Throughout history most ages have believed they face an unprecedented crisis in the way youngsters behave. To misquote Socrates, “Children now expect everything immediately. They have bad manners and contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love Facebook chatter in place of exercise.” Plutarch went further: “The iniquities of early manhood are often monstrous and wicked — unlimited gluttony, theft of parents’ money, gambling, revels, drinking-bouts and love affairs with young girls. The impulses of young men should therefore be kept fettered and restrained by careful supervision.” Plus ça change…

Your recent report and interview have opened the door to discussion, although whether there will be more than wringing of hands remains to be seen. However, perhaps we should revisit some of the ideas floating around as every age binds itself with well-intentioned concepts of doubtful merit. Incidentally, in my young day schools were run by stern schoolmasters, happy to use the rod if a boy misbehaved. We found it jolly effective. Nowadays anyone going near a child is assumed to have dubious intentions. Even touching an injured child to offer comfort is considered a physical assault. Any case of abuse leads to outcries for new laws, leading to populist and ill-considered measures. Is a blanket need for parental education really the solution to the odd incident?

A child needs role models. How can they become decent citizens if unprincipled leaders, functionaries and teachers abound in society? While parents are the first who should be blamed, it’s not counselling but penalties that might change attitudes. Let parents be punished if their offending offspring end up in court. Another way to encourage parental responsibility – and to avoid teenage pregnancies – would be to strictly enforce financial child support and the inscription of the father’s name on the birth certificate. For the more dalliant and absent-minded young ladies, you could provide notebooks to record their coquetries. In the case of impoverished males, Mr Duterte could be asked to administer castration. Mind you, he and his religiously-challenged supporters, who often understand natural phenomena as divine retribution, might take note of Typhoon Haima.

In ancient times, there was little distinction made between what was expected of children and adults. Certainly by the age of 14, boys were considered young men; nowadays the very use of the word ‘child’ elicits confusion. Because of forced marriages, the UN and others would ban under-18s from marrying and some ban them from any form of sexual relationship. What are young men meant to do? The answer would be obvious to Ancient Greeks but we’d better not go into that. We considered teenagers quite capable of making decisions. There are few forced early marriages here and the law is already insane enough. If two 13-year-old youngsters go a tad too far, each of them is guilty of rape. How can the age of marriage and even less consent be raised to 18 when youngsters are becoming precocious at an ever earlier age? By contrast, Plutarch suggested that marriage is the best way to stabilise youngsters’ lascivious desires.

It might help if there were more news of positive role models. Instead, youngsters are swayed by peer pressure and attractive stories of deviant behaviour on anti-social media. Still, there’s always some good news tucked away. Despite headline claims of nepotism, your recent report suggests that, far from considering your appointment a sinecure, you’re prepared to speak out. Mount Olympos loves life’s little ironies.

Yours sincerely

Epi Phron