We've created a society, a system far too complex for such simple attributions. You're only fooling yourself if you blame any one of those parties.
A whole system analysis and solution is the only way to make meaningful progress.
Something less drastic?
How about this..
Look at this thread. You’ll read all kinds of excuses for and blame of the mother.
Yet nobody mentioned the father.
A father — under our system — faces no penalty for neglecting a child. None. In a custody order where the mother has primary, the father has NO OBLIgATION to see the kid.
This is so engrained in our culture that, like I said, the thread doesn’t even mention a father...
In this case, it's quite possible the father is in prison.
In my line of work, I know of men who have upwards of a dozen children from just as many women. There is nothing in the law that deters this activity. Nothing. There used to be. And, when there was, it didn't happen.
Penises and Vaginas, orgasms and lust, haven't changed one iota in the past 10,000 years. I have little patience for those who wring their hands, fretting about how to stop this insanity. We know exactly how to stop it. You can open any legal code older than 100 years and see exactly how it is stopped.
The fact is, this society has made the deliberate and intentional decision to eradicate any responsibility on the part of men, leaving women absolutely fucked (and the daughters of these women even more screwed.) Ironcially, it was all done in the name of feminism.
https://www.educationnext.org/international-look-single-pare...
In any case, nobody ever linked ‘adultery laws’ with school.
There are many ways to incentivize nuclear families and discourage illegitimacy.
And, many ways to do the opposite.
In US, for whatever bizarre reason, society had been trained to recoil at the idea of a nuclear family. Indeed, some readers will reflexively gag at my use of the term ‘illegitimate.’
It’s strange.
Occasionally you get these stories where people are ‘shocked’ that a kid in Baltimore didn’t go to school! Yet, the fact that he has no father is just ho-hum. Missing the forest for the trees.
* The law treated illegitimate children as illegitimate. It was harsh to be born out of wedlock. (https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/inheritance-rights-for-leg...). No child support. No inheritance. Etc.
* Until recently, there was no no-fault divorce. You couldn't up-and-leave a marriage without good cause. If your husband was beating you or your wife committed adultery, that was a valid reason. If you got bored, existential ennui, or married for child support in the first place, you were SOL unless the other party agreed. People were expected to make it work.
* All sorts of fraud laws around sex and sexual behavior. If we had sex because I promised to marry you, I was expected to marry you. Marriage was viewed as a legal agreement.
... and so on.
Most of it had problems, but there were some good ideas in there too. Adapting those to a 21st century framework of equal rights would be challenge, both intellectually and politically. There was a history of perverse, unintended consequences, intertwined changes, etc. and a discussion like this would be a political hot potato.
Divorce is also a massive industry and political lobby. It intertwines itself with social justice and feminism, so it's hard to tease out, but a lot of work is actively done to break up families, since lawyers, guardians ad litem, etc. profit. A lot of that hits low-income families, despite low-income divorce happening without bringing this industry in.
You either are or not. My bet would be that the parent is fully aware, but ashamed and in denial about the situation.
A busy mother is still a mother. Should know when their son is lying. She could be tricked for a month, for one year maybe, but when 4 entire years passed and she claims that didn't suspected anything... either she barely talks in the dinner with the boy about his day or she carefully circumnavigated the theme and don't really wanted to know the details of his education.
And some parents just don't like the school system. I know a case of a divorced mother that deliberately boycotted the education of her daughter repeatedly asking her to be at home so she didn't feel alone. The outraged school wanted to do a point and the truant girl had to repeated several years, with the same outcome and less effort put on it each year. Everybody, was relieved when she eventually reached the legal age, was dumped from the school, show the middle finger to everybody and keep with their former life (Partied hard, socialized a lot, found a partner and married). We could say that she is doing fine, in fact.
This is a lie you tell yourself to be able to continue to look down on people.
In the real world, people are affected by their circumstances, regardless of whether they have the ability to change them.
Not, this is a dichotomy covering all the possible outcomes, thus can't be a lie, by definition.
Some people are good parents, other are terrible at parenthood. Where is the lie in my statement? There are millions of examples.
If your son failed the school for four years, failed in ALL classes, didn't learn anything in your face, and you are clueless about that, don't blame other people. You have a responsibility in this train crash. You must calm down, do damage control and exercise more the communication part in your parenthood. You can be busy and tired, but this is no excuse for not showing the slighest interest for your boy's life, future plans, interests, or education. Not at this level.
Being a good parent is more than being just a food providing machine.
Parents have to care for a child to do well (or even mediocre) in school. A child isn't going to choose to do difficult homework in lieu of video games if left up to their own choices.
If we examined the parent's school grades, we'd probably find a similarity, unfortunately. Same with the parent's parents. All this ultimately leads to working 3+ low-skill/low-education jobs just to keep a roof over your head. Every statistic about high school graduation rates firmly says so.
... you even assume that the family has internet at home...
- The mom holding an iPhone 12
- Her son playing video games on a large TV then pulling a smartphone out of his pocket.
I think it's reasonable to assume they have internet access, at the very least through their phones.
It's fine to challenge someone's assumptions, but it kind of feels like you're trying to pull a "gotcha" that doesn't apply in this case.
In Florida, my mom taught students whose homes *didn't even have floors*.
BUT that's a very challenging process, and we should still have compassion for people who haven't managed to pull it off yet.
(I have no input on the specifics of this situation though, just trying to provide some context)