From my cultural experiences as an American and the readings for this tutorial, it is clear that there are many cultural differences between China and America. As more Western ideals gain global traction with the increase of globalization, some traditional Chinese ideals have withstood the test of time. Filial piety is one of these ideals. Filial piety, a duty to care for and listen to one’s parents in their old age as repayment for all they’ve done for you, stands in contrast to the more individualistic Western ideals that seep into family care. The complex mesh of cultures in America prevents me from coming to one universal ideal about parental care but the emphasis on parental care is not as seriously stressed in a more individualistic society. On a spectrum of China’s collectivist attitude to America’s individualistic attitude towards parental care, my parent’s attitude is closer to the collectivist ideal. I’d argue that that’s because of my grandparent’s immigrant values and that this is likely the case for many families that immigrated to America. This essay examines the differences between Chinese ideals, American ideals, and my mom’s ideals which are a mix of American values and her immigrant parent’s values.
Filial piety has served as a pillar in society and the Chinese family structure since its introduction via Confucianism. Simply put, filial piety is an obligation to care for one’s parents after all they’ve done for you but it’s much more complicated than this. Confucianism is centered around the family, loyalty, harmony, and self-discipline. Confucianism and ideals like filial piety provide a structure and a model for harmonious relationships within a family. The relationship between child and parent is one of the Five Cardinal Relationships of Confucianism and filial piety is necessary to maintain this stable relationship. Without filial piety and a harmonious relationship between child and parent, Confucianism assumes that the stability and order of society would crumble. Filial piety is required by society and not solely the morally right thing to do. Filial piety is also not contingent on parents successfully caring for their child. Through some stories read to the youth like The Twenty-Four Paragons of Filial Piety, even if a parent mistreated their child or wasn’t able to provide the necessary resources for them, the child respected and cared for the needs of the parent first. Because this relationship was so important to Confucian society, the collective interest and the societal pressure to maintain this relationship came before the individual interest of the child. While I focus on the emphasis in filial piety for the child to care for the parent, it is important to recognize the obligation for the parent to care for the child. Filial piety also manifests itself in various other ways that I won’t focus on but are still important to address like the exchange of food or the burial services for family members. I will be using the general context I provided above to examine Spring Grass’ relationship with her parents and my mom’s relationship with hers.
Spring Grass’ sense of filial piety is complicated but she does still feel an obligation to care for her mother. The reader witnesses Spring Grass’ tough upbringing and her original dislike for her mother but we also hear her inner thoughts and how often her mother and father wander into her mind. Spring Grass’ decision to pay for her mother’s surgery shows the role that filial piety likely played in her making that choice. Spring Grass states even before finally deciding to pay for the surgery in full that if her mother had just asked she would pay for the surgery. Rivers Ho or their financial situations are concerns but her obligation to her mother is more important than her obligation to her husband and money. This becomes even more important when taking into account how much of Spring Grass’ motivation throughout the book is to make money. No matter how complicated her relationship with her mother, her duty as a daughter surpasses her personal desires to make and keep money. This choice also puts her and Rivers Ho in a more difficult situation when considering how they will pay for their children’s education. This further illustrates how significant Spring Grass’ sense of filial piety as a daughter is because she’s willing to risk more work and harder times trying to finance her children’s education. Spring Grass’ duty to take care of her parents, particularly her mother, surpasses all her other responsibilities as a wife, mother, individual, and worker. This is also surprising because typically in Confucian society, the sons and not the daughters would be expected to help the parents financially. While I think Spring Grass’ filial piety played a large role in her decision to financially help her mother, I also believe her moral character among other factors contributed to this decision. Spring Grass’ family staying as a whole unit at any cost is the most important thing for her and this conflicts with the Western ideals for parental care.
While in the media and in the culture, family structure and harmony are very important in America it is not as culturally significant as it is in Chinese culture expressed in the book. I can not think of an American ideal that comes as close to the importance and significance of filial piety. In America, as in most places globally, parental care is the morally right thing to do but it is not a requirement like filial piety. It is important to take care of the elderly and one’s parents but having your parents cared for by a caretaker or in a nursing home is just as fine as caring for them yourself. A less hands-on approach is normalized which makes sense because American culture is not centered around the family but the individual. Individual work schedules and responsibilities complicate the amount of time left to spend with family and the prioritization of that family time. This stands in contrast to a more collectivist culture like China that still encourages individual success and working hard but also prioritizes family and the collective first. While the Chinese attitude towards societal balance places the collective first, the American attitude places the individual first. Parental care is usually done out of love or moral obligation but in America there is a certain transactional element. If parents mistreat their children, the child has no obligation to care for them in their old age or keep in contact with them once they’re an adult. A certain quality of care for the child is necessary for the parents to eventually reap the benefits of that quality care in their old age. Some of these values have affected the way my mom views parental care but my grandparent’s immigrant cultural beliefs and more collectivist values have more strongly impacted my mom.
My mom’s parents both immigrated from Jamaica when they were teenagers or young adults and thus raised her with Jamaican ideals when caring for your family. Jamaican ideals for familial care seem closer to Chinese collectivism than the more lax American ideal. Jamaica, and many Caribbean countries, tend to be more collectivist. This makes sense given the great deal of history and struggle that has happened on these islands. Jamaica gained independence from Britain in 1962. After all the tragedy pre-emancipation and the upward climb to reshape their society and become economically competitive post-emancipation, collectivism was necessary to ensure the survival and the growth of the nation. They did not have the resources to afford to put the individual first as many Western countries did around that same time. This is similar in many countries that also have high immigration rates to more Western countries: “Collectivist cultures are associated with less wealth and thus with higher rates of emigration. As a result, most immigrant families are more collectivist than the societies to which they are immigrating” (Hynie). This collectivist culture seeps into the Jamaican views on parental care.
Not only are Jamaican children obligated by a sense of responsibility to care for their parents, it’s the law. Under Section 10 of the Maintenance Act, it reads: “Every person who is not a minor has an obligation, to the extent that the person is capable of doing so, to maintain the person’s parents and grandparents who are in need of such maintenance by reason of age, physical or mental infirmity or disability” (Jamaica, 2005, 9). While both of my grandparents are relatively young, in their early 60s, and still care for themselves, she still does play an active role in their lives. They text and call frequently, my grandma visits our apartment monthly and exchanges meals and groceries with my mom, and my grandpa drove me to my boarding school every break for my four years in high school. This close, intergenerational interaction will likely result in my mom and her sister taking up a lot of the responsibility of caring for her parents once they can no longer care for themselves. During my childhood, my great grandfather who was also from Jamaica lived with us until his death. We had a caretaker there while my mom was at work and my sister and I were at school but as soon as we returned, we cared for him. Sending him to a nursing home was never considered an option. He spent his last days in a hospital only because of the severity of his health issues or else we would have cared for him at home. My mom’s cultural ideas about caring for one’s parents reflect a sense of duty to be directly involved in caring for older family members and keeping them close is a must.
China’s collectivist culture makes caring for one’s parents a requirement for societal harmony no matter how they may have treated you growing up. This is exemplified through Spring Grass’ complicated relationship with her mother in her youth but her instant willingness to help her mother when needed. America’s individualistic culture treats parental care as the morally right thing to do but it is partially dependent on how they raised you. My mom has shown an obligation to care for her parents in their old age as hands-on as she can and I expect that I will do the same. Given how diverse America is, individual familial cultures and the country from which your family immigrated have a stronger impact on parental care than general Western ideals. The more individualistic the culture, the more lax the attitudes towards parental care. The more collectivist the culture, the more parental care becomes a requirement and the larger the societal significance of parental care becomes. Cultural attitudes towards parental care are shaped by the intersections between many factors as their society takes shape. While the circumstances were different in America, China, and Jamaica, America is in an interesting position given how large the immigrant population is. The more collectivist values of immigrant cultures clash with the more individualistic values of American culture. While this culture clash has been ongoing for years, as globalization and capitalism gain more traction, this clash becomes more significant and it complicates how I and many kids of my generation may view parental care in the future.
Citations:
- Jamaica, Ministry of Justice, 2005, The Maintenance Act. Ministry of Justice. https://moj.gov.jm/sites/default/files/laws/Maintenance%20Act.pdf
- Hynie, Michaela. “5.0. FROM CONFLICT TO COMPROMISE: IMMIGRANT FAMILIES AND THE PROCESSES OF ACCULTURATION.” McGill University. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/10977692.pdf
- Teon, Aris. (2016, March 14). “Filial Piety (孝) in Chinese Culture”, The Greater China Journal. https://china-journal.org/2016/03/14/filial-piety-in-chinese-culture/