opposed to environmental regulation? does he wish to see Social Security and Medicare abolished? In short, what exactly are the specific conservative values that the experience of growing up first in foster care and then in the bosom of loving adoptive parents has engendered?
2
This article seemed to be commissioned simply for the controversial headline. There was very little substance. I still have no idea why he is conservative. Is he socially conservative? Fiscally conservative? Simply believing that individuals should take responsibility for their actions does not make one conservative. Simply telling someone they were a victim does not make one liberal. Apparently, sympathy is not allowed either.
15
From this "I experienced a stable family, if only for a few years. Though they experienced homophobia and struggled financially, they never let it get in the way of doing the right thing for their son." I understand that Mr. Henderson's adoptive mother was in a relationship with another woman and this was very helpful for him. Does Mr. Henderson know, that conservative administration want to ban same-sex couples from adopting so that this loving, stable family would not even be possible?
And why does stable family automatically mean 2 parent family, where (presumably/usually) the mother stays home? Will Mr. Henderson stay home when he has children and not put his Yale education to use? And why does he think that parents choose this? what is his solution for families, when one parent suddenly dies or becomes very ill? Should the children be taken away and put into a "right kind of family"? The focus should be on strengthening parents and children and not on holding up one kind of family as better than all the others.
9
I'm a straight, white, married mother of three, and I send my kids to the Christian school affiliated with the church we attend. No drugs or government assistance. I believe in putting one's children first, no matter what. From my own experience, it is unquestionably, and exponentially, better to raise kids in a two-parent household.
And . . . I'm liberal.
This piece is illustrative of why the US is so polarized. Each "side" thinks they get to claim all virtue. When people think they have all the virtue, and the other side is not only different, but depraved, civil discourse is stilted, and political compromise is impossible.
Mr. Henderson does not mention specific conservative or liberal policies he either supports or opposes. Instead, he seems to use the term "conservative" as a proxy for a certain lifestyle or philosophical ideal. He seems to view the opposite (liberalism, I suppose) as an apologia for "lax parenting" and a selfish/hedonistic lifestyle that harms children. That's where this essay ends.
I wish it went further! Mr. Henderson is plainly intelligent and had many unique life experiences through his childhood, military service, and education. A policy discussion would be more enlightening than one that trades in false stereotypes. What laws would nudge parents to take responsibility? What laws would help foster children? Should education be changed? A national dialogue? What's next? I bet his answers would not all be "conservative" talking points.
19
Be careful with the assumption about no drugs among Christian school students. No snark here; I just know that in my town growing up, the kids who got thrown out of public school, usually for drugs, went to the Christian school because it was the only one that would take them.
7
Honestly, he doesn’t seem intelligent to me. At all. His appears to lack basic reasoning skills.
1
Consider that he is writing from the perspective of Yale, where being a good liberal means adhering to a very strict set of talking points about systemic racism, intersectional victimhood, and white (especially heterosexual, cis, male) privilege, all of which are assumed to be universally true, regardless of critical analysis or proof. His "conservatism" is a matter of acknowledging that the hard work of raising children and creating a stable home is the responsibility of parents, not the government or the school. We are all responsible for what we do. Not that difficult to understand. He's not arguing in support of the current "conservatism."
6
Thank you, Rob, for an insightful and well written piece. I'm sure your future is every bit s bright and hopeful as you are. Best to you from a fellow air force veteran who is also one of the 'lucky ones.'
4
The piece seems neither insightful nor well-written. It seems more self-serving and confused, based on inherent assumptions the reader is not privileged to and faulty conclusions.
3
It seems to me that much of Mr. Henderson's reasons for being conservative stem from his perceived victimhood by his peers at Yale. I understand this. I didn't have the easiest childhood either, but found it very frustrating when others viewed me as a victim. I've had an absolutely wonderful life and can't complain.
The rest? What liberal doesn't agree that a stable household is not ideal. I didn't realize that conservatives had a monopoly on this virtue.
17
This makes no sense to me at all.
"Individuals have rights. But they also have responsibilities."
That's about as liberal as it gets, the conservative view is
"Corporations have rights. They also have no responsibilities other than to the stock holders"
29
Hi, Rob, and thank you for this thoughtful column. It's good to have you in the world. I would like to add one aspect to this...economics. It would be great to pay stay-at-home parents with at least social security, so we could have more families where someone actually gets to stay home and raise the kids. Best for children to be RAISED, not left to their own devices.
Un unintended consequence of economic pressure, maybe, is that parents fall into the big pharma trap of using drugs to make kids more docile. This is convenient for parents and teachers, but it is also a, um, loaded gun when you consider that these medications can cause depression and suicidal impulses. Add to that a lack of parental involvement, and...
7
I sometimes feel that the nexus of many conflicts between liberals and conservatives lies in the fact that humans are, at the same time, both individuals and statistics. At any given moment we may chafe at those labels and broad categorizations, but they are facts. You can change your situation by addressing either one. And you'll likely be even more successful if you can address both.
3
Congratulations on your graduation. Political views are not always clear or consistent. While the benefits of a two parent (and grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, friends, neighbors) family are not in any real dispute, differences do show up in ideas about how best to support families of all configurations. The writer highlights again that it is often liberals who are living the ideals of family and thrift that conservatives proselytize about. The writer also highlights that the gender of the two parents is not a determining factor in the success of the children. Traditional, with tweaks, is not quite the same as conservative.
5
I'm confused by this message; that a two parent household is seen to be a strength only by conservatives?! I am a liberal and strongly believe in a two parent household as ideal. But we don't live in a perfect ideal world, so I also stongly believe in the idea that it 'takes a village'.... Why would the author think he has to be 'conservative' in his political stance, just because he believes in the strength of a two parent household? Just doesn't make any logical sense to me. It's so narrow in thinking...
29
Liberals say that it takes a village, because individuals break down and fail sometimes, and there needs to be a floor under the human condition.
22
Well said, thank you
1
How did this piece make the Times?
I do not really see a coherent thesis.... Where does it state that liberals do not believe in two parent households? And how could you receive the only stable environment of your childhood in a loving gay household and somehow conclude that your experience supports a conservative world view?
27
A disappointingly childish essay from someone who I would expect more from. I'm sorry the author has let his own disgust at the idea that he is a victim of anything cloud his compassion for those people who did not or could not follow his path.
13
Odd. I had a near- identical upbringing, and it made me a liberal. Like most liberals, I too believe an intact family is best for children. Since we can't yet legislate intact families, I'm for all the social welfare programs that could help these children bridge the gap.
28
The writer sounds like a terrific person, and I applaud his achievement. That said, the two people he cites as partly responsible for his life turning out well were gay women. Conservatives--at least today's--have more than a touch of homophobia. Additionally, I don't think that viewing a two-parent home as the best way to raise kids is a conservative value. Most of the people I know are liberal and they believe the same thing--unless the two parents are abusive. And, as we've seen recently, they can be.
9
You're key objection to the liberal point of view seems to be that the liberal called you a victim, and you value your own power to choose and be responsible. But this is a false dichotomy. You can be BOTH a victim and someone who overcame. The key insight you need is the thought that the pressures you faced were ones that people should not have to face, and social policy can help prevent that, And Yet the most social policy can do is put people in a position to succeed... it is still up to them to do the work. Look at your classmates: being set up to succeed does not undermine the motivation to work; it tends to enable it.
5
I'm not sure how this makes the author a conservative unless he supports legislating the two-parent family, and in particular mandating that it consist of a married man and woman. It doesn't sound like he does. It's a bit of a strawman to suggest that liberals disagree that a two parent household has benefits for kids. It's just that we don't spend a lot of time berating people for not living up to that ideal. Instead, we want reproductive health options to prevent unintended pregnancies, and we support same sex marriage, which is just another way to provide a two parent home.
137
I too came from an addicted, abusive upbringing. In/out of foster homes until my reluctant aunt & uncle took me in at 11 years old after my mother's death from alcoholism. My father was deemed unfit for MANY reasons. My siblings were on their own. So, I DO have a similar perspective. I graduated from college, none of my 3 siblings graduated high school. One died by age 43 of an overdose. Mr. Henderson's definition of "conservative" is what derails his argument. He calls it conservative because two people care for a child? Why is that conservative? I realize Mr. Henderson and I have skewed views of family, but I still believe that family is dynamic and different for everyone. What Mr. Henderson does SEEM to say is that we need to recognize that every human being deserves kindness, respect and nurturing. I do not believe it matters what structure that nurturing, caring environment takes. The foster system serves a purpose in a time of extreme need. It has many flaws, but it is, after all, a system meant to be temporary. Ideally, all children need a stable, loving "family", no matter what structure that family takes. In this time of extreme partisanship, using a term like conservative is not productive. By its definition, conservative is anti-change. It is nostalgic, static, conformist. Why then promote something that limits change to the very system he demonizes? Showing respect to what came before is fine. Remaining static and rejecting change is unhealthy.
15
What does the data show for children raised by 3 adults? Or 4?
My maternal grandparents were a huge part of my childhood, and they enriched my life immensely.
Why think two is the magic number?
7
The author says, 'My skin crawls when people use me as an example of a person who can shoulder the burdens of a nontraditional upbringing and succeed. They use my success as an argument for lax attitudes about parenting.'
So I find his post illogical. Why does homosexual parenting equate to laxity? And who would ever, ever argue for lax attitudes about parenting?
Furthermore, all of your parenting was nontraditional, even the parenting that you feel finally secured your future. So what are you trying to say?
Are you sure you understand the meaning of 'conservative'? No one, conservative or liberal, would disagree with the premise that two caring, thoughtful and responsible parents are the ideal. That is not a uniquely conservative idea, but simple common sense. Nor do liberals argue with the idea that individuals have both rights and responsibilities.
Well done, you, for making a success of your life, but for a psychology graduate, you seem to understand very little about human psychology.
10
While I have no objection to anyone's self-identification, I think that Mr. Henderson's focus on individual responsibility over group think makes him more of a Libertarian than a Conservative.
While taking responsibility for one's own life and making good decisions may not always ensure a good outcome, doing the opposite almost always guarantees a bad one.
4
I can relate to the writer. I’m Black, child of Africans immigrants and a conservative . By virtue of these facts I too have been considered a victim by many well-meaning people. When I tell them that whatever discrimination I’ve faced hasn’t been worthy to note or debilitating, they frown. Surely some white person discriminated against you.
I’m sure they have but I didn’t notice it. Just about every job I have had or promoted to has come at the hands of someone that was not black. I suppose I might have missed some opportunities because I was black, but I wouldn’t know.
Often times I read the NYT race articles and I often wonder what country they are covering. It’s very difficult to relate to the litany of victimhood stories and constant blaming of discrimination for disparities. Individuals, parents or communities are absolved of any part in the disparity but the omnipresent god of white supremacy is held to account.
It’s simply bizarre to me to not hold a group of people responsible for their actions because of their race or history in this country. It comes off as dehumanizing me, but it’s the dominant view of the smart set so here we are today.
64
Ed,
I’m thrilled to hear about the lack of discrimination you have experienced it this country. That just shows the power of liberal values!!
20
As someone who grew up amidst the rubble, violence and arson fires of East New York Brooklyn, I applaud Mr. Henderson's embrace of taking responsibility and rejecting the disempowering helplessness of victimization. That said, it would be ideal if we can all move past simplistic "blame" altogether, whether it be of the individual or ideologies/institutions. Alternatively, if that's not possible, let's assign blame to "all of the above," and embrace all solutions - individual and systems oriented - that demonstrate positive results.
Congratulations, Mr. Henderson, on your well-earned achievements and graduation from college. If you decide to join the GOP as a conservative, perhaps you can re-introduce to it the concepts of self-respect and taking responsibility.
7
Being a new parent and a child from a broken home, this story brings tears to my eyes thinking about a former foster kid who will likely have a stable family life once he has children of his own.
BTW, foster parents are amazing people!
2
Not having what it is perceived that others have makes a lot of people conservative. Not only do they want homes with two parents, they want the homes to be bigger, the cars to be better, and the bank accounts to be fatter. Not having is a basic incentive for wanting more. Of course, those who grow up having it all want to keep it all as well. Conservatives come in all sizes from all sorts of backgrounds. The common denominator is that they put their own needs and wants above the needs and wants of others. Liberals tend to concern themselves with the welfare of their fellow humans as well. Rob says that most at Yale are not conservative, which is generally a temporary condition for those of privilege. As he attends alumni meetings, he will find himself less in the minority.
7
The reason there are relatively few conservatives in academia is that the purpose of university is to introduce new ideas, not reaffirm already held beliefs.
Incidentally, I bet there are a lot of conservative single parents, or even two-parent couples, whose offspring had to be placed in alternative living situations.
6
Reading this reminded me of how I looked at two-parent families for most of my life. Being the odd one out, growing up with a distant father and a rotation of female relatives and eventually a terrible stepmother, I can tell you I used to look at those around me with envy. As a way to secure myself, I tried to take pride in being everything these people were not. I can tell you once you get beyond your early 20s, none of that matters. The school environment was rather toxic for me, but I did that to myself by seeing the world how you saw it. Once you get over using this to call out how you're different and see the world with a bit more compassion, people will warm up to you. Children call you a victim, adults call you a survivor.
4
In my earliest understanding of the labels "conservative" and "liberal" they were not diametrically opposed concepts. Conservative referred to an inclination to be prudent and cautious in judgement and preference. Liberal meant being open-minded in weighing alternatives for best probable outcomes. Rather than representing an inherent conflict, those two approaches can be mutually complimentary in reaching a rational, clearly explicable decision.
Unfortunately, political nonsense has evolved to obscure those truths by using those terms to identify and reinforce prejudicial ideologies while often concealing hidden agendas.
Mr. Henderson accepts the political label "conservative" because he advocates two-parent families for the benefit of their children. Does that place him in opposition to those (bleeding-heart) "liberals" who advocate increased support for single mothers who struggle to care for their children?
These observations don't make me a liberal or a conservative but I do expect to be rejected by both as a smart aleck.
9
It is rare to find a university that is not liberal today. I feel so sorry for the moderate and conservative students who are being bombarded by the liberal propaganda. They must remain silent or risk being ostracized by their peers and teachers. It is so unfair that they are not allowed to freely voice their opinions without possibly receiving a lowered grade. This will change if enough students band together and protest against this inequitable treatment.
4
As a professor, and a liberal, I can assure you that no conservative students I or my colleagues have taught have received lower grades because of political ideology. Until very recently, conservatives had a lot to add to the conversation. Now we have firebrand right-wing provocateurs invited to campus in order to inflame liberals and moderates. Homophobic, misogynist, all around nasty folks. This is why conservatives have gotten a bad name on campuses.
3
It is so unfair that student's minds aren't opened to new ideas, new experiences, and new people outside of one's old "comfort zone" at college. Conservatives refuse to grow in spite of the factual evidence in front of them. I feel sorry for the rest of us - conservatives have dragged us down to the Trump administration on their way to destroying the entire world. Woe to the rest of us, who can see, read, analyze, and learn.
2
I fail to see how the author is a "conservative" although I will take him at his word. As to the two parent (or more!) family, I don't know anyone who doesn't agree that takes a village to raise a child and that the more adults involved, the better. That said, when I was in college (University of Chicago), sitting in the living room of a dorm during my third year, the subject of social security came up, and we started talking about how many of us were living on Social Security death benefits from our parents. In that group of 16, nine hands went up, including mine. Over 50% of the group at that very selective college had suffered the loss of a parent. Presumably, most if not all had other people in loco parentis in our lives; I certainly did. And I think that's the point. Two parents are great. Four grandparents are great too. And one parent plus some other permutation of stable adult presence can be just fine as well. Oh, and I'm extremely liberal myself.
8
Good reply Ms Tabor. I knew many of those people in Hyde Park as well. Growing up with both parents in my case was only an economic advantage( no loans for college).the emotional advantage, the feeling of security and self confidence only came a few years ago through the efforts of my wonderfully nurturing wife.
2
I couldn't agree more that a two parent caring family is very important to the health and well being of children. I don't understand why that has anything to do with being a conservative. My politics, which are liberal, have nothing to do with the fact that it is better for children to grow up under the care of responsible, mentally healthy adults.
17
Dear Rob Henderson, you don't seem to have a very comprehensive grasp of the scope of 'liberalism' or 'conservatism'. There are many issues that each side addresses differently - for example, do you believe that the insurance industry health care model we have now is the best for our society, or do you think your VA care - basically a socialist model - is better?
Or try this - do you believe that the free market drives the oil industry and will stop them from ruining the earth, or do you think the government should prop up the oil industry - as they do - now that is socialism. OR, do you think the oil industry has proven incapable of respecting the earth and people over simple profit, and therefor need to be regulated - t hink about that one, I don't think you have considered this issue at all< from your column.
Liberal and conservative are words that I do not think have much to do with how you treat your children, at all. I think many other commentors have pointed that out to you.
I hope you get a chance to spend some time at a liberal arts college, studying history and art. Good luck to ya, expand your mind!!
16
I raised my sons in a two parent home. On the outside, we looked and lead a charmed life. I was a stay at home mom who gave up her career to raise our sons. We attended church as a family, both sons are Eagle Scouts. But a cancer was growing underneath. A young woman that I chose to mentor at my husbands urging was working to destroy my idyllic life. Gradually my husband began spending more time away from home and immersing himself in Boy Scout leadership. Despite every effort, I made to be a better wife, partner, mom, housekeeper he spent more time away from home. I read all the books about making your marriage better etc. What I didn’t know or understand the young woman was undermining all my efforts. I tried to be the dutiful conservative wife, being subservient to his needs. Until that fateful day, I heard ’I love you but I am not in love with you’. He moved out to make decisions in with a friend. Many lies and two years later I find out he had been living with her all this time. They both denied their relationship because they didn’t want to be seen as ’bad’ people. As a result, I have a very healthy distrust of men who claim to be conservatives. They claim family values but under the surface are rotten to the core. I know more liberals who are more moral without shouting it from the rooftop.
13
I'm confused by this piece. Are parents responsible for the health and happiness of thier children, or are the children themselves? The author is clear to avoid victimhood, yet heaps blame on parents who choose not to parent in a two parent arrangement. If children who grow up in these less than ideal circumstances are not victims, what are they? And why should society change to help them if they are capable of doing just fine, "not being victims"?
6
I consider myself a liberal but think that Rob Henderson makes some interesting points about the importance of responsibility in life. I'm divorced but I would never kid myself that it was good for our children. I had a tough childhood and although it was nothing like his - I still had to overcome high odds to become a CPA. I'm a liberal though because if society stacks the odds too heavily against disadvantaged people only the incredibly exceptional will be able to break out of it. How about the two income families who work at small companies and can't afford health care. Does Mr. Henderson know what happens to families like this when they have a child born with serious defects? And perhaps Mr. Henderson's mother could have been helped if we had better programs for addicts. I think he has taken his own accomplishments and concluded that everyone can achieve them if they just try hard enough. While I have respect for his views, for the most part I don't agree.
3
Beyond raising the standard of living as a step towards preventing the circumstances of Rob's parents, just what does he propose society do with the child of a parent who's drug addiction makes them incapable of raising the child? I don't see how the fiscal policies and budget priorities of conservatives make the reality of situations like Rob's any better.
5
I might idealize two-parent families if I had an upbringing like Mr. Henderson's. But my family was the ideal two-parent family, everyone sitting down together for dinner every night. I think we even said grace. And my family was abusive. I dreaded sitting down to dinner, knowing I was putting myself in plain sight for an hour of insult. A loving family, or a negligent or abusive family, can have any shape, any number of people.
9
The author has a really bizarre working definition of "conservative."
13
The prevalence of single parent families is higher in red states than in blue states How are two parent families “ conservative” ? Looks to me like red state conservatives talk the talk while blue state liberals walk the walk
12
The only thing I can say is bravo, and I’m amazed the Times actually printed something that has an alternative point of view from their own.
4
Except this bizarre reasoning doesn't do anything for "alternative" viewpoints.
1
I have met a lot of people over the decades who were kicked out of their "conservative" homes because they were gay.
8
"But it is not really up for debate that the two-parent home is, on average, better for children." I don't know if the author is white but this could be the ultimate white privilege.
2
Also extremely misinformed. There is no consensus in the research, at least not the legitimate research.
1
Extremely well said, specifically the bit about the classmate labeling Henderson a "victim" assuming Henderson was not as progressive as him. Thank you, NYT, for publishing this.
4
Whoa, Mr. Henderson, "How people raise their children is a matter of preference"???? Yeah, my mom really *preferred* to have my father abuse her and leave her one day, with no notice, stuck with two children to care for.
Yes, I wish I had 2 parents growing up. But these oh-so-lovely conservatives you speak of are very actively, now, re-writing laws so gay couples may not adopt in certain states. (See: Savage Lovecast, 5/15.)
And just so you know - my single mother raised a doctor, a business owner, and a not-for-profit founder and leader. I certainly hope you mature a bit and open your mind. By my calculations, you're not even 30 yet. And a little compassion towards those you see as 'non-ideal' families would go a long way. you're welcome.
16
Does Mr. Henderson realize that being a conservative these days also implies being anti-science, anti-education, anti-progressive, homophobic, and anti-anything-reasonable? He needs to come up with a better term to describe himself...
16
Otherwise, I can’t see how this story makes any sense at all.
7
Unless Rob is also a raging bigot and / xenophobe, I don't see the connection to conservatism.
8
Congrats to the author on his graduation, but boo/hiss to his professors who evidently never cautioned him about "straw man" arguments. Who are these family-destroying "liberals"? How does he actually define a political conservative? This reads like a rather incoherent cover letter accompanying an application to work for a right-wing think tank.
21
"This reads like a rather incoherent cover letter accompanying an application to work for a right-wing think tank."
Or for Fox.
4
What nonsense. I've never once see a liberal advocate for single-parent homes -- everyone recognizes that it's difficult for the single parent, the child (or children), and not the ideal situation. That is a large reason why liberals are strong supporters of both widely available birth control and freely available abortion -- because they recognize that potential parents are in the best position to evaluate whether they can provide for a child. That ability to decide when and how many children to have is the hallmark of the "personal responsibility" mantra the author claims to support, yet is a view that is diametrically opposite of the views advanced by conservatives, who want no education on birth control, no birth control, no abortions and also want to limit food stamps, welfare, adequate school and child care funding, and pretty much every other social program that assist families to provide stable homes for children (which the author, btw, benefited from in payments to his foster parents to offset the cost of his upbringing). Conservatives are not the party of "personal responsibility" and progressives are not the party of "laissez-faire responsibility" as the author is suggesting. The difference is that progressives recognize that there are supports that society, as a whole, can provide to advance the stable upbringing of children -- supports that "conservatives", despite all their "all about the children" boasting, don't support.
14
Trump claims he's a victim, of a witch hunt. Does that make him a liberal?
9
Strange . . . the opioid epidemic is in the red states. Aren't they the conservative ones?
12
Another white twenty something mansplaining how if he did it, everyone can do it. That's great he was successful, but blaming the poor is an old standard.
6
Perhaps liberal and conservative have become too knee jerk and narrow. My wonderful girlfriend and I believe strongly in stable families, sacrifice, and individual success. Her kids are Ivy's, but we hate liberal PC'ism and what goes by feminism these days.
She was born with a disfiguring skin disease and terrible parents. Dad left at age 5 and Mom mostly cared about dating and marrying. K could have easily spiraled down into drugs and pity. She chose Tough. An early woman in tech, valued in several startups. Waited for marriage and stability to have children. (Her husband became mentally disabled and after years of trying, she left for the kid's benefit.)
Most of my family is similar, although my lesbian sister had a daughter, raised by the rest of the family as Sis worked. But all of us are, I would say, FDR liberal Democrats. Which, I guess, is pretty conservative these days!
2
I'm not clear on which beliefs make the writer a conservative. Acknowledging the benefits of a stable home life? Don't we all, liberal and conservative universally see them? And liberals don't think that the people who have come before are stupid. That isn't liberalism, it's immaturity.
7
Simple question: Why are you for an ideology that would deny the only dedicated parents you've ever had to get married?
9
Wow. For someone who goes to Yale, the author demonstrated shockingly poor logic. Not only does he confuse causation with correlation, he hasn’t a clue what liberals stand for. And Yale, by the way, had traditionally been considered one of the most conservative of the Ivy League schools.
10
The root problem is sexual irresponsibility. People have children who have no business reproducing. Drug & alcohol addiction, mental illness, lifestyle instability, hedonism, narcissism, stupidity --- none portend well for children. Women always get blamed, but many men refuse to use contraception or take responsibility for impregnating underage or addicted girls.
While generally children do best in a two-parent family, it all depends on the parents. Spend time hanging around the Juvenile & Family courts, and you will be sickened by all the cases of fathers & stepfathers raping underage daughters, and all the violent men who beat & harm children, and the horrible cases of abuse, neglect and mistreatment, physical, mental and emotional. Far too many fathers are addicted to alcohol, drugs, nicotine, gambling, pornography and create an ugly home environment. (Look how your misogynistic adoptive father abused you.) The two-parent family is only an advantage when the two parents are decent, wholesome, healthy & fit to parent.
If conservatives care about child welfare, why do they oppose contraception, women's reproductive services, sex education and programs to prevent unwanted children? Unplanned & unwanted accidental children often end up abused, while planned & wanted children come into an environment of love and caring.
Life is a sexually-transmitted condition, yet conservatives eschew making policies to insure that all children are planned & wanted.
10
Today’s conservatives wrap themselves in the flag and carry a bible while demanding tax breaks that defund our institutions and destroy our civil rights. Today’s American conservatives are not practicing conservatism - they practice fear, fascism, racism, and misogyny.
You sir, are a survivor. You have grit, determination, and you finish what you start - that makes you a grown up, a responsible citizen and a contributing member of society- welcome to the liberal ideal.
8
Caveat: wild speculation ahead.
Let’s roll the clock back to the 50’s which time period conservatives idealize. Two young adults, perhaps teens, named Rob and Kim fall in lust. Kim ends up pregnant, resulting in Rob and Kim getting married. They have a child and name him Robert. However, since their marriage began in their teens, as many did in more conservative times, they grow apart. Robert spends his time a work, then the bars. Kim has an illness requiring prescription medications. Conservative ideals dictate there are no divorces, so Robert and Kim stick it out, even though Robert abuses Kim regularly in front of his son, and Kim disappears for days after overdosing on pills. Little Robert is left stuck in a dysfunctional abusive family. Big Robert loses his job due to his alcohol binges, the family begins to suffer malnutrition. Since they are “conservative” there is no governmental help they will accept. Kim tries for a job but Robert won’t let her cause a woman’s place is in the home.
Choose your own ending: a) Big Robert commits suicide and Kim and Jr move back with her family b) Big Rob gets caught stealing, serves time in prison c)Kim overdoses scarring Jr for life d) Rob Jr manages to survive it all by going into the military where the government takes care of him for 10 years, giving him the tools he needs to one day graduate Yale. However, he can’t afford it because the GI bill was cut by conservatives. So he goes to community college instead.
5
"There aren’t many conservative students at Yale"
then...
"It’s no accident that most of my peers at Yale came from intact families."
Did you ever consider the possibility that many of those intact families were "liberal," and that's where the students acquired their liberal leanings?
9
Conservatives typically want less government in their lives. It appears the author has done nothing but use the government his entire life. First he used the government to be adopted. Then foster care. Then his epiphany at age 10 was likely a public school teacher. Then he entered the armed forces where the government trained him, housed and fed him. Then he went to college, hopefully taking advantage of the GI bill, but perhaps scholarship.
Ordinary adults taking responsibility made some difference, and a STABLE two person family is more beneficial than an unstable one. But the author has no appreciation for what our tax dollars have done for him. And this is what makes him a conservative.
11
Actually two parents can be very involved without being married! What a news flash! We can have family dinners in different households and all be supportive and loving. This isxallanybofvus wants or needs.
1
The underlying assumption here is that conservatives have less, addiction, divorce (“broken families”) and somehow their politics prevent the abandonment of children. Have you SEEN the news of pastors and GOPers being taken down by affairs and other disreputable anti-family behaviors?!? There will always be those kids who raise above unbelievable odds with focus, determination, talent and some lucky breaks. That could be anyone...liberal, progressive, atheist, foster child, and gasp! Even conservative.
6
You seem to imply that two parent families are a "conservative" construct, yet point to the fact that overwhelmingly liberal Yale is comprised of mostly two parent families. Is it just me or did you undermine your own argument?
8
Everyone with a story isn't a writer- nor should they attempt to capture their particular life story and try to turn it into something more. Sadly, Mr. Henderson is trying to do just that- and failed. This whole thing sounds like it belongs on Mr. Henderson's personal blog (if he has one)- not the Opinion section of The New York Times.
4
Well, you sure showed them!
What exactly do you think is desirable about a two parent family that includes one parent so emotionallly crippled that he would take out his anger at his ex wife on a child? In order for you to realize your vision for two parent families, do you propose to make divorce illegal? Do you propose to take children away from single parents and put them in... wait for it... foster care?
5
I am a liberal and an ordinary adult who takes responsibility. I don't use drugs or use my children as pawns to hurt other people.
While no one can blame you for the cards you were handed, you come off as simply another bitter conservative.
6
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I hope that you still have a good relationship with your adoptive mother.
Thanks for this. The message you send is the same as the one which comes from Jordan Henderson, who is under fierce attacks from liberals.
Let me express the hope that you escape his fate and that people listen to you.
1
Oh dear lord... are we back to the silly assertion that conservatives carry the torch of family values? That a good family life is a conservative concept? Thanks for the laugh, Rob. I’m glad to see that through all of this you’ve at least kept your sense of humor. Unfortunately, however, you are a victim... of faulty logic and political propaganda.
11
I just say to Rob. You go, boy ! And share your support to other foster children who need a chance... which I imagine you are already doing.
27
Wait, Mr. Henderson, you say that the vast majority of students at Yale are liberal and also that the vast majority of these students come from intact families? I would think that would entice you to become liberal, not conservative.
8
I am perplexed by this piece. While the author acknowledges the stability of his teen years in a two mom family (his adopted mom and her partner), he does not seem to recognize that conservative policies have rallied against same-sex couples foster parenting and adopting children in many states for years. Is there not an understanding that the infrastructure of support for children in lower income (even two parent) households is being stripped away at an alarming rate by the current administration? Is he not aware that, emboldened by the ugly rhetoric from the recent presidential campaign, foster children, adopted children and immigrant children of color were being taunted by their classmates that they were going to be deported? I applaud this young man's accomplishments and not choosing to not be labeled a victim, but I would recommend that he re-examine his bedfellows.
11
I'm confused about why this author's view that stable, well-resourced, two-parent households where the needs of children are prioritized are the gold-standard for child-rearing is considered "Conservative." My liberal friends and I all agree on these points. But, life doesn't always work out the way we predict or hope in this regard, and people who don't find themselves able to establish this paradigm for their children should not be shamed or judged. An economically and emotionally stable/peaceful one- parent household goes a long way towards conferring many of the same advantages and is preferable to a dysfunctional and chaotic 2 parent household.
11
What a bunch of malarkey. What passes as opinion these days is obviously just the skewed thinking of someone who seems to have been brainwashed. I am a proud liberal whose family has been here since the landing of the Mayflower. I and my family have great values and many of those you seem to think only belong to conservatives. What is it with our military folk today. Have they forgotten they serve all Americans not just conservatives. To me this is what is wrong with my Country today. People have forgotten we are all Americans not just the conservatives, many who came into this country because my ancestors were tolerant enough to let them in. Please don’t serve in our military if all you are serving for is to protect conservatives. That is not on what our country or our military was founded.
4
Mr. Henderson’s desire not to be a victim is admirable. I am so tired of victimization being made into a virtue that when I hear somebody complaining, I automatically tune out. Like Mr. Henderson, I could have spent my life blaming forces beyond my control (our family were refugees). Instead I applied myself and have been fairly successful. Is it a conservative attitude or a liberal one? In a normal country, the question should be meaningless. Mr. Henderson’s suggestion that junkies should not have kids or my revulsion from sob stories would be seen as moral positions, not political ones. But in the US politics have become culture. We are truly two nations, not one. Partisan divides have hardened into philosophical positions, most of the illogical and/or ignorant. So while I define myself as a liberal, my liberal friend are horrified when I tell them my tax dollars should not go to people like Mr. Henderson’s birth mother. And I wonder what Mr. Henderson’s conservative friends would say if he suggested that contraception and abortion must be not only free but strongly encouraged, so fewer kids are born to junkies and thrown into the maw of foster care. Both are ethical and rational positions but because they don’t fit with the partisan rhetoric, they would be rejected by both sides.
3
Rob,
To escape the chaos of foster care for the order provided by the military makes a lot of sense. But to equate single family parenting with liberalism? Where did you make this ridiculous connection?
Perhaps in the Air Force? The military services share a bias against liberalism for many reasons that don't fit this comment, and core to anti-liberalism is the LIE. Believing things that are not true is core to modern conservatism. Like Communism, it simply cannot stand on its own as a political philosophy without altering the facts to fit.
9
Surely one awesome parent > two inadequate parents?
9
Thank you for sharing your wonderful journey with us. As a gay liberal who has never touched a voting lever for a Republican in my sixty years I too am looking back at my dysfunctional home life and hard knocked values. I’m afraid that I am discovering my inner strengths to think more freely and that I’m probably a closeted conservative at heart. I also want a robust USA economy, peace in Korea, Chinese trade balance, Iran contained, Syria punished, and a friendly Israel. Keep up your spirits and know that we liberals can’t trust our own instincts even when our noses are rubbed in it and lose sight of what is truly important - family. MAGA!
2
having had a terrible childhood of my own, I agree with you on many points. However, I am not a conservative. I was victimized but don't consider myself a victim. I really try to help kids in the same situation to lift themselves up. My feeling is that children need a stable home more than anything but that can be put together in many ways. I think that above average intelligence helps A LOT when trying to get over a bad childhood. You can reason, you can work your way through it. There are people who are just not able to do that. You seem pretty well defended to me which I understand, which I am also, but it is not always so healthy. I would think about that.
As parents we did put our kid first and as she is adopted and was also in a bad foster situation, it was a good idea for sure. My friend once said that children thrive with structure and routine. They crave it.
My advice is this. Worry less about other people you were with at Yale or wherever. There are always idiots everywhere. Give back, work with kids, help them. They need you.
4
Well, Mr. Henderson, sorry to be harsh, but your current success was possible only because of public programs (like your lifetime of free education) that conservatives abhor. It seems to me that you are conservative for the same reason that Paul Ryan is conservative; you got yours, and now you want to pull up the ladder. That’s not conservatism, that’s greed. Oh wait, silly me, that is precisely conservatism.
9
I prefer the company of liberals. They are generally more interesting and fun to be around. Maybe that is more pronounced in the age of Trump, where we have learned that liberal and conservative labels don't fit neatly into a box.
3
Adoptive mother and her partner? If you're saying that your most stable family situation involved lesbian parents, then you need to face the fact that you are a liberal.
5
No, he needs to face the fact that his parents were.
2
Wow. Conservative means conserving old traditions, which would include a more traditional model for acceptance to Yale, which certainly would have excluded Mr. Henderson, who wins empathy for his circumstance but who is clearly not very insightful. A “broken home”: divorced parents. So what? “He severed ties with me in order to hurt her”: Really? How do you know that? He claims never to have considered himself a victim, yet he takes every opportunity to cast himself in that role. He claims to be a conservative yet any conservative selection committee would never have admitted him to Yale. He was admitted to Yale because he fit the latest profile for the perfect Yale student, which is anything but the traditional (conservative) profile.
And then he complains. And excludes. For shame!
7
I don't know why commentators are being so deferential to the author; he is essentially making the claim that liberals don't believe in the value of parents or a good family home. It is the tired and poisonous rightwing canard that liberals don't just have a different view on the role of government, but are actually inferior as people. His rough childhood shouldn't inoculate him from criticism of his offensive views.
10
I'm sure Mr. Henderson essay is heartfelt, but I'm mystified why the Times thought it worthy of publishing. He purports to make a case for his life experience as a foster child affirming some vague form of conservatism. I'm left throughout his piece wondering what one thing has to do with the other.
He extols the virtue of two parent households. What progressive person argued otherwise? The entire piece is riddled with vague allusions to personal responsibility, as though it is the province of conservatives. Really? Trump, Gingrich, O'Reilly, Limbaugh . . . etc, etc.
Perhaps his limited life experience inhibits his perspective. I might argue that the story he tells is an argument for progressive policies. A world where mothers get prompt treatment for drug addiction. A world where foster children are loved and supported within a national safety net guaranteeing health care and educational opportunity.
So two parent families are one straw man. Personal responsibility is the other. Henderson has apparently fallen for some hypocritical Bill Bennett idea of personal responsibility. What makes him think progressives are not personally responsible? For decades, his conservative friends have used this argument as a way of denying the persistent stench of racism, to blame victims, to promote a dishonest "bootstrap" ideology - in general to create a "every man (!) for himself" ideology that preaches "you get what you deserve and deserve what you get."
6
You should be very proud of your accomplishments but don’t worry too much about the negative comments. Anyone who is not a far-left liberal will be totally destroyed here. Like a fish that can’t see the water it’s in, today’s “progressives” don’t realize the extent that their party has come to hate personal responsibility, morals, traditional values, and hard work. You have obviously risen above the victimization and government dependency rhetoric which is the lifeblood of the Democratic party. I wish you all the best.
Unfortunately, you sound as if you have watched too much Fox News. It is actually those on the left who do believe in those attributes. It is many on the right who use connections, under the table payments, cheating of workers, shortcuts, and avoiding service in the military and to others to get ahead. To them only chumps do not cheat and rig the system. "Smart" to pay no taxes.
2
He, like you, has no vision or insight beyond easily digested conservative sound bite lies. I wish you both epiphanies from your conservative straight jackets.
1
Growing up close to the center of a very poor urban area outside of Philadelphia, I have seen firsthand what the ravages of institutional racism, poverty and social class norms can do to an individual. If you're lucky enough to survive, it's a win, and graduating high school and finding a job is close-to miraculous. College? Forget that.
I applaud your successes while facing adversity, but please hold the lecture on things you are clearly uninformed about.
Continued success to you. May you not fall prey to what I find is the conservative's disease of conjecture, animus and prejudice.
10
Dear Rob,
I am am happy to read of your success. Kudos for your achievements in the face of a less than positive upbringing. It sounds like you were tossed around badly as a kid and yet you found some direction and defied the odds. Kudos.
But what does that have to do with being a "conservative"? Every lefty I know would suggest that a two parent family that loves and supports it's kids is the best way to go. Who doesn't?
Today's "conservative" believes in the right to life - until the child is born. Then little things like healthcare, nutrition and education are just the luck of the draw. You get that stuff if you are born in the right neighborhood. If you aren't lucky and live on the wrong side of the tracks...you suffer because your parents who are working multiple jobs at low wages and are called lazy. You as the child are undeserving of what most compassionate and intelligent folks would call human rights in the richest nation to have ever existed.
Sorry, Rob. While I respect your accomplishments and wish you the best, the current crop of "conservatives" are mostly selfish beasts. That was not always the case. I know. I am a "recovering conservative". The good news is that it doesn't take "12 steps" to recover from a political philosophy that has been destroyed and made evil by bible thumpers, fake news peddlers and oligarchs.
12
Conservatives today DO say the word family, a lot, so I can see where that would be tempting, and confusing.
But Conservatives, who often don't believe in sex education, contraception or abortion, have proven to have the highest rates of teen pregnancy in their states. I'm sure you would agree that a teenager who can't finish an education and has a hard time finding gainful employment will find it very hard to parent a stable family.
Conservative, in the Trump administration today, also means deregulation of toxic chemicals that are poisoning our air, land and water; it means defunding children's health care; it means getting rid of banking laws that protect families' savings; it means battling an increase in the minimum wage that working parents need to feed their kids; it means eliminating investigations into for-profit colleges that steal family savings; it means robbing the public schools that helped you imagine your future. All of these conservative efforts threaten family health and financial stability.
Conservatives are politicians like Newt Gingrich, who pontificate about rediscovering God, but is on marriage #3 and divorced his wife while she was in a hospital bed with cancer - and Donald Trump, who had sex with a porn actor while his third wife was home with a newborn baby, introducing untold disease into his home.
Last, your own data says that liberals can raise families just fine - Yale students are liberal and from stable families.
You've got this.
11
It seems the author is assuming that his drug-addicted mother and absent father were "liberal"? It's quite possible they were neither conservative or liberal.
6
The political language of conservative and liberal is dead. They are black and white wielded to force complexity into simplistic mental pablum for the purpose of creating strife and apathy. Conservative and liberal are words used by the power elite, in all realms of social organization, to generate frustration and discord. All for the purpose of enervating the body politic so that the few with power and wealth can rule over the many.
A healthy democracy requires a healthy and active electorate. When the electorate is force fed a diet of simplistic terms of conservative and liberal, red and blue, red neck and white collar through television, insipid entertainment and infantilized religiosity, democracy is starved until it falls into its grave.
1
Congratulations on your graduation and your overcoming. I had a two-parent family but, since they were both alcoholics among other things, I had a lot to overcome, too. I, too, was also very conservative at one time.
You make the mistake of equating liberalism with not sharing the values you espouse. So, this whole piece, for all it's admirable points, went off the tracks early on a flawed premise.
If you meet and actually get to know more liberals over time, you'll see where you are wrong. Best of success.
5
I was actually looking forward to reading this, but the thought process of this piece was really jumbled and unfortunately lacking. It just isolated two family values the author had and then made the leap that therefore he's "conservative" without any explanation of how these values translated to his policy preferences. In fact, as a liberal, I even agree with both value judgments. Seems like a step was lost to explain how this translates to full-throated conservatism, especially in an era where Trumpism is redefining what that word means.
Really expected something more rigorous from a Yale grad. And a NYT piece...
7
Count me as a liberal for believing that two same gender adoptive parents have a higher chance of raising loved, well-adjusted and achieving children.
1
A worthwhile article. His definition, or description, of conservatism is apt. We should preserve what works and is proven. There should be thought and caution in major changes. Who can doubt that a two loving parent household is desirable. But single parent households can succeed, and quite often, it is an involuntary situation. I am not sure what plausible suggestion "conservatives" have, other than condemning the single parent.
In our present day "conservatism" is claimed by the right wing extremists, who might better be termed reactionaries or authoritarian theocrats. They are not conservatives in the more classic sense. This author is justly proud, and it is telling that his best environment was with same sex parents. Present day "conservatives" would usually be horrified that it worked and refuse to acknowledge it.
2
The tone of this writer is defensive. He has a chip on his shoulder. He looks around at his Yale cohort and declares: I'm a minority. Most people here aren't like me.
It's the same attitude on the other side of the coin when ethnically minority students at elite colleges claim they are not at home on campus because there are not enough people here who look like me.
I can assure Rob Henderson that his acceptance at Yale is a numbers game of affirmative selection in which his lucky star came up. His birth mom was dysfunctional, he is a foster child, he was impoverished, raised by two moms, an Air Force veteran, not a liberal and a high achiever. Yale ticked those boxes in its attempt to diversify the student body because, well, it listens and it tries to open its doors.
And what do you get? Seeming ingratitude from someone whose political bedfellows strenuously oppose affirmative action in favor of the touchstone personal responsibility argument, me, myself and I did it. (Clarence Thomas, anyone?)
As a long ago college applicant I was graced by being accepted on a full ride scholarship to a university that is the country's most selective. It was the generation of women's liberation and, yes,as a woman I was a minority on campus. Did I look around and find myself superior to my fellow students because I believed in my own self sufficiency? No, I counted my lucky stars every day of those four years. Fate picked me, right place, right time. So thanks.
6
Re-read the Moynihan report. Then re-read the article. The most salient point made by Mr. Henderson was not about the importance of two-parent households, but was stated in the paragraph that begins, "Last year, a fellow student told me I was a victim".
First time I visited the article, there were 54 comments, and none of the comments mentioned the importance of the rejection of victimhood. Not one. Now, there are 152 comments, and still, where's the mention of victimhood? Aren't you New Yorkers supposed to be critical readers?
Is the destruction of the Black family, resulting in an outrageous out-of-wedlock birth rate, important?
Mr. Henderson, nothing you describe about yourself contradicts my own views yet I self-identify as a liberal. I too believe in personal responsibility and I too believe, other things equal, that two parents are better one, despite being a single parent myself. I fear that you have bought a dime store version of liberal and unsurprisingly, found it wanting.
What about you, sir, makes you a conservative? Do you believe that food stamps ought to be taken from children because their parents can't find or maintain gainful employment? Do you believe that you should have been denied health care due to your family circumstances? Those beliefs would make you a conservative.
I have to add that I find it highly doubtful that your entire path to graduation at an Ivy league institution would have been derailed had just one person called you a victim before your arrival at Yale.
7
It's too bad the label conservative has been hijacked by folks that are not conservative whatsoever. For example, shoving a particular religion down the throats of others is not conservative. But evangelical Christians consider themselves to be conservatives.
The original intent of the word conservative is probably a better fit with the libertarian viewpoint. Individuals are responsible for their own success or failure. They neither deserve nor expect any handouts. If you bring a child into the world you are responsible for that child's well being, even before your own. Don't expect the state to raise your kid.
This article tells you the assumptions conservatives make about how liberals live, think and exist in society! Wow
4
Ahhh, a Burkean conservative, like David Brooks. I can respect that. Much better than the people who call themselves conservatives who are free-market libertarians or no-nothing, knee-jerk anti-democrat/anti-liberals. Unfortunately, Burkean conservatives are such a minority now of the people who call themselves conservatives, that they would be better off adopting another label.
2
How ironic! Most of the comments — which I can only assume are mainly written by people who did not attend an Ivy — are far more nuanced, and better informed, than this column by a Yale graduate.
Henderson employs the most superficial definition of “conservative,” and twists and purposefully misinterprets non-conservative thought to fit his agenda. He mixes up correlation and causation, too. If I were a member of the Yale Pyschology faculty, I imagine I would be mortified to have my department represented by this essay.
On a slightly different note, I will be spending the rest of my day shaking my head at the idea that someone who lived in a happy and lesbian home would ever identify with a political movement that proudly asserts its homophobia.
Mrs. David
5
Liberals support 2-parent families and are not known to champion drug addiction. Mr. Henderson is welcome to his politics, but his reasoning here is certainly garbled.
8
Mr. Henderson, I commend you for speaking such truthful heresies, particularly in a venue where few readers are exposed to them. Now I politely suggest you don the nearest flame retardant outerwear at hand...
27
My father was an abusive alcoholic and my mother was beaten down by him. I witnessed as a child the failure of any law enforcement agency to hold him accountable. That's what made me a liberal. Next.
119
"I understand conservative philosophy to mean that the role of the individual in making decisions and undertaking obligations is paramount."
Every right-thinking person - liberal or conservative - agrees with this sentiment; it isn't unique to conservatives.
The difference between liberals and conservatives is in their approach to those who, for whatever reasons, do not make the right decisions, or who neglect their responsibilities.
Conservatives want to punish, liberals want to help (an over-simplification).
4
My interpretation of "conservative" in this context is less focused on the political constructed meaning . I don't think Mr. Henderson is arguing about political conservative ideology lead to better outcome for children. I think "conservative" here is more of literal function that states the importance of stability in caregiving system.
The virulent responses to this student's op ed suggest a failure of imagination.
The overwhelming majority of respondents have no experience of foster care, not as children, as foster parents, as court appointed special advocates (CASA), as parents who have lost their children, or as parents who have adopted from the foster care system.
Absent experience, why not step back for reflection? This person's view is shaped by a system designed and implemented mainly by elites who share your experiences, not by children and families who struggle with state ideas of "the best interest of the child." He sees at Yale what can be seen in colleges nationwide: foster children aren't there.
"I don't see understand why he believes ..." Why not ask an empathetic question whose invitation is "Tell me more..."?
"...this myopic opinion piece." Why not compassionately float evidence that suggests he expand his thinking, or consider whether your thinking in areas where you have no experience might be equally myopic?
"I grew up in poverty in Connecticut with a single parent and wound up going to Yale, so I know where Mr. Henderson is coming from." So you share a portion of his experience. But you were not taken from your parents and then be subject to the secrecy of the foster care system.
Let this voice speak of a system that disproportionately destroys. Then look to your lives and check what contribution you might make. 400,000 young people and their families are suffering.
1
I agree with the statement having two parents and two providers in the household is better. I don't think there was EVER a debate on this point.
What is debated is what is causing the rise of divorced, separated and never married households. Conservatives think this is all about personal values. I think it is about destruction of the safety net: once you fail, it is difficult to get back on track. The cost of living has outstripped the wage growth since the 1980s. This pattern will repeat in future generations because the gap is so large that unless you are truly remarkable as an individual, it is not likely you will make it passed the hurdles. This also comes from someone who has ALSO gotten passed those hurdles.
Given the amount of attention to cultural arguments and the push ever rightward of social and economic policy since the 1980s, if the conservative argument held any real value, one would think that it would have changed the outcomes from a generation ago but it has not. Poverty rates, income growth, wealth inequality and a whole host of other large scale problems in our society has simply not improved and in many cases has become worse.
The tendency to conveniently think that one can simply ignore the consequences of these changes and pretend that the past 30 years did not happen is so distorted.
Frankly, I am tired of repeating myself.
8
I'm not seeing the connection between the author's recognition of the values of stable parenting, perseverance and belief in one's self and political conservatism. Those values are well repesented across the political spectrum. I sense the point he's trying to make is that his determination not to be limited by his hardships is antithetical to a liberal stereotype of institutionalized victimhood, but his argument is unpersuasive. Wish him all the best though.
11
A stable upbringing is the luck of the draw. We can choose our friends but not our families. I know people who were brought up in less than stable families and in spite of this, have turned out to be relatively normal and happy in life.
I have a friend who told me she and her twin sister were raised in an abusive home and I was very surprised. There were no telltale signs of abnormalcy or dysfunction whatsoever. They are two of the nicest and fun loving of my friends. They were able to overcome adversity and are leading fulfilling lives.
Maybe Mr. Henderson leans conservatively due to his unusual upbringing. It is possible that the lifestyle he experienced while growing up was so chaotic that it turned him against a liberal lifestyle. Sometimes when children are exposed to a steady dose of liberalism they swing the other way upon adulthood and that is one of conservatism. I have seen this happen on occasion.
3
" It is possible that the lifestyle he experienced while growing up was so chaotic that it turned him against a liberal lifestyle."
Not to infer that a "chaotic" lifestyle is necessarily "liberal"... I'm sure there are some families that call themselves "conservatives" but are quite "chaotic."
1
Chaos is not liberalism
2
You need to think about the support system for parents. Paid family leave and low cost childcare would go a long way toward allowing parents on the financial margins to be engaged parents while also supporting their children financially. Unfortunately today's Republican party doesn't see this as a priority.
9
I am bewildered by Mr. Henderson’s story. Yes, it is inspiring that he is well on his way to a successful life after scaling many hurdles in his childhood. He gives the credit for his success to a stable adoptive family during his adolescent years.
Then he leaps to the conclusion that his experiences as a child are responsible for his conservative viewpoint. That is a non sequitur. There is no logical connection between his experiences as a foster child and conservatism.
The broken family of his birth is not the consequence of liberalism. Broken families are found across the political spectrum. My broken family was caused by the mental illness of my father when I was 2 years old at a time when the mentally ill were institutionalized. Nothing political about that.
His adoptive family was as likely to be conservative as liberal. Since Mr. Henderson seems to give them most of the credit for his success. His story is not an example of the conservative myth that every poor child can achieve success without any help from anyone by taking personal responsibility for themselves.
Functional families are not exclusively conservative. It is offensive to make such a baseless claim…if that is what Mr. Henderson is doing.
26
I got the sense he was doing exactly that.
6
Yes, many studies have confirmed that two parent homes are best for raising kids. Raising kids is a lot of work and two people pitching in is obviously better.
Conservatives, however, believe that those two parents must be of the opposite sex when no study confirmed straight parents are any better than parents.
Does the authors take the conservative view on this too? If so, it’s based on opinion and prejudice, not science and reality.
7
No, he doesn't take the conservative view on gay parents. Re-read the third from last paragraph. His adolescent years, which he credits as his sole positive home environment, appear to have been in a home with lesbian partners. Interesting that he can think of himself as a conservative or that he thinks anyone else would label him thusly just because he thinks two parents are better than one.
wonderful that the author is able to describe his situation in a way to show us the terrible things that can happen to children.
But I don't see understand why he believes that only conservative families have a wonderful dinner time together and ask questions and show love and care. That is done by all good families; liberal, moderate or conservative. Sadly, I have seen some intact families not doing these goodthings; they were are conservatives and were terribly cruel and nearly abusive to a child.
Why do people always have to make everything about where they are on the political spectrum? There are wonderful families everywhere and there are problems everywhere too like drug addiction.
104
"Why do people always have to make everything about where they are on the political spectrum?" Because how you approach the problems you mention generally springs from your political views. Rights vs. Responsibilities. From a conservative viewpoint, my rights (beyond life and liberty) are first a product of my responsibilities to others, particularly my family.
Crawling skin or not, he IS evidence of what is possible if there are supports for a throw away kid (I was one too) even if one gets a harsh start! That although not ideal, he DESERVED a shot.
The sole position in this column that separates his principles from liberal positions is that he feels a need to condescend and mischaracterize the words, actions and behaviors of liberals. How is it okay to say that we’re NOT “ordinary adults doing the right thing for our children.” Why doesn’t the NYT ask a liberal about our parenting values instead of filtering our values through such a false narrative? Each day there is a column on these pages that casually purports that liberals aren’t “real Americans.” In this telling, liberals don’t spend time with our children, refuse to raise them appropriately and put having a “career” first. This all denies the reality that most of us are working longer hours for less pay because of conservative public policies favoring holding down wages and worker’s rights.
He should begin by being accountable himself, by acknowledging it is conservatives who would deny his beloved adoptive parents the right to be his parents at all. That it is conservatives who would dismantle the governmental institutions that he relied upon to survive when he was a child.
I’m a liberal because I was a foster kid. I know the importance of belonging, being valued and invested in by strangers.
26
Great response. Thank you.
1
youth in a similar situation.
I too was raised by a single parent — thankfully my mother spare me the abuse my father heaped on my half siblings.
I am a liberal and I don’t think that believing that 2 loving parents are best for kids means I am not liberal. I too took responsibility for myself as a kid, but this too does not make me a conservative.
81
This was a thoughtful piece but one that I agree is flawed.
First, there is nothing about acknowledging that one has been a victim that requires one to REMAIN a victim. Conservatives often seem to get this wrong. A child who's been abandoned by his parents IS a "victim"- of bad parenting. Children who cannot face this truth often settle on the default assumption that they are responsible for the abandonment, and therefore unlovable. A child who is helped to see that he/she is not responsible for her parents' bad choices is precisely the one likely to think she's worthy enough to join the Air Force and get into Yale.
In my home state, drug abuse and divorce do not seem to follow political affiliations. My community of Liberal friends are mostly-married, all gainfully employed, largely church-going, and very involved with their kids. We simply also believe in taxing the rich (ourselves), universal health care, anti-racism & sexism laws, gun control, and helping the poor.
Yet, whenever I visit "conservative" America (say, at a family reunion), I run into well-meaning folks who simply don't understand that everything they believe about liberals is wrong! We have all the family values they have; and then some....
16
I fail to see what liberalism or conservatism has to do with either being a foster child or the results from growing up in such an environment.
People on both sides of the political aisle have drug addictions, divorces, behave badly, etc. People on both sides of the aisle treat their children well or not. It's quite absurd to me that Conservatives believe that Liberals somehow don't take personal responsibility for their lives. Just about every Liberal I know works hard and tries to the best for their family.
If you look at what Conservatives do as opposed to what they preach, you'll find a great deal of hypocrisy. That's how we elected Trump. And if you look at what Liberals do as opposed to what they preach, you'll find a great deal of hypocrisy. That's why most of our cities and schools are still segregated.
One person tells you you're a victim and you use that as evidence that liberals don't believe in personal responsibility?
14
Back when I was a child in a two-parent family, it only took one income to finance a family.
15
Gee, that works for Trump . . . So what's wrong with the rest of us?
2
I raised a foster son from the age of 8. He is 29 now and has become a noble human being whom I respect and admire. I am a liberal who still has a George McGovern card. I also served in the Marine Corp in Vietnam as a grunt. When I read how this gentleman decided to be a conservative I am reminded of the fact that we have a fascist like Trump as POTUS and how after the injustice and harm he has brought to America his supporters still admire him. It is beyond sad. It is dangerous. I fear for our future because of this distorted thinking.
19
Rob, Congrats on your achievement. No small accomplishment! However, I'm misunderstanding where conservative or liberal concepts differ here. A two-parent home is the ideal for children, whether we are liberal or conservative. It's not a political decision, it's just a universal understanding that a child is best served with 2-parent family, but a functional family, and not a destructive one. Unfortunately, it doesn't always happen. Placement for the child in a good environment is ideal. Unfortunately, social services can't pay social workers a good wage, little money is allotted for social services., caseworkers are overloaded, burned out, and children are victims. Government is needed, more money should be allotted for services for those society must protect.
Taking responsibility for oneself, a universal concept. I'm thinking, taking care of the less fortunate and the needy, is a progressive and liberal concept. I don't hear your words on that, only your stress on taking responsibility for oneself. Well, do you think the less fortunate, the mentally ill, the poor and physically ill should remain uncared for, diseased, living on streets, going hungry, along with their children? It's something we're not addressing, in fact, we're reducing benefits for a large portion of children and adults. How many would fare as well as you, in situations we're seeing now? So, how I'm wondering, out of your dysfunctional life, you see conservatism as the answer?
7
While Mr Henderson speaks factually about his experience and its’ impact on his values, I urge strong caution. This is not a solicitation for convincing others of its’ correctness, its’ being ‘ right’.
My bi racial step son was raised by his white Jewish mom, ( now my adorable wife) in Texas ,then NJ. Many of his peers were raised in 2 parent families espoused by Mr Henderson.
My step son however, is one of the few millennials ( I attend MA classes with many who btw are often as fabulous as he is!) who is financially and emotionally secure, headed in a direction of his choosing. Yes his mom gave him a financial head start. But she gave him , as a single mom, what Mr Henderson unfortunately could not find:self confidence. Having 1 or 2 parents is a simple answer to a complex problem
The system is broken and no one has the guts to try to fix it. Not conservatives not liberals. No one. My step son is a fine and remarkable young man raised with self confidence by a single mom who adopted him. The odds were against him, on paper. My wife wasn’t thinking about that as she raised him.
He beat them ,and makes both my wife and I remarkably proud. And by the way, my wife, whom I married when she turned 55,is as remarkable as her son.
I am one lucky man.
14
I think people like Henderson see only their own problems. Did he ever look with empathy at what was facing his adoptive parents, or did he just make a career of feeling sorry for himself?
4
It sounds like Henderson hasn't "done his work," i.e. really dealt with his trauma. He's achieved to outrun it and bury it--and thinks living by so-called traditional conservative standards will "totem" it away. Nope--reality does not work like that.
1
Non sequitur.
Something escapes me in Mr Henderson's reasoning.
There is nothing 'nebulous' about poverty and its deleterious effects.
I would point out to him the States of Mississippi and Louisiana, two very Republican States, which have strong anti-abortion laws, and shameful infant mortality rates. If this is what conservatism delivers, I don't want it.
10
Nice piece, although Mr Henderson doesn't disclose whether his conservative philosophy results in supporting Trump and the current Republican party.
He correctly says "the two-parent home is, on average, better for children" but elides the critical aspect of financial security. Two parents who both work long hours, at insecure jobs, and/or earn less than a living wage still result in a serious impairment of upbringing in many cases.
I'm all in favor of personal responsibility, but let's not forget that capitalism in isolation, despite its efficiency and incentives, is soulless and does not lead to social justice beyond the law of the jungle. Society, including through its mechanism of government, must exert feedback on capitalism to guarantee a share of the benefits to those who the also soulless Paul Ryan would call undeserving and Donald Trump calls losers.
7
Hmmm... Believing in two parent families and families who prioritize their children over their careers makes you a conservative? Really? Apparently, I have been confused about my identity as a liberal all this while. It turns out I am bonafide conservative.
10
Confusing. Lacks a definition of "conservative". Does the author mean the contemporary misuse of the term as applied by Trump and his minions, or say a traditional David Brooks approach which values objectivity and stability. If the former, the author has my sympathies. If the latter, we can have a discussion.
3
I see many comments here that seem to be playing dumb, to an extent, about what Mr. Henderson means by conservatism. They all basically say some version of the following:
so you believe in 2-family households! so what? that doesn't make you a conservative. To be a conservative, you must believe [insert insane policy position here].
Obviously, this is an unfair technique, and misses the point.
Mr. Henderson explicitly mentions acknowledging the wisdom of previous generations. This means not dismissing the moral codes and social mores of previous times out of hand. It means not looking disrespectfully on EVERY traditional intellectual habit or power structure.
If you want a model of what this dangerous anti-conservativism might look like (and I don't call it liberalism, because that would also be unfair), look at the character of Erik Killmonger in the the new Black Panther movie. You might temporarily like his style when he knocks over the African museum exhibit, but it grows less charming when he kills the curators, burns the field of enchanted flowers on which his own society relies, and kills its priest and apparently its king as well, all to assert his own primacy.
You can't form a peaceful and productive society out of Erik Killmongers. You do need some amount of intellectual and moral stability, embedded in traditional roles and expectations.
The fact that some of these are flawed means they must be improved, not destroyed.
1
James writes: "You can't form a peaceful and productive society out of Erik Killmongers."
Nor, i would point out, can you do so with people who believe they have a divine warrant to bomb abortion clinics. Erik Killmongers is no more representative of most liberals than anti-abortion extremists are representative of most conservatives. So I fail to see the point James is trying to make.
1
Hee. You...kinda missed the point about Killmonger. He became everything conservatives love out of his rage over being excluded. But that made him as destructive as any of the racist colonialists he also hated.
2
This young man seems to have learned a few things. One can only hope empathy and compassion for others will someday replace his current tone of judgmental superiority and thinly veiled knee-jerk disdain for the same liberal ideology that gave him two kind and caring mothers.
Every great spiritual leader would scoff at the idea that compassion can also be "conservatively" applied.
8
Dear Mr. Henderson,
May I ask how you came to understand what liberals do and don’t value? Did you learn about ‘liberal thought’ from your inexperienced classmates? Did you learn about ‘conservative thought’ from anti-liberal propaganda?
I’m would call myself ‘liberal’, and our family lives in a liberal enclave. Nearly every child in our neighborhood (including ours) enjoys 2 loving parents who universally teach self-reliance, responsibility and compassion for others. We would never champion poverty and single-parent families as desired outcomes (per that silly ‘conservative’ propaganda); but yes we respect the inherent dignity of ALL people regardless of their circumstances.
You write: “Individuals have rights. But they also have responsibilities.” These are in fact the sentiments that we liberals actually live by: we are responsible for ourselves, for our neighbors, for the planet and for future generations.
One final observation from my lived experience: I come from a family of outsized wealth and my many ‘conservative’ relatives are not terribly interested in whether or not people like you succeed. (Don’t misunderstand, they would applaud your success, but it doesn’t affect them personally, so they don’t really care one way or the other.) They are primarily focused on avoiding taxes.
Respectfully, I’d advise you to wait a bit before you decide what ‘liberals believe’ and what ‘conservatives believe’. The world may have a few surprises in store.
12
"Ordinary adults taking responsibility made all the difference for me. I maintain that the agency of individuals will lead to fewer impoverished childhoods. If today that makes me a conservative, great. I take responsibility for that."
I'm not sure that "makes you a conservative," though? I maintain that the agency of individuals will not necessarily lead to fewer impoverished childhoods, but that doesn't make me a liberal or a conservative, that's just a belief I have that "bootstraps" don't always get you where you want to be.
It sounds as if the author had a rocky childhood, like many, and experienced the ups and downs of living in poverty, in a nontraditional family, etc. He also leaves out a LOT in terms of his journey to becoming a "conservative." Is this a ham-handed effort by the NYTimes to print something with "conservative" in the headline to appease the right?
3
Divorced parents. Went from suburbs to the South Bronx. Worked in uncle's store from age 11 to 13. After school job age 15. Full-time, aged 19.
Left husband. Moved 3,000 miles. Worked full-time job. Put key on 8 year old son's neck and crossed fingers. Averaged maybe $5 leftover after bills. All I knew was broke.
Moved 2,000 miles, earned real estate and sales license. Moved another 1,500 miles. Went back to school. Worked full-time. Earned three degrees, including masters in 12 years. Paid cash out of pocket. became fluent in another language.
Got married again. Bought first house. Sold it. Bought a second house. Maintained excellent credit and paid my bills throughout. Didn't whine once.
65 now. Been paying taxes since I was 15. Tired of working. Scared to retire because of the cost of medical coverage.
Good for me. I had the fortitude. But everyone doesn't have the mental, emotional, and physical stamina to endure...life
I'm what you would call a liberal.
If everyone thought like the writer, there'd be no foster care system. No socialworkers. No foster parents.
9
If you are 65, you are on Medicare -- single payer health care, very similar to CANADIAN single payer. If that is not good enough for you....what on earth could possibly be enough?
You want to identify as a conservative? Fine, but whatever your path to that identify, the rest of the clan that similarly self-identifies expresses itself through right-wing authoritarianism: by identifying despised outsider groups and acting aggressively toward them. They are xenophobic, racist, religiously bigoted, uncaring about the misery they cause others. They elected Trump and the current GOP leadership and refuse to hold him accountable for his violations of the Constitution, the law, and simple human decency. Regardless of where you went to school, what challenges you overcame, or what you mean by conservative, by labeling yourself as such you are aligning with that group. You don't justify their cruelty, immorality, and multitude of vices through your own personal virtues.
6
First let me say congratulations to you and the people who nurtured you and helped you on your way. I’m glad you found your way and wish you all success.
I don’t think of a dedicated two parent family as conservative. I think of it as an ideal for any responsible parents. You can find such “conservatives” on all sides of the political spectrum.
2
This man has just insulted every stable 2 parent family that is Liberal in their politics.
He holds a lot of resentment for his biological parents and then transfers that resentment toward a system that tried to help him (no matter how imperfect it is). Without foster care, he would have spent his youth homeless and living on the street. He owes more to Liberal policies than he thinks.
He thinks that two parent families should consist on a mother and a father, yet he praises the gay family that provided a stable and nurturing environment for him.
This man is not conservative, he is confused.
9
Thanks for a great column, Mr. Henderson!
1
There are agencies or institutions that monitor, educate, develop, provide religion, for foster, abused, homeless, and disturbed children such as the FL Sheriffs Ranches Inc. I believe they modeled after Texas. Look to religious sources as well. Sadly our government does not support family and it's sometimes unique form.
I've got it. I understand just where your values are, that personal responsibility (both parents and children) are paramount. I couldn't agree more. I woould like to be a center right guy, really I would, but there is no center right to identify with. What Republicans have become is a bunch of crazy, no morality in sight shills for destroying the value systems that my religious beliefs teach me are right and righteous. So I attempt to pull the Democrats who still have some values toward the center. Think long and hard about too strong an identity with conservatives, Today's versions are a bunch you really might not want to share a meal, let alone values with.
4
another paul ryan conservative: someone who got help when it was needed, and thinks nobody else should -- the definition of being given a ladder and then pulling it up
10
According to other accounts, the author self identifies as a C student back in high school and junior high. I don't know many of those who went to Yale. From what I can tell, his admission was due to something called the "Warrior Scholar" program. (Which is a fancy way of saying affirmative action / diversity admission which is somehow palatable to the right because it is based on class / culture rather than linked to race). And, oh yes, the same big government program paid for his studies.
5
He paid for his GI benefits -- around since WWII -- by serving overseas in a military conflict -- one in which thousands of young people have lost their lives or been horribly maimed. That's hardly the same as a welfare program that gives benefits to people based on identity politics.
1
Rob, with all due respect, I have to ask what makes you think liberals are against or unsupportive of two-parent families. I'd also ask whether your life would have been better if your original parents—unloving to each other and at least one with an inevitable drug problem— had somehow been forced to live together. And how would conservative policies force that to happen? Let me suggest that the Yale newspaper or a psychology do a survey asking how many students come from liberal vs. conservative families. And how many came from living, supportive families.
6
I must commend both the nyt and the author for giving a bit of the mind set of what's it's really like a bit off the prosperous cohesive social structures that I know the majority of it's readers thrive in. The chaos that is imprinted on so many other less secure Americans is on clearer display than 10,000 societal white papers in this short essay. Sure confounding "conservative " for having a memory of dinner with adults and children sitting at the same table attempting some simple conversation about how did the day go for you will seem so conceptually incorrect as to merit a d grade metaphor. Actually no more accurate picture of what's going on out there have I ever seen in the nyt. And i'm 67 and have read the paper daily since 5th grade when my progressive Long island iu willets elementary school hired a Appalachian socialist named "Hardy Finn" to be my 5th grade teacher and made us all subscribe to the nyt.
1
Your understanding of what being conservative means is seriously flawed. For a start in today’s world it means: state control of a women’s body, war on the environment, worshiping the alter of wealth, encouraging the destruction of the free press, utter lack of belief in the common good, guns above life, lies before truth, blaming the poor for poverty, sowing division to attain power, and racism as a founding principle. This will not end well...
7
The notion that being in favor of intact families is a conservative value is absurd. And I will risk being somewhat illiberal in suggesting that this is a man with a giant chip on his shoulder. He might well be proud of his success in the Air Force and getting to Yale, but his success in developing a worldview that is neither simplistically binary nor dependent on right-wing cliches about the nature of liberalism is an ambition still to be fulfilled.
6
“My skin crawls when people use me as an example of a person who can shoulder the burdens of a nontraditional upbringing and succeed. They use my success as an argument for lax attitudes about parenting. But I am one of the lucky ones.“
So... it isn’t all about personal responsibility then? You acknowledge that your upbringing—over which you had no control—created serious obstacles that many people would not have been able to overcome? Welcome to the left :)
Seriously, though. We can believe all these things: that personal responsibility matters *and* that environment matters; that 2-parent households are usually better for children *and* that it doesn’t always work out that way, and when it doesn’t, those kids deserve a fighting chance; that older people have wisdom and that younger people do as well.
No argument made in this column is inherently conservative. I suggest the author get to know some liberals who aren’t under the age of 22.
Congratulations, by the way.
My own father’s in prison for the rest of his life, my parents have five angry, abusive marriages among them. I grew up with violence and terror.
I went to Harvard. I worked my a— off to get there. I struggled for years to overcome my childhood. *And*—white and wealthy— I came from a background that was privileged in ways most people’s aren’t.
As a liberal, I acknowledge both these realities, and fight for a fairer world for others. That’s the point.
9
What does any of this have to do with being liberal or conservative? Congratulations on your Ivy League success, but what Yale apparently didn’t teach you and maturity may is that the ideal of child rearing in a stable, supportive, loving family that fosters agency and personal responsibility transcends ideology and politics. Why encourage divisions where they don’t exist?
5
This article doesn’t make any sense. He seems to believe conservative families are somehow better at providing a stable upbringing for their children without providing any evidence of that. The only evidence he provides is that only 12% of Yale students are conservative. This would seem to argue against his case. Also what if he’d been gay with the homophobic presumably conservative parents?
4
You have a lot to be proud of Mr. Henderson. Congratulations on serving our country in the Air Force, and on graduating a few days ago from Yale, one of our finest universities. Your social victories are evidence of stability and maturity. This NY Times Op-Ed is serving as your resume, as well as reinforcing your identity of being a social exception. A few conservative think tanks will reach out to you with job offers, as will several right-wing politicians, wondering if you will to be their poster boy. Feel free to take them up on their offers, but I'm guessing you will get involved with a liberal, romantic partner, and will stay in the most liberal part of our country, the Northeast. You will end up teaching at a private prep school, its classrooms and faculty lounges filled with liberals. There, you will remain a social exception, which makes you feel exceptional.
2
I guess you consider yourself a success.
Not so much when it comes to logic.
I'm happy you're happy blaming individuals in every less-than-two-parent family. But poverty is a critical issue, no matter how many parents.
Your conservative tribe sees to it that poverty is life-long, soul killing, family destroying. Its the way you want it. Its a natural consequence of "I'd rather blame people than abstractions".
Remembering very little developmental psychology you imagine that a couple years of two-parent living will turn around the lives of children otherwise deprived of the experience. I'm skeptical.
I will point out lack of employment, lack of fair pay and benefits, lack of reliable services like transportation can be as important as the number of parents.
How can you think no two-parent families suffer drug addiction, poverty, abuse?
I am encouraged that, as a conservative, you do not feel the need to specify what variety of parents you prefer. So two moms, two dads, one white one black, Muslim, even (ugh) liberal would be OK. Call that a win for humanity. If only your party agreed.
Why do you say "If I was a victim, I would have given up"?
Just because you apparently lack ambition, there's no reason the same is true of everybody.
Unless you have the conservative picture of victims as people who whine endlessly in the most offensive way, begging for handouts and complaining about what they get. Behaviors that remind me most of wealthy Republicans.
3
The author refers to his adoptive mother and her "partner" and that they "experienced homophobia." Is this a reference to positive influence from a same-sex relationship (and very negative impact from the earlier heterosexual relationship)? His fellow "conservatives" may burn him at the stake!
The author's "skin crawls" when he is used as an example of someone rising above his background. Yet, his fellow "conservatives" use the same argument to say that racism is no longer an issue and the country needs to do no more to overcome the effects of hundreds of years of racism.
I know of no "liberals" or "progressives" who believe children are not a priority, that parents don't need to be involved with their children, or that the government shouldn't step in to protect and support children if no one else will. Does the author disagree with them?
2
Another way of saying it:
When a conservative works hard and is successful, he says, I did that.
When a liberal works hard and is successful, he looks at those he left behind and says, there but for the grace of God go I.
4
How can this possibly be a piece in the paper without addressing his DNA? Do we really think his disposition is significantly affected by his upbringing? He joined the Air Force, something half the nation can do. How does this change the dialogue?
It’s not clear to me what Henderson distinguishes as conservative and liberal beliefs. Or perhaps I just don’t agree with him.
No liberal beliefs that says that a child is better off raised in a single-parent household. Can you provide me with evidence to the contrary? In fact, with their attacks on family planning, conservatives may be one of the biggest causes of single-parent households.
There is nothing I have seen in liberal beliefs that says we should be telling 10 year olds that they are victims and they might as well give up. I agree with Henderson that there a broad discussion of victimization on campuses. At many points it gets lost in the urge to fix the downtrodden, a very demeaning idea. But it is also in response to the common conservative response to blame the victims and then defund and ignore them until they burn something down and then incarcerate them.
Henderson brushes off the homophobia that his adoptive mother and her partner faced. So let’s consider. Liberals probably set up the foster care program that led to his being adopted? It looks like his adoptive mother had liberal tendencies. And it was conservative homophobes who would have taken away what he says was the one saving grace in his life—his two-parent (although same sex) household.
While he points out definite problems with liberalism, he also charactatures it. His view of conservativism also seems like a characature, although a flattering one.
3
I was adopted by two people who should never have been parents in the first place. They got pregnant with my brother, divorced, and my father remarried and had two more children with a woman to whom he is still married who has not been kind to me once in the 45 years they've been together. Getting ready to fight the inheritance fight within the next few years.
What does this have to do with my politics? Nothing. I also went to good schools and have had good jobs and climbed out of a rocky childhood. That and a subscription fee gets me a copy of the New York Times with this hazy argument within its pages.
2
I am completely befuddled by this opinion. Where in the lexicon of liberalism is service to others, priority of people over profit- in this case career advancement- and responsibility viewed as anathema?
Conflating liberalism with "political correctness" is sloppy thinking. Assuming only conservatives respect and revere the teachings of our forebears- I believe that is called education- can not be called an observation so much as a pathos.
While I have never studied at Yale and know only a handful of people who have, I would imagine that the student body there to be self satisfied and impressed with themselves, and leftward leaning in their cosmopolitan ways. But truly liberal I doubt.
Please don't confuse liberalism with the kool aid being served there.
1
The takeaway is being a conservative means taking responsibility for yourself...a trait that is disappearing. Modern liberal thought supports the theory that personal adversity is society’s fault. Previous generations understood what the author accurately posits, we are our own stewards. Tools help but in order to be successful we must use them and not rely upon others and in particular, government, to clear our path. Refreshing!
While Rob Henderson is certainly sincere the contradictions in his article are profound. Where oh where does he get the idea that "liberals" don't support two parent families. Has any liberal politician ever said this? Does he think that the meager support given to single moms who raise children somehow encourage single parent families? Would he deny single parents this fragile lifeline? He admits to finally being raised by a same sex couple, in what American Universe was this arrangement fostered by the contemporary conservative movement. Does he think that conservatives don't scream victimhood everyday from the pulpit, to FOX, to talk radio, listen sometimes. I have never heard someone use the success of an under-privileged child as an excuse for lax attitudes about parenting. However , I have heard ,constantly, the success of singular people used to justify denying our society the universal benefits of social reform. Get a good education Mr. Henderson, but stop with these illogical beliefs.
1
I hope that when you say you're a conservative, it doesn't mean you vote for Republican party candidates. Because if you do, you're voting against your moms' interests.
5
Well written, and inspirational.
This country is weak, and it is shallow. Thank you for being neither.
I wish you well, you've got a bright light leading you.
1
I believe in the two-adult model of parenting, where the first adult is a decent parent and the second caring adult can be a grandparent, teacher, or anyone who performs the most basic role of a healthy adult-child relationship 1) “I see you”, conveying a kid is worthy of an adult’s time, 2) “I believe you”, noticing a kid’s feelings and actions, giving them meaning 3) “I am here for you”, hanging around long enough for a kid to form an attachment, so brains can form healthy relationships for appropriate interactions in jobs of social life later. The author's two moms sounded very effective and not the least bit conservative in any traditional meaning of the word.
Does the author call himself a "conservative" because he adds up the sum of two-parent families plus tough love plus the military to equal anti-liberalism? I thought tough love was investing in something generously (love) and expecting some results in return (tough), which is the contract of most social programs, just in reverse, because liberal programs invest in the person first. Conservatism seems like a label as devoid of recognition for kindness and credit due as the badge of a victim is lacking in personal accountability.
Great piece and congratulations Rob on your success at Yale. Thank you for your military service. It's disheartening to see NYT readers jump all over you for the two parent family thing but miss what I considered your main insight: that a victim mentality is self defeating. How lucky you were to receive and internalize the message that if you applied yourself, you would succeed. Everyone has their struggle, and some are harder than others, but to focus on what you don't have or what you perceive others to have is not the way forward. Again, congratulations to you.
Weird views. I come from a solid family that is as tight as - even though we have really ferocious family fights when it suits us. Every single one of us is left wing - what this writer would call "progressive'.
I think the writer doesnt know enough about families to know what he's really talking about. Thats a bit sad. Why anyone would say that these experiences make him conservative is beyond me: if his birth parents are alive today they probably voted for Trump. Anyone who knows "left wing" people - and theres not many in the military - would know that the really strong families come from that side. Just take a look at the republican leadership and all their broken up families.
1
And, I wonder how, when you seem to the be exception to the rule, you can reject a philosophy that seeks to help all, rather than enrich the few?
3
With some revisions that do not alter its fundamentals, this account could have been written by Barack Obama. The author expresses no opinions essential to modern conservatism. I would welcome him as a fellow liberal.
"Last year, a fellow student told me I was a victim. Yale is the only place where someone has said this to me. I responded that if someone had told me I was a victim when I was a kid, I would never have made it to the Air Force, where I served for eight years, or to Yale."
I wonder if it is perhaps a difference in gender or personality, but the writer's insistence that being labeled as a 'victim' is some form of weakness or misnomer is in stark contrast to my own experience. I grew up in an unstable, single-parent household - the result of a brief relationship and an unwanted/unplanned pregnancy. I spent a good part of my life assuming responsibility, blame and guilt for how I was treated and for my family's social and financial struggle. It wasn't until I comprehended that I was a victim that I could separate my family's actions from my own and lose the crippling anxiety. I am a victim, but I do not wallow and perpetuate this label. I use it as a means of personal empowerment; I have survived, grown and improved and I am worthy of love, respect and the fruits of my own work.
My question is; why are you such a proponent of traditional families when your situation, from the start, could never have been a stable family? Do you think that certain policies or laws could have wielded your families into traditional submission or compliance?
Congratulations on your graduation, Rob.
My goodness! How you all attack him. I am ashamed to read these comments. As a young man who has seen the ugliness of life, he gets it, that for him, if he would have applied broad sociological theories to why he was abandoned, why his mother was a drug addict, etc, he never would have made it. He benefited from individual people making choices to do traditional acts that gave him a center of gravity. There is validity in what he argues. And it is truth for him. Will people please honor his triumph and grit? Thank you Rob for your thoughtful piece. I will take you at your definition of conservative.
77
No one is attacking him. They are attacking his very naive and faulty argument. You are inventing things that aren't being said in the comments. Lets not keep perpetuating they myth of the beleaguered conservative. It is not a real thing.
23
We disagree with him because he draws the wrong conclusions, conclusions no doubt formed in the conservative environment of the Air Force and reinforced by conservative "news" outlets. Nothing in his Horatio Alger-like and self-promoting article here indicates that he should have found today's conservative principles - no healthcare, no child care, no family planning, no addiction care - so attractive in light of how opposite they are to his story.
25
Clearly, the language you choose to use in critiquing his piece is full of criticism and attacks. Listen, I would agree with you regarding the role of government in our lives as a force of good. The reality is we cannot discount his experience. His life was "rescued" by what he sees as old fashioned values. I see nothing wrong with that. People committing to people. Imperfect people committing to people. The more people feel they need to criticize him, the more I get his point. I am liberal. I am progressive. I am open minded and will respect the experience of others and try to understand their journey. I do not want to be caught in the prison of ideology. I respect his journey. I don't care what label he puts on it. Good people helped him. For that I am glad. Let's not be so, as people say, "knee-jerk" liberal. These comments are sure making a stereotype truer than true. It is a disturbing thing to watch. Yuck!
9
I'm struck by the irony that the only stable parents the author had were a lesbian couple, who would have been denied foster parenthood under a conservative administration.
237
I didn't read that he was raised by a lesbian couple. I think you inferred that because Rob refers to his mother's "partner", and that they were homophobic.
There were not homophobic as you state, they "experienced homophobia" as the author states. I do think it is the author's intention that we infer that they are a lesbian couple.
3
No, he said that they "experienced homophobia". Something straight couples rarely encounter...
4
You go, Mr. Henderson! What a wonderful, well-written piece on a beautiful life....yours. Whatever happened to you is all good, because it made you who you are. The world awaits, and you have already made it better by sharing your story. Thank you. I wish you every happiness going forward. Congratulations!
1
I applaud your achievements and am proud of you for your accomplishments.
I knew everything when I was young, as I’ve gotten older I realize that I truly know very little, but I understand the world much better.
I have learned that Conservativism means that “my way is the only right way”. And as the majority, this authoritarian voice can be hammered into every citizen. Diversity is not tolerated.
Whereas Liberalism is acknowledging that there are many ways to get to the same result. And it allows individuals to make mistakes, sometimes grave mistakes that impact family and children.
Neither is perfect, but then again, as humans, neither are we.
7
The main problem with your interpretation of Liberalism is that it takes your passions and uses government as its enforcer. Conservatism wants small government. That is the main difference between your understanding of Conservatism and Liberalism.
Liberals support birth control and family planning (and in rare cases, abortion).
I will hazard a wild guess that couples with unplanned pregnancies find themselves in financial binds more often than those who do not. Money (and sex) are the two main reasons for divorce. Financial difficulties can lead to one parent families which we all know are not as good as two parent families for raising children.
My point---- family planning facilitates lasting marriages and two parent families. Conservatives (at least as defined today) do not support family planning.
9
All power to Mr. Henderson for his grit, work ethic, and sense of responsibility. Likewise to his mother and her partner for their raising of him, and for people everywhere who put children before career and personal responsibility before blaming others, and who see some wisdom in our ancestors. But I am mystified as to how one gets from those beliefs to the typical tenets of modern political conservatism, such as extreme tax cuts for the rich, an arm-everybody policy on guns, and a bellicose foreign policy whose most fervent advocates are religious fanatics who hope to bring on the apocalypse. None of those sounds to me like personal responsibility or respect for the ancestors.
7
Congratulations on your graduation, I glad you were able to overcome so much when adults let you down. I am most thankful you benefited from a 2 parent family, and hope you use your voice among your fellow conservatives to show that you thrived with your non-traditional family. There are so many in the foster system who would benefit from being placed with gay couples who just want to love and raise children.
1
The first thing that strikes me about this story is, how did he get into Yale? Scholarships? A series of broken homes and a portion of his life spent in the loving care of a gay couple and then he joins the military and graduates from one one the two or three top-tier colleges? All power to him, but what is absent form this story is what seems more important. The data he cites is very limited, especially given the demographics of his educational experience. I actually do believe growing up in a stable environment is crucial, but what is stable? Just two people staying married or together until the kids are grown? I grew up in a home with two parents, but one of them was traveling for probably 65% of my first 17 years. It was not a home that I would call stable. I know for sure I could glean from people I know and others if I asked, that their homes were not what would pass for stable. Yes, foster care is barely a crapshoot, and the people providing it have many levels of expertise and ability. Some do it for the money. If all of this is leading up to a Jordan Peterson moment, then I’m not buying it. I hope that this man, when he takes the next step in his life, makes good choices. But this anecdotal presentation leaves more questions than answers.
4
The author clearly fancies himself as a self-made John Galt type; who rose to the top on his own merits, and ignores the massive contributions of public schools and government programs that made his success possible. In other words, he's a Paul Ryan conservative.
3
I agree that children do best with two loving parents, and I am a liberal.
8
Jennifer I agree with you. The times has taken to publishing smug conservatives who sashay around glorifying their alleged martyrdom and personal exceptionalism. The writer here has profited from tax supported institutions and programs from school to the military to I suspect his financial aid. Not a bow to any of that here. Additionally he doesn’t deign to acknowledge that he learned much from his liberal education or his fellow students; he was just ticket punching. That’s a missed opportunity young man; as an old blue, I’m disappointed.
3
Typical Conservative, trying to explain, in the face of common sense, why Mr. Henderson votes for Republicans.
They roll out vague principles like, in this case, family values and individual responsibility, He might add fiscal responsibility, smaller government, law and order, respect for the flag, etc. But when it comes to living and supporting these grand ideals, they don't want to be specific as to how.
I suspect Mr. Henderson can also tell us Trump is a great business man who tells it like it is; Paul Ryan is an economics wonder; Mitch McConnell respects the Constitution; regulations hurt capitalism; public assistance is destroying families; regulation of firearms makes us less safe; and on and on.
9
"Typical Conservative, trying to explain, in the face of common sense, why Mr. Henderson votes for Republicans."
You know, I didn't see that in Mr. Henderson's op-ed.
What he said was that the two people whom he credits with his success are lesbians -- lesbians who had dinner with him every night, lesbians he considered his parents. And the other person whom he appreciates is his teacher, who told him he must "apply himself" in order to succeed.
Some rich people can get by with "gentlemen C's" in college and their parents' money. The rest of us have to work hard, delay gratification, put off baby-making until we're stable emotionally and financially, and keep at our jobs even though they do not always satisfy us. For the most part, jobs are for paying the bills.
Our inner cities as well as their hard-working black populations are suffering because too many, and for generations, have not followed what for lack of a better term can be called the middle-class formula for getting through life.
One can be liberal in one's beliefs -- a love of learning for its own sake, civil rights for all, the ability of a woman to determine her own medical and family needs -- but just doing what you want while bringing babies into the world isn't liberal; it's selfish and short-sighted.
Thanks for this article. While it might have had a different intent, I think it's most powerful message is that it's really way past time to dispense with all the labels and stereotypes about conservatives, liberals, progressives, elites, etc. It's not accurate in the least, and it really impedes conversations among people who wouldn't otherwise be arguing on many issues.
5
No one doubts that two people can probably do a better job raising children than one. We should support families. Ironically, it is the conservative states (trump country) where divorce, teen pregnancy, out of wed lock births, and opioids are the highest. Look it up, all those evangelical christians seem to be missing the mark on their morality lessons to the rest of us.
13
This is why labels like conservative, liberal, and progressive do not work well. It is not easy to stereotype our experiences. Further, political allegiances do not fit into tidy boxes. I, too, had an upbringing that should color me a certain way, yet I cannot fit into a one word description.
7
I was in foster care from age 6 - 10 and I am progressive. Perhaps I am deluding myself, but I would argue that my economic/political outlook is based on a rational look at the impact of "conservative" economic tenets of faith, which undermine those in need of lifting up--and bestows largesse on those who need it least.
If my atypical childhood had any impact on me at all (and I figure it must have), it would be that my compassion for those who have it tough augments the simple logic of progressive economic policies.
And part of my progressivism is just me -- a belief that we should be free, even encouraged, to be different and to not suffocate society by repressing those who don't fit the mainstream mold.
17
I would be interested in knowing what "being conservative" actually means to the writer in terms of the policies he supports. Anyone I know who has spent time working in the foster care and dependency system would agree with most, if not all, of what he wrote. Liberals do not want the state raising children instead of families. I hope the writer will use his obvious talents and elite diploma to advocate for children and families in some way - without getting bogged down in political labels.
33
Although the author’s achievements are commendable, I don’t understand why he associates a conservatism with a two-parent, stable family. (As he notes, most of his peers at Yale “came from intact families”, but very few were politically conservative.)
I think there needs to be more focus upon prevention.
Consider a person who grew up with abusive, irresponsible, drug-abusing parents, and who then repeats the cycle by having children at a young age, when doing drugs, unable to maintain a stable relationship, unable to hold a job, etc. The political right focuses upon punishment-after-the-fact, e.g., lectures about personal responsibility, and cuts to welfare and food stamps. But that won’t transform a psychologically damaged person into a responsible parent. The political left focuses upon help-after-the-fact, e.g., food stamps, counseling. But while that at least provides material help to the children, it won’t transform the psychologically damaged person into a responsible parent.
I’m no expert, but it seems to me that what’s needed is help at an early point—not only foster care or drug treatment, but also information about the financial and other practical benefits of waiting to have children until one is employed, in a stable relationship, etc. The right doesn’t want to do that, probably because their ideology opposes government intervention. The left doesn’t seem to want to do it either, for reasons that I don’t really understand.
10
Isn’t the main focus of Planned Parenthood the education of young people about family planning? I know that the conservative right has worked hard to focus on abortion, but that is, so far as I know, a small part of their aim.
Schools used to have classes on Home Economics. We may think about Home Ec as cooking and sewing, but when properly taught it looked at the finances and planning. These courses have disappeared, as have Shop classes, due largely to budgetary cuts.
So I think you downplay the role that liberals at least would like to have.
2
A perfect example of how labels like liberal or conservative convey very little useful information.
We should never think of complex social issues like family structure in overly simplistic terms. Mr. Henderson is absolutely correct about the data. Two parent homes provide far more stability and life opportunities than one parent homes. That would seem like a "conservative idea." But it's not.
The data also tells us that two parent same sex homes can provide the same stability as opposite sex families. This would seem to be a liberal idea, but it is not.
Family stability and social opportunities for children are part of a complex matrix of society, affected by income, education, social support for families in crisis, medical services, mental health services and many more.
Unfortunately, many conservatives in the GOP have transferred all these issues to the individual, knowing full well that lack of social support only makes the work of raising children that much harder and their success that much less likely to occur.
There's nothing conservative about real, serious support for families. Nor has expecting individual responsibility been abandoned by liberals.
If we are serious about supporting families, we need policies like good pre-natal care, head start, drug treatment, paid family leave and work hours that allow for family time.
Forget the labels, but support serious family policies and all the Rob Henderson's will have a better shot at life.
21
REBELLING Against abuse and abandonment is logical. Rebelling against common sense does not. The GOP, in case the talented, intelligent writer has not duly noted, is in the midst of a civil war of ideologies. As a consequence, nothing gets done in Congress. And the current White House is plagued by constant firings and resignations. The chaos in the current GOP administration must be at least as dangerous for the mental health of the US as the experience of the writer was in broken homes where he was not nurtured. If there is anything nurturing about the current administration, I have yet to detect it. John Dean, in his book, Conservatives Without Conscience, wrote that the idea of an America Conservative is a contradiction in terms, because the US was founded on the revolutionary ideas of the Enlightenment. There are, indeed, many middle-of-the-road Democrats. I consider myself politically agnostic. My primary interest is in efficient management of problems. To date, I have found NONE that I could support from the GOP since 1980. There is a war on the middle class. But since educationally you are now of the 1%, where is your concern for the 99%?
9
In many ways, we are looking at a decades long PR campaign on the part of the Republican Party, to relabel conservatism and liberalism. They have been largely successful, especially with their base, on pushing the image that conservatives (i.e. Republicans) have all of these important family values, while liberals (i.e. Democrats) do not. The amazing part of it is that they have done it with lots of talk, while their actual policies are very different.
Henderson seems to have fallen into this trap. Since he looks at the two parent family as a conservative good, he decides that liberals must be against it. He doesn’t, however, show any actual actions on the part of conservatives to support it, or actions on the part of liberals to break it up.
5
As dozens of comments have rightly noted, preference for a two-parent family is not limited to conservatives. It's disheartening that after a successful military career and Yale, the author doesn't recognize that the love and support he values exist in progressive and liberal families as well as conservative ones.
17
Two married people who raise a family can be progressive and liberal, no? I don't see that single mothers who begin having babies at 16 and don't stop are anything at all -- progressive or liberal.
Sometimes women become single mothers because of misfortune: the long-term illness or death of a spouse, or divorce. At least the children had a head start with two parents. But when a girl drops out of school to have a baby (because she hopes her baby-daddy will stay with her?), and then continues to have babies, her babies are the ones who are going to suffer. So, unfortunately, will their schools and neighborhoods. Let's not pretend that fifty years of that sort of behavior, and liberal efforts to help out financially and with social services, has done much good.
Now, if religious extremists would just get out of the way so that we can supply IUDs to girls, we'd be getting somewhere.
2
The author is a beneficiary of highly supportive institutions.
1
Congratulations on your graduation! I wish you every success! I wonder, however, (as a progressive myself) why you think conservatives have a monopoly on the virtues you cite?
This idea that progressives view themselves and others as victims is a familiar Fox-News talking-point but bears no relationship to the progressive friends, family, and neighbors I know.
My grandfather, a U.S. Army veteran of World War II -- modest; hard-working; self-sufficient; orphaned at 10 -- pulled his family out of poverty through scholarships and brute effort. He was a progressive.
FDR confronted the Depression by creating and investing in programs to put the country back to work, and my grandfather never forgot that government could be used to help common people. (For example, he got to graduate school on the G.I. Bill.)
My grandpa served the poor, supported refugees, and had radical ideas, for example, that women should earn equal pay for equal work (Pretty progressive for a guy born in 1920.) Or that white people (like ourselves) have a responsibility to stand up against prejudice and racism in our community.
In short: the values of progressives look pretty similar to your own.
Progressives don't advocate for single-parenthood. (Most days, even two parents aren't quite enough to handles my kids.)
Personal responsibility is part of being an adult -- not a conservative.
25
Mr. Henderson's reasoning, to borrow one of his terms, is stunted. He thinks calling someone a "victim" precludes that person from being empowered to take charge of their lives. And he thinks that only conservatives believe in the concept of personal responsibility. Sadly, such one-dimensional thinking is the hallmark of being a conservative today.
17
Without knowing Mr. Henderson's age, but guessing it to be under 30, I can only hope that as he grows older and sees more of life his views will soften.
His position seems to be much like that of JD Vance who wrote "Hillbilly Elegy." In both cases, the protagonist succeeds enormously despite very difficult childhoods,emerges from military service, acknowledges he is lucky, went to Yale, and declares himself to be a "conservative."
In Mr. Henderson's case, his view of what makes him conservative is that he believes in two-parent families. In Mr. Vance's case, the argument was that he didn't believe in government getting involved in people's lives. Both are straw-man arguments, but I trust they will learn this for themselves as life proceeds.
But even now, surely Mr. Henderson knows of some non-conservative two-parent families where children grow up in an atmosphere of love and consistency.
I think what he has really helped to prove here is how meaningless the labels of "conservative" and "liberal" have become.
I wish him the best as he proceeds through life.
13
Dear Rob, Thank you for telling your story. Comgrats on your graduation! What an amazing and inspiring accomplishment. As a progressive I agree with you that it is better for children to grow up in 2 parent famiilies. I agree with the idea that success in life has much to do with determination and hard work, attitude and fortitude. Sadly even those qualities don't always add up to success.
I am not sure why you believe those to be 'conservative' values... to me these are just basic good sense and values common to most Americans. I hope you decide to go on to graduate school and do some research on these ideas. Your perspective and experience is unusual, you could help provide very much needed answers to the questions you grapple with here, and have had to contend with your whole life...what best helps a person to succeed? Especially foster children? And children from poverty conditions? Best of luck to you as you continue your journey. I have no doubt you will succeed at whatever you do.
11
Excellent column! Commenters are certainly responding defensively to his pro traditional, two parent family stance. It seems to me that he is addressing/criticizing attitudes and trends, especially attitudes of people under 55 or so, more than he is addressing specific policies. In other words, he is talking about changes in the culture. And I think he is correct. The culture today DOES disparage and almost mock traditional marriage, praising single parenthood, and singleness. Younger people have their "hookup" culture, and older people are supposed to be happiest when married only to their profession. Personally, I'm just not convinced this kind of society meets all needs for connection, though. And government programs help with financial security, but a government program is not a parent or a role model. Does a government program or even a teacher notice when a child seems unhappy or worried, and take the time to find out why? Do government entities care?
4
I completely disagree with your comment that "culture today DOES disparage and almost mock traditional marriage, praising single parenthood, and singleness." American culture today disparages and mocks those who claim to be hard-line traditional man+woman marriage proponents who secretly or not-secretly violate those traditional marriages (typically serial adulterers like our POTUS, adulterers who get caught out (innumerable politicians) with their opposite or same-sex partners or prostitutes or on-and-on). American culture today is moving forward to valuing non-traditional marriage, partnership, parenthood and singleness, or whatever is best for the INDIVIDUAL. As a child of a traditional marriage ending in horrible painful acrimonious divorce because of serial philandering, and a wife in a traditional marriage with two traditional children, I can say "traditional" marriage is what you make it.
1
So-called conservatives are more apt to divorce than so-called progressives who, by the way, are statistically more likely to maintain two-parent families. Progressive policies support access to health care, education and wages that protect family structure. I honestly don't see how the stereotyping and generalizing in this piece follow any logic, although this is where discourse often ends up.
17
Congratulations on your graduation, Rob!
I think most people will agree with you that a stable, two parent Family is what is best for the upbringing of children.
In my experience there are very few people who set out to become a parent on their own. Most people want to raise their children with their partner. This is not what makes somebody conservative or liberal.
Now let's say, what happens when one partner dies? That's when the rubber meets the road. How do we treat the parent who has the lone responsibility for the children now? If that parent was a homemaker, do we as a society provide for that parent, since we asked him or her to make the children the no. one priority? Do we make it easy for that parent to hold down a job by having affordable child care? Or do we say "We want a society where all children are raised by a two parent family. You don't fit that description. Tough luck for you and your kids."
I think the answer to that question determines whether you are conservative or a liberal - at least that's my take away when I look at American policies at the moment.
12
What's you describe is common ground, not something exclusively "conservative." What's makes you want to identify as conservative remains a mystery to me. Is it the conservative movements support and approval of gay adoptive parents?
17
There is nothing inconsistent about being liberal and believing in personal responsibility. We all do what we can to help ourselves and others succeed which includes taking responsibility for ourselves as well as offering aid to others. When I vote, I’m taking personal responsibility by supporting policies for assisting others less fortunate than myself. Any philosophy that focuses on making others change is doomed to fail. We all need to take responsibility for ourselves, including what we, and our government, do for others. A person can be a victim, take government assistance and be personally responsible all at the same time, just like the author.
13
Congrats Rob. For making it. I see a lot for that I recognize. The three names, just like me, from three adults. Where we differ is I was born into and grew up in a marriage that's in its 67th year. Yes, Mom and Dad are both still living and still married. A long marriage noted for verbal, emotional and physical violence. It expresses itself even today in the faces and dispositions of my four siblings and myself. And we are all ‘successful,' just like yourself. Your story is nice, simple, and from my perspective, untrue. But we all need simple stories to get by. Their value is in their utility, not their truthiness. When I asked one of my siblings why she studied so hard, eventually becoming a pediatrician, she said, "It's not like I can go home." Last, the result is that I'm a liberal, progressive, etc., also effectively inoculated against being a Xenophobe. Why? Because statistically, and based my experience, the most dangerous people in one's life are the people you know. That also seems to apply to you.
6
@Scott-- Agreed. Many two-parent homes have major problems such as emotional, mental and physical abuse. The suffering and trauma become part of who we are and inform our decisions on some level for the rest of our lives, just as the young writer of this article describes. The luck of the draw seems to be how many angels on the journey show up and at what time. An encouraging teacher/mentor or merciful neighbor saves a vulnerable kid from self-destruction.
We can never know the burden another person carries, so let's be careful with one another.
1
All due respect for the writer. All due respect.
But if this is how we have to characterize the debate between what it means to be conservative and liberal, we're completely lost. The problem is in the public space and to this writer in particular, this is how it appears. Conservatives believe in family; liberals believe in what? The government in place of the family? I don't get it.
I always thought liberal meant providing people with opportunities to achieve and some protection from the harsh realities of economic injustice and social aspersions based on nonrelevant characteristics. If this is not what I would have learned about being a liberal at Yale, I'm glad that I didn't attend.
14
And it is conservative, reactionary parties, like GOP and the old , pre LBJ Democrats, ewho have modeled and created this cruel system. The idea that children "age out" of any aid from government at their 18th birthday, is one of the most awful and cruel sentences our politicians and many religious and other groups have for dealing with the most needy and the least cared for segment of society.
Becoming that which caused so much of the suffering in his life will never help Henderson to live above and beyond his history. Being in the military is, as most members of psychological groups can tell, a way to continue feeling part of a large, if uncaring family, which will still clothe one, give individuals goals and allow some to believe that unquestioningly doing the bidding-regardless of it's nature-of the military-is as close to serving a father and mother- a family- as they'll ever be able to get.
I am sad for Henderson. He may , one day, in his 50's-60's awake to discover how foolishly he has misjudged the world ; how wastefully and without consideration, he has given his faith to a system which gives back little but a place to be buried , some colorful ribbons and, if he lives, a retirement check.
5
There's nothing nebulous about exploitation, about conflict between capital and labor; one side's gains is the other sides' loss. One can, and should, embrace personal responsibility, as you have, without thinking it defines the whole ball of wax. A stable family led by two equal parents is a liberal ideal, not a conservative ideal, which puts the man above the woman. Achieving a stable family led by equals has been made more difficult by almost forty years of wealth redistribution to those of higher income through trickle-down budget-busting tax policies that reward only the most powerful. Poverty is a result of too little worker power, too little meaningful liberalism, not too much. Drug addition results from personal failures within a larger context. Without that context, you can tell only one side of the story. It's a simple story that rings half-true.
7
Congratulations on your graduation! You and your family are deservedly proud of your accomplishments and I am genuinely happy for you. My comment here arises out of my concern that despite your, no doubt, excellent education, you seem to have mixed up correlation and causation, a classical error of logic. You looked at the sample population of your peers at an ivy league school as if they represented all students in a generation and you drew a straight line between their family arrangement & their success. You assumed the correlation of the high frequency of two parent families and attendance at an ivy league school or the high graduation rate were evidence of causation while not investigating other causal evidence. While this conveniently serves your argument and elevates you as a noble example of how with grit and determination the "lift yourself by your bootstraps" approach is correct. But this is an illusion. The very fact of you being so exceptional would seem to suggest that there is much more here than a simple straight line between two-parent families and the success of children. I personally don't see how you square the circle of your non-traditional family and modern conservatism in America, but I'm happy that your family can be comfortably loving and at home in our country today. I hope it continues to be so. As a proudly Progressive teacher, I have always told my students their hard work can shape their futures despite obstacles, but I acknowledge the challenges.
7
I'm a progressive, Rob. I believe society as a whole should take responsibility for all its members: poor, old and sick included. I believe we should share resources through progressive taxation, and care for future generations by protecting the environment from destruction. My concern for the well-being of others doesn't stop at my nation's borders, either. I don't believe war is the path to justice or peace.
And I agree with you that a two-parent household is better able to care for children that a single-parent one, and that parents should prioritize the care and protection of and attention to their children over other goals that diminish the quality of that care.
I can't see these as conservative ideas. These days, "conservative" seems to be all about conserving personal power and wealth regardless of the damage that does to other human beings and our society. That viewpoint is propelling us toward destruction.
13
Rob, speaks truth to apologists. It is popular to create vast lists of systemic excuses for why individuals and groups fail to succeed. In doing so, self reliance, self-actualization, and self-determination are cast aside. Instead we build a self reinforcing set of arguments on the why we cant as opposed to a set of tool on how we can. Worse, these excuses release us from focusing on items of family and culture that make far more of a difference in outcomes. Intact family matters. Role models of success matter. Hard word and grit matter. Education and not from a third tier school in a tertiary subject matter. Being a non-criminal matters. Virtually all of us are born with some set of barriers. The question is whether we choose a path of agrievement and assume failure or a path of perseverance
6
Congratulations on your upcoming graduation, and all of your accomplishments to date. Rob, you describe yourself as a conservative, but the word that comes to my mind is traditional, for your focus is on child rearing and not on political ideology. There are biological imperatives for parents of all species. Humans, in particular, need stability, love, and nurturance through a long developmental span. I paused my teaching career to stay home with my son. Now, as I approach retirement, I see how this decision punishes me economically. Perhaps if we, as a society, took a hard look at the economic drivers of family instability, we might restructure things to make a traditional family life more possible.
9
Show me a conservative who actually cared about Rob Henderson, aside from putting him in a battle zone. They disenfranchise children, women, minorities, and most men who are not Yalies.
They do not respect individual rights and responsibilities, except their own. They put themselves first, in everything, from political alliances, to laws controlling the "other" to enriching themselves and their friends while disenfranchising everyone else.
It's nice Mr. Henderson did so well. Perhaps he will use his conservatism to fix the social programs that conservatives call "entitlements."
Or maybe he will keep on fighting for himself. Fighting.
11
Rob, Beware of false dichotomies. Social forces (e.g., poverty or affluence, racism, sexism) have enormous impact on people AND an individual's decisions and actions do too. One can be a victim AND a person who moves ahead (aka a survivor). One can find the wisdom in long-held beliefs and values, long established institutions AND see the need for change.
You yourself seem to have benefitted from a bit of change, a change the brings more people into an age-old institution--the family. Most conservatives would not support the family you enjoyed for many years in your adolescence. There is in fact a history of children being taken from same-sex couples and put in foster care based on the "wisdom" that said families are not in the best interests of children. One of the most dramatic changes in our country in recent years has been the legal recognition of gay marriage and the protection of parental rights of same-sex parents, changes that get more support among liberals and progressives than among conservatives.
9
Congratulations on graduating Rob. You are not alone in having a rough childhood, graduating from a prestigious university, and being a conservative. I am glad you had people who cared enough to encourage and parent you. Teachers and older ladies in the projects kept me on track.
So many people confuse conservative with Republican. True conservatives would be sickened by what the GOP pushes as being conservative. There are many conservatives in America, most people would qualify. Most of these same people also believe in liberal ideals. Our political parties have moved to the extremes and left the vast majority of Americans behind.
It is time to form a new party or two and rid ourselves of the two highly dysfunctional parties that rule this country. It is not conservative or liberal to want equality, liberty, stability, love, and opportunity.
14
The notion that political philosophy determines one's attitude toward the importance of individual responsibility contradicts American experience. No society which treasures freedom could survive in the absence of a parallel commitment to duty. The disagreement that divides liberals from conservatives centers on the issue of society's shared responsibility for the fate of each of us.
We all live enmeshed in institutions and relationships that limit our autonomy. Mr Henderson worked hard in order to succeed, but his community determined the quality of the educational opportunities available to him and also offered him the chance to obtain valuable training and discipline through service in the air force. Many people trapped in ghettos never encounter similar lifelines that would enable them to escape their stunted environment.
Many modern conservatives attribute these different life outcomes solely to the personal characteristics of the individuals involved. They define opportunity in such formal terms that, in the absence of legal barriers, each person must assume responsibility for her own fate. Thus society owes each of us only the legal right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Liberals define equality of opportunity differently. Since the individual cannot determine his initial environment, the community must try to help compensate for the severe disadvantages many of us confront. But each person must still take advantage of the help offered.
11
What does the the argument the author is makings have to do with conservatism or progressivism? A stable, loving, protective environment in childhood leads to a constructive adult. Is there a progressive who would try to counter that argument? Also, it sounds as though what turned the author's childhood around were two gay adoptive parents. Was it not conservatives who led the charge in opposing such arrangements? In short, what is the argument?
27
You've done great; you are also much brighter than "average" as well as having had - in time - a stronger family. Your voice is important to remind people that children are not nurturd by a "system" but by individuals who actually love THEM.
AS a liberal, I want to be clear that one can hold the same beliefs that you espoused about the how vital it is to have strong caring family -- AND come out on the other side of the political spectrum. There are many things that government can do to help open opportunities for those who do not have the resources and connections of many or most of your classmates at Yale. They include providing generously for education, ensuring access to medical care, and even trying to improve grotesquely underfunded services for children both to strengthen families of origin when possible, or to provide a safer, stronger system of foster and adoption care when that becomes necessary.
At one time, being a single parent was stigmatized socially. Removing that stigma was important; but reality is that intact families ( emotionally as well as physically intact; preserving abusive families is toxic)) can provide much more.
It remains a subject as difficult to discuss rationally today as it was when Democrat Daniel Moynihan focused on the dangers of breaking up the family in 1965 - when his focus on African American families was perceived as racist.
6
Lack of education and poverty (financial stress) are main drivers breaking up two parent households. Social services, as in Europe, help all parents and children by providing childcare, family leave,free university education ,vocational training, healthcare, etc, etc. Stress is reduced, time with kids increased. There is no question of victimhood here. It is called solidarity and common sense.
Being proud of making it despite the odds should be a source of pride. I know this as well. But the choice to use it to support a conservative mantra is misguided.
9
He is not supporting a "mantra", he is expressing his own beliefs, and he has a right to do so.
4
A mantra is not exclusive of one's belief and while one has a right to express those ideas, others have to the right to see them as misguided, especially when such beliefs are presented in an international publication which invites comments.
Kudos on finishing college! You might be an actual conservative, rather than what calls itself "conservative" nowadays. I too came from an unusual background for the education and the career I eventually gained, and I did not and do not see myself as a victim. Taking individual responsibility for my choices, and believing that my choices make a difference, is what got me out of where I grew up.
However, the place where I grew up, an inner city in Appalachia, really is deeply and negatively impacted by powerful people--owners, both outside and inside Appalachia--not taking responsibility for the effects of their choices on the physical, social, economic, educational and moral environments there. Had more individual responsibility been taken, in the past, to build and exercise character and hold self and others accountable to work for the obvious common good, conditions there would now be better. But people born to wealth and high rank took advantage of their power over others, and to ensure their own advantages would continue, they neglected the well-being of the whole and the long-term good, pursuing their own aggrandizement at the expense of others (slavery is probably the purest, but by no means the only, example); and they secured short-term personal gain at the expense of long-term shared well-being (climate change is now becoming a prominent example of this kind of effect.)
Backing out of this situation requires collective goodwill and commitment to the shared good.
5
Two parents of different biological sexes and genders. Four grandparents. Eight grandparents.
Five siblings — three girls and three boys altogether. Numerous aunts, uncles and cousins.
Lots of dogs, cats, horses, sheep, cows, goats and birds.
All must be healthy, strong, fit, intelligent, humorous, wise and kind.
A well-made house with a roof that doesn't leak. A garden with fruit trees. Sun, wind and rain. Climbing trees, riding bikes, building dens, reading books.
Helping others.
4
Congratulations on your graduation from Yale.
Conservatism emphasizes the things you mention and I applaud all of your points regarding the family structure. However, we should recognize that contemporary conservatism also aligns itself with laissez-faire economic principles whose realization undermines the very object of your piece, the family.
When the market is given control over our time, labor, and our political bodies , policies are passed that make it even harder for two parent families to manage. The stress of these burdens often create conflicts that can undermine the type of loving household you found yourself in.
We are all victims in the sense that we suffer enculturation in a society, family (or not), and economic system we have no choice over. But you are right to emphasize individual agency over victimhood. However, while you rightfully target the disjunct between kids from privileged two-parent families and their own laissez-faire attitude about family structure, I wonder where how far your conservative philosophy extends.
More tradition bound, European, nations provide government support for families in the form of parental leave, thereby showing a clear conservative preference for family to the gyrations of a crisis prone labor market.
In short, your conservative 'focus on the family' could lead one to interesting, progressive, places when one sees how those forces mentioned above that we have no choice over can actively undermine family values.
8
For me as a foreigner your American conservative-liberal divide sometimes looks weird. I sympathize with this essay and agree with its points (hard to disagree with statistics, huh).
Yet the author calls himself "conservative", but in U.S. it also means being "pro life". I can't wrap my head around it - how can you support the strong family, responsibility, the goal of investing heavily into the well-being of the child - while also limiting the choices of families in case of unplanned pregnancies?
If I were in U.S. I'd sympathize with Republican world view minus abortions (and guns, and single-payer healthcare).
6
Dear Rob: I agree with the premise that having two healthy functioning parents (or adults) who put a child's well-being first is a good idea. I also think our society should do more to support the family unit like they do in Europe. I was raised by a single parent part of the time and then in foster care and then back home with the single parent. It was a rough ride but what got me through was the love of my mother and the caring adults in our community and at school. These experiences convince me that a supportive network protecting quality of life is the way to go for children. So if paycheck doesn't last the month, the child can eat 3 meals at school. One more FYI: Look at your Yale peers and see how many of them are legacy candidates. The system of privilege and entitlement must also be factored in.
9
"our society should do more to support the family unit like they do in Europe" It might also be a good idea to celebrate nations where the family is stronger than in America and where few people have white skins.
Why do we keep screaming about Europe where most people are white and which became rich by exploiting the rest of the planet?
Why not celebrate societies where people have brown skins, societies which are not rich, but in which the family is intact?
I would also say, beneath those polished exteriors of classmates who may have more than you, there are kids who've survived upbringing with alcoholism, mental/verbal abuse, estrangement from a beloved parent or no bond with shallow parents, etc., etc. Ivy League schools are no guarantee of personal well-being or wholeness. Privileged establishments? Yes, but no insurance against pain and trouble that plague many human families.
This is a wonderful, inspiring, politically incorrect essay about the value of the two-parent family. The benefits of two-parent families are repeatedly confirmed in social science studies. (I've taught many courses on juvenile deqlinuency at an elite college where--as at Yale--the vast majority of students are from two-parent families.) Yet conclusions that children of two-parent families have far fewer problems with schools, police, legal institutions, drugs, mental health issues are still somewhat suppressed in textbooks and in generally taboo in academic discussions. This essay is also an exercise in "positive psychology"--somehow the writer prevailed despite an immendsely frustrating and insecure background that often dooms others. The author is a remarkable young man. Blessings and good fortune to you!
11
Congrats Rob, Well done for making it to and graduating from Yale despite your early childhood traumas.
I'm sure you have a self-motivated drive to succeed. Not everyone has that gene. It is a relatively rare trait to have. Most people need to get pushed to sink or swim and you seem to have things figured out for yourself. Congrats on that.
My biggest questions for you though is:
1. Do you think the government had a role to provide you with
your schooling, a family, and other resources, that made
you the success you are today?
2. Do you think that your success was completely of your
own doing and that you would still be in the position
you are today without government intervention on your
behalf?
3. What role do you think the government should have in
providing for its citizens? What kinds of things should be
provided.
4. What mechanisms should be in place to prevent a
pandemic from wiping out a significant chunk of the
American (or world) populace? For instance, drug-
resistant TB has become a worldwide scourge. How
should an infected person be handled if they do not have
insurance or the means to pay for doctors visits and
prescription drug costs. Should they be allowed to infect
many others, or should they get treatment and care?
5. When should government be okay with allowing citizens to starve, die, or not be treated for ailments?
12
The greatest predictor of academic success for children is the academic level of the mother, controlling for all other variables. It seems that the author benefited from not one, but two educated moms. I doubt if he would have been as successful if he had remained in the heterosexual two-parent family.
10
I agree with everything the author says- and that's why I will never, ever be a Republican. Whether this makes me conservative or liberal is a matter of how one interprets these terms.
12
Mr. Henderson refers to himself as a conservative, but he doesn't say what he thinks that means, other than believing in personal responsibility. He doesn't refer directly to what he thinks liberals believe; he only alludes to reactions he received at Yale. Maybe it's based on interactions at Yale, maybe what he or his perhaps regrettably homophobic caregivers have been told by right wing media. As other posters have pointed out, liberals do not disbelieve in personal responsibility.
However, liberals are more likely to believe, at least these days, that the child should not be condemned (statistically speaking) to suffer for the sins of the parents. Just as Mr. Henderson respects the data that say that children with two parents fare better, I hope he also respects the data that point to additional societal factors that correlate with poor outcomes for children, such as education spending or access to health care.
7
"Liberals do not disbelieve in personal responsibility." What a silly idea.
4
He didn't say his caregivers were homophobic, he said they EXPERIENCED homophobia.
"Foster care, broken homes and military service have fashioned my judgments. My experiences drive me to reflect on what environments are best for children. Certainly not the ones I came from."
What does that have to do with being a conservative or a liberal? Try that argument in a Yale debate competition and see where it takes you...
12
The author speaks about getting the benefit of a stable, two parent home for a few years. The author also references his mother and her partner, and the homophobia they faced. From this, I inferred he lived in a household with his mother and her female partner. I would be interested to hear what he thinks about the current policies in other states that do not allow lesbian and gay couples to foster or adopt children, denying children the stable two parent model the author advocates for and was able to receive.
25
The author states two-parent families are better for children, with regard to money, parental availability and children's educational outcomes. These may indeed be better in two parent families. However that does not mean that all children of single parents would be better off if thier parents remained in dysfunctional relationships.
When I was 15 my mother separated from my father after years of violence. Our income dropped but home life was immeasurably better and more peaceful.
It is important that financial support is available so that parents have the option of leaving dysfunctional relationships. Children who experience or witness abuse have significantly poorer outcomes on a range of measures as adults, particularly mental health.
16
Congratulations on your graduation, Rob.
I'm guessing that your top-notch education was subsidized in part by veteran's benefits. This is your right.
You also mention that your mother and her partner were a loving couple who gave you a stable home.
You seem to ignore the fact that conservative politicians are not above trying to cut and/or privatize vets benefits, to cut the deficit or encourage competition, they say. And American conservatism includes a large segment of religious conservatives who would disapprove of your most successful family relationship and try to prevent adoption by gay people.
Please think about this before you rush to embrace conservatism.
31
What college students think about the world doesn't really constitute either liberalism or conservatism. It's a set of ideas that are usually extreme, because they haven't yet been tested.
9
Mr Henderson is hardly your typical college student. The article states he served in the military for eight years before attending Yale. So he's likely close to 30, and has had plenty of opportunities to test his beliefs.
2
Good for you! Instead of capitulating to an argument that insists we can solve our problems only once "society" changes, you've taken a level of ownership of your life and feel somewhat in charge now. Congrats!
That's what rankles me so much about modern progressivism—the ideology focuses exclusively on the cultural level and almost entirely removes the individual from the equation.
Poverty is a good example. Most of my peers (college-educated millennials in the conservation industry) complain about being poor, about capitalism, about the investing class. While their grievances are salient, I've observed that very few of them take serious ownership of their finances. They blow money at bars and restaurants, even though they make nearly the minimum wage. They don't save. They take food stamps, purposefully remain ignorant about their expenditures, then complain how the chips are stacked against them.
Progressives would insist we can't address poverty until we address "the system". They might have a point, but in the meantime, we don't have to reform the tax code to live richer, more meaningful lives—instead, we simply have to reform ourselves. Create a budget, live within your means, and then start helping others. That's the ideal problem-solving template, in my mind—at the individual level.
It takes a lot of momentum to change "the system". Better instead to put the lion's share of your energy into living a righteous life before trying to tackle that can of worms.
5
Rob glosses over a major turning point of his life... according to him, it was a teacher who told him at 10 years old that if he applied himself, he could make his life a success.
A public school teacher.
Following that advice, Rob made his life, so far, a success.
Rob's life changed because a government system intended to provide him with an education and an opportunity actually worked as intended. Had that government system failed, Rob might have failed.
Yet public schools and the government in general have been a target of conservative attacks for years. Starved of resources, derided, and abandoned.
Yet the government is the one "adult" that never abandoned Rob.
Schooling him, employing him, even trying to provide foster care for him... who does he thinks runs the foster care system? And does he think conservatives fund it as required or do they starve it of resources?
Clearly being at Yale doesn't confer brains on anyone... Rob is right to be contemptuous of his fellow student who tried to reduce his life to victimhood. But it's not much brighter to take a conservative outlook from a life rescued based upon the liberal value of government taking an active role in improving people's lives.
It's just common sense that two parent families are better on average than single parent families.
But making sure that children in tough circumstances don't fall through the cracks takes more than common sense- it takes liberal policies.
You are welcome, Rob.
62
I think this essay associates personal responsibility with being a conservative - at least on a personal/family level. I don't think personal responsibility and accountability is a conservative, progressive or liberal trait. It is a personality trait. However, JD Vance also talks about personal responsibility as a conservative trait.
I extend my sense of personal responsibility beyond my family and friends. I am also responsible to care for others including people who can't care for themselves or make mistakes along the way. Does that make me a liberal?
Ive been reading several autobiographies of "overcomers" - EDUCATED, HILLBILLY ELEGY, GIRL WHO SMILED BEADS, etc. I am trying to figure out what they have in common. I understand that Mr. Henderson attributes his success to his adolescent family life. But I think the toxic stress literature from Harvard and ACES would suggest something more basic - attachment with at least one adult and at least some time periods of feeling safe and cared for during childhood.
I don't think these are conservative or liberal qualities. I hope Mr. Henderson can create the family life he never had for his own children. Im sure that would be as healing as any ideology or political activity.
17
I know a number of parents who raised adolescents facing challenges. Some faced illness; some faced drugs; some faced mental illness; some simply seemed to be behaving badly. In the face of such difficulties many parents would prefer a stable, 2 parent family. This is not a conservative or liberal choice, but is seen as a sensible one by many people regardless of their politics.
Most of the current predictors of political alignment center on other kinds of choices. I can not make a list without ranting. But it seems to me that those wishing to penalize same-sex parents facing financial challenges are rarely identified as liberals.
9
We are focusing only on individual rights for the development of a being but we should give the same importance to one's responsibilities. Every being has a purpose and he/she should stand up for something in their life.
1
I welcome Mr. Henderson's personal story and how it informs his conservative beliefs. Next election, and every two years afterward, he's going to have the pleasure of living up to his definition of conservative and he's going to vote out the morally corrupt within his own party. Until the Republican party decides to stand for common human decency, we're all in trouble.
Mr. Henderson, while I think your view of the world is a narrow one that doesn't begin to grasp the complexities and differences between public and personal lives, I have some hope that you might actually be conservative for the right reasons . . . I just wish that you would see that the major conservative party around here, The GOP, is no longer interested in your view point. They claim it where they can, but they don't believe it and they work directly in opposition to your vision of how this can be a better country.
Ours is an open and loving table, Mr. Henderson. Should you ever change your mind, we liberals support your beliefs and want to work with you to keep families together, to build a moral and just society, to teach individuals to act with the agency you claim they need to be loving parents and members of a great society. I hope you'll join us in your own way.
26
This point of view succumbs to the myth that conservative ideals will deliver healthier, happier and more successful families and children. The truth is that disfunction is a human trait that does not follow political party lines. I am a moderately liberal person living in a community where Trump received 80% of the votes cast. I see so many families breaking or broken on a daily basis it would make your head spin. The local police and social services are swamped. Drugs and alcohol on the rampage. Many of the adults are unemployable and their children suffer tremendous neglect. This in a town with six churches and one bar.
Liberals are far from perfect too, but they get a few things right. They believe that a strong social safety net helps families and children and they are correct. That is a no brainer.
Plus, if conservatives would have had their way Mr. Henderson would have never have met the people who cared the most for him. And they most likely would have never met each other. They would have lived separate lives of loneliness and shame.
So, that is three lives made profoundly better by liberal thinking. Mr. Henderson, where would you be without liberals? Not where you are today that is for sure.
34
I was going to reply, but you pretty much said all my thoughts. I will add one thing though! As a foster child myself and an adoptee who met my other siblings, a two parent home is no guarantee of a safe and happy home. I am the only one who was raised in a loving and nurturing environment out of us five siblings!
11
A stable home, a commitment to personal responsibility, a good education, these are, indeed, ideal elements for the making of an ethical and successful life. Conservatives AND progressives both want these things for themselves and their children. The difference is whether they want them only for themselves or for ALL children, especially those children who do not and cannot have it on their own. We must not fall into the notion that because 'I did it, I pulled myself up by the bootstraps, everyone else can and must.' That would be good only if it were possible. We must not overlook the fact that some people need more help than others.
24
If this is the quality of writing, reasoning, and argumentation that a Yale education produces these days, then I fear we are in even deeper trouble than I thought, which is saying something...
16
The writing was fine. If this were tenth grade and you were my student, responding to another student's essay, I'd give you an F. I'd say get off your high horse and address the arguments he made, rather than making dyspeptic side comments. Your whole comment is ad hominem - not exactly sophisticated argumentation.
I, too, have a very fine education, and I can write, and comments like yours make me see red.
Without the social workers and free public education, I doubt he would have made it to Yale or even be alive today. The author is where he is today because of social network progressives have developed over the years (however flawed).
33
Thanks for sharing Rob. Learning more about each other and why we have views and beliefs is the only way we can break down the barriers. You will go far.
1
Mr. Henderson believes that individuals can and should take responsibility for their choices and not blame oppressive social forces. This only makes one a "conservative" in the face of a certain kind of left-liberalism, or progressivism, that strikes me, for one, as rather false.
His argument that his position is "conservative" makes about as much sense as someone saying that they are conservative (or a liberal) because they believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The father of modern political philosophy, Machiavelli, had it right. People's lives are the result of two very contrary forces: fortuna (chance or luck) and virtu (powers and capacities).
Blaming society, or some part of it, for the difficulties you have is as pointless as blaming yourself. Forget blame. The concept of blame is not even coherent. It is thought that the blamed person or thing was the cause of something that happened but should not have, and he should be considered guilty, meaning deserving of punishment, with (more) evil directed at him and legitimated. What a silly notion. But responsibility is something else; it's an ability. it is recognizing that there is an "I can" that has some object according with some need or desire.
Left-liberalism in this country was made a moralism based on resentment by (ruling) professional-class liberals and managers. One can deny its validity and be on the left.
Then: we can also work to change things. We can.
2
While you are celebrating your admirable success - Please try to avoid putting your prejudices in my mouth.
This piece poses a false dichotomy. None of the many liberal friends I have hide from the needs to pull up ones own bootstraps. Most have embraced this fully. It accounts for much of the success in their lives.
What they (and I) would say is, perhaps we might all be better off if we made sure that most of us, especially our many children in some shade of distress, can at least locate a pair of boots to pull on. It might make more sense than ensuring that the hedge fund class continue to dodge any of the costs incurred by the society they are milking and frequently bilking.
12
' My adoptive mother and her partner raised me from middle school ...Though they experienced homophobia'
Although it's not spelled out here, it appears to be that Henderson's adoptive parents were a lesbian couple.
Does anyone notice the irony here? Of course many self-professed conservatives would balk at the notion that two lesbians raise kids or, god forbid, get married. Just ask Mike Pence.
Henderson simplifies and makes a caricature of what it means to be 'conservative', or liberal, for that matter.
I'm sure it's quite easy to find people that struggle with drugs, unemployment, poverty, anger, and a generous amount of bad choices that think of themselves as 'conservatives' and voted accordingly. Not that it helped them much.
7
Reminds me of the old saw "not all conservatives are fools but fools do tend to be conservative"
It's wonderful that despite your setbacks you managed to get on with your life.
I cannot see that this makes you a poster child for conservative values.
We can all pick and choose anecdotes that support or undermine policies conservative or progressive.
Just because it happens to snow in march does disprove the reality of climate change.
Yes, having 2 parents is great, but not if one is violent and drug addicted.
Finally in which conservative nirvana will there be no unwed mothers, substance abuse, gun violence, war and crime?
You inanely equate "conservatism" with adults "taking responsibility".
Did your study of psychology give you no insight into the complexity of human interaction?
We all are interdependent. We all need support and give support when we can.
I hope that your lived experience gives you more insight into what it means to be a loving person. To have compassion for those that do not have your abilities, strengths and yes LUCK.
10
Dear Me Henderson, the very least I expect from a college-educated person, especially from such an elite institution is to, first, question your dearest notions, and having tested and refined your assumptions, present your hypothesis, reasoning, and conclusion. What I see, as others have noted, is a position not born from thoughtfulness but perhaps from a reaction to what you perceive as thoughtlessness on the part of your university peers.
I am curious as to your choice of major, and what you plan to do with it.
5
He majored in psychology. It says that at the top of the page.
Mr. Henderson's conclusion does not follow from his argument. There is nothing in the column that explains why he is a conservative.
It appears that he believes that only conservatives embrace family values - while evidence shows that family and societal disfunction is higher in Red States than Blue States.
Compare our prior President - family and responsibility oriented -with our thrice-married current one. Or with two-timing conservatives Newt Gingrich or Rudy Giuliani.
I wish Mr. Henderson luck in his life and career, and hope he learns that neither conservatives nor liberals have a monopoly on morality; and that liberal policies are more likely to help more people live a responsible life.
13
A complicated story, simply told. I found this a very moving account of a life so far, and have high hopes for your future. For the record, I celebrate your success devoid of politics. The world can be divisive enough it is hard to imagine. Honorable men and women are everywhere. Dishonorable men and women are everywhere. This was beautifully written, and I am glad you shared your story.
1
I agree with the writer’s basic tenet that we all have responsibilities and obligations to ourselves, our families and to society. We need to own the lives we make for ourselves. I, too, abhor the PC reluctance to speak honestly about people’s life choices. The writer’s biological mother did choose drugs over her child. She was not a victim of addiction, but an addict. His biological father was cruel and irresponsible, not a victim of a bad upbringing. He made his choice: he chose to run. I applaud Rob Henderson for not seeing himself as a victim.
Where I part ways with the writer is on his view of what makes a family. Two parents do not a stable marriage make, Mr. Henderson! You cite so much anecdotal “proof” of your claim, but they prove nothing. The stability of a family has nothing to do with how many parents are part of it. What makes a family is love and — yes — taking responsibility for each other. I was brought up in what passed for a stable family, but one parent was an abusive alcoholic. I assure you, I would have been a happier, more stable child (and adult) if I did not have that harmful parent in my life. A stable and loving family can include a single parent, a hetero couple, a same-sex couple, a parent and grandparents, or any combination of people who love, care for and generally act as responsible parents to a child. You don’t get to define what makes a family.
12
Labels such as conservative and liberal don't mean what they used to. Liberals fundraise on Wall Street and outsourced labor so corporations could enrich their shareholders at the expense of American labor. Conservatives vote for thrice married politicians who court Russian influence. Kennedy and Reagan wouldn't recognize their own political descendents. Intact families are rarer on both sides of the aisle, but valued by many across the political spectrum. I think that with maturity we may learn that labels are useful as long as they don't close our minds to seeing value that can't be easily pegged. An intact family with two female parents may be conservative in the best sense of the word, but it took a liberal movement to enable its existing in a legally protected state.
5
It would be nice if commenters paused to think more about what Robert Henderson says rather than simply reacting to it. Yes, it is largely anecdotal, but then so are most of the cases/experiences/arguments put forth by the Most Recommended commenters.
3
I did respond to what he said, and made no reference to anecdote. I don't see many comments that this criticism applies to. Perhaps this should be a reply to what's being responded to., Rather than leaving it to readers to make the connection.
2
How ironic that the author writes that fewer than 12% of Yale students identify as conservatives, yet 24 out of 25 students in one of the classes there came from stable, two parent families. Were all the conservative students in that class? Or were liberal parents living the virtues of fidelity, constancy, and care for their children? If the latter, it seems to counter the author’s argument. Of course, virtue really isn’t liberal or conservative - it’s just virtuous.
21
I empathize with and commend this writer for what he went through and how he responded, but it offends me that he seems to assume the notions of personal responsibility and self-determination through effort are somehow essentially 'conservative' and that by implication, people who hold so-called 'liberal' views believe only in victimhood and being helped by a paternal state. This is untrue. Being liberal simply means being compassionate. What conservatism is now is anybody's guess-- because the conservatives have abandoned what used to be a coherent set of beliefs and values and allowed it to fracture into a mash of old Reaganism, old tea party rhetoric, religious right manias, greed, fear, intolerance, and-- ironically re this piece-- aggrieved victimhood that fears a progressive future. I don't know a single left-leaning person who believes people are helpless victims, or any who don't believe it's their own efforts that will deliver the life they would hope to have. It took courage to recover from what this writer recovered from but without taking anything away from that struggle I've encountered many worse. I don't think it strengthens the writer's future to assume there is a great 'them' of left-leaning people who want to deprive him or anyone of their own self-agency. I wonder, if he spent a weekend with some actual contemporary conservatives as they now are, if he'd still consider himself one of them.
9
I commend you for your success! You have certainly overcome obstacles, and shown strength, independence, and intelligence in doing so. But, as the child of divorced patents back in the 60s myself, with one parent distant and unsupportive (not to mention alcoholic), and as someone who has leaned far more liberal than not, i don't think conservative vs liberal ideology even really belongs in the discussion. Families struggle at times, whatever the idealogy. I'm glad you found living support when you needed it
8
This is an interesting read. It seems a little weird to use being raised by lesbians as an argument for conservatism, but as a liberal, I can understand some of what Henderson is saying here. My favorite restaurant in my ultra-liberal hometown is one that is frequented almost exclusively by conservatives. One of the reasons I like it there is that the conservative families are far less lax as parents. They don't allow their children to run around the restaurant shrieking, dressed in a Halloween costume, even though it's May. They don't distract their child with a noisy phone or video game or music instrument. They don't bring little tupperware containers of cheerios that wind up crushed all over the floor and leave them for the waitress to clean up. If the baby starts to cry, mom or dad takes her outside and if she won't calm down, they wind things up and go home. Children are taught to use 'inside voices' and how to behave in a restaurant, in public, so they don't bother other people. They know that there is no benefit to the world or to their child in telling them that they are special and destined for great things, or in deferring to their preferences and opinions as if they were adults. This is the kind of demonstration of personal responsibility liberals - my people - could stand to learn from. Most of the rest of the modern conservative platform is cruel nonsense, but that doesn't mean we can't learn from the parts that aren't.
5
Your assessment of what you perceive as the sharp division of parenting along partisan lines seems myopic. Just for the record, how did you know of what political persuasion those parents actually were?
It is hard to understand how a party could be seen as full of "cruel nonsense" and still parent children so well.
1
I also went to high school in Red Bluff, Ca, and was raised in a stable, conservative Christian, two-parent home. I’m a liberal. We all have arguments that we think justify our beliefs, but our beliefs aren’t rational. If they were we would all believe the same thing. Our beliefs are born from experience, varied and incomparable. This is why we are so baffled by opposing viewpoints and unable to convince each other of our own obviously flawless point of view.
14
It's interesting that the only "conservative" viewpoint Rob espouses is support of a two parent household. I didn't realize that this was particularly conservative or liberal. The essay ends by alluding to his most stable household being led by two female partners- distinctly not conservative. Of course dividing the work of child rearing is easier between two people than one person shouldering the burden alone.
There are many "liberals" who believe that family stability should be supported by government policies. Rob may call this being socially conservative and politically liberal. Those family dinners that gave Rob something to look forward to and open ears and hearts to listen are enabled by social policies that allow working parents to come home at a reasonable hour and spend time with family.
Rob, you're not really a conservative. Some liberals work hard too and do not expect anything to be given to them. I wish you the best of luck!
10
What happens to all the foster children who do not get a few years of responsible parenting or languish in child protective services or who are not innately resilient?
5
The newly married and titled Duchess of Sussex was raised by a single parent from the age of six. Despite having what appear to be pretty loopy step-siblings, she seems to have turned out well, and is devoted to causes that focus on raising others up. And despite that fact that she's now a royal, she appears to be a progressive young woman; I doubt that that will change. Having two parents is an ideal circumstance until it isn't, for one reason or another. Being "liberal" or "conservative" isn't necessarily related to whether has one or two parents. And as a progressive, I believe strongly in the concept of rights accompanied by responsibility. I don't think your argument will hold.
11
I have some family that rely on state programs because of intellectual disabilities and I was intrigued by the title of your article. After reading it, I see we agree about prioritizing children and I agree that it’s much better for kids to have two committed parents. But I definitely don’t consider myself a conservative. When you said ‘conservative’, I thought you meant you were against funding programs that provide services to disadvantaged people. Hopefully you realize that many kids in foster care are irreparably damaged after having unstable caregivers who were physically, emotionally, and sexually abusive during their formative years. Surely you’re not implying that helping them would mean treating them as victims and would be bad for them? And have you heard that liberals actually have lower divorce rates and are more successful at family planning?
14
I feel confident that not one of the characteristics Mr. Henderson ascribes to a conservative school of thought would be interpreted as such here in the perceived bastion of US liberal thinking, San Francisco. This perplexing reaction leads me to conclude that either current Yale liberals are a distant breed from the local flavor or Mr. Henderson has strongly succumbed to the divisive nature of labels - something we all should strive to eliminate as we repair our divided culture.
11
While Mr. Henderson presents a reasoned point of view, for me it's another example of why trying to equate morality with political beliefs is so depressing.
I agree with nearly every point Rob makes about the value of two parent homes and the importance of adults who love and value their children, but I'm a mid-60's, dyed-in-the-wool, lifelong left-wing liberal wingnut whose parents divorced when I was 16.
You don't need to wear the label of Conservative or Liberal to be a loving parent; you just have to be a human being with empathy. You have to care.
There are people of every political stance who are loving, caring parents. I wish we'd all realize that basic humanity is more important than any political party.
17
As I read the comments here I am inspired by the difference between how these liberal readers are respectfully and carefully pointing out areas where the writers political education is incomplete. When I read the comments on conservative sites they are filled with blaming, name calling and distortion.
There really is a difference between conservative and liberal but it is not in how they value marriage...
31
Holding people responsible for their own fate is not the same thing as getting them to take responsibility for it. A woman or a black or a foster child must take responsibility for their own fate even though none of these is something they are responsible for. Your individual quest might include trying to see that other foster children would have to go through less of what you went through, or it might include leaving foster care as a haphazard system because it builds character and shows people that only individual effort can be counted on.
I was orphaned by domestic violence at 12. From then on I moved every 6 months - from Foster home to group home to foster home until I was emancipated at age 17. I was given $200 when I turned 18 when the estate was settled and told good luck. I took college classes whenever I could - in between traveling the world, working several jobs at a time and learning to just survive. I finally graduated from college at age 40 and went on to be a top financial advisor. I believe we all need to be challenged to be the best we can. We need to know we can make it on our own. Travel was one of my best teachers. I learned to accept people from all backgrounds and cultures, and I learned to appreciate just how lucky we are in the US to have opportunity. Travel made me comfortable in unknown situations and made me face my fears. It's not such a scary world after all. There are more good people than bad. We should ship every child off to travel on their own after high school. That is how we will become better people. More loving, more accepting, and better human beings. Oh and more liberal :)
24
Not sure how wanting well-provided for kids from families that can support them makes the author conservative...I thought those were just decent human values which are lacking on both sides of the aisle. I think the progressive thought is that single parents shouldn't be punished for the circumstances that led them to be a single parent. And maybe there should be a social safety net to help support them.
42
Had the author’s parents had access to healthcare, subsidized childcare, a minimum wage and affordable higher education, they might have had a chance in life to take better care of him. But he only sees “responsibility.”
I paid for his healthcare in the air force and since he is a retired veteran, I still pay for his healthcare. But, again, he believes it is all about personal responsibility. The reality is that it’s about the check I write each month to take care of his health, while he votes against healthcare for my family.
56
How do you know how he votes?
I think cleaning up and getting off of drugs so you can take care of the child you gave birth to falls under the umbrella of personal responsibility...
2
I’m glad the author succeeded in doing what he wanted. I sense an underlying anger and hostility that he projects onto those who aren’t what he thinks of as conservatives yet nothing he writes differs from what we all ideally would like for our children. But it often doesn’t work out that way in relationships. I was a single parent to a now adult son who is a wonderful person. I’m an unabashed liberal who believes labels can tighten a noose around our connections. Getting to know one another and working together goes deeper than labels.
13
Thank you, Mr Henderson, for taking responsibility for yourself and for, so far, making a success of your life. I hope you'll ponder the role that liberalism (public education, the terribly imperfect foster care system, nutritional support, housing, tolerance, and more) may have played in your accomplishments. You did not get where you are purely by your own enviable grit. While many others may have failed to accomplish as much as you, they have had opportunities made possible by liberal politics.
While my childhood was not quite as chaotic as yours, my story is similar. I will be forever grateful for the programs and people (and the genetic lottery) that made my success possible. I am a liberal because I want to see every disadvantaged child have, at least, the supports that I had. Obviously, opportunity will not lead to success for every disadvantaged child but I believe that we fail as a society when we fail to give all children the support needed to make success a possibility.
44
I like everything you wrote- and I admire your perseverance and success. I would only add that I don't know that these views should be pigeonholed as either conservative or liberal- can these not just be your views irrespective of greater ideology? I would say I lean liberal and at the same time I wholeheartedly agree with your article.
20
Rob,
I support your search for the truth in your life.
I am also confused when you blame liberals for
supporting things like subsidized food stamps for hungry people , subsidized education like the GI Bill, tax help for the middle class, deep background checks for gun owners, single payer health care, health care for children( no-strings) and holding the President accountable if he committed treason. Liberals IMO are more responsible than the current conservatives starting with telling the truth.
These are things that conservatives are not in support of.
I am confused by your logic and your argument.
I appreciate your service to the country. I am a retired psychologist and Vietnam era intelligence officer.
The one thing you say that rings true is that you love
the two women that gave you the most.
Best,
Michael
42
There probably are plenty of 'liberals' as well as 'moderates' who would agree that in an ideal situation, children are raised in families that have two functional, loving parents.
Perhaps what was needed in the writer's life, and in current times, is more governmental funding for programs that could help, and would have helped his biological parents with the many difficult challenges they faced, and which contributed to the writer ending up in the child welfare system, and in foster care, and then eventually adopted. This would be something 'conservatives' would oppose.
Or, is it possible that in the case of the writer, the 'system', though imperfect, actually worked - that is, coming from a terrible home life, once the child welfare system was involved, he was removed from an unhealthy environment and placed in one that he reports was stable and loving, which probably contributed to his attending college.
The two-parent family that adopted the writer would not, in the eyes of many 'conservatives' qualify as a 'true family'. The writer states he was raised by an 'adoptive mother and her partner', and they experienced homophobia.
The writer can use any label he chooses for himself - conservative, liberal, moderate, independent, etc. But I don't think his belief that two-parent families are the ideal, on its own, makes him 'conservative'.
19
so the author believes that a two-parent family is essential for raising healthy children. why he thinks, in spite of his own experience, that a two-parent family will always remain a two-parent family, and thus fuel his conservatism, is beyond me. obviously, no one marries or partners with the intention of divorce, so his criteria is even more ephemeral than his rationale.
9
I raised my now 36 year old daughter as a single parent from when she was eighteen months old. Her father was dangerously abusive of both of us yes, even when she was that young. She got an academic full ride to an Ivy League university in a single parent home.
This piece by Mr. Henderson has an odd note. As others have noted, I kept reading to understand why he was conservative but he never really says why he is a conservative. Sounds to me like he needs therapy, maybe a lot more therapy.
14
Two quick points: 1) Conservatives do not hold ownership of the idea of personal responsibility. I think it's important to understand that each of us can work to improve our circumstances in life while simultaneously recognizing that factors outside of our control can influence our path. Some people work hard and still end up in dire straits, while others easily follow a path laid before them to success.
2) You can simultaneously be a victim and see yourself as someone capable of having a bright future. Being a victim and shrouding one's self in the helplessness of victimhood are separate issues. Recognizing that we were victimized and what consequences that had on our being opens doors to developing healthy coping strategies and moving forward in our lives. The author suggests that recognizing ourselves as having been victimized is synonymous with defining one's self as a victim. That's simply untrue.
38
I don't understand the equation of 'conservatism' with familial responsibility, unless of course, the author, quite illogically buys into the GOP public mantra that liberals don't have "family values", etc. I am happy that the author worked for a large government "bureaucracy " (the USAF), and was able to go to Yale, (possibly the "evil"-to conservative thought- government "handout" enabled said education, despite his poverty-laced upbringing. Perhaps he doesn't realize that a stable family environment is desired and cherished by ALL segments of the populace, and the populace in general is greatly disadvantaged when this does not occur. I would have hoped that his collegiate education would have taught him the value of critical, questioning, logical pursuit of thought, rather than assuming that only conservatives value individual decision making and choices. Does he really think that a liberal family unit does not prioritize family values over careers?? Many people who come from privileged backgrounds' main priority is to preserve that privilege, rather than help others. And conservatives LOVE to blame the ordinary people for the demise of potential paths to extended privilege. Please, my young friend, join the Peace Corps- do that for several years, and hopefully, gain some humility to temper your youthful exaggerations and blatant generalities, and please, don't use your psychology degree to counsel others, until you have done so.
19
Well-said. Two parent families, a stable community with moral values from faith, and a sense of personal responsibility are fundamental to upbringing. I admire President Obama for the stable life he brought to his daughters in a home free of divorce or the abuse the author suffered.
38
"Faith" has no monopoly on moral people.
2
HAVE YOU BEEN OUTSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD? THE IDEAL EXISTS , OR DOES IT?
What about children who don't end up with two parent families? do we blame them for not bucking up? This essay is hollow. I suspect the author is more damaged than he has yet worked through.
3
I am a single mother by choice, by design. I have a high income. My child has absolute stability - there will be no divorce in my child's family because I'm not married! My child has an extended network of supportive family and friends. One parent or two doesn't matter - it's the circumstances, parenting skills and level of disruptions and resources that matter, not the number (or gender) of parents.
12
I think I’m missing something here. I was waiting for some revelation as to why you’re conservative but nothing is jumping out at me from your article. I think it’s pretty obvious to anyone that growing up in a loving and relatively functional two parent home speaks volumes about childhood and its outcomes. But your article fails to make a point as to why you chose conservatism. But at the end of the day I’m happy for you that you turned out well despite your somewhat chaotic upbringing.
14
Mr. Henderdon,
Every reason you listed as to why you are a conservative are as much supported by non-conservative, so-called liberals. Conservative and Liberal labels are best understood as ways to categorize supporters and detractors of particular policies to achieve particular political goals. Your beliefs, such as they are, are shared equally by Liberals and Conservatives.
11
I would like to thank Mr. Henderson for sharing his views as I think conversation on conservative vs. liberal or progressive views is useful for our country. My first thought in reading the article is that it was a fairly narrow view of conservatism, touching mainly on a single facet (individual responsibility as opposed to institutional responsibility) that is actually a facet that many liberal or progressive people would agree with. It is easy but a mistake to confuse "conservative" with the GOP. Solid discussion on the value difference and how these would be reflected in policy is warranted.
12
I agree that traditional 2 parent households are usually the best for children. I also agree that raising children should take precedence over career and the personal challenges of substance abuse. I would go one step further and state that all children should be desired and planned. With that said, I am extremely liberal politically. I also practice what I preach -- 25 year marriage, 2 kids in top universities, piano lessons, braces, soccer coach, etc. My parents shared my politics but not my family planning. A chaotic childhood can make you choose a safer, more traditional lifestyle. It doesn't necessary follow that you need choose "conservative" political views. The GOP espouses a love of corporations and Darwinian social order. There is nothing nurturing in that.
21
Knowing the value of a stable 2 parent family is not a partisan issue. I had a difficult childhood as well, and can't say for sure if that is why I am a liberal Democrat, but do appreciate what a good environment can do for a child, as does Mr Henderson.
21
Yes. Where is it written that a two parent home is stable, supportive, and non abusive?
57
The author is simply saying he is not a victim, and that victimhood does not define him. He also says simply that it is Individuals taking responsibility that define this country, not the institutions of state. This is a conservative viewpoint because the left in this country exalts victims and the state over the responsible individual.
7
The "Left" does not exalt victims or the State. The Left is as diverse as is the Right; some of us are progressive, liberal or conservative socially. We do not believe that individuals need not take responsibility for their lives. Where we might digress with you, Chris, is where we believe that there are areas where government, Federal, State of Local, is better equipped to care for abandoned children, single mothers who need financial support, young people who need financial help to attend college or university. Community Health Centers are supported by taxes; those Centers provide basic care for the uninsured, the poor et al. Scholarships are given to those students who would not otherwise be able to go on from high school. There is no justification for poor children to be relegated to a life time of poverty; we already did that with sweat shops, cotton mills, field work, etc. We are beyond that; we have created a basic safety net for all. No child needs to go hungry at school; no mother needs to go without pre-natal and child care. We are the richest country in the world; we don't throw our poor, our disabled, our wounded vets et al onto a trash heap. We take care of them; we don't label them as 'victims'.
5
What nonsense.
You obviously have never actually talked with liberals.
On the other hand, all my conservative friends say people need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
But when they have children, they move to the best school district they can afford.
They know environment and good schools makes a huge difference.
1
I grew up in orphanages, institutions, foster homes, halfway houses, and on the streets. I have come to the exact opposite conclusion as Mr. Henderson’s. What foster children and kids from broken environments need is a system with strong child protection laws… those do not come from conservatives. Strong child labor laws do not come from conservatives either and children without intact families are most vulnerable to exploitation. Children from broken homes require a healthy public welfare allotment. That means real funding – which conservatives continually tear down. As far as group homes orphanages and the like are concerned, the charitable caprices of fickle private entities (Ronald McDonald houses etc. are no match for good policy and funding (a feature and policy of liberals - NOT conservatives). The right is in the business of defending elites. The right-wing talk of restored family values and two-parent integrity are a meaningless ruse. Legislation of morality is not possible or desirable anyhow so it is a moot point. I’ve never read so much twaddle in my life.
75
Rob, there's a subtext to your piece that people who are to blame for their misfortune do not deserve to be helped. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, but if I am not, then as a liberal I disagree. Everyone in trouble deserves to be helped, even those who brought it on themselves. The only people who shouldn't be helped are those who insist on engaging in destructive patterns of behavior and refuse to change. Government programs to help people shouldn't be limited to people who got into trouble through no fault of their own.
13
How did you get that message? My takeaway—Mr. Henderson believes parents, preferably two, shouldn't indulge their own selfish whims and desires at the expense of their children, that in fact parents should set aside their own desires for the benefit and well being of their children.
Dear Mr. Henderson,
If by conservative, you intend to vote for Republicans, you should know the following:
Republicans cut taxes for the rich.
The 2018 deficit is going up after the Trump tax cut by almost double - $600 Billion is going to around $1 Trillion.
Most people I know will be getting about $1,000 a year for 7 years.
That's about $20 a week.
But after ten years, we will have added $10 Trillion to the national debt or about $67,000 for each tax payer.
I wouldn't mind if Republican voters got fleeced. But I am getting fleeced, too.
Reagan cut taxes and got 16 Million jobs and a huge increase in the deficit / debt. It’s the reason they put the debt clock in Manhattan.
Clinton raised taxes and got 23 Million jobs, almost 50% more than Reagan and balanced the budget, zero deficit.
W Bush gave us two "tax cuts for the job creators" and we got 3 Million jobs. He took Clinton's zero deficit and gave Obama a whopping $1.4 Trillion deficit. And he also gave Obama the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Obama got us through the Great Recession and cut the deficit by almost 2/3 to $550 Billion. He gave us the "jobs killing" Obama-care and we got 11.5 Million jobs, almost 400% more than W Bush. And 20 Million people got healthcare.
And now Republicans have done it again, cut taxes and increased the deficit / debt. And I expect worse job creation than Obama.
Already the 2.06 Million jobs in 2017 was the lowest since 2010 when the recession ended.
38
Well Put!
This should be required reading!
You laid this out in plain English!
3
You're only conservative by Yale standards. Most conservatives I know would not consider an adoptive mother and her partner and a woman partner at that, a home that would lead to any good outcomes for children.
21
Maybe not in Pierre, SD. However, there are many successful same sex partnerships raising healthy, well educated, happy children. Times have changed: homosexuality is now accepted; same sex marriages are now accepted; children grow up just fine in those families. The wider world in the U.S. has moved beyond what you consider necessary for a "good outcome".
Dear Mr. Henderson. Thank you for your service to our country, and your belief that discussing differences may help us be better people, and better citizens. But I'm confused by your claim to be Conservative, and your identification of Liberals as people you disagree with.
You may disagree with your peer undergrads at Yale. It would be a mistake to believe that Yale undergrads define Liberalism. It would be a mistake to believe that the views you express correspond to President Trump's base, much less older Conservatives, for example, Presidents George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Calvin Coolidge, or Senators Goldwater, Helms. etc. Or their supporters.
I've never met anyone I respect who advocated single parenting as an ideal to seek. Maybe Yale undergraduates do. I'd say they're wrong, if they did.
I know loving. single. parents and their loved and happy children. I've known miserable two parent families and miserable kids who were not loved, or cared for with responsibility, by two parents. Two parents are generally better. But the devil is in the details. Its not always better to keep two parents married when they aren't good for their children.
Is it your Conservative take that your birth parents should have been compelled to stay married and raise you?
Do you believe Liberals are wrong to accept single parenting?
Should the unkind husband and your adopted mother have been compelled to stay together?
Would the word "victim" have really stunted your life from age 10?
16
I don't want to speak for him but perhaps Mr. Henderson feels that as a child his needs should have trumped the various concerns of the others on your list. That I understand. What I don't know get is why he would characterize that pov as "conservative".
I also think this man WAS obviously a victim of circumstances beyond his control, whether he recognizes that or not. I believe he's saying that defining himself TO HIMSELF in those terms might have kept him mired in self pity and hindered his ability to pro-actively propel himself forward. Why he feels the need to define this perspective along inaccurate political lines is less clear.
3
Mr. Henderson's needs as a child surely *should* have outweighed his biological father's impulse to vanish before he was born, and his biological mother's impulse to use drugs and not care for him.
Is it Henderson's argument that his biological parent's lousy care for him was caused by Hillary Clinton and me and as a reaction, he's against Hillary Clinton and me and the rest of us, so he's a Conservative?
I don't recall HRC or myself arguing that fathers should abandon the mothers of their children, or the children themselves. Or supporting it in any way, Or arguing it was ok because they were doing what they felt like
Am I the only person who infers that his foster mother's partner is female, judging from his oblique reference to homophobia? The tension between that fact and his professed conservatism (if this means he votes Republican) needs no elaboration.
14
It's a bit confusing, because it doesn't sound like the problem was that any of his parents "valued their careers over their children." Did liberalism make his fathers disappear or his mother become addicted to drugs? There's nothing conservative about knowing that our society makes it much, much easier to raise children if there is more than one person responsible for them. I'm glad he got to experience a stable family - yet "conservatives" are actively trying to make life harder for two-mother families like his and to prevent gay couples from adopting children. I hope he spends more of his time and education on righting that injustice than fighting the straw men of "liberalism" he sets up here.
18
This article makes zero sense.
Mr. Henderson presents zero evidence that liberals are exhorting people to abandon their responsibilities, especially not their parental responsibilities, which seems to be the unstated premise of this article. Nor did the author present evidence that liberals do not understand that it is best for children to grow up in loving environments where the children are nurtured and protected.
This op-ed is troubling and doesn't even bother with the pretense of presenting a cogent argument.
39
100% agree. NY Times lately has taken to trolling their subscribers under the pretext of giving them more diverse viewpoints. This approach suffers from the same false equivalence problem the media has in general because one side, as in this example, fails completely in making any argument of any kind on behalf of "the other side".
5
And what of the child raised in a loving two-parent home who succumbs to drug addiction? If those two-parent homes are responsible for your classmates’ successes, then I assume they’re likewise responsible for any failures... such is the problem with attributing personal responsibility to societal failures.
12
I would first say "thank you for your service" to this young man, and second, "congratulations". But after that, his inferences about what a Liberal is, or is not, is not well-constructed. He seems to believe that Conservatives have a special license on responsibility, accountability, and family commitment. I'll chalk that up to his youth and inexperience, because the reality is far different than his commentary and observations.
He clearly did have some profoundly challenging circumstances, and has a lot of drama in his past. Importantly, though he may not want to admit it, he IS, in fact, a victim. And that doesn't mean that it is the end of the world, nor something that cannot be overcome. It does, in fact, mean that a lot of those really tough events in his youth were not because of his actions, and that he did nothing to deserve that fate. It is not debilitating for all, as he has demonstrated. Calling the situation accurately does not then give an excuse to feel as though being a victim (or the dreaded 'victimhood') is an all-purpose built-in excuse. He proved that.
I wish this young man great success in the future, but he would be far wiser to keep his mind open to other experiences. His obviously define him, but not necessarily the world at large. Liberals are famous for open-mindedness and generally loathe labels. Oh, and we also all support the concept of a two-person family; another canard that doesn't hold water.
21
I lived and worked in CT for 22 yrs. Yale is an enclave of rich students surrounded by a large poor black neighborhood. Yale is very conservative, as compared to Harvard, or even Princeton. The Air Force is the most conservative branch of military service. Mr. Henderson's opinion, for what it's worth, is not representative of the millions of people who grew up in foster care, or broken homes. He might be surprised at how many succeeded in finishing college and went on to have good jobs. I grew up in the Central Valley; my family was financially comfortable. My best friend was from a large Mexican family; they were not poor, but they needed to help each other as they grew up. They are all successful; own homes; send their children to college and to Europe. They did not need welfare to achieve any of that; none of them were ever on drugs. They had two parents, as did I; most of the kids whose families were farmers also had two parents. Large urban environments can be more difficult; and, yet, millions of families raise good families in those environments. We need to step away from stereotypes; not all broken homes produce broken children; not all two parent families produce healthy well adjusted children.
5
Congratulations on your graduation, and for the obstacles you overcame to reach this point. Thanks also for starting the dialog here.
There's a schism between conservatives and liberals that's been magnified in recent years to such an extent that people are inclined not even to date the other persuasion. There's something in the air far more extreme than even the most fervent LBJ or Barry Goldwater partisans from a half century ago (my family had both).
Two questions come to mind..
1. What's brought the temperature up in partisan rancor?
There's a lot of factors to this, however we can lay some of this at Rupert Murdoch's feet - feeding (and fomenting) populist outrage has been his media model for decades. It also seems that the ultra-wealthy want most of us divided, because the paralysis gives them freedom to operate. Outrage has a business purpose.
2. How can we bring the temperature down between people of differing political stripes?
As a liberal, I'd like to start by admitting that some of my favorite people on earth are conservative politically - I can't fathom their political choices, but I surely enjoy them as people, even if what we do in the voting both is far different. That's a bridge of sorts.
Lastly, lets' be suspicious of dead certainty. Anything for which you or I are absolutely certain means we've stopped talking. Lightening the dialog and laughing together might actually save this earth.
10
Mr. Henderson. your story is moving and your achievements admirable. Congratulations to you, and thank you for sharing your conservative-tending thoughts. That takes courage these days: intolerance rages at all points of the political spectrum.
Your account of your one experience of stable family life (which I hope was merely the first, soon to be followed by long-lasting personal happiness) gave me the impression that the loving couple who raised you were lesbians (because you said they endured homophobia). Forgive me if I have the wrong impression. But if that is correct, well - thank heavens for progressives' insistence on gay rights.
Personally I find that no one political group has a monopoly on good ideas (or even a tenuous grasp, in many cases). Please continue speaking honestly of your experience and your opinions as they develop. It is so refreshing, and I do believe will encourage civilized debate. God, I've missed civilized debate ...
11
In a traditional intellectual sense, the view that environment shapes character and destiny is entirely liberal. It stems from Enlightenment John Locke's concept of the tabula rasa, that the individual is born as a blank slate, to be shaped by education and experience. This contrasts with Conservative Edmund Burke's celebration of traditional hierarchy (born to be a peasant, destined to be a peasant, etc.). The concept of the tabula rasa historically led to the deep involvement in environmental issues that informs such liberal concerns as education, the welfare state, upward mobility, etc. I'm sorry that Mr. Henderson did not learn of this fundamental development in Western culture at Yale.
15
I identify with your experience, Robert. I am a former foster child and college graduate, now in my 50s with a very successful career and a daughter who will graduate from college herself next year.
I'm not sure how you define 'Conservative', but I would like to say this: not every divorce leads to a "broken home". Many parents are able to create securely functioning families for their children after a divorce -- if they themselves are mentally and emotionally healthy.
"Broken homes" are created by broken people -- married or not. Some of the most toxic and dysfunctional relationships I've seen are among couples who refuse to address their problems -- but also refuse to split up. Sometimes divorcing is the most courageous thing a person can do. Other times, it's the most honest.
It feels like you are assigning a solution -- "Conservatism" -- to a problem created in your childhood that you may not yet completely understand. And how could you? In my personal experience as a foster child, it takes decades (yes, decades!) to integrate the trauma. And that's with nearly-continuous therapy and spiritual work.
Traumatized people hit developmental milestones much later than other people -- into our 30s and 40s and beyond. Figuring out who we are politically, emotionally, creatively and spiritually is a long process. And for me it really began when I graduated from college and started feeling safe. Thank you for writing, and best of everything to you.
19
Such a kind response to a column many of us disparaged--including me. I hope the writer heard your wisdom. I hope you will find many ways to share the wisdom and empathy you earned. We will be better with your voice.thanks. Keep it coming!
8
I had nearly the same experience (ex foster child adopted by 7) but reached the opposite conclusion. You are right that an individual's personal responsibility and agency are important, but you are suggesting that these are solutions. They are not means, they are ends. The flaws of the individual - which may have contributed to their present circumstance - can be destructive to others. If others have to suffer by no fault of their own, it is the prerogative of the community to intervene. If the children of a single mother must suffer because they've been abandoned, the state should intervene. The children did not have agency in their parents' choices. Why should our parents decide our fates? If we are going to decide our own fates, the government should help us.
5
Good for you.
I was a liberal for a very long time. I left it behind because to me the only thing that matters in the end is character, and liberals are allergic to making moral claims about individual behavior and its consequences. Every problem, for a leftist, is the fault of some collective system. What that ends up meaning is that credit for every good outcome belongs to a collective system as well.
But our individual behavior is all we have, and that’s what the world is made of.
Personally, I wouldn’t go so far as to call myself a conservative, because I still believe in the power of unions to negotiate better lives for their families, and I still believe that unchecked wealth inequality could wreck our whole society.
But all in all, I have the most respect for people who do the right thing and act honorably without complaint. People like that are everywhere, but you don’t usually read their stories in these pages. Instead, here you get profiles of professional victims acting as tokens of well-funded causes.
Meanwhile, genuine and flawed and honorable people just go about their lives and business and hold the world together for the rest of us. There’s no Facebook likes or crowdfunding for that.
I have no doubt that your life has been hard. It’s inspiring to know that with enough heart and a little encouragement it’s possible to rise above dire circumstances. Because it’s been done. By people like you, individually.
Thanks.
8
Another way of saying it:
When a conservative works hard and is successful, he says, I did that.
When a liberal works hard and is successful, he looks behind at those he left and says, there but for the grace of God go I.
25
Exactly!
I am always amazed how extremely smart, driven people,( those on the very edge of the bell shaped curve) are often blind to their gift. Most people do not have the ability to overcome their family, their environment or their lack of motivation. Poverty and poor parenting are often generational. It often takes a major external force to break this cycle and that force cost money and resources. Conservatives are clearly not willing to spend, instead they seem to think that every disadvantaged child has the ability to overcome his or her environment. Some do but most don’t. We owe it to them to help end the vicious cycle.
31
A woman who was determined to take care of herself, and take care of her partner, ,adopted you. And took care of you. And changed your zip code.
It is most often zip codes in the end. Two parent zip codes afford families, even single parent ones, the capacity to eat meals together. To do home work. To encourage the best in others.
You share my luck, a two parent zip code.
4
I do not know of any liberal progressive who are homophobe. (the people who harassed your adoptive parents were most certainly conservatives) The writer seems mistakenly to attribute the person with solid family values the term of conservative. Although I am a liberal- progressive, I share the values he mentions, I believe in personal responsibility, in taking care of my loved ones, I believe that two parent family, great education and health care, absolutely necessary for stable childhood. The difference with conservatives and liberals is that, liberals feel responsible toward fellow human beings, and care for people like Rob Henderson and his family and do not mind paying higher taxes so he could have had better assistance as a kid.
25
I am a single mother to two young boys, and an international student currently completing a Ph.D. at Princeton. I agree that it is better for children to grow up in an environment with more than one adult carrying the load. A patient mother with time and love to spare, herself supported and loved, obviously has more emotional (and financial and practical) resources to offer her children. When I have had to get up with a fever to make school lunches or tend to sick children and go in to work it's been miserable. The enhanced cortisol-load and social isolation create a negative cycle that has impacted is all. Yet I think it's easy to idealize other peoples' lives and not see that every family has challenges. Having been through expensive schools on scholarships I have spent a lot of time with rich, two-parent families that are profoundly unhappy and often dysfunctional, especially when money has been made through ethically-questionable life choices. I did not envision my life taking the path it has, nor the lives of my sons whom I had hoped would have alternative school educations and a stay-at-home Mom to support them. Unexpected circumstances changed the trajectory. Nonetheless, despite the financial hardships and chronic stress we were under for a while, my sons have a deep sense of empathy, compassion, and knowledge that there are so many other people in the world facing far greater challenges and trauma. I hope that through cultivating gratitude happiness will follow.
29
Mr. Henderson, congratulations on your graduation from Yale today. You have accomplished much despite the odds against you. I understand what you are saying. You wished you had two loving parents your entire life as every child should. Ignore the commenters disagreeing with you. This is a liberal newspaper with mostly liberal readers (I am not one of them).
My mother gave me good advice. Try not to think about painful memories. Let it go. I share that with you. Good luck in all that you do. I hope you find someone wonderful to love who will love you in return and help you to imagine your brilliant future and forget the past. All the best to you.
10
Rob Henderson, I am sorry about the challenges you've endured because of your family, and that classmates put you in a box. Sadly, your gratuitously contrarian analysis seems motivated more by your frustration with cloistered college students than by reality -- and could actually damage the cause you say you support.
Modern conservatism is waging a full on assault on the family. They are against the following: family planning, which allows parents to have kids when they're ready and have the resources; reducing wealth inequality so parents can afford to raise kids in healthy environments; enlightened gender roles, which leads to happier families because women aren't doing all of the emotional labor; a strong safety net so kids don't grow up in poverty because they were born in difficult circumstances; stronger workplace laws so employers don't demand their employees spend time at the office at expense of their families.
I come from a proudly liberal family, and my parents are some of the most stable and loving people I know. They were also very strict parents -- more so than many parents I knew growing up who were "conservative."
The Republicans have done some good PR to make you think conservatives care about family. The on-the-ground reality, which maybe you'll get a better view of when you leave Yale, is that they are attacking the modern American family, mercilessly.
123
Not a true reply, but I've paid enough dues in teh foster system to comment anywhere under this article... I forgot to mention in my own comment the pivotal role that public education plays in the lives of orphans and foster kids. It is of paramount importance. Conservative education policy continually advantages elite children, and children with good supportive families to look out for them, while continually maneuvering to dismantle the public education system. Orphans and foster children need the safety net of robust Universal Public Education or too many will slip through the cracks. This is exactly what conservatives want - cheap and ignorant labor. My years in the foster care system taught me well who my enemy is ... They taught me this reality better than a Yale education ever could.
27
Thanks for sharing - even if not a true reply, a needed perspective.
"For instance, when I say parents should prioritize their children over their careers, there is a sense of unease among my peers. They think I want to blame individuals rather than a nebulous foe like poverty. They are mostly right. Many people who come from privilege do not like placing blame on ordinary people. They prefer to blame ideologies, institutions, abstractions."
I can't even figure out what thought is supposed to be expressed in these sentences. First, people in poverty struggle to find jobs, careers are for stable, middle class and up people. And those careers are what give their kids advantages. Second, people from privilege should be less likely to blame ordinary people - they don't have to contend with the same struggles and get easily what others have to work hard for.
16
I din’t see how any if the author’s experiences and insights are either conservative or liberal. That political or ideological designation seems completely beyond the point. Further, by the author’s reasoning, two parents are better than one. But by that same reasoning, three parents would be better than two, and so forth. Maybe a better way to describe successful child-rearing is that it involves enough loving individuals to oversee the complex growth of an individual into a moral being; that can include parents, older siblings, step-parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, godparents, family friends, coaches, teachers, and mentors. The key is that the older figures care deeply, and each in a different fashion, for the child.
23
I do not see how valuing having a two parent upbringing where two adults are invested in a child's success is conservative. To my mind that makes more sense than all the nonsense I hear from politicians about ending welfare as we know it, no child left behind, or making America great again.
When we are children the people who raise us, worry about us, discipline us, love us, cheer us on, bring us back down to earth, comfort us when we're sad; those are usually our parents. The problem in America is that we don't understand the real value of having a caring loving intact family because it's not supported by our culture any longer. Employers demand/expect employees to be available 24/7. We do not have a tradition of truly valuing life in America. We value money and wealth. We don't have good foster care systems in America.
It's not conservative to want a family's care and love. It's human. What passes for conservative in America is the stripping away of money from programs that can help people like Rob Henderson in order to give government hand outs to the richest among us.
43
These values you’re writing about are not political - just human. I can’t think of one liberal who would disagree with the notion that two parents is preferable to one, and that a person is responsible in some way for their life path. Paradoxically, the “conservative” party has made voting as an act of blame into sport, and areas governed in this way tend to have many more fractured families. This doesn’t mean that socioeconomic factors aren’t important - they are - you said it yourself that you’re an anomaly given your background. But you’re not a conservative - at least not as you’ve written here. You’re a human who was resilient in the face of adversity and recognizes the role that both yourself and others played in this resiliency. That’s not political.
17
Thank you Mr. Henderson. Congratulations on your graduation, and best wishes for the future.
I think it would have been helpful if you had defined your parameters of how you are 'conservative' a little more fully.
I don't think that it is only a conservative idea that children should be raised in stable homes, I think it is a universal value.
Anyone who has a child wants to have to have stable housing, adequate food, good education, a safe neighbourhood, recreational activities, friends, and love available for them for their whole lives.
I don't think this is a conservative idea, it is universal.
Who are those people who use you "as an example of a person who can shoulder the burdens of a nontraditional upbringing and succeed. They use my success as an argument for lax attitudes about parenting."? If you are basing this on the students at Yale, you might find that that cohort is not representative of the adult population.
Do you find that there are a lot of those people who use your example for lax parenting? Or was it only one, or two?
I think you might want to re-consider your attitudes about people who are not 'conservative', and how different they really are from you. I think you might find that the majority of those 'ordinary adults taking responsibility', come in all political stripes.
You will meet many people in your career, I hope you will be able to learn from them all.
13
Rob, thanks for sharing your experiences. It's eye-opening, and I learned from it. I would challenge the ease with which you reject the term "victim". Maybe you didn't identify as a victim at the time your school mate said it, but you once had been a victim of neglect, etc. You have a history of victimhood. Claiming, or owning, one's status as a victim is proper not only to good health, but also to a sense of justice. How can we hope to address injustice if we can't allow victims to express their status as such? Indeed, the people who neglected you still owe you an apology, even if you've gotten over it. So in this way, allowing freedom for victims to be victims is really the flip side of individual responsibility. If there can't be victims, then there are no culprits. It just becomes an argument for the status quo. One would think conservatives can see this--after all, it's biblical.
Instead of the conservative rejection of identifying with the victim, we need to allow victims to express their true vulnerability, and give them the space to reject the shame they are made to feel. We treat vulnerability as anathema, but it is the door to true freedom. Sure, it can be abused, but if the victim's experience is grounded in reality, it is simply the truth, and those responsible should answer for it.
7
In my personal experience, relinquishing the status of victimhood is beneficial to good health.
Rob is a person, not a "victim." He calls out the bad people, but he doesn't define himself by their actions.
I agree we should allow people to be vulnerable, but labeling ourselves by the terrible actions of others is not helpful for growth.
1
Liz, thanks for responding. I still don't quite agree with your use of the terms. For me being able to say one is a victim is a sign of agency. Relinquishing the status of victimhood is a sign of good health, but so is being able to define our own limits based on the person we've become (now that we've been a victim). I said Rob *was a victim. It certainly looks like he's moved on. And he's free to reject the term, but I'm sure there's more he can learn by interrogating the experience in therapy. Victims never stop being persons first. If I claim to have been the victim of a bully, I'm the person they have wronged. I'm only 'defined' by their action if I start to see myself as the bully's natural or justified target, i.e. prey. The victim's claim is that he never deserved it. Victimhood for me is living with that sense of injustice, but I agree as you seem to be saying, it shouldn't limit us.
Why is it "conservative" to propose that two parents are better than one? Why is it "conservative" to make children a priority?
I believe in both of these things, but I would bet if you ran me through a series of questions about government spending priorities, taxation, the war on drugs, civil rights, and reproductive rights, you might come to the conclusion that I am on the "liberal" end of the spectrum.
I decry the social circumstances that has led to the increase in single motherhood and the need for foster care. I dispute the notion that they are the result of "liberal" "values". If anything, they result from the increasing economic pressure on middle and lower class families. What end of the political spectrum is responsible for that?
And it is one thing to say that the children of single mothers should not be stigmatized, and should be given the same opportunities to thrive as children with two parents. It is quite another to promote single parenthood over a two-parent household. They are not the same thing, and it is a misconception to think the latter rather than the former is the standard "liberal" position.
26
Dear Mr. Henderson,
First of all congratulations on graduation!
Second of all you said:
"Ordinary adults taking responsibility made all the difference for me. I maintain that the agency of individuals will lead to fewer impoverished childhoods."
"If today that makes me a conservative, great. I take responsibility for that."
Actually, that doesn't make you a conservative. Anybody with common sense believes in accountability and responsibility.
What differentiates liberals from conservatives is liberals have more empathy and want to help people less fortunate.
Liberals are more open minded and accept people who are different.
And liberals recognize that most people will rise up to their environment and that we want to give everyone the best environment possible.
If from your troubles, you choose to help others who have similar problems then you will be a liberal.
On the other hand, if you blame the person for the environment they were cast into, then you will be a conservative.
Good luck with your life.
I grew up on the South Side of Chicago, started working when I was ten, made it through college when five of my friends were killed.
I had a two parent family with a normal amount of love. More important, even though my parents were blue collar, my mother read to me even as a baby.
By now, with a master's and a successful career in IT, I am usually called the "liberal elite" by the Confederate flag waving, NRA, evangelical Trump supporters here in the South.
30
Yes, the writer may be confused on some issues of what defines a conservative vs what defines a liberal.
But he may be thinking along these lines:
A conservative is one who isn't shy about asking someone about his or her father.
A liberal is more concerned about offending someone who may not have a father.
Liberals are, of course, every bit as patriotic as conservatives, and believe as much in personal responsibility.
But it's probably true to state that these days liberals aren't as eager as conservatives to extoll the advantages of a family led by two parents. At least in the mind of this young man when discussing basic child-parenting issues with Yale contemporaries.
1
I am quite liberal and relatively old. It wouldn't occur to me to *not* ask about someone's father because they might be offended.
It would occur to me to *not* assign a gender or pronoun to someone I don't know and who seems ambiguous or non-binary.
It would *not* occur to me to claim everyone must agree that "America is the Land of Opportunity.".
Clearly not the case for Native Americans, or Spanish speakers who suddenly became citizens when Florida, Georgia, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona or California joined the USA.
Clearly not true for African Americans, particularly the descendants of enslaved Africans.
1
The author hasn't really discussed political conservatism as much as he discussed a personally conservative view of life and values. The two are not at all necessarily related. Political conservatism, as in the belief in a "small government", low taxes, protection for authoritative institutions and a culturally dominant civic religion does not necessarily follow the sort of "personal conservatism" that implies responsible living and family values. The reason so many make this connection is because political conservatism has had an excellent sales job at conflating the two, which is probably why a lot of Americans describe themselves as "conservative" while supporting a majority of line item liberal policies like Social Security, Medicare, universal health care and worker protections.
There was nothing provided in the author's background that indicted "liberalism" as the cause of the problems of his upbringing. Drug addiction happens to political conservatives (or non-political people), as well as does divorce, family dysfunction, irresponsibility and petty cruelty. And I see no solutions from low taxes and "small government" that would have made a bit of a difference in his upbringing, except perhaps to starve more state agencies of revenue needed to monitor his case and fill in the gaps. On the other hand, it has been noted that many "blue" voting areas feature very highly in "conservative" family and personal values. Perhaps the author needs a bit more nuance in ideology.
29
I am so happy for you that you finally had a good foster experience, and believed you could succeed in this world. It's a tough world, and you've made it. Godspeed...
5
i was going to share that I did not understand what this person thinks conservative means. then I read all the responses and felt they answered her exactly as I would have. So I abstained commenting. Henderson is confused about liberals versus conservatives. conservativess dont stick together anymore than liberals do.
11
Defunding Planned Parenthood will make for more unwanted babies, and more abortions. The lowest teen pregnancy rates are after many years where insurance had to cover contraceptives-- not a coincidence. The push to get rid of SNAP from the farm bill-- almost made it. Giving 1.2 billion dollars to the Koch brothers in tax relief will certainly help. Letting go of environmental regulation, allowing toxins and lead into places where foster kids might consume them, and then not come Yale students-- yup, that's Conservative. Blowing up the deficit,Conservative. Rubblizing the Middle East, conservative. Privatizing National Parks, conservative. I can go on and on. What does this guy think is Conservative in the Trumublican party?
25
Last I checked, statistics show that red states have higher rates of divorce, teenage pregnancy, and childbirth outside of marriage.
That said, congratulations on your achievements, happy graduation, and thank you for your service.
38
Statistics are that Red States receive more in Federal Aid on all levels than they contribute. I don't mind CA taxes going to help those who need welfare in Mississippi, Alabama et al. I do mind that they vote against progressive "liberal" policies whenever they end up in Congress. The solid Republican bloc voting in Southern and border States often works against their own interests. VW refused to locate a large manufacturing plant in a Southern State after they learned it was a "right to work" State. VW correctly determined that "right to work" meant the employee would accept lower wages with no benefits than was available in other States. Right to Work for less.
3
I don't think that support for personal responsibility, or support of 2-parent families makes you a conservative. I also don't think that liberals decry personal responsibility, or 2-parent families; indeed, I think they support them at least as much as conservatives.
You seem to identify as a conservative because you hate welfare; you seem to think that people noticing and trying to abate social forces which result from collective failures (i.e. poverty) somehow encourages people not to take more personal responsibility; you also seem to think that success comes entirely of one person's effort. You might consider this: despite your significant misfortunes, it is likely because of societal structures put in place to take care of people who could not take care of themselves that you are alive today. You certainly have not been as lucky as most, and you certainly have made much of your lot, but even you did not succeed on your own. I think you may miss the degree to which you owe much to the systems liberals support, and you decry.
20
The big flaw with what you sa y is that conservatives do not practice what they preach. The bible states have the highest divorce rates while the lowest rates are in blue states.
30
Now here is another Yalie writing about personal struggle and getting there. Definitely a worthy personal achievement. However, the logic seems flawed. Taking care of family is not a conservative value, but a human value. Plenty of broken conservative families and healthy liberal family, and vice versa.
15
Dear Robert, you’re not a conservative! At least nothing in your fine essay convinces me you are. Finding yourself frequently on the other side of arguments with Yale students does not make you a conservative. What it means is that you’re not a thorough-going lefty. But neither are most Democrats or even I’d say most self-described progressives or liberals. Your interlocutor asked a great question: what does it mean to be a conservative? Your answer is that you don’t dismiss the accumulated wisdom of the ages. But neither do most liberals. Neither does the magnificent institution, steeped in tradition, from which you are about to graduate, hotbed of leftist ideas and rhetoric though it may be. What it means to be a conservative today is to embrace an even crazier and certainly nastier dogma than any you encountered on campus. Conservatives today are extremists. They are, on the one hand, free market fundamentalists who don’t care if people have access to, say, affordable health care, and, on the other, petty cultural imperialists who insist in a free society on enshrining their narrow viewpoint, often influenced by minority religious fervor and sentiment or simple tribal resentment, into law and policy. At Yale, I’d probably be the class conservative too. Don’t mistake that environment for the rest of the country. In fact, I would love it if you ran for office partly based on your message of individual responsibility — as a Democrat.
10
I don't know a single liberal person who doesn't value two-parent families, but I know plenty of conservative ones who would have busted up the writer and his two gay parents.
69
Might look at the divorce rate by state to see where the family values people reside.
14
Perhaps the New York Times can go to other schools beside Yale to get a take on what today’s youth are thinking. A few months ago it was Ms. Cornejo on what it feels like to be a dreamer and now with Mr. Henderson and the foster care system. Liberal or conservative, it’s all coming from the same place.
5
I find the strange judgmental tone of this piece disturbing, like an opportunistic jab at liberal sensibilities because he feels excluded from his peers at Yale.
14
You sound like a very impressive young man and you deserve a lot of credit for your many accomplishments. I'm not sure exactly why you say you're conservative. Frankly you sound liberal. Liberals also are all in favor of intact families, personal responsibility, and caring for children. (I might quibble with the idea that it takes two people to raise a child - in my opinion, it takes a lot MORE than two.
The only part you don't mention is what's supposed to happen to the kids who are abandoned who fare worse than you have done. Many fare much worse. Liberals tend to believe the answer to that is that society has an obligation to step up and help then. That's all. Like you, we believe children should never be abandoned.
13
Lots of liberals have dinner every night with their families. And some conservatives are like President Trump, loads money but divorced with loads of dysfunction and terrible behavior, such as bankruptcy, infidelity, and substance abuse. Trump leads a party of conservatives and has unprotected sex while on his 3rd wife.
"Individuals have rights and responsibilities"? Tell it to the rich who live in gate guarded enclaves and lust for lower taxes while defunding public schools, healthcare, childcare and road building.
21
And what makes you think liberals don't believe in personal responsibility? We do. But we don't believe the one-percent should get to keep all the money, while the rest of us struggle and starve. We believe the U.S. is a big family, and it is our personal responsibility to take care of everyone!
30
So what was it about being a foster child that made you a conservative? Your article does not address this?
I guess a stable two parent family upbringing implies conservatism? The data shows that 'liberal' blue states appear to have better stats in all categories related to stable families than 'conservative' red states - divorce, abortion, teenage birth, drugs, etc. So you had a tough life, struggled hard and became a success. Your life and subsequent choice of ideology is a non-sequitur.
13
The posters arguing with the author are talking past him. I just reread his essay, and he never once used the word liberal. He used "progressive" once, as an adjective, not as a noun. This man is not attacking liberalism. He's arguing with a group of very young, very inexperienced, very lucky people who feel that it's in bad taste or somehow bigoted to blame irresponsible people who neglect or abandon their kids. As someone who himself survived the neglect and abandonment of at least three parental figures, he has a point.
If this man defines conservatism as believing that decent people have a duty to take care of their kids, well then, this Yellow Dog Democrat, lifelong liberal, cradle feminist is a conservative, too.
11
Responsible parents raise successful children? Excellent philosophy, but hardly conservative. And one question, Mr. Henderson: did you rely on affirmative action to get into and pay for your university education? Nothing wrong with that of course, good for you, but that doesn’t sound very conservative either.
4
Hopefully Mr. Henderson’s conservatism does not translate into voting for the GOP because under their platform his adoptive mother and her partner would not have been able to adopt him. If it were to the GOP no gay or lesbian couples, no matter how loving and financially stable, would be allowed to adopt a child even if said child was languishing in foster care.
9
It seems the author doesn't want to address the issue that most conservatives don't want stable, same sex adoption, but rather man/woman marriage/adoption only. This is a major issue I have with conservatives. They will often throw out what works because it doesn't fit into their narrow world view. Loving, stable family, but Jenny is going to have two mommies? NO!
9
I'm pretty sure everyone knows that two parents, on average, provide more resources per child than one. The difference between liberals and conservatives is on other child raising matters.
When there is a circumstance of only one parent, liberals would help with government aid, conservatives would not.
Regardless of the number of parents, liberals would believe children have a right to a good public education and basic health care. Conservatives do not.
And let's not forget that conservatives don't want just any two parents; they require a heterosexual pair. Conservatives would have children remain in foster care and not adopted at all, rather than being placed in a home with two same sex parents.
10
I don't think it does make you a conservative, but thanks for sharing your story.
2
I congratulate Mr. Henderson, but I hope he understands he's not much like today's Conservatives, who want to conserve the established order, not individual potential. I hope he also understands that individuals have the power to create their own frameworks (a/k/a "write their own stories"), if only they are told about this early enough. Most children are told that the way things are is the way they have always been and must always be. This makes them, and keeps them, predictable, which protects the established order. If instead we tell children that all of our habits, institutions, and cultures are artifacts, useful for so many purposes but limited in unknown but dangerous ways, then they can grow up with a sense of balance between commitment and wonder which will be the making of their lives. That balance is what needs to be conserved.
1
I find your essay interesting and there are a lot of blanks I wish you had the space to fill in about how your conservatism plays out in your political views. For example, what policies do you support that would help encourage child-centric 2 parent families? What policies do you support to make it easier for single parent families to focus on their kids since the reality is that there are many single parent families? Do you see access to health care as a right? (It's hard to be the best parent you can if you have a health condition and can't take care of it properly). How about access to healthy, affordable housing? It's hard to raise kids if you spend 80% of your small income on substandard housing. You talked about the homophobia your adopted mom and her partner experienced. Do you support LGBTQ rights and marriage (which would make for more stable two parent families)? Your essay implies that, unlike some conservatives, you probably do, but I don't know. I suspect your views are more nuanced than some conservatives, and as a liberal, I also suspect I might not agree with you on a lot of things. However, I wish I could hear more.
5
I am befuddled by why this author thinks the attitudes he mentions are somehow "conservative". This author seems to be bringing an attitude to his conversations with his fellow Yale students that is perhaps impeding his ability to understand what they are saying. I live adjacent to the bluest part of a blue state, and went to one of the most famously progressive colleges in the country, and I never hear people say that parents shouldn't make sacrifices for their kids, or that people aren't responsible for their own futures. Or that two-parent families aren't a good thing. In fact, it's the progressives around here who tend to be the ones making big sacrifices for their kids, often to a ridiculous extent, not the conservatives. Progressives believe that the playing field isn't necessarily level, but - surprise! - most conservatives believe that, too. The difference is in the degree to which they think it is the government's responsibility to fix it. That's all.
7
There seem to be two stripes of conservative, as alluded to in this myopic opinion piece. The first kind like to pull the ladder up behind them, denying others the same advantages they enjoyed. This is easily demonstrated by conservative attitudes towards immigrants, and exemplified by Trump himself whose grandparents as well as his wife would not be allowed to live in this country had his views been law back then. The second kind are those who realize they do not have a ladder of success, and therefore they want nobody to have a ladder. Mr. Henderson sounds like a bit of the latter ladder. He had it rough, he had a hard, traumatic childhood, but what he doesn't grasp is that liberalism seeks to help people exactly like him, whereas conservatism undermines the very things that would have made his life better.
327
That's the attitude a lot of conservatives rally against, this idea that a bunch of complete strangers know precisely what will make life better for all of us, and are ready to shove it down our throats whether we're willing or not. That the state, or the bureaucracy, or the university system knows best.
I would argue most human happiness isn't derived from material comforts—it's derived from feeling in charge of your life, acknowledging that your actions have real consequences (good or bad), that you can lead a profound and meaningful existence.
In that context, focusing on one's "personal responsibility" makes a lot of sense, and I'm not sure how this author advocates pulling the ladder up on anyone. I think more than anything he's suggesting that conservatism forces people to acknowledge they actually have a tremendous amount of agency and direction in their personal lives, which is a reality that most progressives tend to skim over.
9
@specimantwo
The first paragraph of your comment exactly characterizes Christian conservatives - those who want to encode their religious belief into the law books (i.e. Jam their religious beliefs down our throats, know precisely what will make our lives better).
I completely agree with your second paragraph. But how is this the sole domain of conservatism? This is a universal desire.
23
"Most human happiness is not derived from material comforts", I think most of us would agree. However, I do not think this is a tenant of conservatism. Rather quite the opposite, considering the opposition to parting of material wealth.
As you can read from the comments on this article, the caricature of liberals that conservatives so willingly recycle is just not accurate. What liberals have said that people do not have agency or direction in their personal lives? If anything, the income inequality and the stagnation of wage growth in this generation in the US is a sign that conservatism does not promote this (and the US has had very small social net compared to the rest of the world for the past 50 years).
What liberals scoff at the idea of homosexual partners raising a child? Conservatives do not want gay people to adopt. I do not see how this fits into "the power of the individual."
The author sadly conflates "individual ruggedness," or accomplishment with conservatism. The two are actually far from each other. As he said, fewer than 10% of foster children go to college. Is that grounds for dismantling the program, or for trying to improve it? His mother succumbed to drug use. Is that a positive (hey, it made him fight even harder!) or should society try to help drug addicted parents recover?
Liberals want society to provide opportunity to translate motivation.
4
I knew a man who left the Soviet Union in 1973. His parents were punished for his actions and lost their jobs, and his colleagues were made to publicly denounce him. He came to the USA, did quite well as a research physicist in industry, and believed so strongly in the phrase "Better dead than red" that he advocated for the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam.
I knew a man whose brother was thrown out of a helicopter in Peron's Argentina. He went to the UK and became a quite successful research scientist in academia. He was also a hard-line, implacable Communist.
See the pattern? It's hard even for people who are clearly highly intelligent to not allow their personal experiences to distort their broader social conclusions. Don't be like those guys. Try to look at the world with your brain instead of your trauma.
4
It is reported that Ronald Reagan said that Hispanics were natural Republicans. Was he suggesting they were family oriented? Was he suggesting they were turned off by welfare abuse? Was he suggesting they actually believed in the American Dream of hard work leading to success?
Who Knows?
I do feel that Ronald Reagan and Donald trump have little in common.
3
What a great piece. Full of so many truths that the Socialists despise. Among them is that people are not all the same. Sure, they need to be afforded the same level of respect but that does not make them the same.
1
I understand that you are trolling and are not likely to receive my reply with a thoughtful attitude but perhaps somebody will.
Neither most liberals nor most socialists believe that all people are the same. I hope you'll look into that a bit more.
I'm pleased that you feel all people need the same level of respect. I hope you also feel that all people need the same opportunities (especially during childhood) to succeed: physical safety, nutrition, education, healthcare, tolerance,...
How in the world would you know what I despise?
Congradulations on your graduation, Mr. Henderson!
I raised 3 children alone, without any type of support from their biological father. Let me tell you about him. He shot a scottish terrier puppy with an BB-gun. He spanked my 11 year old daughter with his leather police belt leaving red welts from just below her shoulder blades all the way down to just above the knee-folds on the back of her legs. He hit my 5 year old boy in the face with his fist for walking in front of the TV while he was watching a football game. Whenever I was teaching sewing classes it turns out he would lock all three kids in the dark closet he had made (to stash his guns) under the stairs. There are many things he did to my children and to me. I sought and attended counseling for over 4 years, alone, trying to find a way to hold our marriage together 'for the sake of the children'. I did exactly what the Stake Bishop told me to do: Treat him as if he was the most valued member of the family, pray for him constantly, make a nice home for him. The day I left him, packing up my 3 children and the scotty and driving across 3 states was the best thing I have ever done. I stayed a single mother raising my children alone until they moved out from the home. All 3 are successful. My son is fighter pilot for the military. My oldest daughter is building contractor, and my youngest daughter is a working single mother raising her 5 yo son.
Please tell me again how inefficient single parents are.
19
Former single mother here. Raised my Latina daughter until age 10 in a partnerless home. Often worked 2 or even three jobs. Always tired. Qualified for various forms of welfare but never took it. She never went to high school. Instead she went directly from 8th grade to Washington State University at age 13. She graduated at 18 with a 4.0. She went on to a full ride graduate program at Cal Berkeley, finishing her first graduate degree before she could legally drink. She has been since then a fully self supporting public health professional. Spare me the bit about single parent homes. Kids need stable, supportive homes. One decent focused adult who loves their children can provide that. She got that from me.
18
I was raised by a single parent and don't disagree with your point.
However, the things you value are more easily provided by a 2-parent household.
2
I appreciate the author's difficulties growing up and his ultimate success, but I see no reason to label his success as due to conservative leanings. Upbringing and success in life do not hinge on particular circumstances about number or gender of parents nor their political leanings. This is just one example of someone who succeeded in difficult circumstances who has attributed particular political characteristics to his success, but the complete opposite could have been equally possible
3
Rob Henderson is a success but he's confusing that with conservatism. He succeeded because a teacher and a parent and partner decided he was worthy. He wasn't abandoned by everyone. Yes, a rough start and a few lousy adults but ultimately he had a loving but non-traditional home. Rob Henderson was loved if not every day of his childhood at least enough to prove to himself he was lovable.
Conservationism, at least in today's world, is Christian, heterosexual and preferably Caucasian. So-called family values comes with a lot of hypocrisy.
Rob Henderson did well for himself. He chose to not be a victim and take responsibility; that's neither conservative nor liberal but is a separate choice.
4
Conservatives - here's a shocker, given the anti-liberal drivel that has come from the right wing propaganda machine for decades - we liberals believe that stable families with involved, nurturing, and limit-setting parenting are best for children too!
We just don't accept the rigid definition of "family" that conservatives try to push on everyone.
Surely two loving parents, sharing the responsibilities of parenting, hoe an easier row than single loving parents, but many single parents do a great job of raising their children, and just as surely, one loving parent will do a better job of raising their children then two dysfunctional ones.
When it comes to families, one size does not fit all.
12
So his definition of a conservative is someone who takes responsibility for their actions? That's it? A judgment of personal character and nothing to do with a person's political beliefs?
And this guy goes to Yale?
10
It's notable Henderson was adopted by a gay couple. This isn't written about much but children adopted into gay households usually grow upper middle class. In fact, gay male couples have -- especially white males -- the highest houshold incomes in the country. Think about it: white privilege and patriarchy is a powerful combination (I tease).
But gay adoption isn't embraced on the right. Some states make it very difficult. And to societies detriment. There is nothing better for a child than to grow up in a loving, two parent home.
6
Are all the Republican scandals really a model for conservative family values?
Women are lining up to attest to harassment and payoffs from the POTUS. Look up recent resignations from governors, senators, aides and representatives, not to mention the impassioned defense of pedophilic behavior and domestic abuse we have seen and continue to see. Or alternatively, the lack of condemnation from those whose silence speaks volumes.
The mind reels.
And yes, liberals too establish safety and routines for their children. (And for the children of others, as teachers.)
6
You say that valuing a two parent household is a conservative value. I disagree. I was lucky to meet my husband at 19. We married at 26 and have 3 children. I have been a stay at home mother for 23 years. Without access to family planning, I could have potentially had a dozen children (I never had any problem conceiving). With that many children, we would have required 2 incomes so I would have had to work (probably multiple jobs). In addition, we would not have been able to help our children through college. My seemingly conservative life style would not be possible without Planned Parenthood.
10
I find your reasoning for why you're a conservative to be flawed - you're making gross generalizations about people.
Count me as a liberal who believes we should put children before career, including not having mothers go back to work until children are a few years old.
Count me as a liberal who believes in personal responsibility.
Count me as a liberal who believes children are better off with two parents.
Count me as a liberal who believes that the love, attention and attunement we receive as children shapes our future more than whether we come from privilege or not, though I am not in denial about the larger forces at work and know they have big impacts too.
Don't take the people you've met at Yale to represent the entire human pool of liberals. I know plenty of lefties who'd agree with me.
391
Count me as a liberal who wants the government to help all individuals get a leg up, in a manner that works for their particular circumstances. Over fifty years of being very involved in politics, it's clear to me that conservatives have worked to defund every program that might help individuals, from education to welfare to public transportation to healthcare. I suggest that is not the way to help those in need. And I don't blame the individual for their struggle, I'd like to see a government using facts to shape a society that gives everyone a chance to improve their lives. I would guess that Mr. Henderson would agree with all that, and that he needs to sort out his ideas about liberal and conservative, and flesh out his historical/factual information, to see where his heart truly lives.
20
His whole point is you’re not a typical liberal.
2
Old lefty agreeing. I was going to write a comment just like this, but thought I'd check to see if someone already had!
5
Of course, everyone should take responsibility for their actions. But there should also be wisdom, something that older people on average have a lot of (as well as children, but that's another argument). As well as compassion. I wouldn't label myself in any way but I don't disagree with you even though people may regard me as progressive based on my "lesser evil" choices but I have been called a conservative before (I sincerely believe in the whole "pull yourself up by the bootstraps without self promotion" deal). The problem is that people aren't perfect, and everyone, including myself, can be hypocrites. It's a matter of degree. I am hard on myself in a few areas compared to others but in others I'm definitely harder on others than I am on myself (something I'm always working to better myself, again something everyone needs to be able to do). There's no problem if you label yourself whatever you wish to label yourself as, but the notion that one ideology or philosophy is always better in every situation for everyone is the problem.
2
"Many people who come from privilege do not like placing blame on ordinary people. They prefer to blame ideologies, institutions, abstractions."
All people who come from privilege do not like placing blame on their privilege, especially those who come with the middle class privilege, when it's so easy to put an end to it.
Kids born and raised in families with a house income in the top 33% bracket must not represent more than one third of public college enrollee and must pay for it. Kids born and raised in the bottom 33% must get full scholarship and one third of the seats.
This is the only way to put an end to the broken ladder, but the middle class will never let this happen.
1
I believe that 2-parent households are ideal, and I value hard work, determination, and self-reliance. But as an agnostic, outdoor-loving, scientifically-oriented person, I'd never refer to myself as a conservative. You seem to be looking for easy labels, Rob, but luckily it doesn't usually work that way.
7
The author falls into what the criminologist Elliot Currie refers to as the fallacy of autonomy. The ability of families to function well depends on many factors outside of the control of parents or their children. Individual agency exists within a set of structural influences. It was ever thus. So how about we pay more attention to social policies that make it easier for families to do the right thing?
8
Interesting essay, but I have a bone to pick. Like the writer, I believe in the importance of a two-parent family where parents put the kids before their careers. Additionally, I believe adults should take responsibility for their lives and the lives of their children.
These aren't necessarily "liberal" or "conservative" values. They're values I'd presume the vast majority of Americans believe in, irrespective of their political party. In fact, I've voted Democrat in every national election since 1992. I consider myself relatively conservative fiscally and pretty liberal socially.
Somehow, this author got the notion that liberals have no notion of right or wrong, and don't think people should take responsibility for themselves or their children. That's a fallacy being spread by the far right. I hope as this writer goes through life he can escape some of the stereotypes he's developed about non-conservatives.
165
I wish that you had written more about what being a conservative means to you and how it compares with what those currently in power appear to believe. It sometimes seems to me that conservatives believe that parents and only parents should be financially responsible for their children. They seem to balk at any financial support for poor families with children to improve the standard of living of these children, be it food stamps or rent subsidies or medicine, all are labeled as "socialism". If you want to be rich in america here is the formula, go to college, marry someone who went to college and never have children and we will reward you financially your whole life.
It seems that modern conservatism views having children as just another "lifestyle choice" that must be paid for by those who made this choice.
I wonder what your brand of conservatism thinks of this notion.
9
Growing up today, I would have been removed from my biological family due to severe psychological and physical abuse. My mother became disabled when I was young. My father was a violent misogynist. It was a miserable childhood resulting in a tumultuous teen/young adulthood. I persevered based on the kindness of strangers and a deep faith (based on spiritualism not religion) plus therapy as an adult. My life has been attenuated in some areas but mostly highly gratifying and by most standards highly successful. Why do some people survive, save - even thrive despite horrific beginnings while others do not? It's a fascinating question. Money does not guarantee familial support or caring - it comes from a deeper source and innate resourcefulness. I agree with the author - all children deserve the BEST of beginnings as well as happy childhoods. The world would probably be a better place if this were the case. However, an idyllic beginning in life is not mandatory in order to become a happy, contributing member of society.
9
I would like to sincerely ask why the author believes that all Progressives don’t support two-parent families or prioritizing children over careers? I am a staunch progressive that also believes two-parent families are better for children. I also happen to believe that when you choose to have a child, you will be required to sometimes put that child’s needs first. This is not an attitude that is exclusive to Conservatives, and I will go so far as to say there are plenty of Conservatives that don’t agree with him or live by that rule. The political parties in this country are not as clear-cut and black and white on issues as many people (especially Conservatives) seem to believe.
28
Can't liberals embrace the factors listed by the author? I came from a 2-parent household. My parents who both worked outside the home also shared child care responsibilities in a way that my siblings and I were their top priority. They also made clear that, once we were grown and out of college we were responsible for whatever choices we made. My siblings and I have had successful careers that we each built on our own. But, unlike the author, my parents are not at all conservative, but are liberal.
31
What's the point of using labels such as conservative, liberal, progressive? Labels reduce us to caricatures defined by others. They turn us against one another.
Why not just say that you look favorably upon two-parent households, putting children first and taking personal responsibility. You will find lots of blue and red people who 100% agree with you! Peace and best wishes in your career.
29
Congratulations to Mr Henderson for his Ivy League degree, best of luck in his life thereafter, and what on earth does his piece have to do with conservatism?
Does he seriously think that a two-parent, caring, involved, and stable household is a conservative idea? Because that would imply it is not a liberal idea at all. Really. Please get serious.
Besides the sophomoric level of arguing "conservative ideas of family good" (if this article were an essay Mr Henderson ought to get a C/D grade on that point alone), and besides the overall unnecessary defensive tone of the article, there is the reality that conservative/Republican politics have eroded family stability in measurable ways for the "middle class" income level and below. In fact, key why the result has not been fully catastrophic is that although Republicans control the WH, the House, and the Senate, they cannot get their act together to enact policies; their policies are based on magical thinking as opposed to rational and analytic thinking; and in cases where they did manage to enact their policies the results have been more or less catastrophic (Kansas comes to mind) which is what happens when you operate on magical thinking.
Just FYI, we are a committed two parent household, we go out of our way to have family dinner and to engage with our children in their daily life and their education, and we are VERY liberal.
50
You're absolutely correct that children need stable homes headed by responsible adults. But conservative governance doesn't make that outcome more likely. It makes it less likely by draining resources away from ordinary people and funneling them to the rich, whose kids don't need the help. Poverty really does make a difference here, because it is much harder to keep your life together, keep your relationship together, and cope with the strains of raising kids when you don't have money.
Also, it doesn't seem to me that any of your failed parents prioritized their career over you, they just failed to care about you, period. Parents who make their career a priority acquire more resources, which makes caring for their kids easier. It's not a contradiction. Though it certainly matters more than anything else how much the parents care. My mom never had much money after my dad left her, but she always gave me everything she could. My dad had money, but gave me hardly anything.
I respect your experiences, but I think you are drawing the wrong conclusions from them. Individual responsibility matters, but circumstances also matter.
45
Although my background was not as harsh as Mr. Henderson's they also were not easy. Neither of my parents went to high school. They were both laborers, and my Dad got sick while I was in grade school. We lived in a Bronx neighborhood where over seventy people were murdered a year and if you were a child and especially if you were white, you were constantly in fear for physical safety.
Despite that, I fared better over time, professionally and in my personal life, than far more "privileged" kids from Manhattan and Greenwich. I attribute that to values, most of which I absorbed from my parents. It may not take a village -- it certainly shouldn't take the state -- but it does takes parental focus. Those parents can be straight, gay, black, white or whatever. But if they care, no valley cannot be crossed.
Thank you, Mr. Henderson. You have more wisdom than most of your former Yale peers.
8
I have a lot of admiration for the author, but I’m baffled by his definition of ‘conservative”. There are the words that today’s conservatives attribute to themselves, but their true meaning is made clear with actions. Families trying to cope with drug addiction, divorce or divorce, children who’ve been abandoned - they could use a little help. Conservative policy has kicked the legs out from under any number of programs to help families and children. You’d have to buy into the demonizing of the “liberal” to believe that somehow they don’t live in stable families or value their children. The difference I see is that liberals also care about other people’s children. I’m sorry, but looking at the actual policy pushed by conservatives, they don’t value people at all, only money.
50
The fact that children are better off in two parent families is no great insight. Where liberals differ from conservatives is that we recognize that the ideal often doesn't happen. I don't know of a single liberal who doesn't support policies that encourage two-parent families. What we object to is penalizing single parents. As the author's experience shows, many single-parent families are created when the other parent leaves. Stepping up and shouldering the whole responsibility for children shouldn't be punished, even for a worthy goal of trying to encourage more two-parent families.
40
I did not see anything in this opinion piece that explains how leaving the author and others in similar situations to be raised by his biological parents would improve outcomes.
3
Eh. I agree with other commenters that it is weird to think liberals are against two-parent households.
But as the author writes his experience, I would like to add mine: I basically did not grow up with parents. I had the choice to go into foster care based on the situation around me but chose not to report the domestic violence and abuse, and I have never regretted it. I, too, went to HYP for undergrad, then continued on to grad school and to become a prof.
We are all shaped by our experiences, but we are also all biased. Because I came out just fine, I am actually quite happy to not have biological family members. I don't feel like I am missing anything, and I am actually grateful for the non-interference. Undoubtedly, I am biased as a result of my experiences, but that is why I suspect the author is, too. The only thing I wish is that someone had taught me to brush my teeth and use soap. Sure, I know some people who had much more engaged parents, who got pushed to do X, Y and Z growing up, picking up valuable skills I will forever miss out on. But you never know what child will like A, B and C instead, and you can't do all the things.
It may sound like a hard thing to say a child should have some personal responsibility, too, but they should. I could make the informed choice at age 11 to stay with my abusers; I think that means I could also make other informed choices about whether to work hard.
3
Progressive, liberal actions taken by society as a whole create an environment for success for everybody. Then conservative, personally responsible actions taken by individuals make that success happen at an individual. Why is it so hard to understand that liberalism and conservatism act at two different levels, and both are needed in order for us to thrive?
7
You do not understand conservatism. It's not about "responsible actions" so much as it's about taking away every government agency or service that could help the less fortunate, including foster children. Liberalism and conservatism do not act at two different levels as they are opposing forces, some would say diametrically opposed.
6
You're right, that's what conservatism has become, or become labelled as. In general, incidentally, conservative policies applied at a macro level mostly cause harm. This writer, however, and to my understanding, is talking about conservatism practiced at an individual level, where it is actually a good thing.
I loved the clarity of language in this article, and totally get the philosophical conclusions arrived at by the author that a "conservative" upbringing lends to stability and the overall wellbeing of a child. That is, if conservative is defined as a two-parent home where love reigns. Any kid who has been bounced around from dysfunctional single parent homes may come to the same conclusion. Of course there will be exceptions, but overall the message rings true.
1
I am a Foster Father for two girls right now, and I hope I understand Rob. My wife and I eat dinner together each night with these two girls, I ask those inane questions about school and friends. I offer the unsolicited advice.
I know that with some luck my influence may make a dent, but may not sharply alter the course of their lives.
I am a conservative too, I believe that we all have to be responsible for our actions. I believe that families are fragile, frail things, that are nurtured into strength by commitment.
Commitment, sacrifice, WORK . Words we don't hear much anymore, and see them defined in peoples lives even less. Whether you label yourself or others with "conservative" or "liberal", Democrat or Republican is not crux of the issue. Whether you are able to commit to finding value and fullness outside your own wants and desires, whether you can commit to another person and in the process submit to sacrificing for someone else is the singular issue of our time, and one we all must individually choose to answer.
When we do make a choice to give ourselves up we find something better, each day I look at my wife, and these two school aged children and know that every day I will sacrifice for them. It is in that knowledge and faith that I find greater strength.
Thank you Mr. Henderson for your service, congratulations on a singular accomplishment in completing your course of study.
7
Commitment, sacrifice, and WORK are not attributes special to people who subscribe to one political party, generation, gender, or otherwise. We all do those things, everyday. “In my day” memes are tired and counterproductive.
8
I don't believe that one needs to be conservative to understand and value the importance of a two parent loving family. This is a liberal value as well. The difference between these two points of view are what to do when the family fails or falls apart. I believe that liberal points of view have more room to support people when things don't work out ideally. Mr. Henderson, you were fortunate to have at least one loving parent who asked you about your day and loved you even when things were rough. I would imagine that she and her partner and your re-constituted family had more acceptance in a more liberal environment. Despite your obvious setbacks in life, you were blessed with a good brain and a good amount of self-determination. Fortunately you found yourself in a "non-traditional" family that was able to support and celebrate you and your achievements. I hope in your future career you will be able to pass this message on to others. Thank you for your service and best wishes to you in the future!
6
I regularly tell my kids, the product of a 33 year relationship and a 24 year marriage, how lucky they are (never mind the fancy private college with no debt). Parents at every school and sporting event. Check. Help with homework. Check. Asking how the school day went. Check. After school sports, music lessons, SAT prep... check, check, check.
For a wonderful year I worked as a mentor at an inner city school with kids who didn't have the advantages of mine. They did awesome projects and when it came time to give end of year presentations, did parents show up? Out of 100 kids only 6 parents showed. Those kids are every bit as smart and talented and motivated as mine, even more so, but they will not enjoy the same success.
It starts with the parents.
I'm a political "liberal" only because the alternative, a so-called "conservative" is unacceptable today as both an American and as a moral human being.
24
Same here. I admire a lot of conservative ideals, including self sufficiency & the emphasis on family, but I can’t stomach the racism, sexism and xenophobia festering in the heart of the Republican Party today. Those cruelties are far worse than the flaws of extreme liberalism. So I vote moderate Democrat or Independent.
4
When you investigated where those parents were, what did you find? Were they working? Sick? Without transportation? Taking care of someone?
5
There is nothing in conservatism as it is practiced that would give Henderson what he values and he makes no effort to explain what he thinks it does to make families stronger and more supportive. Denying a single parent access to day care and employment and healthcare will not keep her (or rarely him) from being a single parent. What is "conservative" supposed to mean, here?
Instead, it seems like Henderson lacked stability and dependability from the people in his life and now clings to the myth that he can force people be good and reliable parents by authoritarian imposition. If only there had been a strong leader his parents could have been forced to care for him. Having never been able to live as a child he desperately tries to create a world with an all-powerful father figure in the state. It's sad but confused. Meanwhile, "liberal" states like Massachusetts have lower rates of delinquency, abortion, teen pregnancies, and crime than "conservative" states like Alabama, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia.
41
We also have lower divorce rates.
8
This may be a classic conservative view. But is not one that is represented in politics now. Indeed, I see more personal responsibility in my progressive friends than in "conservative" politicians such as Ryan, Trump or McConnell. These politicians have claimed conservatism, but use their power to ensure that their corporate sponsors have guaranteed dominance in their artfully constructed "free" markets. Meanwhile people like you & I, Rob, work all our lives, playing by the rules. But the fruits of our labor are subject to their theft. The market collapses? My 401k loses first. The hospital charges double their quote? Sorry, they are not accountable. Better pay up or collections will call. Class action suits for this type of complaint. Supremes say NO!! I respect real conservatism. I started out that way 50 years ago. But what politically calls itself conservatism now is a corrupt scam.
19
The definition of conservative put forth in this article seems to be "someone who does not think of themselves as a victim." To be fair the author probably thinks it to be something else, but I can't glean any other criteria for being a "conservative."
This isn't a political question; how does acknowledging oneself as a victim of something earlier in life preclude you from being "successful" later in life? Now to be political: American conservatives view themselves as victims all the time (God is out of the schools, Mueller is abusing power, the second amendment is under attack, reverse racism, class warfare, etc.)
Also citing the sad rates of college attendance of foster children, how is the answer "be conservative?" There aren't single parent republicans? Republicans don't overdose on drugs? Republicans don't leave their children to foster care?
28
Great article! Thank you for sharing.
I agree with "parents should prioritize their children over their careers." But, to me, the word "conservative" as a label for a person means a) likes authoritarian leaders b) is religious to the point that (s)he wants to impose his/her religion on others, in blatant violation of the first ten words of the First Amendment c) likes simple, convenient lies much better than the rule of law.
Basically, to me a "conservative" wants to undermine American values in favor of an imagined distant past. A "conservative" wants to make the United States more like Iran, in terms of mixing religion and law. A "conservative" wants to undermine all environmental regulations, and make poor people more poor, sick, and miserable.
"Conservative" is a very bad label to use.
15
Is the writer aware that the homophobia his adoptive parents suffered from has been spread throughout this country largely by conservative politicians and conservative religious groups? He seems like a very smart young man and I wish him well with his future. But when he calls himself a conservative, I have to wonder if he has read up on what conservatives have done to LGBTQ people in America...
18
i understand that this person's life was broken, but that is no reason to oppose programs that help adults and children to eat, read, write, and live indoors, with healthcare.
the folly of the conservatives is that they believe that name calling and hate will make children fed and educated.
33
I think this is a telling piece. his POV isn't inherently conservative, but in the present liberal culture of identity politics based in a celebration of victimhood, my guess is he feels he has no choice but to label himself "conservative" since he refuses to identify as a victim. good for him that he was/is motivated to overcome his background, too bad for the rest of us. the more we want to be victims the less we will get anything done - the circle becomes vicious. and the real conservatives win.
11
I come from a liberal messy family where my dad gambled and my mom worked hard. I spent 14 years going to school at night and supporting myself - that’s not conservatism - it is fear and a need for stability and the willingness to do anything to obtain it. Today i am married, with two kids in a two job household that eats dinner together every night. My children can be anything they want to be but if they tell me they are republicans then all I have worked for will be lost
You are not a conservative - you are a survivor.
21
Congratulations! You have demonstrated great resilience and certainly a strong sense of determination.
But please don't extrapolate too broadly from your own experience. Gender based Income disparity means women earn less, and since single parents are overwhelmingly female, of course they have fewer resources. If 50% of single parents were dads you might see something different.
Or not! But Surely Yale taught you not to conflate correlation with causation.
10
While I applaud your great achievements given the challenges you had to overcome, I am not sure I see the point of the article in connecting your success to being conservative. By many accounts (by no means all), so-called liberal states are better at building families than red ones.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/upshot/red-vs-blue-america-on-marriag...
11
Thank you for your service, Mr. Henderson. Congratulations on your graduation.
5
This description is priceless.
“We had dinner together every weeknight. We talked about minutiae. They would ask me, “How was school today?” And I would respond with the usual “It was fine.” They gave me unsolicited advice. I was sarcastic in response. And we loved one another.”
6
Happy trails, my friend. Looks like you can count strong agency and perseverance among your biological gifts.
What escapes me entirely, though, is why you would think that acknowledging the good that comes from caring & intact families needs to be labeled conservative.
15
I’ve read that liberals and conservatives have different brain structures. Conservatives tend to have a larger amygdala, the part of the brain responsible for fear. That’s likely why the author is conservative.
Even being raised by two loving liberal parents can’t overcome biology. I know a young woman whose conservatism has confounded her parents for years.
1
The difference between a conservative and a liberal:
Liberals look at system failures, conservatives concentrate on individual failures. This is a good case in point.
It's going to be a long road to separate the failures of what you see as liberal behavior and feelings of abandonment, I assure you, they are not connected.
4
Mr. Henderson has every right to be proud of himself and his many achievements. Sadly, this essay does not rank amongst them. He creates a vague straw man of liberalism (“my Yale classmates who called me a victim and are uncomfortable when I say things they disagree with”), then presents his own white-washed version of conservatism (“I believe two parent families are better than one”). He conveniently ignores the toxicity of hatred, xenophobia, and denial of reality we see on Fox News everyday. And he also ignores the liberals who fought for gay couples (like his mom and her partner) to be allowed to adopt and raise and love foster kids like him.
Listen, everyone on earth with any character or common sense knows to prioritize kids over career and that two parents can do more than one. It’s obvious to everyone. That’s not conservative thinking. Conservative thinking, rather, is biting the hands that’s trying to help you simply because it’s liberal. So yes, Mr. Henderson, congratulations... a conservative you most certainly are.
19
Interesting. I know three ex-servicemen who were in foster care. They are all conservative politically. All have been divorced, one several times. But only one has children. He pretty much would have given his right arm not to have been out of his children's lives. But he drank too much and scared them, so he left. Now his kids are adults and they have a relationship again. I'm pretty sure he'd say that it was his responsibility to stop drinking and start parenting again. It's one of the biggest regrets of his life. But I think he'd also say that asking individuals to take responsibility for themselves isn't a conservative ideology. It's a moral absolute. Don't mistake liberal's compassion for other people's suffering as a get out of jail free card. It's not.
13
" when I say parents should prioritize their children over their careers, there is a sense of unease among my peers."
I bet your female peers are particularly uneasy, because they know they alone will be expected to prioritize. How many conservative men are staying home with the kids or making it easier for their wives to have a career?
34
First, congrats on overcoming a difficult background.
But coming from a two parent home means nothing. I had a crazy mother and an angry abusive father. I am estranged from both for my own mental health. They did not provide emotional or financial support.
I'd take one healthy parent over two bad ones.
Also, it's liberals, not conservatives who want to fund services to better serve people with addiction issues, better serve foster kids. etc. So I find your views interesting.
19
This article is a sad indictment of the role of modern media in American culture, and how people in certain areas and professions are subject to a nonstop flow of lies and warped ideas that shift their worldview away from reality.
It presents a series of cliched conservative talking points, but provides no evidence that any of them are true. Did liberal politics cause the author's mother to become addicted to drugs? Did liberal politics cause his father figures to leave him? I too grew up conservative and I remember learning all these "truths" about liberals - then I left, and quickly discovered that those truths were mostly lies. Not only lies, they were beside the point - "family values" aren't liberal or conservative at all. Most liberals live a very "conservative" family-centric lifestyle. I know; I'm one of them. And taking responsibility for your own actions? Again, most liberals are responsible, hard-working people. I, a liberal, found a stable relationship and married to provide even more stability before having a baby. Just the sort of responsibility that conservatives claim to love. Which areas of the country have the highest rates of unwed motherhood? Is it the conservative ones, or the liberal ones?
So ask yourself: who talks the talk, and who walks the walk? Whose policies have provided stability and helped families, and whose have caused harm?
48
Made it through Yale and never learned causation-correlation or confounding variable? Ever considered that what makes make bad parents are irresponsibility and inability to form stable relationships, either with their kids or their partners? This could have been the cause of both broken relationships and bad parenting. You say that if you had thought of yourself as a victim, you'd never have "made it". Ever consider that telling single-parents that they are doomed to fail are setting them up for failure? Like the society doesn't stigmatize them enough as it is?
7
What conservatives mostly believe (although a generalization) is what Mr. Henderson said in the article - "the people who came before us weren't stupid." I would argue pretty strongly that the "tune in, turn on, drop out" generation of the 60's believed the opposite. They wanted to throw out all the rules that humans had learned through thousands of years of experience. Their ideas have led to the implementation of policies and the acceptance of cultural norms opposed to traditional marriage and traditional family - one of those being no-fault divorce, another being "non-judgmental" attitudes about having children out of wedlock, promiscuity, pre-marital sex, and so on. It doesn't take a genius to notice the upward trajectory in divorce rates in the USA and the implementation and acceptance of "liberal" ideals. The sad thing is that these norms have been fulfilled mostly in the lower classes with devastating effects. Wealthy liberals, like the readers of the NY Times, still, for the most part, raise children in traditional 2-parent marriages while giving lip-service to the "do what makes you feel good" non-judgmental mentality of the 60s.
33
"Upward trajectory in divorce rates" - according to the BGSU web site, divorce rates in the US have been trending downwards for some years.
Always good to argue from the facts.
13
Self identified evangelicals have a higher than average divorce rate and most evangelicals will also identify as conservative. Unemployment, low wages, lack of health care all have a high negative impact on marriages and families. Economic and educational status and age are big factors (but not the only factors).
LOW divorce rate: People with 4-year college degrees, married over age 25, and income over $50k.
HIGH divorce rate: People without college educations, married under age 18, lower income, especially below $25k/yr. As the other comments said it's good to argue from the facts
15
Jared,
You decry liberals for “opposing traditional marriage.” “Traditional marriage” is code for husband and wife. I assume you didn’t read the essay. Otherwise, you wouldn’t agree with a man who attributes his success to unmarried lesbian parents (unmarried likely because it wasn’t even possible at the time). Please clarify:
8
Mr. Henderson, You have clearly had a difficult childhood to say the least. I am concerned about your assumptions about Liberal and Conservative values and behaviors, however. You do not have evidence-based data to support your conclusions....just a very intimate knowledge from one boy/man's experiences. Drawing conclusions requires massive datasets. I am a Liberal and am adamant about being a responsible human being and a contributor to the betterment of society. I believe children come before their parents needs, but I definitely do not believe in staying in a marriage when they are abusive or bitter. That teaches children marriage is horrible and women (generally the victims) are allowed to be abused. Countless children of divorced families live happy and healthy lives. It depends on the individuals and not their political leaning. Data does support the fact that Liberals tend to be far more considerate of others in society and make more personal sacrifices to see the needs of the many are helped (they outweigh the needs of the few). Were it not for Socialist/Liberal morals and attitudes, there would be no Social Security, paid sick leave, maternity/paternity leave, paid vacation, state subsidized health insurance and child care for foster kids and others in need, etc. Conservatives are focused on personal rights, personal financial gain, and assisting others generally only when they are willing to convert to Christianity. This is what data supports.
6
I am frankly sick of the canard that liberals are against 2 parent families. What liberals believe, generally (we believe a lot of things), is that all families should be given the opportunity to succeed. We cannot dictate to others how their families will be organized, nor can we prevent things that might happen (death of a parent, etc.) that change the structure of a family.
It's interesting to observe the number of divorces among Republican leaders as compared to Democrats. The Clintons certainly had their issues, but they stuck together. The Obamas were a family we might all dream about. Reagan was a divorcee, and Trump is on his third wife. Don't even get me started on Newt Gingrich.
I suspect 2 parent families are best, but none of us, including our learned author, is in a position to truly know. All each of us knows is what we've experienced.
Republican legislation and programs have taken every opportunity to destroy families by taking away health care, supporting employment practices that put strains of families, and undermining education and opportunities for young people.
I have no time for lies about liberals being against traditional family values (unless those values are sexism and homophobia).
19
Two is not a magic number, parent-wise. If the parents are both mentally-emotionally healthy and loving, terrific. That isn't always how things work out, though. If that's the case, one is a great number if you can get it. I suspect a lot of children subjected to abuse in a "traditional" two-parent family would agree.
6
Mr. Henderson, like other commenters, I didn't see how you connected being raised in a two-parent family makes one conservative or that conservatives are the only ones who value family and children. My parents were both socially liberal and fiscally conservative, and were diehard Democrats. I am a single mother who raised her daughter with the help of family and in turn, have tried to be there for not only my daughter, but for my nieces and nephews. Family values are developed as you grow and are somewhat based upon how you are raised. It has nothing to do with being either liberal or conservative.
And today's conservatives as a whole do not seem to be strong proponents of family values. How many of them have been outed recently in the #MeToo movement, or have tried to convince a mistress or girlfriend to seek an abortion while they preen themselves on being anti-choice? And when they elect a man to the presidency that is on his third marriage, hooked up with the next wife while still married to the prior, and had multiple affairs and give him mulligans when some new revelation is made, that just says "sleezeball" and not conservative to me.
Congratulations on having made something of your own life, but I feel it has been successful because of WHO you are, and not WHAT you are. You decided to make something of your life, not depending on others to give value to your life. And it's not because you're conservative or liberal.
12
What you fail to include in your calculations is the geographic area you were raised in.
2
As a liberal and someone who has a ten-year-old adopted from foster care I am appreciative of what you've written. I don't want my daughter to grow up feeling like a victim, even though bad things have happened to her and I need to be careful about how I frame her history. I think that liberals seeing everyone as a victim and not wanting adults to take personal responsibility is a stereotype, but I get what you mean and I respect what you've said.
6
"... it is not really up for debate that the two-parent home is, on average, better for children." And the sun is yellow, the sky is blue and the grass is green. Of course it is best to have a two parent, intact and non-abusive family. The question is what do you do when that is not what has happened. How do you help the kids who fall through the cracks if the two parent household devoted to their kids is not happening. The author is to be congratulated on his overcoming his life circumstances to get to his current place but his assumption that the desirability of a two-parent household is a "conservative" idea is more than a little misplaced.
16
Beautiful article, thank you for sharing !
But why conservatism correlates with stable households ?
7
Anyone who isn't applauding Mr. Henderson and how he has become what he is today has issues I don't even want to discuss.
Thank you for your service, Mr. Henderson, and congratulations. This nation needs more folks like you.
3
I read this, and huh? What's the point? That it's best to be in a loving supportive two parent household? Well of course -if it IS actually a loving supportive home. Sometimes two parents together make a hellish life for children, depending on the parent. And some single parents raise incredible kids. But, yes, it is often easier to have financial support and logistic and emotional help. How does that make one a conservative? Also, this writer was adopted. How about all the many foster kids who age out of foster car or need support -- How are "conservatives" helping them? Or how are they helping poor families and single mothers so that their kids can get the best shot?
15
As a progressive developmental psychologist specializing in parenting I would suggest that’s not conservatism. But it is true.
10
Whatever you take from the author's essay, his idea of being conservative has nothing to do with the current characteristics of the Republican Party, the "conservative" party: anti-education, anti-science, anti-choice, and a deep misunderstanding of the progressive mindset. Yes, vulnerable individuals have responsibilities, but to succeed they also need opportunities, and safeguards against abuse. They do not need "welfare". They need investment, which is something liberal Democrats have attempted to provide through government channels.
10
I’m as liberal as they come but when I unexpectedly got pregnant nearly 8 years ago, I radically changed my life and career to accommodate the new child in my life. My staunchly conservative parents chastised me for having a child out of wedlock, not recognizing the fact that I wasn’t getting married because the father didn’t ask. He and I now live together, raising our daughter together, despite the fact that we are not married - because we both value the role of a two-parent household for the benefit of our child. So maybe I’m conservative just like you after all? Somehow I don’t think you’d necessarily agree.
13
Perhaps your road would have been easier if there was more governmental support for your mother rather than less. Access to both Mental health care and drug rehabilitation could have helped your birth mother cope. Conservatives imagine that these services are available to all but the reality is that they aren't especially to the poor. Conservatives have made sure of that.
28
Hmmm.... I agree with the author in one sense; I doubt it is Yale's fault for the obvious deficit in critical thinking skills. The of stating a premise, and marshaling evidence to reach a conclusion is absent here. This is the fault of the individual.
The author apparently believes being a victim and being successful are mutually exclusive. They are obviously not.
Second, the author believes that somehow agreeing that there is an advantage in a two parent household is a conservative principle. Says who?
Does it even occur to the author that making sure there are enough jobs with a living wage helps insure a two parent household?
How much do today's conservatives care about that?
18
There are many voices - some here - who champion single parent households by pointing out special cases. The author was ultimately raised by a gay couple; many liberal voices defend the right of gay couples to raise families as if those families are some special case of single parent families. This is a nuanced essay, but the author still doesn't see the modern conservative approach to family, religion and control as part of his "conservative" world view. Progressives should be advocating for help for single parent families, but not asserting that they are just as good as two parent families, which they sometimes do.
Nice column.
But nowadays, judging by our public debates, I can’t see where either liberals or conservatives stand for and exemplify a deep and abiding respect for the need to take accumulated wisdom seriously while holding to the idea that both individual rights and individual responsibilities are paramount.
We’ve maneuvered ourselves to where “liberal” and “conservative” are now broad ill-defined terms that somehow have great power to define and divide us.
One might as well say that we livatives are good because we do and think these moral, practical and becoming things while those conerals are bad because they do and think these immoral, impractical and unbecoming things.
Perhaps, as an occasional experiment, we could junk the terms and discuss various ideas without regard to whether they’re liberal or conservative.
Many people are eager to have such a discussion on mass incarceration. Some people would like to have that conversation on climate change. We could discuss a progressive income tax, or the wisdom and costs of a regulation, specifically and on the merits.
3
Last I checked, statistics show that red states have higher rates of divorce, teenage pregnancy, and childbirth outside of marriage. Just saying...
45
Everyone agrees that stable families are desirable. Liberals, by the way, actually tend to have them, at a higher rate than conservatives, anyway. But the real question I think you should ask yourself is: which would have been better for you as you grew up--hard-core republican policies, or hard-core democratic ones? If you think the answer is the former, I think you need to put those analytical skills to work and think a little harder about how government policies affect people.
33
He has a strange definition of conservative. I share his values and I’m a liberal.
Without government help (social services) where would he have ended up?
47
First, thanks for your service and congratulations on your degree. And I agree with you that two-parent families offer more resources for child rearing. I also agree with you that individual agency is important. And I'm so sorry that adults abandoned you--that has to hurt horribly.
But I think you're making a critical mistake. As you point out, you beat the odds, and you beat them because you had caring adults in your life. The technical social science term for this is resilience, typically applied to kids who, like yourself, beat the odds and grow up to be happy, healthy adults. All that liberals are saying is that we should do some things to even the odds. For instance, you talk about the importance of two-parent families, and you're right. But one of the reasons that a lot of women raise children without fathers is that large numbers of men, particularly men of color, are in prison or cannot find employment subsequent to release. Moreover, fewer men than women graduate from high school and fewer matriculate to college. Perhaps we could increase the number of two-parent families by addressing these social and economic issues.
22
Yes, he was likely helped by some caring adults, which he recognizes in the piece, but read the story, please: This fella made it almost entirely on his own. Somewhere inside of him is something that couldn't be kept down. There were plenty of ready-made excuses, but he didn't let those get in his way. That's his definition of conservatism, it seems to me, and it is hard to argue with the basic premise, which is, at some point, you become responsible for yourself, and nobody cares more about you than you.
This is an uncomfortable truth to those who argue for and make apologies for the welfare state and myriad other liberal policies. But it is a truth nonetheless, and we should honor Mr. Henderson for reminding us of this instead of attacking him. He clearly has a bright future ahead.
1
There is nothing dissonant between adhering to a sense of personal "gumption" and responsibility and supporting a more expansive social safety net at a broader level. There are many examples of political liberals who arose in difficult upbringings and "made" something of themselves in later years, yet support liberal, not conservative politics, as a result. There was nothing to suggest in the author's essay that such "liberal" social programs like public school prevented him from making something of himself (may I also point out, he enlisted in probably the largest public jobs program known as the military, which also carries with it benefits for home ownership, college tuition, etc). There was also nothing to suggest that any liberal program or policy caused the dysfunction in the families of his earlier years, or any implication that a more broadly applied conservative agenda would have resulted in a different outcome. In fact, since the author is around 30 years of age, that does mean he came of age in the post-Reagan era which has featured the biggest reductions and drawbacks in traditional welfare and cash assistance programs, so it's unclear what point is really being made: were his family circumstances improved or hindered as the broader economic direction and public sector has been moving in a more "conservative" direction for the past 40 years?
I think that the experience you had deserves better than to be politicized so. I have a different political stance than you, but, like you, had a similar moment early in my life that changed the course of my life: that moment when I realized that I more than anyone or anything was responsible for what I would become and that if I really wanted it and worked for it, I could achieve it. I was 13. That epiphany is beyond politics. It's just human survival. Take care brother.
13
I am an almost retired university professor. When I was 8 my father had a stroke and my mother took off. My 13-yr old sister took care of my younger sister and me until we were "rescued" by a distant relative.
I had a great deal of trouble with high school and barely made it to university, where, incidentally I nearly flunked out. But I taught myself how to study and apply myself, then went on to grad school and ultimately a long and wonderful couple of faculty jobs.
I attribute my success to good friends, great mentors, a caring foster family, but also to my own pugnaciousness. I was always the smallest guy on all sports teams I played on and had only one good eye. But my own genetic makeup contributed to my fight and desire to succeed once I found out what that could mean.
Politically, I am an unrepentant liberal, and I don't understand how anyone coming out of similar circumstances could be anything else. We experienced first hand what help can accomplish and so I would assume we would want that extended to others coming after us.
The biggest failure of so-called conservatives and the bone-headed Republicans is their loss of empathy. You, Mr. Henderson, of all people, should have tremendous empathy for people in similarly dire circumstances.
59
The most critical part of this opinion piece is the definition Mr. Henderson provides for conservatism. He isn't referring to talking points or a party's platform, but rather the idea that people from previous eras did things the way they did for reasons we should more carefully examine before dismissing those time-tested ways.
24
Unfortunately, in America, the political and personal definitions of "liberal" and "conservative" are often intertwined and conflated. He made a point to differentiate himself from the "liberals" on Yale campus, which I took to mean the standard college political liberal. While he didn't state he was a political conservative, ID'ing as a blanket "conservative" sort of implies that he is.. and that seemingly only political conservatives are capable of upholding family values and personal virtues, which is a long standing belief on the Right. Additionally, the author makes the same sort of connotations that because liberals liberals support a more expansive safety net that supports single parent families (as well as 2 parent families that are low income..) and other policies that increase state subsidization of families of children that liberals somehow only "believe" in single parenthood as an ideal. Far from it. Liberals simply acknowledge that social and economic conditions can create single parent families and that pragmatically it is best to try to ensure for the social and economic stability of such households, YMMV with various policies of course. But that is not a "preference" for such, or a wish that traditional family structures disappear. It's simply a means to try to equalize resources and opportunities outside of familial circumstances. Conservatives may disagree with the policies, but they don't get to own "family values" as they have gotten away with for years.
6
Great essay. I guess I'm a conservative too, although in the bizarre & self-serving political spectrum that our politicians & media sell us, I am too left-wing to fit onto the charts. The question our debates don't allow us to ask is this: what are the policies that give us splintered families, atomised communities & disrupted lives? From your point of view I'm guessing that it's unmoored individualism. From my point of view it's right wing economic policy, which views jobs, lives, & communities as abstractions to serve as the pleasure of corporate & financial interests--that in fact gives us unmoored individualism in the first place. The "liberals" who try to compensate for the effects of these disruptions generally did not, until very recently, accept the disruptions without a fight, or content themselves with affirming the dignity of the victims.
Workers having more control about how their jobs are run, more job security, and political power equal to their employers: these things would do more to stabilize families & communities than a hundred lectures from millionaire Republicans in Congress. Think about it.
18