From http://www.dwnews.com/gb/Consumer/education/2008_1_23_11_46_21_507.html
星岛日报记者萧慧三藩市报道／三藩市公校学生若长期无故旷课逃学，后果将会很严重，家长也会牵连其中，因为屡劝无效者将会惊动三藩市地检署的律师，以「行为不检轻罪」（Misdemeanor）检控家长。数据显示，单在06至07学年，校区就有5,417名学生惯性或长期旷课，比例接近学生总人数10%。地检署与校区联手，已获警察局及市「儿童家庭青少年服务」部门支持，通告家长有关此事，有问题者可致电求助热线415-701-7829。
三藩市校区学生支持服务专员蔡伟权（Keith Choy）指出，学生在没有请假条、医生证明纸等情况下，无故旷课累积超过10天以上属「惯性旷课」，超过20天以上就会被视作「长期旷课」。校区惯性或长期旷课的学生大有人在，仅在上学年就有5,417人，而且近半、约2,400人是5年级以下的小学生。上学年长期旷课的学生中，35%和33%是非裔及拉美裔学生，亚裔学生约占18%，其中华裔学生有350人之多。长期旷课学生最多的地区，包括邮编为94124的湾景区，其次是外米慎/Excelsior区、米慎区、访谷区，均集中在市东南部。
地检官贺锦丽和校区学监加西亚强调，对待不同年龄学生长期旷课的问题，他们会视不同情况作不同处理，因为他们也知道父母养育子女、供书教学并不容易，因此他们一般会先了解，家庭是否有实际困难，对症下药地尽量提供帮助，包括安全护送学生到校的服务等。
一般来说，学校检测到某学生无故旷课多天，就会电话联系家长，若家长不理睬，情况没有改善，就会上报校区「学生出勤委员会」（SARB）。该委员会首先会请来学生及家长一起开会，了解家庭有何困难，希望提供各类资讯和帮助等，地检署通常有6名律师及助理处理这类个案并出席会议。但若经多方协调后，学生旷课仍没有任何改善，最终就会出动检控官提诉。「行为不检罪」最高刑罚会是入狱一年和罚款2,500元。
贺锦丽解释，加州规定受教育是人权，而在过去5年，三藩市凶杀案中年龄低於24岁的受害者，94%是高中辍学生，同时县监狱中被关押犯人大部分没有工作或缺乏读写能力的人。这种情况并非巧合，显示学生旷课导致不获教育，与犯罪有直接的联系。
加西亚指出，学生旷课逃学，不但会影响其学业，更由於旷课者中，非裔和拉美裔学生各占三成以上，若不及早作出处理，学生族群之间的学业差距只会越拉越大。另外，加州政府对校区的教育拨款，有大部分是看学校中学生的出勤率而定，若不解决旷课问题，会使已因为注册人数下降而损失经费的三藩市校区，进一步损失经费。
2008年1月23日星期三
2008年1月22日星期二
Asian American History Timeline
From http://www.cetel.org/timeline.html
Asian American History Timeline
This timeline is primarily adapted from Sucheng Chan's book Asian Americans: An Interpretive History ©1991, Twayne Publishers, Boston. Some elements were adapted from LEAP (Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics). Links are included to the text of selected historical documents.
1600 - 1799
1600s- Chinese and Filipinos reach Mexico on ships of the Manila galleon.
1763- First recorded settlement of Filipinos in America. To escape imprisonment aboard Spanish galleons they jump ship in New Orleans and flee into the bayous of Louisiana.1790 - First recorded arrival of Asian Indians in the United States.
1800 - 1849
1830s- Chinese "sugar masters" working in Hawaii; Chinese sailors and peddlers in New York.1844- U.S. and China sign first treaty.1848- Gold discovered in California. Chinese miners begin to arrive.1842-52- China is defeated by the British Empire in the first Opium War, resulting in Treaty of Nanjing whereby China is forced to cede the island of Hong Kong and open ports to foreign commerce.- A series of floods and crop failures in southern China lead to poverty and threat of famine among peasant farmers.1847- Three Chinese students arrive in New York City for schooling. One of them,Yung Wing, graduates from Yale in 1854 and becomes the first Chinese to graduate from a U.S. college.
1850 - 1899
1850- California imposes Foreign Miner's Tax and enforces it mainly against Chinese miners, who were often forced to pay more than once.1852- First group of 195 Chinese contract laborers land in Hawaii.- Over 20,000 Chinese enter California.- Chinese first appear in court in California.- Missionary Willian Speer opens Presbyterian mission for Chinese in San Francisco.1854- Chinese in Hawaii establish a funeral society, their first community association in the islands.- People v. Hall rules that Chinese cannot give testimony in court against whites.- U.S. and Japan sign first treaty.1857- San Francisco opens a school for Chinese children (changed to an evening school two years later).- Missionary Augustus Loomis arrives to serve the Chinese in San Francisco.1858- California passes a law to bar entry of Chinese and "Mongolians."1859- Chinese excluded from San Francisco public schools
1860- Japan sends its first diplomatic mission to U.S.1862- Six Chinese district associations in San Francisco form a loose federation.- California imposes a "police tax" of $2.50 a month on every Chinese.1865- Central Pacific Railroad Co. recruits Chinese workers for the transcontinental railroad.1867- Two thousand Chinese railroad workers strike for a week.1868- U.S. and China sign Burlingame - Seward Treaty recognizing right of their citizens to emigrate.- Eugene Van Reed illegally ships 149 Japanese laborers to Hawaii.- Sam Damon opens Sunday school for Chinese in Hawaii.1869- Completion of first trancontinental railroad.- J.H. Schnell takes Japanese to California to establish the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony.- Chinese Christian evangelist S.P. Aheong starts preaching in Hawaii.1870- California passes law against importation of Chinese, Japanese, & "Mongolian" women for prostitution.- Chinese railroad workers in Texas sue company for failing to pay wages.1872- California's Civil Procedure Code drops law barring Chinese court testimony.1875- Page Law in Congress bars entry of Chinese, Japanese, and "Mongolian" prostitutes, felons, and contract laborers.1876- U.S. and Hawaii sign Reciprocity Treaty, allowing Hawaiian sugar to enter U.S. duty free.1877- Anti-Chinese violence in Chico, California.- Japanese Christians set up Gospel Society in San Francisco, first immigrant association formed by the Japanese.1878-In re Ah Yup rules Chinese ineligible for naturalized citizenship.1879- California's second constitution prevents municipalities and corporations from employing Chinese.- California state legislature passes law requiring all incorporated towns and cities to remove Chinese outside of city limits, but U.S. circuit court declares the law unconstitutional.1880- U.S. and China sign treaty giving the U.S. the right to limit but "not absolutely prohibit" Chinese immigration.- Section 69 of California's Civil Code prohibits issuing of licenses for marriages between whites and "Mongolians, Negroes, mulattoes and persons of mixed blood."1881- Hawaiian King Kalakaua visits Japan during his world tour.- Sit Moon becomes pastor of the first Chinese Christian church in Hawaii.1882- Chinese Exclusion Law suspends U.S. immigration of laborers for ten years.- Chinese community leaders form Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association (CCBA or Chinese Six Companies) in San Francisco.- U.S. and Korea sign first treaty.1883- Chinese in New York establish CCBA.1884- Joseph and Mary Tape sue San Francisco school board to enroll their Chinese daughter Mamie in a public school.- Chinese Six Companies sets up Chinese language school in San Francisco.- United Chinese Society established in Honolulu.- CCBA established in Vancouver.- 1882 Chinese Exclusion Law amended to require a certificate as the only permissible evidence for reentry.1885- San Francisco builds new segregated "Oriental School" in response to Mamie Tape case.- Anti-Chinese violence at Rock Springs, Wyoming Territory, results in many Chinese deaths.- First group of Japanese contract laborers arrives in Hawaii under the Irwin Convention.1886- Residents of Tacoma, Seattle, and many places in the American West forcibly expel the Chinese.- End of Chinese immigration to Hawaii.- Chinese laundrymen win in Yick Wo v. Hopkins case, which declares that a law with unequal impact on different groups is discriminatory.1888- Scott Act renders 20,000 Chinese reentry certificates null and void.1889- First Nishi Hongwanji priest from Japan arrives in Hawaii.- Chae Chan Ping v. U.S. upholds constitutionality of Chinese exclusion laws.1892- Geary Law renews exclusion of Chinese laborers for another ten years and requires all Chinese to register.- Fong Yue Ting v. U.S. upholds constitutionality of Geary Law.1893- Japanese in San Francisco form first trade association, the Japanese Shoemakers' League.- Attempts are made to expel Chinese from towns in southern California.1894- Saito, a Japanese man, applies for U.S. citizenship, but U.S. circuit courts refuse because he is neither white nor black.- Japanese immigration to Hawaii under Irwin Convention ends and emigration companies take over.- Sun Yat-sen founds the Xingzhonghui in Honolulu.1895- Lem Moon Sing v. U.S. rules that district courts can no longer review Chinese habeas corpus petitions for landing in the U.S.- Hawaii Sugar Plantations' Association (HSPA) formed.1896- Shinsei Kaneko, a Japanese Californian, is naturalized.- Bubonic plague scare in Honolulu - Chinatown burned.1897- Nishi Hongwanji includes Hawaii as a mission field.1898- Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. decides that Chinese born in the U.S. cannot be stripped of their citizenship.- Japanese in San Francisco set up Young Men's Buddhist Association.- The Philippine Islands become a protectorate of the United States under the Treaty of Paris ending the Spanish-American War.- Hawaii is also annexed by the United States.1899- Chinese reformers Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao tour North America to recruit members for the Baohuanghui.- First Nishi Hongwanji priests arrive in California and set up North American Buddhist Mission.
1900 - 1949
1900- Organic Act makes all U.S. laws applicable to Hawaii, thus ending contract labor in the islands;- Japanese Hawaiian plantation workers begin migrating to the mainland.- Bubonic plague scare in San Francisco - Chinatown cordoned and quarantined.1902- Chinese exclusion extended for another ten years.- Immigration officials and the police raid Boston's Chinatown and, without search warrants, arrest almost 250 Chinese who allegedly had no registration certificates on their persons.1903- First group of 7,000 Korean workers arrives in Hawaii to work as strikebreakers against Japanese workers.- 1500 Japanese and Mexican sugar beet workers strike in Oxnard, California.- Koreans in Hawaii form Korean Evangelical Society.- Filipino students (pensionados) arrive in the U.S. for higher education.1904- Chinese exclusion made indefinite and applicable to U.S. insular possessions.- Japanese plantation workers engage in first organized strike in Hawaii.- Punjabi Sikhs begin to enter British Columbia.1905- Chinese in the U.S. and Hawaii support boycott of American products in China.- Koreans establish Korean Episcopal Church in Hawaii and Korean Methodist Church in California.- San Francisco School Board attempts to segregate Japanese schoolchildren.- Korean emigration ends.- Koreans in San Francisco form Mutual Assistance Society.- Asiatic Exclusion League formed in San Francisco.- Section 60 of California's Civil Code amended to forbid marriage between whites and "Mongolians."1906- Anti-Asian riot in Vancouver.- Japanese nurserymen form California Flower Growers' Association.- Koreans establish Korean Presbyterian Church in Los Angeles.- Major earthquake in San Francisco destroys all municipal records, including immigration records, so Chinese immigrants are able to claim they are U.S. citizens and have the right to bring wives and children to America.- Japanese scientists studying the aftermath of the San Francisco earthquake are stoned.1907- Japan and the U.S. reach "Gentlemen's Agreement" whereby Japan stops issuing passports to laborers desiring to emigrate to the U.S.- President Theodore Roosevelt signs Executive Order 589 prohibiting Japanese with passports for Hawaii, Mexico, or Canada to reemigrate to the U.S.- Koreans form United Korean Society in Hawaii.- First group of Filipino laborers arrives in Hawaii.-Asian Indians are driven out of Bellingham, Washington.1908- Japanese form Japanese Association of America.- Canada curbs Asian Indian immigration by denying entry to those who have not come by "continuous journey" from their homelands (there is no direct shipping between Indianand Canadian ports).- Asian Indians are driven out of Live Oak, California.1909- Koreans form Korean Nationalist Association.- 7,000 Japanese plantation workers strike major plantations on Oahu for four months.1910- Administrative measures used to restrict influx of Asian Indians into California.- Angel Island Immigration Station opens to process and deport Asian immigrants.1911- Chinese men in America cut off their queues following revolution in China.- Pablo Manlapit forms Filipino Higher Wages Association in Hawaii.- Japanese form Japanese Association of Oregon in Portland.1912- Sikhs build gurdwara in Stockton and establish Khalsa Diwan.- Japanese in California hold statewide conference on Nisei education.1913- California passes alien land law prohibiting "aliens ineligible to citizenship" from buying land or leasing it for longer than three years.- Sikhs in Washington and Oregon establish Hindustani Association.- Asian Indians in California found the revolutionary Ghadar Party and start publishing a newspaper.- Pablo Manlapit forms Filipino Unemployed Association in Hawaii.- Japanese form Northwest Japanese Association of America in Seattle.- Korean farmworkers are driven out of Hemet, California.1914- Aspiring Asian Indian immigrants who had chartered a ship to come to Canada by continuous journey are denied landing in Vancouver.1915- Japanese form Central Japanese Association of Southern California and the Japanese Chamber of Commerce.1917- Arizona passes an alien land law.- 1917 Immigration Law defines a geographic "barred zone" (including India) from which no immigrants can come.- Syngman Rhee founds the Korean Christian Church in Hawaii.1918- Servicemen of Asian ancestry who had served in World War I receive right of naturalization.- Asian Indians form the Hindustani Welfare Reform Association in the Imperial and Coachella valleys in southern California.1919- Japanese form Federation of Japanese Labor in Hawaii.1920- 10,000 Japanese and Filipino plantation workers go on strike.- Japan stops issuing passports to picture brides due to anti-Japanese sentiments.- Initiative in California ballot plugs up loopholes in the 1913 alien land law.1921- Japanese farm workers driven out of Turlock, California.- Filipinos establish a branch of the Caballeros Dimas Alang in San Francisco and a branch of the Legionarios del Trabajo in Honolulu.- Washington and Louisiana pass alien land laws.1922- Takao Ozawa v. U.S. declares Japanese ineligible for naturalized citizenship.- New Mexico passes an alien land law.- Cable Act declares that any American female citizen who marries "an alien ineligible to citizenship"would lose her citizenship.1923- U.S. v. Bhagat Singh Thind declares Asian Indians ineligible for naturalized citizenship.- Idaho, Montana, and Oregon pass alien land laws.- Terrace v. Thompson upholds constitutionality of Washington's alien land law.- Porterfield v. Webb upholds constitutionality of California's alien land law.- Webb v. O'Brien rules that sharecropping is illegal because it is a ruse that allows Japanese to possess and use land.- Frick v. Webb forbids aliens "ineligible to citizenship" from owning stocks in corporations formedfor farming.1924- Immigration Act denies entry to virtually all Asians.- 1,600 Filipino plantation workers strike for eight months in Hawaii.1925- Warring tongs in North America's Chinatowns declare truce.- Hilario Moncado founds Filipino Federation of America.1928- Filipino farm workers are driven out of Yakima Valley, Washington.- Filipinos in Los Angeles form Filipino American Christian Fellowship.1930- Anti-Filipino riot in Watsonville, California.1931- Amendment to Cable Act declares that no American-born woman who loses her citizenship (by marrying an alien ineligible to citizenship) can be denied the right of naturalization at a later date.1934- Tydings - McDuffie Act spells out procedure for eventual Philippine independence and reduces Filipino immigration to 50 persons a year.- Filipino lettuce pickers in the Salinas Valley, California, go on strike.1936- American Federation of Labor grants charter to a Filipino - Mexican union of fieldworkers.1937- Last ethnic strike in Hawaii.1938- 150 Chinese women garmentworkers strike for three months against the National Dollar stores (owned by a Chinese).1940- AFL charters the Filipino Federated Agricultural Laborers Association.1941- December 7 - Japanese planes attack Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. United States enters World War II.- After declaring war on Japan, 2,000 Japanese community leaders along Pacific Coast states and Hawaii are rounded up and interned in Department of Justice camps.1942- President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs Executive Order 9066 authorizing the secretary of war to delegate a military commander to designate military areas "from which any and all persons may be excluded" - primarily enforced against Japanese Americans.- Congress passes Public Law 503 to impose penal sanctions on anyone disobeying orders to carry out Executive Order 9066.- Incidents at Poston and Manzanar relocation centers.1943- Incident at Topaz Relocation Center. Registration crisis leads to Tule Lake Relocation Center's designation as a segregation center.- Hawaiian Nisei in the 100th Battalion sent to Africa.- Congress repeals all Chinese exclusion laws, grants right of naturalization and a very small immigration quota to Chinese (105 per year).1944- Tule Lake placed under martial law.- Draft reinstated for Nisei.- Draft resistance at Heart Mountain Relocation Center.- 442nd Regimental Combat Team gains fame.- Exclusion orders are revoked.1945- August 6 - atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, ushering in nuclear age.- August 14 - Japan surrenders, ending World War II.1946- Luce- Celler bill grants right of naturalization and small immigration quotas to Asian Indians and Filipinos.- Wing F. Ong becomes first Asian American to be elected to state office in the Arizona House of Representatives.- Philippines become independent. U.S. citizenship offered to all Filipinos living in the United States, not just servicemen.1947- Amendment to 1945 War Brides Act allows Chinese American veterans to bring brides into the U.S.1949- U.S. breaks off diplomatic ties with newly formed People's Republic of China.- 5,000 highly educated Chinese in the U.S. granted refugee status after China institutes a Communist government.
1950 - Present
1950-53 - Korean War1952- Clause in the McCarran - Walter Act grants the right of naturalization and a small immigration quota to Japanese.1956- California repeals its alien land laws.- Dalip Singh Saund from the Imperial Valley, California, is elected to Congress.1962- Daniel K. Inouye becomes U.S. senator and Spark Matsunaga becomes U.S. congressman from Hawaii.1964- Patsy Takemoto Mink becomes first Asian American woman to serve in Congress as representative from Hawaii.1965- Immigration Law abolishes "national origins" as basis for allocating immigration quotas to various countries -- Asian countries now on an equal footing with others for the first time in U.S. history.1968- Students strike at San Francisco State University to demand establishment of ethnic studies programs.1969- Students at the University of California, Berkeley, strike for establishment of ethnic studies programs.1974- March Fong Eu elected California's secretary of state.- Lau v. Nichols rules that school districts with children who speak little English must provide them with bilingual education.1975- More than 130,000 refugees enter the U.S. from Vietnam, Kampuchea, and Laos as Communist governments are established there following the end of the Indochina War.1976- President Gerald Ford rescinds Executive Order 9066, 34 years after WWII.1977- Eilberg Act restricts immigration of professionals.1978- National convention of the Japanese American Citizens League adopts resolution calling for redress and reparations for the internment of Japanese Americans.- Massive exodus of "boat people" from Vietnam.1979- Establishment of diplomatic relations between the People's Republic of China and the U.S. reunites members of long-separated Chinese American families.1980- The Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees set up an Orderly Departure Program to enable Vietnamese to emigrate legally.1981- Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians (set up by Congress) holds hearings across the country and concludes the internment was a "grave injustice" and that Executive Order 9066 resulted from "race prejudice, war hysteria and a failure of political leadership."1982- Vincent Chin, a Chinese American draftsman, is clubbed to death with a baseball bat by two Euro-American men.1983- Fred Korematsu, Min Yasui, and Gordon Hirabayashi file petitions to overturn their World War II convictions for violating the curfew and evacuation orders.1986- Immigration Reform and Control Act imposes civil and criminal penalties on employers who knowingly hire undocumented aliens.1987- First formal signing of the Proclamation of Asian Pacific American Heritage Week by the White House.
1987- The U.S. House of Representatives votes 243 to 141 to make an official apology to Japanese Americans and to pay each surviving internee $20,000 in reparations.1988- The U.S. Senate votes 69 to 27 to support redress for Japanese Americans, creating The Civil Liberties Act of 1988 .- American Homecoming Act allows children in Vietnam born of American fathers to immigrate to the U.S.1989- President George Bush signs into law an entitlement program to pay each surviving Japanese American internee $20,000.- U.S. reaches agreement with Vietnam to allow political prisoners to emigrate to the U.S.1992Korean businesses looted and burned as a result of riots in Los Angeles due to outrage over Rodney King verdict.
Asian American History Timeline
This timeline is primarily adapted from Sucheng Chan's book Asian Americans: An Interpretive History ©1991, Twayne Publishers, Boston. Some elements were adapted from LEAP (Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics). Links are included to the text of selected historical documents.
1600 - 1799
1600s- Chinese and Filipinos reach Mexico on ships of the Manila galleon.
1763- First recorded settlement of Filipinos in America. To escape imprisonment aboard Spanish galleons they jump ship in New Orleans and flee into the bayous of Louisiana.1790 - First recorded arrival of Asian Indians in the United States.
1800 - 1849
1830s- Chinese "sugar masters" working in Hawaii; Chinese sailors and peddlers in New York.1844- U.S. and China sign first treaty.1848- Gold discovered in California. Chinese miners begin to arrive.1842-52- China is defeated by the British Empire in the first Opium War, resulting in Treaty of Nanjing whereby China is forced to cede the island of Hong Kong and open ports to foreign commerce.- A series of floods and crop failures in southern China lead to poverty and threat of famine among peasant farmers.1847- Three Chinese students arrive in New York City for schooling. One of them,Yung Wing, graduates from Yale in 1854 and becomes the first Chinese to graduate from a U.S. college.
1850 - 1899
1850- California imposes Foreign Miner's Tax and enforces it mainly against Chinese miners, who were often forced to pay more than once.1852- First group of 195 Chinese contract laborers land in Hawaii.- Over 20,000 Chinese enter California.- Chinese first appear in court in California.- Missionary Willian Speer opens Presbyterian mission for Chinese in San Francisco.1854- Chinese in Hawaii establish a funeral society, their first community association in the islands.- People v. Hall rules that Chinese cannot give testimony in court against whites.- U.S. and Japan sign first treaty.1857- San Francisco opens a school for Chinese children (changed to an evening school two years later).- Missionary Augustus Loomis arrives to serve the Chinese in San Francisco.1858- California passes a law to bar entry of Chinese and "Mongolians."1859- Chinese excluded from San Francisco public schools
1860- Japan sends its first diplomatic mission to U.S.1862- Six Chinese district associations in San Francisco form a loose federation.- California imposes a "police tax" of $2.50 a month on every Chinese.1865- Central Pacific Railroad Co. recruits Chinese workers for the transcontinental railroad.1867- Two thousand Chinese railroad workers strike for a week.1868- U.S. and China sign Burlingame - Seward Treaty recognizing right of their citizens to emigrate.- Eugene Van Reed illegally ships 149 Japanese laborers to Hawaii.- Sam Damon opens Sunday school for Chinese in Hawaii.1869- Completion of first trancontinental railroad.- J.H. Schnell takes Japanese to California to establish the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony.- Chinese Christian evangelist S.P. Aheong starts preaching in Hawaii.1870- California passes law against importation of Chinese, Japanese, & "Mongolian" women for prostitution.- Chinese railroad workers in Texas sue company for failing to pay wages.1872- California's Civil Procedure Code drops law barring Chinese court testimony.1875- Page Law in Congress bars entry of Chinese, Japanese, and "Mongolian" prostitutes, felons, and contract laborers.1876- U.S. and Hawaii sign Reciprocity Treaty, allowing Hawaiian sugar to enter U.S. duty free.1877- Anti-Chinese violence in Chico, California.- Japanese Christians set up Gospel Society in San Francisco, first immigrant association formed by the Japanese.1878-In re Ah Yup rules Chinese ineligible for naturalized citizenship.1879- California's second constitution prevents municipalities and corporations from employing Chinese.- California state legislature passes law requiring all incorporated towns and cities to remove Chinese outside of city limits, but U.S. circuit court declares the law unconstitutional.1880- U.S. and China sign treaty giving the U.S. the right to limit but "not absolutely prohibit" Chinese immigration.- Section 69 of California's Civil Code prohibits issuing of licenses for marriages between whites and "Mongolians, Negroes, mulattoes and persons of mixed blood."1881- Hawaiian King Kalakaua visits Japan during his world tour.- Sit Moon becomes pastor of the first Chinese Christian church in Hawaii.1882- Chinese Exclusion Law suspends U.S. immigration of laborers for ten years.- Chinese community leaders form Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association (CCBA or Chinese Six Companies) in San Francisco.- U.S. and Korea sign first treaty.1883- Chinese in New York establish CCBA.1884- Joseph and Mary Tape sue San Francisco school board to enroll their Chinese daughter Mamie in a public school.- Chinese Six Companies sets up Chinese language school in San Francisco.- United Chinese Society established in Honolulu.- CCBA established in Vancouver.- 1882 Chinese Exclusion Law amended to require a certificate as the only permissible evidence for reentry.1885- San Francisco builds new segregated "Oriental School" in response to Mamie Tape case.- Anti-Chinese violence at Rock Springs, Wyoming Territory, results in many Chinese deaths.- First group of Japanese contract laborers arrives in Hawaii under the Irwin Convention.1886- Residents of Tacoma, Seattle, and many places in the American West forcibly expel the Chinese.- End of Chinese immigration to Hawaii.- Chinese laundrymen win in Yick Wo v. Hopkins case, which declares that a law with unequal impact on different groups is discriminatory.1888- Scott Act renders 20,000 Chinese reentry certificates null and void.1889- First Nishi Hongwanji priest from Japan arrives in Hawaii.- Chae Chan Ping v. U.S. upholds constitutionality of Chinese exclusion laws.1892- Geary Law renews exclusion of Chinese laborers for another ten years and requires all Chinese to register.- Fong Yue Ting v. U.S. upholds constitutionality of Geary Law.1893- Japanese in San Francisco form first trade association, the Japanese Shoemakers' League.- Attempts are made to expel Chinese from towns in southern California.1894- Saito, a Japanese man, applies for U.S. citizenship, but U.S. circuit courts refuse because he is neither white nor black.- Japanese immigration to Hawaii under Irwin Convention ends and emigration companies take over.- Sun Yat-sen founds the Xingzhonghui in Honolulu.1895- Lem Moon Sing v. U.S. rules that district courts can no longer review Chinese habeas corpus petitions for landing in the U.S.- Hawaii Sugar Plantations' Association (HSPA) formed.1896- Shinsei Kaneko, a Japanese Californian, is naturalized.- Bubonic plague scare in Honolulu - Chinatown burned.1897- Nishi Hongwanji includes Hawaii as a mission field.1898- Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. decides that Chinese born in the U.S. cannot be stripped of their citizenship.- Japanese in San Francisco set up Young Men's Buddhist Association.- The Philippine Islands become a protectorate of the United States under the Treaty of Paris ending the Spanish-American War.- Hawaii is also annexed by the United States.1899- Chinese reformers Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao tour North America to recruit members for the Baohuanghui.- First Nishi Hongwanji priests arrive in California and set up North American Buddhist Mission.
1900 - 1949
1900- Organic Act makes all U.S. laws applicable to Hawaii, thus ending contract labor in the islands;- Japanese Hawaiian plantation workers begin migrating to the mainland.- Bubonic plague scare in San Francisco - Chinatown cordoned and quarantined.1902- Chinese exclusion extended for another ten years.- Immigration officials and the police raid Boston's Chinatown and, without search warrants, arrest almost 250 Chinese who allegedly had no registration certificates on their persons.1903- First group of 7,000 Korean workers arrives in Hawaii to work as strikebreakers against Japanese workers.- 1500 Japanese and Mexican sugar beet workers strike in Oxnard, California.- Koreans in Hawaii form Korean Evangelical Society.- Filipino students (pensionados) arrive in the U.S. for higher education.1904- Chinese exclusion made indefinite and applicable to U.S. insular possessions.- Japanese plantation workers engage in first organized strike in Hawaii.- Punjabi Sikhs begin to enter British Columbia.1905- Chinese in the U.S. and Hawaii support boycott of American products in China.- Koreans establish Korean Episcopal Church in Hawaii and Korean Methodist Church in California.- San Francisco School Board attempts to segregate Japanese schoolchildren.- Korean emigration ends.- Koreans in San Francisco form Mutual Assistance Society.- Asiatic Exclusion League formed in San Francisco.- Section 60 of California's Civil Code amended to forbid marriage between whites and "Mongolians."1906- Anti-Asian riot in Vancouver.- Japanese nurserymen form California Flower Growers' Association.- Koreans establish Korean Presbyterian Church in Los Angeles.- Major earthquake in San Francisco destroys all municipal records, including immigration records, so Chinese immigrants are able to claim they are U.S. citizens and have the right to bring wives and children to America.- Japanese scientists studying the aftermath of the San Francisco earthquake are stoned.1907- Japan and the U.S. reach "Gentlemen's Agreement" whereby Japan stops issuing passports to laborers desiring to emigrate to the U.S.- President Theodore Roosevelt signs Executive Order 589 prohibiting Japanese with passports for Hawaii, Mexico, or Canada to reemigrate to the U.S.- Koreans form United Korean Society in Hawaii.- First group of Filipino laborers arrives in Hawaii.-Asian Indians are driven out of Bellingham, Washington.1908- Japanese form Japanese Association of America.- Canada curbs Asian Indian immigration by denying entry to those who have not come by "continuous journey" from their homelands (there is no direct shipping between Indianand Canadian ports).- Asian Indians are driven out of Live Oak, California.1909- Koreans form Korean Nationalist Association.- 7,000 Japanese plantation workers strike major plantations on Oahu for four months.1910- Administrative measures used to restrict influx of Asian Indians into California.- Angel Island Immigration Station opens to process and deport Asian immigrants.1911- Chinese men in America cut off their queues following revolution in China.- Pablo Manlapit forms Filipino Higher Wages Association in Hawaii.- Japanese form Japanese Association of Oregon in Portland.1912- Sikhs build gurdwara in Stockton and establish Khalsa Diwan.- Japanese in California hold statewide conference on Nisei education.1913- California passes alien land law prohibiting "aliens ineligible to citizenship" from buying land or leasing it for longer than three years.- Sikhs in Washington and Oregon establish Hindustani Association.- Asian Indians in California found the revolutionary Ghadar Party and start publishing a newspaper.- Pablo Manlapit forms Filipino Unemployed Association in Hawaii.- Japanese form Northwest Japanese Association of America in Seattle.- Korean farmworkers are driven out of Hemet, California.1914- Aspiring Asian Indian immigrants who had chartered a ship to come to Canada by continuous journey are denied landing in Vancouver.1915- Japanese form Central Japanese Association of Southern California and the Japanese Chamber of Commerce.1917- Arizona passes an alien land law.- 1917 Immigration Law defines a geographic "barred zone" (including India) from which no immigrants can come.- Syngman Rhee founds the Korean Christian Church in Hawaii.1918- Servicemen of Asian ancestry who had served in World War I receive right of naturalization.- Asian Indians form the Hindustani Welfare Reform Association in the Imperial and Coachella valleys in southern California.1919- Japanese form Federation of Japanese Labor in Hawaii.1920- 10,000 Japanese and Filipino plantation workers go on strike.- Japan stops issuing passports to picture brides due to anti-Japanese sentiments.- Initiative in California ballot plugs up loopholes in the 1913 alien land law.1921- Japanese farm workers driven out of Turlock, California.- Filipinos establish a branch of the Caballeros Dimas Alang in San Francisco and a branch of the Legionarios del Trabajo in Honolulu.- Washington and Louisiana pass alien land laws.1922- Takao Ozawa v. U.S. declares Japanese ineligible for naturalized citizenship.- New Mexico passes an alien land law.- Cable Act declares that any American female citizen who marries "an alien ineligible to citizenship"would lose her citizenship.1923- U.S. v. Bhagat Singh Thind declares Asian Indians ineligible for naturalized citizenship.- Idaho, Montana, and Oregon pass alien land laws.- Terrace v. Thompson upholds constitutionality of Washington's alien land law.- Porterfield v. Webb upholds constitutionality of California's alien land law.- Webb v. O'Brien rules that sharecropping is illegal because it is a ruse that allows Japanese to possess and use land.- Frick v. Webb forbids aliens "ineligible to citizenship" from owning stocks in corporations formedfor farming.1924- Immigration Act denies entry to virtually all Asians.- 1,600 Filipino plantation workers strike for eight months in Hawaii.1925- Warring tongs in North America's Chinatowns declare truce.- Hilario Moncado founds Filipino Federation of America.1928- Filipino farm workers are driven out of Yakima Valley, Washington.- Filipinos in Los Angeles form Filipino American Christian Fellowship.1930- Anti-Filipino riot in Watsonville, California.1931- Amendment to Cable Act declares that no American-born woman who loses her citizenship (by marrying an alien ineligible to citizenship) can be denied the right of naturalization at a later date.1934- Tydings - McDuffie Act spells out procedure for eventual Philippine independence and reduces Filipino immigration to 50 persons a year.- Filipino lettuce pickers in the Salinas Valley, California, go on strike.1936- American Federation of Labor grants charter to a Filipino - Mexican union of fieldworkers.1937- Last ethnic strike in Hawaii.1938- 150 Chinese women garmentworkers strike for three months against the National Dollar stores (owned by a Chinese).1940- AFL charters the Filipino Federated Agricultural Laborers Association.1941- December 7 - Japanese planes attack Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. United States enters World War II.- After declaring war on Japan, 2,000 Japanese community leaders along Pacific Coast states and Hawaii are rounded up and interned in Department of Justice camps.1942- President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs Executive Order 9066 authorizing the secretary of war to delegate a military commander to designate military areas "from which any and all persons may be excluded" - primarily enforced against Japanese Americans.- Congress passes Public Law 503 to impose penal sanctions on anyone disobeying orders to carry out Executive Order 9066.- Incidents at Poston and Manzanar relocation centers.1943- Incident at Topaz Relocation Center. Registration crisis leads to Tule Lake Relocation Center's designation as a segregation center.- Hawaiian Nisei in the 100th Battalion sent to Africa.- Congress repeals all Chinese exclusion laws, grants right of naturalization and a very small immigration quota to Chinese (105 per year).1944- Tule Lake placed under martial law.- Draft reinstated for Nisei.- Draft resistance at Heart Mountain Relocation Center.- 442nd Regimental Combat Team gains fame.- Exclusion orders are revoked.1945- August 6 - atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, ushering in nuclear age.- August 14 - Japan surrenders, ending World War II.1946- Luce- Celler bill grants right of naturalization and small immigration quotas to Asian Indians and Filipinos.- Wing F. Ong becomes first Asian American to be elected to state office in the Arizona House of Representatives.- Philippines become independent. U.S. citizenship offered to all Filipinos living in the United States, not just servicemen.1947- Amendment to 1945 War Brides Act allows Chinese American veterans to bring brides into the U.S.1949- U.S. breaks off diplomatic ties with newly formed People's Republic of China.- 5,000 highly educated Chinese in the U.S. granted refugee status after China institutes a Communist government.
1950 - Present
1950-53 - Korean War1952- Clause in the McCarran - Walter Act grants the right of naturalization and a small immigration quota to Japanese.1956- California repeals its alien land laws.- Dalip Singh Saund from the Imperial Valley, California, is elected to Congress.1962- Daniel K. Inouye becomes U.S. senator and Spark Matsunaga becomes U.S. congressman from Hawaii.1964- Patsy Takemoto Mink becomes first Asian American woman to serve in Congress as representative from Hawaii.1965- Immigration Law abolishes "national origins" as basis for allocating immigration quotas to various countries -- Asian countries now on an equal footing with others for the first time in U.S. history.1968- Students strike at San Francisco State University to demand establishment of ethnic studies programs.1969- Students at the University of California, Berkeley, strike for establishment of ethnic studies programs.1974- March Fong Eu elected California's secretary of state.- Lau v. Nichols rules that school districts with children who speak little English must provide them with bilingual education.1975- More than 130,000 refugees enter the U.S. from Vietnam, Kampuchea, and Laos as Communist governments are established there following the end of the Indochina War.1976- President Gerald Ford rescinds Executive Order 9066, 34 years after WWII.1977- Eilberg Act restricts immigration of professionals.1978- National convention of the Japanese American Citizens League adopts resolution calling for redress and reparations for the internment of Japanese Americans.- Massive exodus of "boat people" from Vietnam.1979- Establishment of diplomatic relations between the People's Republic of China and the U.S. reunites members of long-separated Chinese American families.1980- The Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees set up an Orderly Departure Program to enable Vietnamese to emigrate legally.1981- Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians (set up by Congress) holds hearings across the country and concludes the internment was a "grave injustice" and that Executive Order 9066 resulted from "race prejudice, war hysteria and a failure of political leadership."1982- Vincent Chin, a Chinese American draftsman, is clubbed to death with a baseball bat by two Euro-American men.1983- Fred Korematsu, Min Yasui, and Gordon Hirabayashi file petitions to overturn their World War II convictions for violating the curfew and evacuation orders.1986- Immigration Reform and Control Act imposes civil and criminal penalties on employers who knowingly hire undocumented aliens.1987- First formal signing of the Proclamation of Asian Pacific American Heritage Week by the White House.
1987- The U.S. House of Representatives votes 243 to 141 to make an official apology to Japanese Americans and to pay each surviving internee $20,000 in reparations.1988- The U.S. Senate votes 69 to 27 to support redress for Japanese Americans, creating The Civil Liberties Act of 1988 .- American Homecoming Act allows children in Vietnam born of American fathers to immigrate to the U.S.1989- President George Bush signs into law an entitlement program to pay each surviving Japanese American internee $20,000.- U.S. reaches agreement with Vietnam to allow political prisoners to emigrate to the U.S.1992Korean businesses looted and burned as a result of riots in Los Angeles due to outrage over Rodney King verdict.
Education Needs of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders
From http://www.nea.org/newsreleases/2007/nr070814.html
August 14, 2007
NEA Highlights Education Needs of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders
Encourages programs to improve achievement, college attendance and services
WASHINGTON—The National Education Association is calling for a series of changes to improve opportunities for Asian American and Pacific Islander communities facing educational challenges. Among the NEA’s priorities is addressing the “model minority” myth, which promotes the false assumption that everyone in this diverse group excels in school, on tests and in life.
“The model minority myth is detrimental because it overlooks those students who need help and support,” said Reg Weaver, president of NEA. “Some Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders face significant challenges because of unique historical circumstances and socioeconomic factors. It is a great disservice to our children to lump test scores together and say everyone is doing well instead of examining ethnic specific data to determine challenges and solutions.”
NEA is urging a number of initiatives to improve AAPI achievement and services. They include the following:• NEA supports the creation of a higher education Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institution designation, similar to other ethnicities. This move would improve the infrastructure to serve low-income AAPI students in hopes of helping AAPI communities that have low college graduation rates.• NEA recommends improving research on AAPIs so that it disaggregates data by ethnicity and looks at the learning experiences of individual ethnicities, resulting in improvements to support services and instruction where needed.• NEA supports the federal government creating and funding policies under the so-called No Child Left Behind Act to ensure schools have more capacity to serve English language learners and that these students are assessed accurately and fairly. NCLB’s parental involvement requirements should be strengthened to ensure that there is more outreach to AAPI parents, including bilingual support.• NEA recommends ensuring that teachers are culturally competent; history lessons accurately convey AAPI history and contributions; and AAPI educators, who are underrepresented in U.S. classrooms, are recruited and retained.
While educational attainment among some AAPI groups is relatively high, graduation rates for Pacific Islanders and Southeast Asian groups demonstrate the need for focused resources. Census 2000 data shows the percentage of AAPIs who are over age 25 and have less than a high school education: 59.6% of Hmong, 53.3% of Cambodians, 49.6% of Lao and 38.1% of Vietnamese. According to The Silent Epidemic: Perspectives of High School Dropouts, the national graduation rate is about 70 percent.
Similar problems are reflected in the number of AAPIs who earn advanced degrees. The national average is 24 percent, but only 7.5% of Hmong, 19.4% of Vietnamese and 13.8% of Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders over age 25 have earned a bachelor’s degree or more based on Census figures.
The NEA recommendations are consistent with the Association’s commitment to serving Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and closing gaps in student achievement. In 2005, NEA and the Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies hosted a summit that discussed the problems experienced by underserved groups and possible solutions. NEA also works closely with a wide range of AAPI groups on education issues and supports the goals recently established in the education priorities of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.
“We share the responsibility of providing great public schools for every child,” Weaver added. “We must work with other organizations to level the playing field and create opportunities for future generations. The unique educational needs of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders must not be overlooked."
August 14, 2007
NEA Highlights Education Needs of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders
Encourages programs to improve achievement, college attendance and services
WASHINGTON—The National Education Association is calling for a series of changes to improve opportunities for Asian American and Pacific Islander communities facing educational challenges. Among the NEA’s priorities is addressing the “model minority” myth, which promotes the false assumption that everyone in this diverse group excels in school, on tests and in life.
“The model minority myth is detrimental because it overlooks those students who need help and support,” said Reg Weaver, president of NEA. “Some Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders face significant challenges because of unique historical circumstances and socioeconomic factors. It is a great disservice to our children to lump test scores together and say everyone is doing well instead of examining ethnic specific data to determine challenges and solutions.”
NEA is urging a number of initiatives to improve AAPI achievement and services. They include the following:• NEA supports the creation of a higher education Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institution designation, similar to other ethnicities. This move would improve the infrastructure to serve low-income AAPI students in hopes of helping AAPI communities that have low college graduation rates.• NEA recommends improving research on AAPIs so that it disaggregates data by ethnicity and looks at the learning experiences of individual ethnicities, resulting in improvements to support services and instruction where needed.• NEA supports the federal government creating and funding policies under the so-called No Child Left Behind Act to ensure schools have more capacity to serve English language learners and that these students are assessed accurately and fairly. NCLB’s parental involvement requirements should be strengthened to ensure that there is more outreach to AAPI parents, including bilingual support.• NEA recommends ensuring that teachers are culturally competent; history lessons accurately convey AAPI history and contributions; and AAPI educators, who are underrepresented in U.S. classrooms, are recruited and retained.
While educational attainment among some AAPI groups is relatively high, graduation rates for Pacific Islanders and Southeast Asian groups demonstrate the need for focused resources. Census 2000 data shows the percentage of AAPIs who are over age 25 and have less than a high school education: 59.6% of Hmong, 53.3% of Cambodians, 49.6% of Lao and 38.1% of Vietnamese. According to The Silent Epidemic: Perspectives of High School Dropouts, the national graduation rate is about 70 percent.
Similar problems are reflected in the number of AAPIs who earn advanced degrees. The national average is 24 percent, but only 7.5% of Hmong, 19.4% of Vietnamese and 13.8% of Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders over age 25 have earned a bachelor’s degree or more based on Census figures.
The NEA recommendations are consistent with the Association’s commitment to serving Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and closing gaps in student achievement. In 2005, NEA and the Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies hosted a summit that discussed the problems experienced by underserved groups and possible solutions. NEA also works closely with a wide range of AAPI groups on education issues and supports the goals recently established in the education priorities of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.
“We share the responsibility of providing great public schools for every child,” Weaver added. “We must work with other organizations to level the playing field and create opportunities for future generations. The unique educational needs of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders must not be overlooked."
CHILDHOOD OBESITY and Asian American Kids
CHILDHOOD OBESITY
Asian-American kids are packing on pounds
Posted on Tue, Jan. 08, 2008
BY MOMO CHANG
The Oakland Tribune
Despite the stereotype Asians are petite and skinny, studies show this population is rapidly becoming overweight -- so much so that a California agency is targeting Asian and Pacific Islander Americans in a campaign.
Asian Americans have the fastest growing rate of overweight and obese children, according to the Asian American Network for Cancer Awareness, Research and Training.
''Asian-American families tend to be less physically active, more home-oriented and more screen-oriented than other groups, which can create obesity issues,'' said Kris Perry, executive director of First 5 California, the state agency that recently launched an awareness campaign.
Those are just a few causes among many that contribute to obesity among Asian-American youths, ranging from cultural to environmental factors.
Fast food seems to be one of the culprits. Asian teens consume more of it than their white counterparts, according to a California Health Interview Survey, or CHIS, 2005 survey. Forty-three percent ate fast food daily, compared to 35 percent of white teens.
Asian and Pacific Islander children compared to other ethnic and racial groups are also least likely to get their daily portions of fruits and veggies, according to a CHIS survey from 2001-2003.
And Asian and Pacific Islander children are the least physically active of all racial and ethnic groups. Only 57 percent of Asian Americans between 11 and 17 had vigorous physical activity in a week, according to a 2001-2003 CHIS survey.
''There's a growing number of overweight kids,'' said Jing Liu, dietitian at Asian Health Services.
''A lot of times I hear from kids that the P.E. classes in school are no longer offered, or are only twice a week,'' the dietitian said. ``And a lot of parents enroll their kids in after-school programs, (where) they are sitting for another two hours until they go home and eat dinner. After dinner, they watch TV or play on the computer or video games.''
Food choices figure in weight gain. White rice, a staple in most Asian families, is not that healthy -- especially when consumed in big portions.
In Asian countries, rice is usually eaten from a small bowl, with healthier dishes to eat with it. In the United States, especially in restaurants, rice is heaped onto the plate, Perry said.
And poor kids have less access to healthy foods.
''The food choices in low-income neighborhoods can be very high in fat, and these neighborhoods have less fresh food choices,'' Perry said.
Obesity leads to a host of other health problems -- including heart diseases, strokes, and Type 2 diabetes -- in children.
Asian-American kids are packing on pounds
Posted on Tue, Jan. 08, 2008
BY MOMO CHANG
The Oakland Tribune
Despite the stereotype Asians are petite and skinny, studies show this population is rapidly becoming overweight -- so much so that a California agency is targeting Asian and Pacific Islander Americans in a campaign.
Asian Americans have the fastest growing rate of overweight and obese children, according to the Asian American Network for Cancer Awareness, Research and Training.
''Asian-American families tend to be less physically active, more home-oriented and more screen-oriented than other groups, which can create obesity issues,'' said Kris Perry, executive director of First 5 California, the state agency that recently launched an awareness campaign.
Those are just a few causes among many that contribute to obesity among Asian-American youths, ranging from cultural to environmental factors.
Fast food seems to be one of the culprits. Asian teens consume more of it than their white counterparts, according to a California Health Interview Survey, or CHIS, 2005 survey. Forty-three percent ate fast food daily, compared to 35 percent of white teens.
Asian and Pacific Islander children compared to other ethnic and racial groups are also least likely to get their daily portions of fruits and veggies, according to a CHIS survey from 2001-2003.
And Asian and Pacific Islander children are the least physically active of all racial and ethnic groups. Only 57 percent of Asian Americans between 11 and 17 had vigorous physical activity in a week, according to a 2001-2003 CHIS survey.
''There's a growing number of overweight kids,'' said Jing Liu, dietitian at Asian Health Services.
''A lot of times I hear from kids that the P.E. classes in school are no longer offered, or are only twice a week,'' the dietitian said. ``And a lot of parents enroll their kids in after-school programs, (where) they are sitting for another two hours until they go home and eat dinner. After dinner, they watch TV or play on the computer or video games.''
Food choices figure in weight gain. White rice, a staple in most Asian families, is not that healthy -- especially when consumed in big portions.
In Asian countries, rice is usually eaten from a small bowl, with healthier dishes to eat with it. In the United States, especially in restaurants, rice is heaped onto the plate, Perry said.
And poor kids have less access to healthy foods.
''The food choices in low-income neighborhoods can be very high in fat, and these neighborhoods have less fresh food choices,'' Perry said.
Obesity leads to a host of other health problems -- including heart diseases, strokes, and Type 2 diabetes -- in children.
Why Do Asian American Students Excel in School?
Why Do Asian American Students Excel in School?
By Faiza Elmasry, VoA News
Washington DC - December 28, 2005 - Asian Americans make up 4% of the U.S. population, but represent 20% of the students now attending America's elite Ivy League schools. They are not more intelligent or gifted than non-Asian students. The reason they outperform their peers in the classroom has everything to do with how they are raised.
Soo Kim Abboud is a surgeon and an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Her sister Jane is an attorney. They were born in the United States to parents who had emigrated from Korea with little money in their pockets but big dreams of a better life in their hearts. From the very beginning, Jane Kim says, her parents realized the importance of education for their daughters, and they made it their top priority. "When we were younger, I mean in elementary and middle school, our parents were very involved," she says.
So involved, she recalls, that they gladly assumed the role of teacher after the school day ended.
"The thing that both my sister and I were amazed at was that every time we had a question, every time we asked them to help us with a difficult concept at school or with a project, they never acted as if it was a burden, they always were quick to help us," she says. "There were times when our parents didn't really understand the concepts. They would actually try to re-learn the concepts and re-teach themselves. They just made themselves available all the time."
While their classmates were talking on the phone with friends, having sleepovers and going to the mall, the Kim sisters were different. "I was in the 5th grade and I had a curfew in terms of the time I can spend on the phone," Jane says. "We had much more strict upbringing than others. We didn't go out on weekdays. We didn't go out as much as our colleagues and friends. I think we knew that early on," Soo recalls.
But it wasn't until many years later that the girls realized how much their parents' approach to child-rearing had contributed to their success. Soo Kim Abboud says they also realized they were not alone. "I think that's more prevalent in the Asian cultures than others. There is a great statistic that I like to share," Soo says. "When 15-year-old teenagers were asked whether they expect to graduate from college, 58% of white teenagers expected to graduate from college. Eighty-five percent of Korean and Japanese teenagers expected to graduate from college, and 95% of Indian teenagers expected to graduate from college. I think this shows there is a tremendous emphasis and prioritization of education in these Asian families. That's something to be proud of. We aren't saying we are any smarter, it's just the emphasis on education that makes a difference."
Soo Kim Abboud and Jane Kim compiled their observations in a new book, Top of the Class: How Asian Parents Raise High Achievers and How You Can Too. In it, they explain what Asian parents cultivate in their kids that helps them maximize their chances of success in school. And they highlight the differences between Asian and American families in raising their children.
"In American families, I think, most of them stress effort," Jane says. "We always hear that saying, 'As long as you try, it's O.K.' In Asian families, they really believe in that principle, but they also stress the achievement. They want you to put your best foot forward, but they also want you to do achieve. Asian parents take the time out to really get involved and know what their child is doing in the classroom. They are very aware of what's going on. Asian parents are generally very practical people. They are the first to tell you that money really matters, that if you can't pay your bills, it's difficult to be happy."
While many American parents encourage their kids to have as many extra-curricular activities as they can handle, Jane Kim says Asian parents usually don't do that. "I think Asian families, many of them, make sure that the number one priority is education," Jane says. "So they tend to limit a handful of extra curricular activities. Both Soo and I played piano. We also played tennis, and they are great for taking your mind from your studies and being able to mingle with other students. But I think if you have so many, it's going to detract and you're not necessarily going to do a great job in all of them."
Soo Kim Abboud says she considers herself fortunate that she was raised in an Asian family. Being raised here in the United States, she says, was another advantage.
"I think the American culture is wonderful," Soo says. "It promotes creativity, independence and emotional development. I think the key here is to get the best of the American culture. You also have to embrace and keep what's made the Asian cultures so special: the discipline, the ability to delay gratification and emphasis on education. I think the two of those together is probably the best combination you can have."
However, Asian parents also make mistakes. And that's what the sisters focus on in the last chapter of their book.
"Asian parents sometimes pressure too much to force their kids in one direction," Jane says. "But I think the key here is that Asian parents can learn something from non-Asian parents about expressing that their child's happiness does mean as much as any educational achievement," Soo adds. "The thing that I recommend would be just to keep an open dialogue with your child, to talk with them about what their wishes are, what their expectations are," Jane suggests.
Soo and Jane Kim say they hope their book will inspire parents everywhere to be more involved in their kids' educational life, encourage them to dream and help them work hard until those dreams come true.
Other Readings of Interest
School Daze- The Smart Asian SyndromeBy Gil Asakawa, NikkeiViewAren't all Asians supposed to be smart, especially in math and science? Well, I was a good student -- the model minority and all that. I was near the top of my graduating class, but I wasn't a straight-A student in high school.
Education Culture GapBy Frances Kai-Hwa Wang, AAV Contributing EditorTugging at a few threads of truth behind the Model Minority myth
'Do Your Own Homework': Asian Students Should Learn to Think for ThemselvesBy Andrew Lam, Pacific News ServiceWhen a Vietnamese American author fields anxious e-mails from high school students seeking help with their English essays, he reflects on Asian conformity and the American ego
Inside the Asian Pressure CookerBy Pueng Vongs, Pacific News ServiceAsian immigrants' drive for material success and shame-based culture may be causing many to place impossibly strict expectations on their children. Health and social workers say rates of depression are disproportionately high among Asian youths, and in some cases this results in suicide.
Hear the Audio @ VoA
Elmasry report voiced by Faith Lapidus (Download MP3) 1,345 KB Elmasry report voiced by Faith Lapidus (Real Audio) - Download 891 KB Listen to Elmasry report voiced by Faith Lapidus (Real Audio)
Credit: This article originally appeared on the Voice of America web site at http://voanews.com.
By Faiza Elmasry, VoA News
Washington DC - December 28, 2005 - Asian Americans make up 4% of the U.S. population, but represent 20% of the students now attending America's elite Ivy League schools. They are not more intelligent or gifted than non-Asian students. The reason they outperform their peers in the classroom has everything to do with how they are raised.
Soo Kim Abboud is a surgeon and an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Her sister Jane is an attorney. They were born in the United States to parents who had emigrated from Korea with little money in their pockets but big dreams of a better life in their hearts. From the very beginning, Jane Kim says, her parents realized the importance of education for their daughters, and they made it their top priority. "When we were younger, I mean in elementary and middle school, our parents were very involved," she says.
So involved, she recalls, that they gladly assumed the role of teacher after the school day ended.
"The thing that both my sister and I were amazed at was that every time we had a question, every time we asked them to help us with a difficult concept at school or with a project, they never acted as if it was a burden, they always were quick to help us," she says. "There were times when our parents didn't really understand the concepts. They would actually try to re-learn the concepts and re-teach themselves. They just made themselves available all the time."
While their classmates were talking on the phone with friends, having sleepovers and going to the mall, the Kim sisters were different. "I was in the 5th grade and I had a curfew in terms of the time I can spend on the phone," Jane says. "We had much more strict upbringing than others. We didn't go out on weekdays. We didn't go out as much as our colleagues and friends. I think we knew that early on," Soo recalls.
But it wasn't until many years later that the girls realized how much their parents' approach to child-rearing had contributed to their success. Soo Kim Abboud says they also realized they were not alone. "I think that's more prevalent in the Asian cultures than others. There is a great statistic that I like to share," Soo says. "When 15-year-old teenagers were asked whether they expect to graduate from college, 58% of white teenagers expected to graduate from college. Eighty-five percent of Korean and Japanese teenagers expected to graduate from college, and 95% of Indian teenagers expected to graduate from college. I think this shows there is a tremendous emphasis and prioritization of education in these Asian families. That's something to be proud of. We aren't saying we are any smarter, it's just the emphasis on education that makes a difference."
Soo Kim Abboud and Jane Kim compiled their observations in a new book, Top of the Class: How Asian Parents Raise High Achievers and How You Can Too. In it, they explain what Asian parents cultivate in their kids that helps them maximize their chances of success in school. And they highlight the differences between Asian and American families in raising their children.
"In American families, I think, most of them stress effort," Jane says. "We always hear that saying, 'As long as you try, it's O.K.' In Asian families, they really believe in that principle, but they also stress the achievement. They want you to put your best foot forward, but they also want you to do achieve. Asian parents take the time out to really get involved and know what their child is doing in the classroom. They are very aware of what's going on. Asian parents are generally very practical people. They are the first to tell you that money really matters, that if you can't pay your bills, it's difficult to be happy."
While many American parents encourage their kids to have as many extra-curricular activities as they can handle, Jane Kim says Asian parents usually don't do that. "I think Asian families, many of them, make sure that the number one priority is education," Jane says. "So they tend to limit a handful of extra curricular activities. Both Soo and I played piano. We also played tennis, and they are great for taking your mind from your studies and being able to mingle with other students. But I think if you have so many, it's going to detract and you're not necessarily going to do a great job in all of them."
Soo Kim Abboud says she considers herself fortunate that she was raised in an Asian family. Being raised here in the United States, she says, was another advantage.
"I think the American culture is wonderful," Soo says. "It promotes creativity, independence and emotional development. I think the key here is to get the best of the American culture. You also have to embrace and keep what's made the Asian cultures so special: the discipline, the ability to delay gratification and emphasis on education. I think the two of those together is probably the best combination you can have."
However, Asian parents also make mistakes. And that's what the sisters focus on in the last chapter of their book.
"Asian parents sometimes pressure too much to force their kids in one direction," Jane says. "But I think the key here is that Asian parents can learn something from non-Asian parents about expressing that their child's happiness does mean as much as any educational achievement," Soo adds. "The thing that I recommend would be just to keep an open dialogue with your child, to talk with them about what their wishes are, what their expectations are," Jane suggests.
Soo and Jane Kim say they hope their book will inspire parents everywhere to be more involved in their kids' educational life, encourage them to dream and help them work hard until those dreams come true.
Other Readings of Interest
School Daze- The Smart Asian SyndromeBy Gil Asakawa, NikkeiViewAren't all Asians supposed to be smart, especially in math and science? Well, I was a good student -- the model minority and all that. I was near the top of my graduating class, but I wasn't a straight-A student in high school.
Education Culture GapBy Frances Kai-Hwa Wang, AAV Contributing EditorTugging at a few threads of truth behind the Model Minority myth
'Do Your Own Homework': Asian Students Should Learn to Think for ThemselvesBy Andrew Lam, Pacific News ServiceWhen a Vietnamese American author fields anxious e-mails from high school students seeking help with their English essays, he reflects on Asian conformity and the American ego
Inside the Asian Pressure CookerBy Pueng Vongs, Pacific News ServiceAsian immigrants' drive for material success and shame-based culture may be causing many to place impossibly strict expectations on their children. Health and social workers say rates of depression are disproportionately high among Asian youths, and in some cases this results in suicide.
Hear the Audio @ VoA
Elmasry report voiced by Faith Lapidus (Download MP3) 1,345 KB Elmasry report voiced by Faith Lapidus (Real Audio) - Download 891 KB Listen to Elmasry report voiced by Faith Lapidus (Real Audio)
Credit: This article originally appeared on the Voice of America web site at http://voanews.com.
Child Abuse Among Asian Americans
From http://modelminority.com/article469.html
Child Abuse Among Asian Americans
By Emily Guey
Special to ModelMinority.comJuly 2003
Introduction
Child maltreatment among Asian Americans today sadly remains unexposed. The purpose of this paper is to uncover the nature of child abuse and neglect, also called CAN, in Asian Americans and reasons for its lack of visibility. Only from taking this first step of uncovering child abuse can an effective effort to fight it develop, because only there can all-out efforts be made to try and protect victims.
It is through my vulnerability as an Asian American who has personally experienced child abuse that I unravel its complex cultural roots. My impetus, as implicitly stated in the title, reflects my determination to create wholeness from a broken past by sharing, rather than remaining torn, embittered and silent. I am neither condemning nor rejecting the values of my heritage, but rather, making others aware that child maltreatment can arise from cultural roots. I also hope to shed light on the hidden nature of abuse that keeps this problem locked behind the closed doors of family homes.This paper focuses on Asian American groups in which CAN has been almost invisible: Chinese, Japanese, Philippines, Koreans, and Vietnamese. In addition, CAN in Southeast Asian groups is touched upon, primarily the U.S. refugees of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. This paper touches on the circumstances of the present generation of Asian and Southeast Asians, who continue to immigrate to the U.S. and concentrates on that of previous generations. Asians continue to immigrate to the U.S. in strong numbers. As the first generation brings the cultural roots of CAN to the U.S., concentrating on the first, as opposed to the second generation, would deal directly with the current unmet pressing issues.
The importance of such a study cannot be underestimated. Child maltreatment in any form is painful, and if not addressed, will not only create deep wounds, but also spark further cycles of abuse. Another reason this topic is important is that, because Asian culture is very different from Western culture, child abuse among Asian Americans is often misunderstood by Americans.
The paper is divided into four sections, each hoping to explain an aspect of the unexposed issues related to CAN among Asian Americans. The first, Child Abuse and Neglect Among Asian Americans, compares Asian and American definitions of CAN, and provides examples among Asian Americans. The second, Causes of Child Maltreatment among Asian Americans, gives an overview of Asians and Southeast Asians, and studies the background of the most recent generation, from parental pressure to discriminatory facets of Asian American life, that may lead to maltreatment. The third section, The Hidden Nature of Maltreatment among Asian Americans, focuses on how the cultural roots of Asia, and model minority myth lead to the underreporting of abuse. The last section, Prevention Services, provides a general overview of existing programs, policies, and public awareness campaigns to counteract CAN among Asian Americans.
This paper seeks to provide information that will ultimately serve as a bridge between Asians and Americans. This bridge can hopefully be the link to the creation of more effective services that can match the needs of Asian-American children. The wave of immigration for the present-day Asian-American generation has just begun, and now is the time for the problems to be exposed. The East and West have met, and although there are challenges facing them, these are not insurmountable. A clearer understanding of both sides, East and West, will hopefully be deduced from this work, and can help to diminish those challenges.
Child Abuse and Neglect Among Asian Americans
Child abuse and neglect has been a difficult topic for the West and East to confront. While the West has taken larger steps in approaching this issue, the East lags behind. Separately attacking child maltreatment in the East and in the West is difficult enough. Tackling this issue, however, in the presence of both East and West, requires much insight. Part of the challenge lies in the different perceptions of CAN by Americans and Asians.Even in the U.S., with its complex infrastructure and democratic process, combating CAN is still relatively new. From the first reported case of child abuse in the 1800s, to the recognition of the “battered child syndrome” in the 1960s (Tower, 1999, p.12), to the 1974 Congressional enactment of the important federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act or CAPTA (Barnett, 1997), America’s take on children’s rights has slowly but persistently been established, with most efforts taking place in the past few decades. In Asia, on the other hand, abuse is still, due to cultural roots, a hard issue to tackle, for battered adults. Children, who naturally have a smaller voice in society than adults, therefore, have an even harder time defending themselves in the face of maltreatment. Domestic violence in Asia has just recently started gaining attention, and CAN has yet to start being challenged. The Domestic Violence Act of 1994 was amended in May 2003 to address emotional abuse (Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia, 2003), something that Americans have long since addressed in child abuse cases, and even longer in domestic violence cases.
The current US federal definition of child abuse, taken directly from the 1974 legislation is: “at minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, seriously physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.” Child maltreatment takes on four broad forms: emotional abuse, neglect, physical abuse and sexual abuse. (National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1999).
Asians have commonly believed that child abuse is only defined as extreme physical torture exerted on a child. Only in extreme cases involving such drastic physical torture from beatings in the bathtub, to abandonment of infants in coin lockers (WuDunn, 1999), to severe maternal beatings resulting in death of a four-year old son (Kyodo News Service, 2003), child abuse would be justifiably reported. These cases, apparently caused in large part by economic stress or anger from marriage problems, are not rare. Ministries of Health and Welfare in Asia suspect that, as they begin to intervene in cases of abuse, many more cases of even more severe extremes, problems many did not believe had existed, will come to light (WuDunn, 1999).
More dangerous physical behavior and treatment, including “kicking, beating, slapping, and using objects that caused injuries or deaths,” have been documented (Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia, 2003, last section).
In March 2003, a Japanese newspaper that shares unusual observations correlated a decline in mothers’ morals with child abuse. Incidents of emotional abuse were reflected in several cases: a woman sending her teen-age daughter to steal; another, jeopardizing her young daughter’s health by forcing her to go out with her mother’s boyfriend; another, forcing her child to buy food even with a high fever and bad cold. Although these reported cases of mothers imposing slavish demands on their daughters are extreme, they indicate that Asians are starting to recognize that abuse is not confined only to physical treatments, but nonphysical as well. (Connell, 2003).
More modest cases, however, are less likely to be recognized than these blatantly abusive ones. For Asian families, the general assumption is that physical punishment or discipline by striking a child does not qualify as abuse (Tran, 1997). CAPTA standards, however, indicate that physical abuse constitutes “hitting, punching, shaking, kicking, and beating” (National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1999, para.7), forms which Asian physical punishment or discipline may take on. Additionally, other key facets of child abuse recognized by the U.S., from emotional abuse to physical neglect, have been, and still are ignored by most Asians (Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia, 2003). In 2000, 49.7 percent of reported cases in Japan concerned physical abuse, while 10.1 and 36.5 percent concerned emotional and neglect, respectively (Asia Human Rights News, 2001).
CAPTA standards on emotional abuse and neglect have only just recently been made known in Asia and are becoming slowly implemented. Emotional abuse includes acts that cause serious behavioral, cognitive, emotional, or mental disorders. From terrorizing a child, to using derogatory terms to describe the child, to habitual scapegoating or blaming, parents in America can be accused of emotional abuse. Neglect, on the other hand, takes on three different levels, including psychological. Lack of emotional support and love constitute psychological neglect. (National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1999).
Ultimately, the emotional abuse and neglect that is rooted into many common child-rearing techniques remain accepted to Asian Americans. Even among domestic violence cases, “psychological abuse, which is more common in daily life, is still not regarded by many Asians as a violation of human rights” (Financial Times Information, 2003, para. 7). Convincing Asians that psychological abuse among children is a form of child abuse would be very difficult, then, as Asians have believed for centuries that parental authority was virtually supreme (Tran, 1997).
Shaming children, often interpreted by non-Asian professionals as emotionally abusive (Tower, 1999), does not find the same consensus among most Asian parents. Asian parents often place unrealistically high expectations for their children, highlighted as a factor found in abusive parents (Gelles, 1997). The significant effects of the emotional abuse and neglect on the second- generation Asian American youth, however, may be sound enough to persuade first generation Asians. Amy Tan’s (1989) well-known book, The Joy Luck Club, abounds in examples of how shaming children and placing pressure affects second generation Asian Americans. Throughout the book, one of the main characters, Waverly, experiences emotional abuse, from feeling maternal pressure to win chess tournaments, to crying inside due to the hurt heart feeling maternal rejection, to worrying about how critical her mother would be towards her American boyfriend. Waverly embodies the effects of an Asian American who has unknowingly experienced emotional abuse and neglect. (Tan, 1989).
A real life example occurred in 1990 at the San Francisco Bay Area, when a Chinese American teenager ran away from her home, to avoid her father’s oppressive parenting methods. During his training routines, he would ask her to run home from school, the path stretching vertically 1,500 feet, while swinging a racquet. Such embarrassing schemes were meant to toughen her up mentally for tennis, his goal being for her to be the best player. Faced with the dilemma of many other second generation Asian Americans, the teen ‘s sudden break from home was undoubtedly a reaction to her totalitarian upbringing. (Wong, 100).
At an even more dramatic extreme are the Asian American youths that drive themselves to suicide from not living up to the wishes of their immediate families. Suicide rates among Asian American teens have risen threefold over the past twenty years, with Chinese-Americans 36% higher, and Japanese-Americans, 54% higher than the national average among other teens, compared to all teens in the U.S. combined. The alarming statistics on teenage suicides among Asian Americans point to a need to address the extreme parental pressure among these families. (Rigdon, 1991).
The definitions of child abuse for the Asian and American cultures differ markedly. Most Asians still perceive child abuse only as physical torture, disregarding emotional abuse and neglect. Americans accept a much broader definition, which encompasses not only physical, but also emotional abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse. Change is taking place slowly, however, and as more governmental intervention and exposure to domestic violence and CAN issues take place in Asia, Asian Americans will be more sensitive to their child rearing techniques. Second generation Asian Americans have suffered tremendously from the emotional abuse and neglect inherent in parental pressure, a common child rearing technique among Asian families, and it is past time for more attention on an issue that pervades the lives of countless Asian Americans (Rigdon, 1991).
Causes of Child Maltreatment Among Asian Families
In order to understand the causes of CAN, one must first understand the complicated background of Asian Americans, originating from Asia and Southeast Asia. Asians include Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, Korean and Asian Indians. Their immigration started in 1848 and has reached exploding rates today, the Chinese and Filipino making up 23.7% and 18.1%, respectively, of the Asian American population in 2000, and while Asian Indians represent a smaller proportion of the Asian population (16.4%), they boasted a growth rate of 113.4% between 1990 and 2000 (APA Community, 2000). Southeast Asians have immigrated to the US in four waves of refugee exoduses, from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Among them, the Vietnamese holds an impressive growth rate, second only to the Asian Indians, at 89.2%. While the overall goals of coming to America have been the same – to seek the American dream – the reasons for and details surrounding the departure and arrival of each Asian ethnic group have been different.
Immigration patterns varied among Southeast Asian immigrants, even among the waves of refugee exoduses after the Vietnam War. The first wave of 1975 was comprised of South Vietnamese government employees, military personnel, and those employed by Americans in Vietnam. Well educated, they took on a variety of professional positions in medicine, engineering and business, for example. The second wave, which occurred between 1975 and 1978, comprised of the relatives of the first-wave immigrants, who arrived to escape the harsh life in the new economic zones resulting from war. The third wave, between 1978 and 1980, was comprised of the uneducated and illegal ‘boat people’ from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia who were fleeing the political oppression and economic conditions in their countries and lived in limbo in refugee camps. The most recent wave, from 1980 to 1990, consists of Southeast Asian prisoners released from reeducation camps. (Pang, 1998)
While early waves of immigrants from Southeast Asia adjusted relatively well to the new country, those arriving more recently still face the challenges of healing from war memories, making it very hard for them to feel at home. Most of the 100,000 Cambodian refugees are country folk, and carry deep psychological scars of war and mass exterminations (Takaki, 1989). Personality characteristics such as depression, anxiety, and antisocial behavior that result from the post-traumatic stress disorder, are also associated with violence against children (Gelles, 1997). Children of these refugees, then, who look up to their parents for a proper child rearing, are at risk of abuse and neglect. However, the special protection rights and CAN issues of refugee children are often neglected (Human Rights Watch, 2000).
Asians, on the other hand, have been in the U.S. much longer than their Southeastern counterparts. In the mid-1760s, Filipinos have worked as seamen for the Spanish galleon trade in Louisiana. Asian Indians migrated to become sea captains in Massachusetts and indentured servants or slaves in Pennsylvania beginning in the 1790s. However, little else is known about these earliest Asian Americans (Takaki, 1989).
The real wave of Asian immigration wave occurred between 1848 and 1924, mainly involving laborers for the railroad and agricultural production. The Chinese escaped from political and economic turmoil during the 1850s, found refuge in the gold rush through jobs, and became railroad workers in the mid 1860s. By 1870, they composed 9 percent of California’s population and a quarter of its work force. 38,000 Japanese arrived in the U.S. between 1902 and 1907 and became very successful by exploiting an economic niche in agriculture. However, due to the great economic success in their home country in the early part of the century, fewer Japanese have immigrated since. Between 1903 and 1905, the Japanese have increased control over Korea, making it difficult for Koreans to immigrate. The few Koreans who have come before 1940 are primarily California agricultural laborers. Filipinos have come to America in spurts, starting in 1898 after the Spanish-American War, in which US gained the Philippines. After first migrating to Hawaii as pensionados, students supported by government scholarships, they eventually became sugar plantation workers, totaling 28,000 in 1918. With the enactment of the 1924 Immigration Act, Filipinos came to the US, and by the late 1920s numbered 45,000 in the Pacific, making their mark primarily as young single labor union organizers of agriculture and services. Between 1904 and 1911, Asian Indians immigrated directly to the US, totaling 6,000, and worked in the California agricultural industry. (Fong, 2002).
Circumstances surrounding the second major wave of Asian immigration are much different than those of the first. A dramatic increase in Asian immigration occurred after the enactment of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act, rising almost 7 percent from 1960 to 1970, and another 22 percent from 1970 to 1980. The Immigration Act of 1990, while placing a cap on total immigration, authorized an increase in legal immigration to encourage the immigration of more skilled workers to help meet the needs of the US economy. The law attracted Asians, who since 1965, has been among the best-educated and trained immigrants in the US. (Fong, 2002).
Most of the Asian Americans today come from the second large wave of immigration after 1965, as well as from the children of the first wave of immigrants (Takaki, 1989). The current pressing nature of CAN among this growing generation compels the research to apply specifically to them. In order to target the causes of the commonly attributed Asian American parental pressure that so often results in the CAN discussed in the previous section, it is necessary to understand the greatness of the dreams that pushed them to move to America.
To them, America symbolized great opportunities, from education to freedom, for example in the Chinese case, from the Cultural Revolution. Hong Kong, for example, only had two universities (Takaki, 1989), and so to the new Chinese immigrants, the U.S. was a not only a new home, but a place of educational advantage for their children. Additionally, America, as one of the world’s leading nations, motivates many foreign countries to become more westernized. The Asia Marketing Association in South Korea, for example, reflects its deep passion for recruiting American students to commit one year in Seoul teaching English through its very convenient and attractive offers (Asia Marketing Association, 2003).
Hardly anything compares to the sacrifices and determination the Asians undertook to make it to this country. They were desperate to flee from such social plights as the 1989 Tianamen Square, China’s one-child policy, and relatively low earning standards. Many have risked the tortuous illegal immigration process, paying off the cost of thirty thousand later in America by working in low-paying restaurants and sweatshops. The tremendous sacrifices that the first-generation Asians have taken demonstrate the immense faith they had put in their children to move upward, living out a profession and lifestyle far better than what they could pursue in their home country. (Wong, 2001).
Coming from a culture in which education is king, it is no wonder Asians can have so much trust in their children to carry out the American dream through school. Japan’s ganbatte philosophy, which promotes industry among its workers and students has rubbed off on other Asian countries. University entrance exams in Asia are a national obsession. In contrast to the Scholastic Achievement Tests in America, which are held several times a year, these exams can only be taken once a year, making pressure to perform well on the tests much tougher for Asians. Massive amounts of media attention are placed on status and rank. National entrance exams are the only determinant for acceptance into university. The higher the score, the better chance the student will be accepted into a highly esteemed university. And the greater the university, the greater chance the student has in being hired by a highly esteemed company. (Rohlen, 1983).
Asian students are used to facing this sort of pressure, but the pressure is not, of course, without dysfunction. Exam pressures are responsible for high youth suicide rates, nervous disorders, and even delinquency. When first generation Asians arrive in America, they have already been wired to endure such educational pressure, and since they deeply believe that education is the key to climbing up the American ladder of success, they carry out the dreams for their children by pushing them to excel in school. (Rohlen, 1983).
Parental pressure on the children is intensified even further, not only by their inspiration to pursue greater dreams, but also by their knowledge of America’s history of discrimination towards Asians. In 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, the only piece of federal legislation targeting a specific ethnic group, barring Chinese laborers from entering the US. During the last half of the nineteenth century, Asian Americans were forced to stand up for their rights of citizenship, as many were naturalized citizens, yet barred from reentering the US. The execution of the new welfare-reform law in 1996 made many noncitizens, who were perfectly legal residents ineligible for many public benefits. (Wong, 2001).
Struggling to become accustomed to a new country and bearing the discrimination and trials of immigrant was hard enough for Asian Americans. While many yearn to survive the tumultuous trip to America, few actually make it to the U.S. Those who do make it make the most out of their good fortune, and are exceptionally driven about carrying out their visions through their children. They unconsciously demand the same hard work and discipline on their children that they themselves had expended to arrive in the U.S. The pressure exerted on the children goes a long way, as the parents struggle to attain a dream that lies far above their initial status as immigrants. Once in the U.S., there is a long way to climb up until they can reach their ideal position.
Speaking a different language, for one thing, forces many Asian doctors to become US janitors, rather than to continue practicing in their profession. While 16 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander men over 25 years were holding executive positions, 21 percent were holding professional jobs in 1993(IMDiversity, 2003). Many were confined to making a living by washing dishes and cooking in downtown Chinatowns. Even though the immigrants of the second wave of immigrants were the most highly skilled immigrant group, their restricted employment possibilities created much anxiety for the families. (Takaki, 1989).
Their children are the ultimate bridge to fulfilling their hopes. Because education is one of the few avenues available to Asians, parents tend to have “unrealistically high expectations for their children, a factor found in abusive relationships” (Gelles, 1997). As a result, there is a strong obligation for the second generation to do well in school, as that is the key to employment. From a young age, children are immersed in academic endeavors to ensure a sound start to a good education. They spend intense hours on a daily basis from preparing for the SATs to getting a head start on calculus. The lack of role models for these children and their families to judge how much is good enough to obtain career security. First generation parents feel that in order to rise above adversity, their children cannot be any less than the best, since Americans will not take notice of them unless their achievements warrant outstanding attention.
Parents may unconsciously compare siblings’ achievement and engender pressure in other ways. Strict demands and responsibilities placed on girls and the oldest child to pay tribute to their specific cultural family roles are also common. Educational achievement and focus on cultural values, as well as expectations to succeed are expressed through the use of guilt and shame and family obligations. Children may miss out on youth, bowing to the immense pressures placed on them, the internalization of their parents’ dreams into their hearts too difficult to avoid. (Pang, 1998).
Asian Americans come from a diverse and strong cultural background. Since the second half of the eighteenth century, they have struggled to arrive in America seeking greater dreams. Most recently, with the passage of more opportunistic immigration laws, the first generation Americans are able to live out the dreams through their children. Education a key to success in their home countries, and the first-generation Asians perceive it as the answer to making those dreams come true in the U.S. as well. Faced with discrimination, shortcomings, and a cap on career opportunities, the push for their children to succeed is incredibly strong, often resulting in CAN. Relocation depression, insecurities, and stress-induced circumstances from the discouraging employment prospects for Asian Americans also increase the likeliness of CAN. In addition, intergenerational CAN brought over to America from the prevalence of domestic violence in Asia may promote cycles of abuse in families. CAN in Asian Americans, however, is very well hidden. In the next section, a glimpse at Asian cultural roots and Americans’ perspective of Asian Americans will unravel why.
Hidden Nature of Child Maltreatment
Asian Americans currently make up four percent of the population, but very few CAN cases are reported. The lack of reported cases does not correlate with a strong absence of CAN. As reflected from the previous sections, CAN is prevalent, yet it should not be surprising when one looks at the Asian values why it has been so underreported.
Obedience, conformity, and respect for authority, key Confucian ethics at the center of Asian life (Lee, 1996), make it excruciatingly painful for those experiencing violence to seek help. It’s hard enough breaking out of the family barriers of domestic violence in Asia. It becomes even more difficult in a foreign country where one has been faced with strong discrimination. If Asian Americans are faced with domestic violence or child maltreatment, even in the most extreme ways, these social and cultural values hold them back from seeking help.
When abuse is even harder to detect, as the case with “emotional and psychological abuse, which do not leave physical evidence, but can be as devastating to the child as physical or sexual abuse” (Winton, 2001, p.87), probably the most prevalent form of abuse in Asian Americans, the more likely it is to remain hidden. Furthermore, it is the Asian American’s reaction to the CAN that keeps it even less detectable. Many Asian Americans receive high academic grades in response to needing the approval of their parents and teachers. The desire to please their parents and attain the high parental expectations has been internalized (Pang, 1998), and even though test/achievement anxiety may be detected, a relationship between this and the CAN that usually causes such performance anxiety is hardly ever deduced.
Instead, exaggerated stereotypes about Asian Americans being the model minority have flowered. On one hand, the Model Minority Myth praises the Asian Americans’ hard work and success, for they are living proof that America is truly a land of opportunity. On the other hand, there are underlying damages behind this myth. Paying specific attention to the amazing achievements of the Model Minority has in effect, blocked outsiders from realizing the abusive struggles and pressures that many Asian Americans experience to attain such stellar academic recognition. It also forces Asian Americans, heavily influenced by the Confucian ethic of conformation, to feel pressured to conform to the ideals of the model minority. Indeed, Asian Americans are strongly represented at Ivy League universities: 11 percent at Harvard, 10 percent at Princeton, 16 percent at Stanford, and 21 percent at MIT (Takaki, 1989), compared to the overall 5 percent Asian American enrollment in all U.S. schools (ISACS, 2003).
In addition, direct conflicts between Eastern and Western values, keep an issue that is already tough to talk about even harder to confront. Americans, whose values are centered on independence, assertiveness, and individuality, have just a hard time relating to the Eastern cultural values of obedience, submission, and humility as the East has with the West. By nature, these differences set up barriers to Americans’ understanding the nature of CAN in Asian Americans. Because they are the minority, the rejection Asian Americans feel from not belonging in the mainstream American society is enough to set them apart from trustworthy relationships with Americans; it would be almost inconceivable to open up to Americans about their private problems. Americans, on the other hand, have little cause to suspect child abuse and neglect among Asian Americans because of their idealized status as the model minority.
Additional factors loom large with reporting CAN. Problems with speaking English, as with uneducated Vietnamese refugees, thicken the wall between those who need the post war counseling and those who can provide the professional assistance to prevent the abuse that is likely to occur with their stressful lives. Another inborn fear is that reporting CAN cases could have an adverse effect on the immigration status of the first generation class that worked so hard to arrive in the US. Asians are by nature very quiet and private, and this makes becoming more open about plights challenging. For over thirty-five years, the Japanese Americans who interned during World War II to could not speak up about how horrendously they had been treated (Takaki, 1989).
The silent cycle is hard to break, but the bolder each generation becomes, and as CAN becomes more recognized by the Asian American community, the more easily CAN to be tackled.
Prevention
Despite the hidden nature of CAN among Asian-Americans, growing exposure to the issue has spurred a flurry of government-sponsored programs in Japan and China, the two main Asian countries, as well as social service agencies in America that try to counteract this formerly invisible plight. The new services will prove important to Asians, as “they belong to the fastest-growing ethnic minority group in the US” (Takaki, 1989, p. 5).
Japan, one of the world’s foremost successful economic nations, has taken an unexpected turn from its ganbatte philosophy discussed previously, which has been a main cause of the extreme push to succeed among Asian-American students. Just two years ago, Iwate, a city in northeast Japan, developed an advertising scheme with the theme, ‘ganbaranai’, meaning, – “I won’t work so hard”. Although this idea was rejected among the older Japanese generations, many young people are happy with the fact that Japan has started straying away from its extreme determination for its youth to be so academically focused. The new slogan of ganbaranai to symbolize the new Japan is promising to help the Japanese realize there is more to life than work. (Green, 2003).
Japan may also be a model for the rest of Asia because it has taken great strides in combating child abuse. Exposure of the public to the issue was the first major step. The increased awareness of what is considered abuse of children accounts for the rise of reported cases of child abuse in Okinawa, which had about 1.5 times that of the national average in 2002 (News, 2003). In 1999, the Ministry of Health and Welfare commissioned its first child abuse survey, a great step forward from the past when the Government failed to keep track of cases (WuDunn, 1999). As reporting child abuse cases became more socially accepted, greater attention was turned to something that “had been happening for a very long time that’s just coming to the surface,” according to the director of Center for Child Abuse Prevention (WuDunn, 1999).
Child abuse inquiries in Japan have been up by 60% since 2000. A new law that required police to accompany welfare officials on home investigations was enforced November 2001. Since then, the ministry has learned of 22 deaths caused by child abuse (Asia Human Rights News, 2001). Spurred by this growing recognition of child abuse, delegates of Japanese social service agencies sought the help of the George Warren Brown School of Social Work in the U.S. to learn more about how Americans deal with such issues as parental rights, juvenile courts, foster care, and child abuse and neglect (Everding, 1999).
In addition, amendments and proposals to combat child abuse have been carefully prepared in Japan, which recently realized the lack of mental health professionals to cope with the rise of child abuse cases. An amendment “to rebuild families by providing psychological care for child and parents instead of the current policy of temporarily depriving parents of custody” (Kyodo News, 2003) has recently been established. A recent proposal from educators of child abuse prevention (2003) proponents highlights the following serious needs:
1. A trustworthy relationship between teachers and children
2. Training for teachers to recognize child abuse cases, as well as application of the training towards experience of actual abuse cases
3. Links between the school/teachers and Child Guidance clinics
4. Intervention for Child Neglect
5. Other professionals to realize teacher’s roles
6. Consideration for Children not being abused at the present, but who have experienced traumatic abuse in the past
China follows in Japan’s footsteps in counteracting uncomfortable issues that have traditionally remained behind closed doors, first targeting domestic violence, and then, slowly fighting child maltreatment. China’s unprecedented method of bringing domestic violence into the open with “Don’t Talk to Strangers,” a 23-part TV series on domestic violence in March, 2003 (China Daily, 2003) brings light to previously unacknowledged forms of domestic violence, such as psychological abuse. The creation of the anti-domestic violence team the same month in Beijing serves to combat domestic violence on a community level (BBC, 2003). In Bangkok, in April, 2003, the Child Protection Foundation organized the building of Baan Amphawa, which houses victims of violence, including children, and hopes to provide all children with education (Bangkok Post, 2003).
Slowly, the changes in these major Asian countries, from Japan’s more relaxed approach to educational achievement and strong CAN prevention strategies to China’s exposure of domestic violence and CAN, can serve as models for other Asian countries. As Asians start to be aware of these new facets of life, from education to child-rearing tactics, the demands they impose on their children when they migrate to the U.S. will not be as stressful as in the past. The effect of CAN in second generation Asian Americans, then, will be greatly diminished from the significant changes that have started occurring in Asia.
While Asia has made strides forward with developing programs to fight CAN, social services in the U.S. have tried to increase the understanding of CAN between Americans and Asians. Because the most recent wave of Asians to the US did not take place until 1965 (Wong, 2001), fewer than forty years ago, not much research and literature yet exists specifically on CAN among Asian-Americans, and therefore, very few existing social services truly match up to the needs. Cupertino, the city in the heart of Silicon Valley, boasted an Asian-American population of 13% in 1990 (Bensen, 1998). And yet, Silicon Valley’s largest provider of social services for Asian Americans, Asian Americans for Community Involvement, founded in 1973, only recently celebrated its 30th anniversary (AACI, 2003).
The Coalition for Asian American Children and Families in New York was not founded either until 1986, and has only been incorporated as an independent non-profit since 1992. It acknowledges that child welfare policies and services are rarely designed to meet the needs of the Asian American community. Specifically stating that: “The Asian American community is in no way immune to the problems surrounding CAN,” the coalition offers a very informative fact sheet to prevent immigrant families from unknowingly getting in trouble with the law simply because of differences in cultural influences on child rearing. While it advocates that immigrant families understand the consequences of CAN in the US, it also demands an understanding on the part of child welfare professionals and mandated reporters so that an ideal balance in resolving cultural differences can be established. (CACF, 2002)
Through the help of social services programs in Asia and America, exposure to and understanding of CAN issues will continue increasing. Only a short time has elapsed since the first Asians of the present wave of immigrants stepped foot on US soil, and even though there remains much to be done before the effects of CAN are fully resolved, the work that has already been accomplished sets a good start for the future.
Conclusion
Child abuse and neglect among Asians is an area that is prevalent yet very hard to confront. It transcends many aspects of life, from the private child rearing issues, to the public spotlight on the Asian American model minority. Much understanding between Asians and Americans remains to provide the services that will match the Asian American need of overcoming CAN. CAN usually takes the form of causing shame in children, emotionally abusing the child. Originating from Asian traditions of educational pressure, CAN often is hidden behind the spectacular achievements of Asian Americans.
The current mindset of Asians as the model minority further distorts the reality and pressing nature of CAN. In 1989, half of all immigrants entering annually were Asian (Takaki, 1989), and by 2020, Asian Americans will comprise almost 6 percent of the US population (Winton, 2001). Depression, suicide, and performance anxieties should not permeate Asian Americans to such a frightening degree. Surely, they should respect and honor their parents after all the hard sacrifice they have made for them, but respect should not mean bowing down to extremely unrealistic expectations, pressure that can permanently damage their mental health.
Doing justice to this combating CAN requires much insight and openness on both ends of the equation. From the Asians, accepting the child as not only a means to achieve a great purpose, but more importantly, a being that needs the emotional support to pursue a life of real purpose. And from the Americans, a genuine effort to understand Asians and create the special programs that will help alleviate both the latent and pervasive nature of CAN among Asians Americans.
References
Asian Americans for Community Involvement. (2003, July 19). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.aaci.org/index.html
Asian American Village. (2003, July 19). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.imdiversity.com
Asia Marketing Services: Teaching English in Asia. (2003). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.esia.biz
Asian Pacific American Affairs. (2001, October 31). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.odos.uiuc.edu/apaa/apa_community.asp
Barnett, O.W. (1997). Family Violence Across the Lifespan: An Introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Child Abuse Prevention (For Educators). (n.d.) Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://ww4.enjoy.ne.jp/~sudo.h/in%20english/eng-toppage.htm
Children’s Rights. (2003). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.hrw.org/children/refugees.htm
Coalition for Asian American Children and Families. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://cacf.org/about/index.html
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. (1999, March). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.calib.com/nccanch/
Child centers lack psychiatrists as abuse cases rise. (2003, June 14). In International News. Kyodo News Service. Retrieved July 2, 2003 from home.kyodo.co.jp/
China Tackles Domestic Violence at Community Level. (2003, March 17). Retrieved July 2, 2003 from www.bbc.co.uk
Condon, J. (1985). Japanese Women Today: A Half Step Behind. Rutland, VT: Charles E. Tuttle Company, Inc.
Domestic Violence Act Fail to Address Emotional Abuse. (2003, May 3). Retrieved July 2, 2003 from http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/bm/
Everding, G. (1999, September 23). Japanese visitors seek help with Child Abuse Prevention. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://record/wustl.edu/archive/1999/09-23-99/articles/welfare.html
Fong, T.P. (2002). The Contemporary Asian American Experience (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Gelles, R.J. (1997). Intimate Violence in Families (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Grace, M. (1997, September 22). Daily Bruin. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/home.asp
Green, S. (2003, January 18). In insight. Wairarapa Times-Age. Retrieved July 2, 2003 from http://times-age.co.nz/
Gudykunst, W.B. (2001). Asian American Ethnicity and Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hall, G.C.N., & Oka, S. (Eds.). (2002). Asian-American Psychology: The Science of Lives in Context. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hsu, M.Y. (2000). Dreaming of Gold, Dreaming of Home. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Japan: Child-abuse inquiries up by 60%; reached record of 18.804 last year. (2001, June 22). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.ahrchk.net/news/index.php
Ku, M., & Marino, P. (1998, October). Asians of Change. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/10.08.98/asians-9840.html
Lee, S.J. (1996). Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
McEwen, M.K., Kodama, C.M., Alvarez, A.N., Lee, S., & Liang, C.T.H. (Eds.). Working with Asian American College Students. (2002). Danvers, MA: Wiley Periodicals.
Moral decline sees increase in child abuse. (2003, March 5). In hot topics. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://mdn.mainichi.co.jp/
More Counsellors Needed in the Country, says Muhyiddin. (2003, May 3). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/bm/
Nguyen-Hong-Nhiem & Halpern. (1989). The Far East Comes Near. Amherst, MA: The University of Massachusetts Press.
N.K.K. (Producer). (1994). The Way of Life in Japan. [Videotape]. Japan: Bonjinsha, LTD.
Okinawa is Japan’s worst in child abuse per capita. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://Japanupdate.com/previous/03/05/09/story11.shtml
Pang, V.O., & Cheng, L.L. (1998). Struggling to Be Heard. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Pyong, G. M., & Kim, R. (Eds.). (1999). Struggle for Ethnic Identity. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Rigdon, J.E. (1991, July 10). The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.wsj.com/
Rohlen, Thomas P. (1983). Japan’s High Schools. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Student Diversity: Percent of Enrollment (All Schools). (2003). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.isacs.org/ftpimages/72/download/download_group374_id3058.pdf
Takaki, R. (1989). Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans (1st ed.). Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
Taking on Domestic Violence. (2003, March 14). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.chinadaily.com
Tan, A. (1989). The Joy Luck Club. New York: Ballantine Books.
Tower, C.C. (1999). Understanding Child Abuse and Neglect (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tran, Kieu. (1997). Misconception of Child Abuse and Discipline in the United States. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.colorado.edu/journals/standards/V6N1/EDUCATION/ktran.html
Valley’s Largest Asian American Social Services Agency Turns 30! (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.aaci.org/index.html
Woman gets 4-year jail over death of son from abuse. (2003, February 2). In International News. Kyodo News Service. Retrieved July 2, 2003 from http://home.kyodo.co.jp/
Winton, M.A., & Mara, B.A. (2001). Child Abuse & Neglect: Multidisciplinary Approaches. Neeham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
WuDunn, S. (1999, August 15). New York Times. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.nytimes.com
Wong, W. (2001). Yellow Journalist. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Zia, H. (2000). Asian American Dreams: the emergence of an American people (1st Ed). NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Child Abuse Among Asian Americans
By Emily Guey
Special to ModelMinority.comJuly 2003
Introduction
Child maltreatment among Asian Americans today sadly remains unexposed. The purpose of this paper is to uncover the nature of child abuse and neglect, also called CAN, in Asian Americans and reasons for its lack of visibility. Only from taking this first step of uncovering child abuse can an effective effort to fight it develop, because only there can all-out efforts be made to try and protect victims.
It is through my vulnerability as an Asian American who has personally experienced child abuse that I unravel its complex cultural roots. My impetus, as implicitly stated in the title, reflects my determination to create wholeness from a broken past by sharing, rather than remaining torn, embittered and silent. I am neither condemning nor rejecting the values of my heritage, but rather, making others aware that child maltreatment can arise from cultural roots. I also hope to shed light on the hidden nature of abuse that keeps this problem locked behind the closed doors of family homes.This paper focuses on Asian American groups in which CAN has been almost invisible: Chinese, Japanese, Philippines, Koreans, and Vietnamese. In addition, CAN in Southeast Asian groups is touched upon, primarily the U.S. refugees of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. This paper touches on the circumstances of the present generation of Asian and Southeast Asians, who continue to immigrate to the U.S. and concentrates on that of previous generations. Asians continue to immigrate to the U.S. in strong numbers. As the first generation brings the cultural roots of CAN to the U.S., concentrating on the first, as opposed to the second generation, would deal directly with the current unmet pressing issues.
The importance of such a study cannot be underestimated. Child maltreatment in any form is painful, and if not addressed, will not only create deep wounds, but also spark further cycles of abuse. Another reason this topic is important is that, because Asian culture is very different from Western culture, child abuse among Asian Americans is often misunderstood by Americans.
The paper is divided into four sections, each hoping to explain an aspect of the unexposed issues related to CAN among Asian Americans. The first, Child Abuse and Neglect Among Asian Americans, compares Asian and American definitions of CAN, and provides examples among Asian Americans. The second, Causes of Child Maltreatment among Asian Americans, gives an overview of Asians and Southeast Asians, and studies the background of the most recent generation, from parental pressure to discriminatory facets of Asian American life, that may lead to maltreatment. The third section, The Hidden Nature of Maltreatment among Asian Americans, focuses on how the cultural roots of Asia, and model minority myth lead to the underreporting of abuse. The last section, Prevention Services, provides a general overview of existing programs, policies, and public awareness campaigns to counteract CAN among Asian Americans.
This paper seeks to provide information that will ultimately serve as a bridge between Asians and Americans. This bridge can hopefully be the link to the creation of more effective services that can match the needs of Asian-American children. The wave of immigration for the present-day Asian-American generation has just begun, and now is the time for the problems to be exposed. The East and West have met, and although there are challenges facing them, these are not insurmountable. A clearer understanding of both sides, East and West, will hopefully be deduced from this work, and can help to diminish those challenges.
Child Abuse and Neglect Among Asian Americans
Child abuse and neglect has been a difficult topic for the West and East to confront. While the West has taken larger steps in approaching this issue, the East lags behind. Separately attacking child maltreatment in the East and in the West is difficult enough. Tackling this issue, however, in the presence of both East and West, requires much insight. Part of the challenge lies in the different perceptions of CAN by Americans and Asians.Even in the U.S., with its complex infrastructure and democratic process, combating CAN is still relatively new. From the first reported case of child abuse in the 1800s, to the recognition of the “battered child syndrome” in the 1960s (Tower, 1999, p.12), to the 1974 Congressional enactment of the important federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act or CAPTA (Barnett, 1997), America’s take on children’s rights has slowly but persistently been established, with most efforts taking place in the past few decades. In Asia, on the other hand, abuse is still, due to cultural roots, a hard issue to tackle, for battered adults. Children, who naturally have a smaller voice in society than adults, therefore, have an even harder time defending themselves in the face of maltreatment. Domestic violence in Asia has just recently started gaining attention, and CAN has yet to start being challenged. The Domestic Violence Act of 1994 was amended in May 2003 to address emotional abuse (Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia, 2003), something that Americans have long since addressed in child abuse cases, and even longer in domestic violence cases.
The current US federal definition of child abuse, taken directly from the 1974 legislation is: “at minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, seriously physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.” Child maltreatment takes on four broad forms: emotional abuse, neglect, physical abuse and sexual abuse. (National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1999).
Asians have commonly believed that child abuse is only defined as extreme physical torture exerted on a child. Only in extreme cases involving such drastic physical torture from beatings in the bathtub, to abandonment of infants in coin lockers (WuDunn, 1999), to severe maternal beatings resulting in death of a four-year old son (Kyodo News Service, 2003), child abuse would be justifiably reported. These cases, apparently caused in large part by economic stress or anger from marriage problems, are not rare. Ministries of Health and Welfare in Asia suspect that, as they begin to intervene in cases of abuse, many more cases of even more severe extremes, problems many did not believe had existed, will come to light (WuDunn, 1999).
More dangerous physical behavior and treatment, including “kicking, beating, slapping, and using objects that caused injuries or deaths,” have been documented (Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia, 2003, last section).
In March 2003, a Japanese newspaper that shares unusual observations correlated a decline in mothers’ morals with child abuse. Incidents of emotional abuse were reflected in several cases: a woman sending her teen-age daughter to steal; another, jeopardizing her young daughter’s health by forcing her to go out with her mother’s boyfriend; another, forcing her child to buy food even with a high fever and bad cold. Although these reported cases of mothers imposing slavish demands on their daughters are extreme, they indicate that Asians are starting to recognize that abuse is not confined only to physical treatments, but nonphysical as well. (Connell, 2003).
More modest cases, however, are less likely to be recognized than these blatantly abusive ones. For Asian families, the general assumption is that physical punishment or discipline by striking a child does not qualify as abuse (Tran, 1997). CAPTA standards, however, indicate that physical abuse constitutes “hitting, punching, shaking, kicking, and beating” (National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1999, para.7), forms which Asian physical punishment or discipline may take on. Additionally, other key facets of child abuse recognized by the U.S., from emotional abuse to physical neglect, have been, and still are ignored by most Asians (Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia, 2003). In 2000, 49.7 percent of reported cases in Japan concerned physical abuse, while 10.1 and 36.5 percent concerned emotional and neglect, respectively (Asia Human Rights News, 2001).
CAPTA standards on emotional abuse and neglect have only just recently been made known in Asia and are becoming slowly implemented. Emotional abuse includes acts that cause serious behavioral, cognitive, emotional, or mental disorders. From terrorizing a child, to using derogatory terms to describe the child, to habitual scapegoating or blaming, parents in America can be accused of emotional abuse. Neglect, on the other hand, takes on three different levels, including psychological. Lack of emotional support and love constitute psychological neglect. (National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1999).
Ultimately, the emotional abuse and neglect that is rooted into many common child-rearing techniques remain accepted to Asian Americans. Even among domestic violence cases, “psychological abuse, which is more common in daily life, is still not regarded by many Asians as a violation of human rights” (Financial Times Information, 2003, para. 7). Convincing Asians that psychological abuse among children is a form of child abuse would be very difficult, then, as Asians have believed for centuries that parental authority was virtually supreme (Tran, 1997).
Shaming children, often interpreted by non-Asian professionals as emotionally abusive (Tower, 1999), does not find the same consensus among most Asian parents. Asian parents often place unrealistically high expectations for their children, highlighted as a factor found in abusive parents (Gelles, 1997). The significant effects of the emotional abuse and neglect on the second- generation Asian American youth, however, may be sound enough to persuade first generation Asians. Amy Tan’s (1989) well-known book, The Joy Luck Club, abounds in examples of how shaming children and placing pressure affects second generation Asian Americans. Throughout the book, one of the main characters, Waverly, experiences emotional abuse, from feeling maternal pressure to win chess tournaments, to crying inside due to the hurt heart feeling maternal rejection, to worrying about how critical her mother would be towards her American boyfriend. Waverly embodies the effects of an Asian American who has unknowingly experienced emotional abuse and neglect. (Tan, 1989).
A real life example occurred in 1990 at the San Francisco Bay Area, when a Chinese American teenager ran away from her home, to avoid her father’s oppressive parenting methods. During his training routines, he would ask her to run home from school, the path stretching vertically 1,500 feet, while swinging a racquet. Such embarrassing schemes were meant to toughen her up mentally for tennis, his goal being for her to be the best player. Faced with the dilemma of many other second generation Asian Americans, the teen ‘s sudden break from home was undoubtedly a reaction to her totalitarian upbringing. (Wong, 100).
At an even more dramatic extreme are the Asian American youths that drive themselves to suicide from not living up to the wishes of their immediate families. Suicide rates among Asian American teens have risen threefold over the past twenty years, with Chinese-Americans 36% higher, and Japanese-Americans, 54% higher than the national average among other teens, compared to all teens in the U.S. combined. The alarming statistics on teenage suicides among Asian Americans point to a need to address the extreme parental pressure among these families. (Rigdon, 1991).
The definitions of child abuse for the Asian and American cultures differ markedly. Most Asians still perceive child abuse only as physical torture, disregarding emotional abuse and neglect. Americans accept a much broader definition, which encompasses not only physical, but also emotional abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse. Change is taking place slowly, however, and as more governmental intervention and exposure to domestic violence and CAN issues take place in Asia, Asian Americans will be more sensitive to their child rearing techniques. Second generation Asian Americans have suffered tremendously from the emotional abuse and neglect inherent in parental pressure, a common child rearing technique among Asian families, and it is past time for more attention on an issue that pervades the lives of countless Asian Americans (Rigdon, 1991).
Causes of Child Maltreatment Among Asian Families
In order to understand the causes of CAN, one must first understand the complicated background of Asian Americans, originating from Asia and Southeast Asia. Asians include Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, Korean and Asian Indians. Their immigration started in 1848 and has reached exploding rates today, the Chinese and Filipino making up 23.7% and 18.1%, respectively, of the Asian American population in 2000, and while Asian Indians represent a smaller proportion of the Asian population (16.4%), they boasted a growth rate of 113.4% between 1990 and 2000 (APA Community, 2000). Southeast Asians have immigrated to the US in four waves of refugee exoduses, from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Among them, the Vietnamese holds an impressive growth rate, second only to the Asian Indians, at 89.2%. While the overall goals of coming to America have been the same – to seek the American dream – the reasons for and details surrounding the departure and arrival of each Asian ethnic group have been different.
Immigration patterns varied among Southeast Asian immigrants, even among the waves of refugee exoduses after the Vietnam War. The first wave of 1975 was comprised of South Vietnamese government employees, military personnel, and those employed by Americans in Vietnam. Well educated, they took on a variety of professional positions in medicine, engineering and business, for example. The second wave, which occurred between 1975 and 1978, comprised of the relatives of the first-wave immigrants, who arrived to escape the harsh life in the new economic zones resulting from war. The third wave, between 1978 and 1980, was comprised of the uneducated and illegal ‘boat people’ from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia who were fleeing the political oppression and economic conditions in their countries and lived in limbo in refugee camps. The most recent wave, from 1980 to 1990, consists of Southeast Asian prisoners released from reeducation camps. (Pang, 1998)
While early waves of immigrants from Southeast Asia adjusted relatively well to the new country, those arriving more recently still face the challenges of healing from war memories, making it very hard for them to feel at home. Most of the 100,000 Cambodian refugees are country folk, and carry deep psychological scars of war and mass exterminations (Takaki, 1989). Personality characteristics such as depression, anxiety, and antisocial behavior that result from the post-traumatic stress disorder, are also associated with violence against children (Gelles, 1997). Children of these refugees, then, who look up to their parents for a proper child rearing, are at risk of abuse and neglect. However, the special protection rights and CAN issues of refugee children are often neglected (Human Rights Watch, 2000).
Asians, on the other hand, have been in the U.S. much longer than their Southeastern counterparts. In the mid-1760s, Filipinos have worked as seamen for the Spanish galleon trade in Louisiana. Asian Indians migrated to become sea captains in Massachusetts and indentured servants or slaves in Pennsylvania beginning in the 1790s. However, little else is known about these earliest Asian Americans (Takaki, 1989).
The real wave of Asian immigration wave occurred between 1848 and 1924, mainly involving laborers for the railroad and agricultural production. The Chinese escaped from political and economic turmoil during the 1850s, found refuge in the gold rush through jobs, and became railroad workers in the mid 1860s. By 1870, they composed 9 percent of California’s population and a quarter of its work force. 38,000 Japanese arrived in the U.S. between 1902 and 1907 and became very successful by exploiting an economic niche in agriculture. However, due to the great economic success in their home country in the early part of the century, fewer Japanese have immigrated since. Between 1903 and 1905, the Japanese have increased control over Korea, making it difficult for Koreans to immigrate. The few Koreans who have come before 1940 are primarily California agricultural laborers. Filipinos have come to America in spurts, starting in 1898 after the Spanish-American War, in which US gained the Philippines. After first migrating to Hawaii as pensionados, students supported by government scholarships, they eventually became sugar plantation workers, totaling 28,000 in 1918. With the enactment of the 1924 Immigration Act, Filipinos came to the US, and by the late 1920s numbered 45,000 in the Pacific, making their mark primarily as young single labor union organizers of agriculture and services. Between 1904 and 1911, Asian Indians immigrated directly to the US, totaling 6,000, and worked in the California agricultural industry. (Fong, 2002).
Circumstances surrounding the second major wave of Asian immigration are much different than those of the first. A dramatic increase in Asian immigration occurred after the enactment of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act, rising almost 7 percent from 1960 to 1970, and another 22 percent from 1970 to 1980. The Immigration Act of 1990, while placing a cap on total immigration, authorized an increase in legal immigration to encourage the immigration of more skilled workers to help meet the needs of the US economy. The law attracted Asians, who since 1965, has been among the best-educated and trained immigrants in the US. (Fong, 2002).
Most of the Asian Americans today come from the second large wave of immigration after 1965, as well as from the children of the first wave of immigrants (Takaki, 1989). The current pressing nature of CAN among this growing generation compels the research to apply specifically to them. In order to target the causes of the commonly attributed Asian American parental pressure that so often results in the CAN discussed in the previous section, it is necessary to understand the greatness of the dreams that pushed them to move to America.
To them, America symbolized great opportunities, from education to freedom, for example in the Chinese case, from the Cultural Revolution. Hong Kong, for example, only had two universities (Takaki, 1989), and so to the new Chinese immigrants, the U.S. was a not only a new home, but a place of educational advantage for their children. Additionally, America, as one of the world’s leading nations, motivates many foreign countries to become more westernized. The Asia Marketing Association in South Korea, for example, reflects its deep passion for recruiting American students to commit one year in Seoul teaching English through its very convenient and attractive offers (Asia Marketing Association, 2003).
Hardly anything compares to the sacrifices and determination the Asians undertook to make it to this country. They were desperate to flee from such social plights as the 1989 Tianamen Square, China’s one-child policy, and relatively low earning standards. Many have risked the tortuous illegal immigration process, paying off the cost of thirty thousand later in America by working in low-paying restaurants and sweatshops. The tremendous sacrifices that the first-generation Asians have taken demonstrate the immense faith they had put in their children to move upward, living out a profession and lifestyle far better than what they could pursue in their home country. (Wong, 2001).
Coming from a culture in which education is king, it is no wonder Asians can have so much trust in their children to carry out the American dream through school. Japan’s ganbatte philosophy, which promotes industry among its workers and students has rubbed off on other Asian countries. University entrance exams in Asia are a national obsession. In contrast to the Scholastic Achievement Tests in America, which are held several times a year, these exams can only be taken once a year, making pressure to perform well on the tests much tougher for Asians. Massive amounts of media attention are placed on status and rank. National entrance exams are the only determinant for acceptance into university. The higher the score, the better chance the student will be accepted into a highly esteemed university. And the greater the university, the greater chance the student has in being hired by a highly esteemed company. (Rohlen, 1983).
Asian students are used to facing this sort of pressure, but the pressure is not, of course, without dysfunction. Exam pressures are responsible for high youth suicide rates, nervous disorders, and even delinquency. When first generation Asians arrive in America, they have already been wired to endure such educational pressure, and since they deeply believe that education is the key to climbing up the American ladder of success, they carry out the dreams for their children by pushing them to excel in school. (Rohlen, 1983).
Parental pressure on the children is intensified even further, not only by their inspiration to pursue greater dreams, but also by their knowledge of America’s history of discrimination towards Asians. In 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, the only piece of federal legislation targeting a specific ethnic group, barring Chinese laborers from entering the US. During the last half of the nineteenth century, Asian Americans were forced to stand up for their rights of citizenship, as many were naturalized citizens, yet barred from reentering the US. The execution of the new welfare-reform law in 1996 made many noncitizens, who were perfectly legal residents ineligible for many public benefits. (Wong, 2001).
Struggling to become accustomed to a new country and bearing the discrimination and trials of immigrant was hard enough for Asian Americans. While many yearn to survive the tumultuous trip to America, few actually make it to the U.S. Those who do make it make the most out of their good fortune, and are exceptionally driven about carrying out their visions through their children. They unconsciously demand the same hard work and discipline on their children that they themselves had expended to arrive in the U.S. The pressure exerted on the children goes a long way, as the parents struggle to attain a dream that lies far above their initial status as immigrants. Once in the U.S., there is a long way to climb up until they can reach their ideal position.
Speaking a different language, for one thing, forces many Asian doctors to become US janitors, rather than to continue practicing in their profession. While 16 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander men over 25 years were holding executive positions, 21 percent were holding professional jobs in 1993(IMDiversity, 2003). Many were confined to making a living by washing dishes and cooking in downtown Chinatowns. Even though the immigrants of the second wave of immigrants were the most highly skilled immigrant group, their restricted employment possibilities created much anxiety for the families. (Takaki, 1989).
Their children are the ultimate bridge to fulfilling their hopes. Because education is one of the few avenues available to Asians, parents tend to have “unrealistically high expectations for their children, a factor found in abusive relationships” (Gelles, 1997). As a result, there is a strong obligation for the second generation to do well in school, as that is the key to employment. From a young age, children are immersed in academic endeavors to ensure a sound start to a good education. They spend intense hours on a daily basis from preparing for the SATs to getting a head start on calculus. The lack of role models for these children and their families to judge how much is good enough to obtain career security. First generation parents feel that in order to rise above adversity, their children cannot be any less than the best, since Americans will not take notice of them unless their achievements warrant outstanding attention.
Parents may unconsciously compare siblings’ achievement and engender pressure in other ways. Strict demands and responsibilities placed on girls and the oldest child to pay tribute to their specific cultural family roles are also common. Educational achievement and focus on cultural values, as well as expectations to succeed are expressed through the use of guilt and shame and family obligations. Children may miss out on youth, bowing to the immense pressures placed on them, the internalization of their parents’ dreams into their hearts too difficult to avoid. (Pang, 1998).
Asian Americans come from a diverse and strong cultural background. Since the second half of the eighteenth century, they have struggled to arrive in America seeking greater dreams. Most recently, with the passage of more opportunistic immigration laws, the first generation Americans are able to live out the dreams through their children. Education a key to success in their home countries, and the first-generation Asians perceive it as the answer to making those dreams come true in the U.S. as well. Faced with discrimination, shortcomings, and a cap on career opportunities, the push for their children to succeed is incredibly strong, often resulting in CAN. Relocation depression, insecurities, and stress-induced circumstances from the discouraging employment prospects for Asian Americans also increase the likeliness of CAN. In addition, intergenerational CAN brought over to America from the prevalence of domestic violence in Asia may promote cycles of abuse in families. CAN in Asian Americans, however, is very well hidden. In the next section, a glimpse at Asian cultural roots and Americans’ perspective of Asian Americans will unravel why.
Hidden Nature of Child Maltreatment
Asian Americans currently make up four percent of the population, but very few CAN cases are reported. The lack of reported cases does not correlate with a strong absence of CAN. As reflected from the previous sections, CAN is prevalent, yet it should not be surprising when one looks at the Asian values why it has been so underreported.
Obedience, conformity, and respect for authority, key Confucian ethics at the center of Asian life (Lee, 1996), make it excruciatingly painful for those experiencing violence to seek help. It’s hard enough breaking out of the family barriers of domestic violence in Asia. It becomes even more difficult in a foreign country where one has been faced with strong discrimination. If Asian Americans are faced with domestic violence or child maltreatment, even in the most extreme ways, these social and cultural values hold them back from seeking help.
When abuse is even harder to detect, as the case with “emotional and psychological abuse, which do not leave physical evidence, but can be as devastating to the child as physical or sexual abuse” (Winton, 2001, p.87), probably the most prevalent form of abuse in Asian Americans, the more likely it is to remain hidden. Furthermore, it is the Asian American’s reaction to the CAN that keeps it even less detectable. Many Asian Americans receive high academic grades in response to needing the approval of their parents and teachers. The desire to please their parents and attain the high parental expectations has been internalized (Pang, 1998), and even though test/achievement anxiety may be detected, a relationship between this and the CAN that usually causes such performance anxiety is hardly ever deduced.
Instead, exaggerated stereotypes about Asian Americans being the model minority have flowered. On one hand, the Model Minority Myth praises the Asian Americans’ hard work and success, for they are living proof that America is truly a land of opportunity. On the other hand, there are underlying damages behind this myth. Paying specific attention to the amazing achievements of the Model Minority has in effect, blocked outsiders from realizing the abusive struggles and pressures that many Asian Americans experience to attain such stellar academic recognition. It also forces Asian Americans, heavily influenced by the Confucian ethic of conformation, to feel pressured to conform to the ideals of the model minority. Indeed, Asian Americans are strongly represented at Ivy League universities: 11 percent at Harvard, 10 percent at Princeton, 16 percent at Stanford, and 21 percent at MIT (Takaki, 1989), compared to the overall 5 percent Asian American enrollment in all U.S. schools (ISACS, 2003).
In addition, direct conflicts between Eastern and Western values, keep an issue that is already tough to talk about even harder to confront. Americans, whose values are centered on independence, assertiveness, and individuality, have just a hard time relating to the Eastern cultural values of obedience, submission, and humility as the East has with the West. By nature, these differences set up barriers to Americans’ understanding the nature of CAN in Asian Americans. Because they are the minority, the rejection Asian Americans feel from not belonging in the mainstream American society is enough to set them apart from trustworthy relationships with Americans; it would be almost inconceivable to open up to Americans about their private problems. Americans, on the other hand, have little cause to suspect child abuse and neglect among Asian Americans because of their idealized status as the model minority.
Additional factors loom large with reporting CAN. Problems with speaking English, as with uneducated Vietnamese refugees, thicken the wall between those who need the post war counseling and those who can provide the professional assistance to prevent the abuse that is likely to occur with their stressful lives. Another inborn fear is that reporting CAN cases could have an adverse effect on the immigration status of the first generation class that worked so hard to arrive in the US. Asians are by nature very quiet and private, and this makes becoming more open about plights challenging. For over thirty-five years, the Japanese Americans who interned during World War II to could not speak up about how horrendously they had been treated (Takaki, 1989).
The silent cycle is hard to break, but the bolder each generation becomes, and as CAN becomes more recognized by the Asian American community, the more easily CAN to be tackled.
Prevention
Despite the hidden nature of CAN among Asian-Americans, growing exposure to the issue has spurred a flurry of government-sponsored programs in Japan and China, the two main Asian countries, as well as social service agencies in America that try to counteract this formerly invisible plight. The new services will prove important to Asians, as “they belong to the fastest-growing ethnic minority group in the US” (Takaki, 1989, p. 5).
Japan, one of the world’s foremost successful economic nations, has taken an unexpected turn from its ganbatte philosophy discussed previously, which has been a main cause of the extreme push to succeed among Asian-American students. Just two years ago, Iwate, a city in northeast Japan, developed an advertising scheme with the theme, ‘ganbaranai’, meaning, – “I won’t work so hard”. Although this idea was rejected among the older Japanese generations, many young people are happy with the fact that Japan has started straying away from its extreme determination for its youth to be so academically focused. The new slogan of ganbaranai to symbolize the new Japan is promising to help the Japanese realize there is more to life than work. (Green, 2003).
Japan may also be a model for the rest of Asia because it has taken great strides in combating child abuse. Exposure of the public to the issue was the first major step. The increased awareness of what is considered abuse of children accounts for the rise of reported cases of child abuse in Okinawa, which had about 1.5 times that of the national average in 2002 (News, 2003). In 1999, the Ministry of Health and Welfare commissioned its first child abuse survey, a great step forward from the past when the Government failed to keep track of cases (WuDunn, 1999). As reporting child abuse cases became more socially accepted, greater attention was turned to something that “had been happening for a very long time that’s just coming to the surface,” according to the director of Center for Child Abuse Prevention (WuDunn, 1999).
Child abuse inquiries in Japan have been up by 60% since 2000. A new law that required police to accompany welfare officials on home investigations was enforced November 2001. Since then, the ministry has learned of 22 deaths caused by child abuse (Asia Human Rights News, 2001). Spurred by this growing recognition of child abuse, delegates of Japanese social service agencies sought the help of the George Warren Brown School of Social Work in the U.S. to learn more about how Americans deal with such issues as parental rights, juvenile courts, foster care, and child abuse and neglect (Everding, 1999).
In addition, amendments and proposals to combat child abuse have been carefully prepared in Japan, which recently realized the lack of mental health professionals to cope with the rise of child abuse cases. An amendment “to rebuild families by providing psychological care for child and parents instead of the current policy of temporarily depriving parents of custody” (Kyodo News, 2003) has recently been established. A recent proposal from educators of child abuse prevention (2003) proponents highlights the following serious needs:
1. A trustworthy relationship between teachers and children
2. Training for teachers to recognize child abuse cases, as well as application of the training towards experience of actual abuse cases
3. Links between the school/teachers and Child Guidance clinics
4. Intervention for Child Neglect
5. Other professionals to realize teacher’s roles
6. Consideration for Children not being abused at the present, but who have experienced traumatic abuse in the past
China follows in Japan’s footsteps in counteracting uncomfortable issues that have traditionally remained behind closed doors, first targeting domestic violence, and then, slowly fighting child maltreatment. China’s unprecedented method of bringing domestic violence into the open with “Don’t Talk to Strangers,” a 23-part TV series on domestic violence in March, 2003 (China Daily, 2003) brings light to previously unacknowledged forms of domestic violence, such as psychological abuse. The creation of the anti-domestic violence team the same month in Beijing serves to combat domestic violence on a community level (BBC, 2003). In Bangkok, in April, 2003, the Child Protection Foundation organized the building of Baan Amphawa, which houses victims of violence, including children, and hopes to provide all children with education (Bangkok Post, 2003).
Slowly, the changes in these major Asian countries, from Japan’s more relaxed approach to educational achievement and strong CAN prevention strategies to China’s exposure of domestic violence and CAN, can serve as models for other Asian countries. As Asians start to be aware of these new facets of life, from education to child-rearing tactics, the demands they impose on their children when they migrate to the U.S. will not be as stressful as in the past. The effect of CAN in second generation Asian Americans, then, will be greatly diminished from the significant changes that have started occurring in Asia.
While Asia has made strides forward with developing programs to fight CAN, social services in the U.S. have tried to increase the understanding of CAN between Americans and Asians. Because the most recent wave of Asians to the US did not take place until 1965 (Wong, 2001), fewer than forty years ago, not much research and literature yet exists specifically on CAN among Asian-Americans, and therefore, very few existing social services truly match up to the needs. Cupertino, the city in the heart of Silicon Valley, boasted an Asian-American population of 13% in 1990 (Bensen, 1998). And yet, Silicon Valley’s largest provider of social services for Asian Americans, Asian Americans for Community Involvement, founded in 1973, only recently celebrated its 30th anniversary (AACI, 2003).
The Coalition for Asian American Children and Families in New York was not founded either until 1986, and has only been incorporated as an independent non-profit since 1992. It acknowledges that child welfare policies and services are rarely designed to meet the needs of the Asian American community. Specifically stating that: “The Asian American community is in no way immune to the problems surrounding CAN,” the coalition offers a very informative fact sheet to prevent immigrant families from unknowingly getting in trouble with the law simply because of differences in cultural influences on child rearing. While it advocates that immigrant families understand the consequences of CAN in the US, it also demands an understanding on the part of child welfare professionals and mandated reporters so that an ideal balance in resolving cultural differences can be established. (CACF, 2002)
Through the help of social services programs in Asia and America, exposure to and understanding of CAN issues will continue increasing. Only a short time has elapsed since the first Asians of the present wave of immigrants stepped foot on US soil, and even though there remains much to be done before the effects of CAN are fully resolved, the work that has already been accomplished sets a good start for the future.
Conclusion
Child abuse and neglect among Asians is an area that is prevalent yet very hard to confront. It transcends many aspects of life, from the private child rearing issues, to the public spotlight on the Asian American model minority. Much understanding between Asians and Americans remains to provide the services that will match the Asian American need of overcoming CAN. CAN usually takes the form of causing shame in children, emotionally abusing the child. Originating from Asian traditions of educational pressure, CAN often is hidden behind the spectacular achievements of Asian Americans.
The current mindset of Asians as the model minority further distorts the reality and pressing nature of CAN. In 1989, half of all immigrants entering annually were Asian (Takaki, 1989), and by 2020, Asian Americans will comprise almost 6 percent of the US population (Winton, 2001). Depression, suicide, and performance anxieties should not permeate Asian Americans to such a frightening degree. Surely, they should respect and honor their parents after all the hard sacrifice they have made for them, but respect should not mean bowing down to extremely unrealistic expectations, pressure that can permanently damage their mental health.
Doing justice to this combating CAN requires much insight and openness on both ends of the equation. From the Asians, accepting the child as not only a means to achieve a great purpose, but more importantly, a being that needs the emotional support to pursue a life of real purpose. And from the Americans, a genuine effort to understand Asians and create the special programs that will help alleviate both the latent and pervasive nature of CAN among Asians Americans.
References
Asian Americans for Community Involvement. (2003, July 19). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.aaci.org/index.html
Asian American Village. (2003, July 19). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.imdiversity.com
Asia Marketing Services: Teaching English in Asia. (2003). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.esia.biz
Asian Pacific American Affairs. (2001, October 31). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.odos.uiuc.edu/apaa/apa_community.asp
Barnett, O.W. (1997). Family Violence Across the Lifespan: An Introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Child Abuse Prevention (For Educators). (n.d.) Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://ww4.enjoy.ne.jp/~sudo.h/in%20english/eng-toppage.htm
Children’s Rights. (2003). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.hrw.org/children/refugees.htm
Coalition for Asian American Children and Families. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://cacf.org/about/index.html
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. (1999, March). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.calib.com/nccanch/
Child centers lack psychiatrists as abuse cases rise. (2003, June 14). In International News. Kyodo News Service. Retrieved July 2, 2003 from home.kyodo.co.jp/
China Tackles Domestic Violence at Community Level. (2003, March 17). Retrieved July 2, 2003 from www.bbc.co.uk
Condon, J. (1985). Japanese Women Today: A Half Step Behind. Rutland, VT: Charles E. Tuttle Company, Inc.
Domestic Violence Act Fail to Address Emotional Abuse. (2003, May 3). Retrieved July 2, 2003 from http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/bm/
Everding, G. (1999, September 23). Japanese visitors seek help with Child Abuse Prevention. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://record/wustl.edu/archive/1999/09-23-99/articles/welfare.html
Fong, T.P. (2002). The Contemporary Asian American Experience (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Gelles, R.J. (1997). Intimate Violence in Families (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Grace, M. (1997, September 22). Daily Bruin. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/home.asp
Green, S. (2003, January 18). In insight. Wairarapa Times-Age. Retrieved July 2, 2003 from http://times-age.co.nz/
Gudykunst, W.B. (2001). Asian American Ethnicity and Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hall, G.C.N., & Oka, S. (Eds.). (2002). Asian-American Psychology: The Science of Lives in Context. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hsu, M.Y. (2000). Dreaming of Gold, Dreaming of Home. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Japan: Child-abuse inquiries up by 60%; reached record of 18.804 last year. (2001, June 22). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.ahrchk.net/news/index.php
Ku, M., & Marino, P. (1998, October). Asians of Change. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/10.08.98/asians-9840.html
Lee, S.J. (1996). Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
McEwen, M.K., Kodama, C.M., Alvarez, A.N., Lee, S., & Liang, C.T.H. (Eds.). Working with Asian American College Students. (2002). Danvers, MA: Wiley Periodicals.
Moral decline sees increase in child abuse. (2003, March 5). In hot topics. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://mdn.mainichi.co.jp/
More Counsellors Needed in the Country, says Muhyiddin. (2003, May 3). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/bm/
Nguyen-Hong-Nhiem & Halpern. (1989). The Far East Comes Near. Amherst, MA: The University of Massachusetts Press.
N.K.K. (Producer). (1994). The Way of Life in Japan. [Videotape]. Japan: Bonjinsha, LTD.
Okinawa is Japan’s worst in child abuse per capita. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://Japanupdate.com/previous/03/05/09/story11.shtml
Pang, V.O., & Cheng, L.L. (1998). Struggling to Be Heard. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Pyong, G. M., & Kim, R. (Eds.). (1999). Struggle for Ethnic Identity. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Rigdon, J.E. (1991, July 10). The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.wsj.com/
Rohlen, Thomas P. (1983). Japan’s High Schools. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Student Diversity: Percent of Enrollment (All Schools). (2003). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.isacs.org/ftpimages/72/download/download_group374_id3058.pdf
Takaki, R. (1989). Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans (1st ed.). Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
Taking on Domestic Violence. (2003, March 14). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.chinadaily.com
Tan, A. (1989). The Joy Luck Club. New York: Ballantine Books.
Tower, C.C. (1999). Understanding Child Abuse and Neglect (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tran, Kieu. (1997). Misconception of Child Abuse and Discipline in the United States. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.colorado.edu/journals/standards/V6N1/EDUCATION/ktran.html
Valley’s Largest Asian American Social Services Agency Turns 30! (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.aaci.org/index.html
Woman gets 4-year jail over death of son from abuse. (2003, February 2). In International News. Kyodo News Service. Retrieved July 2, 2003 from http://home.kyodo.co.jp/
Winton, M.A., & Mara, B.A. (2001). Child Abuse & Neglect: Multidisciplinary Approaches. Neeham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
WuDunn, S. (1999, August 15). New York Times. Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.nytimes.com
Wong, W. (2001). Yellow Journalist. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Zia, H. (2000). Asian American Dreams: the emergence of an American people (1st Ed). NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Asian Americans and Education
From: http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/multicultural/le.htm
A Closer Look at Asian Americans and Education
by C. N. Le
As has traditionally been the case, receiving an education is of paramount importance for the Asian American community. Like African Americans, Latinos, and American Indians, Asian Americans have had to fight a long battle to have access to desegregated and equal educational opportunities. In this historical context, some of the most important victories were the 1968 and 1969 student strikes at San Francisco State University and U.C. Berkeley that ultimately led to the establishment of the first Ethnic Studies and Asian American Studies programs in the country.
Since then, Asian Americans have faced many other issues when it comes to their educational experience. Perhaps the most far-reaching issue that Asian Americans still face is actually the most ironic. In the past, Asian Americans were fighting mechanisms of prejudice, exclusion, and institutional discrimination that prevented them from even attending certain schools and therefore receiving a fair education. But recently, Asian Americans have been and continue to be touted as the one ethnic minority group that has successfully overcome racism and achieved the American dream, primarily through education.
As the so-called "model minority," we are frequently portrayed as a bright, shining example of hard work and patience whose example other minority groups should follow. Many people take these beliefs further and argue that since Asian Americans are doing so well, we no longer experience any discrimination and that Asian Americans no longer need services such as bilingual education, bilingual government documents, and public assistance. Further, many just assume that all Asian Americans are successful and that none of us are struggling.
On the surface, it may sound rather benign and even flattering to be described in those terms. However, we need to take a much closer look. In fact, many other statistics show that Asian Americans are still the targets of racial inequality and institutional discrimination and that the "model minority" image is a myth. Reality is always a little more complicated.
It's true that 42% of all Asian American adults have at least a college degree, the highest of all the major racial/ethnic groups. It's also common for Asian American students to have the highest test scores and/or GPAs within any given high school or college cohort. But what usually gets left out is the fact that not all Asian Americans are the same. For every Chinese American or South Asian who has a college degree, the same number of Southeast Asians are still struggling to adapt to their lives in the U.S.
For example, Vietnamese Americans only have a college degree attainment rate of 16%, only about one-quarter the rate for other Asian American ethnic groups. Further, Laotians, Cambodians, and Khmer only have rates around 5%. The cultural stereotype that "all Asians are smart" puts a tremendous amount of pressure on many Asian Americans. Many, particularly Southeast Asians, are not able to conform to this unrealistic expectation and in fact, have the highest high school dropout rates in the country. Again, not all Asian Americans are the same.
Those Asian Americans who are struggling tend to be immigrants who have limited English proficiency. Many people don't know that more than half, 60% in fact, of all Asian Americans are immigrants. Most are relatively fluent in English but a large portion are not. Therefore, similar to other immigrant minority groups, Asian Americans still have a need for bilingual education that is also culturally sensitive to their immigration experiences and family situations.
For many of these recent Asian American immigrant families, the right to a formal education and all the trappings of school life for their children are very new concepts. Further, it is common for Asian American children to quickly assimilate their peers' norms about socializing, homework, growing sense of independence, and other activities surrounding school.
This in turn can lead to conflict with their parents if the parents don't understand these activities and if they feel that their children are acculturating into "mainstream" American society too quickly and conversely, losing their traditional ethnic identity just as quickly. In times like these, knowledgeable educators and school administrators can play an important role in mediating these tensions before too much conflict arise that may lead the Asian American student to withdraw and possibly worse.
Too much success?
Another irony surrounding Asian Americans being labeled the "model minority" is that it can actually backfire to their detriment. Specifically, beginning in the 1980s, many more Asian Americans were applying to college than before. Soon, it became common for 10%, 15%, or more of a given university's student population to be of Asian ancestry at a time when Asians were only about 3% of the general population. As a result, many universities actually became alarmed at the growing Asian American student population on their campuses, so much so that once the Asian proportion of their student population reached 10%-15%, they began to reject Asian students who were clearly qualified. Soon, Asian Americans were accusing universities such as U.C. Berkeley, UCLA, Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and Brown of imposing a quota or upper limit on their admission numbers. After several protests and investigations, these universities admitted that there were problems with these admission procedures but never admitted any deliberate wrongdoing.
Soon thereafter, many opponents of affirmative action began to argue that these Asian American students were "victims" of affirmative action, just like Whites. In other words, these Asian American students were being denied admission when other "less qualified" ethnic groups (implying Blacks, Latinos, and American Indians) were being admitted.
As many Asian American scholars note, at first this argument may sound plausible. But after careful investigation and in-depth research, it became clear that the real issue is not that Asian students are "competing" with other racial/ethnic minority groups. Rather, the real cause of this controversy is the widespread use of admissions factors that always seem to favor White applicants.
These included "legacy clauses" in which the children of alumni are almost always admitted, regardless of their actual qualifications. Other factors that artificially lowered the admissions rates for Asian students included persistent stereotypes that Asian students were not "well-rounded" candidates and rarely participate in extracurricular activities. Again, national research showed that in terms of participating in sports, performing arts, academic and social clubs, and community activities, the rates for Asian students were almost identical to that of White students.
The point is, contrary to the superficially rosy picture of Asian Americans as the "model minority" who have overcome racism and achieved universal educational success, in many respects, Asian Americans are still the targets of discrimination. In discussing these and other issues, Asian-Nation (http://www.asian-nation.org) seeks to provide a concise but comprehensive exploration of the historical, political, economic, and cultural elements and issues that make up today's diverse Asian American community -- almost like an online version of Asian Americans 101 that the entire Internet community can use and learn from.
A Closer Look at Asian Americans and Education
by C. N. Le
As has traditionally been the case, receiving an education is of paramount importance for the Asian American community. Like African Americans, Latinos, and American Indians, Asian Americans have had to fight a long battle to have access to desegregated and equal educational opportunities. In this historical context, some of the most important victories were the 1968 and 1969 student strikes at San Francisco State University and U.C. Berkeley that ultimately led to the establishment of the first Ethnic Studies and Asian American Studies programs in the country.
Since then, Asian Americans have faced many other issues when it comes to their educational experience. Perhaps the most far-reaching issue that Asian Americans still face is actually the most ironic. In the past, Asian Americans were fighting mechanisms of prejudice, exclusion, and institutional discrimination that prevented them from even attending certain schools and therefore receiving a fair education. But recently, Asian Americans have been and continue to be touted as the one ethnic minority group that has successfully overcome racism and achieved the American dream, primarily through education.
As the so-called "model minority," we are frequently portrayed as a bright, shining example of hard work and patience whose example other minority groups should follow. Many people take these beliefs further and argue that since Asian Americans are doing so well, we no longer experience any discrimination and that Asian Americans no longer need services such as bilingual education, bilingual government documents, and public assistance. Further, many just assume that all Asian Americans are successful and that none of us are struggling.
On the surface, it may sound rather benign and even flattering to be described in those terms. However, we need to take a much closer look. In fact, many other statistics show that Asian Americans are still the targets of racial inequality and institutional discrimination and that the "model minority" image is a myth. Reality is always a little more complicated.
It's true that 42% of all Asian American adults have at least a college degree, the highest of all the major racial/ethnic groups. It's also common for Asian American students to have the highest test scores and/or GPAs within any given high school or college cohort. But what usually gets left out is the fact that not all Asian Americans are the same. For every Chinese American or South Asian who has a college degree, the same number of Southeast Asians are still struggling to adapt to their lives in the U.S.
For example, Vietnamese Americans only have a college degree attainment rate of 16%, only about one-quarter the rate for other Asian American ethnic groups. Further, Laotians, Cambodians, and Khmer only have rates around 5%. The cultural stereotype that "all Asians are smart" puts a tremendous amount of pressure on many Asian Americans. Many, particularly Southeast Asians, are not able to conform to this unrealistic expectation and in fact, have the highest high school dropout rates in the country. Again, not all Asian Americans are the same.
Those Asian Americans who are struggling tend to be immigrants who have limited English proficiency. Many people don't know that more than half, 60% in fact, of all Asian Americans are immigrants. Most are relatively fluent in English but a large portion are not. Therefore, similar to other immigrant minority groups, Asian Americans still have a need for bilingual education that is also culturally sensitive to their immigration experiences and family situations.
For many of these recent Asian American immigrant families, the right to a formal education and all the trappings of school life for their children are very new concepts. Further, it is common for Asian American children to quickly assimilate their peers' norms about socializing, homework, growing sense of independence, and other activities surrounding school.
This in turn can lead to conflict with their parents if the parents don't understand these activities and if they feel that their children are acculturating into "mainstream" American society too quickly and conversely, losing their traditional ethnic identity just as quickly. In times like these, knowledgeable educators and school administrators can play an important role in mediating these tensions before too much conflict arise that may lead the Asian American student to withdraw and possibly worse.
Too much success?
Another irony surrounding Asian Americans being labeled the "model minority" is that it can actually backfire to their detriment. Specifically, beginning in the 1980s, many more Asian Americans were applying to college than before. Soon, it became common for 10%, 15%, or more of a given university's student population to be of Asian ancestry at a time when Asians were only about 3% of the general population. As a result, many universities actually became alarmed at the growing Asian American student population on their campuses, so much so that once the Asian proportion of their student population reached 10%-15%, they began to reject Asian students who were clearly qualified. Soon, Asian Americans were accusing universities such as U.C. Berkeley, UCLA, Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and Brown of imposing a quota or upper limit on their admission numbers. After several protests and investigations, these universities admitted that there were problems with these admission procedures but never admitted any deliberate wrongdoing.
Soon thereafter, many opponents of affirmative action began to argue that these Asian American students were "victims" of affirmative action, just like Whites. In other words, these Asian American students were being denied admission when other "less qualified" ethnic groups (implying Blacks, Latinos, and American Indians) were being admitted.
As many Asian American scholars note, at first this argument may sound plausible. But after careful investigation and in-depth research, it became clear that the real issue is not that Asian students are "competing" with other racial/ethnic minority groups. Rather, the real cause of this controversy is the widespread use of admissions factors that always seem to favor White applicants.
These included "legacy clauses" in which the children of alumni are almost always admitted, regardless of their actual qualifications. Other factors that artificially lowered the admissions rates for Asian students included persistent stereotypes that Asian students were not "well-rounded" candidates and rarely participate in extracurricular activities. Again, national research showed that in terms of participating in sports, performing arts, academic and social clubs, and community activities, the rates for Asian students were almost identical to that of White students.
The point is, contrary to the superficially rosy picture of Asian Americans as the "model minority" who have overcome racism and achieved universal educational success, in many respects, Asian Americans are still the targets of discrimination. In discussing these and other issues, Asian-Nation (http://www.asian-nation.org) seeks to provide a concise but comprehensive exploration of the historical, political, economic, and cultural elements and issues that make up today's diverse Asian American community -- almost like an online version of Asian Americans 101 that the entire Internet community can use and learn from.
Asian American Cultures and Education
From http://social.jrank.org/pages/43/Asian-American-Children.html
Asian American Heritage, Differences among Asian-American Cultures
Asian Americans are a diverse group of individuals made up of several "micro" cultures under the umbrella of a larger shared "macro" heritage. It is important to note this inner diversity—Americans of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other Asian heritages—as the various groups are at times as different as they are similar. Nonetheless, there are some common features that may help in better understanding Asian-American children.
The Shared Asian-American Heritage
Before considering some of the shared values and practices of Asian-American groups, it is necessary to reiterate that these groups are exteremly diverse and that individual differences must be kept in mind as these broad generalizations are discussed. There are, however, some similar threads found in various Asian culutres, including the tendency to be more collectivistic (as opposed to the more individualistic Western orientation), as well as the tendency to view the role of the family as central to existence. In addition, the value given toward preserving honor and harmony may be common across Asian-American individuals. These commonalities will be discussed before attention is turned to some of the differences present between the various Asian-American groups.
Collectivism
Valerie Pang and Li-Rong Cheng have called collectivism "one of the most powerful values" found in Asian-American communities (Pang and Cheng 1998, p. 6). Collectivism is characterized by a value system such that the group has more value than the individuals of which it is made. In this orientation, individuals sacrifice their own goals for the greater good of the community, and norms and traditions are emphasized. Virtually every Asian culture is collectivist in nature, in contrast to the more individualistically oriented American framework. This has special implications for Asian-American children, as they may incorporate both Asian and American value systems into their own beliefs. This can be difficult for them as they straddle both cultures. An example is the extreme focus on independence as a positive quality in Western value systems such as that in the United States. An Asian-American child might allow his family more of a role in decisions regarding career or marriage and may thus be viewed in a negative light because of "dependence" on his family. It is important to understand that collectivist societies such as those in Asian cultures may have different values and priorities than those adhered to by Western societies.
Deep Familial Ties
The role of family as central is another common tenet in most Asian cultures, and this familial devotion is often seen in Asian-American children as well. Brian Leung discusses these deep familial ties, noting that Asian-American parents are often seen as sacrificing their own needs for the needs of their children, and in turn adult children are often expected to care for their elderly parents. Also, respect for elder family members is more common in Asian-American cultures than in Western societies.
It is also important to note that not all Asian-American families are at the same stage in their own process of acculturation to the United States. Leung divides these families into three potential groups: recently arrived immigrant families, immigrant-American families, and immigrant-descendant families. Recently arrived immigrant families may struggle with involvement in educational practices in America because of differences in beliefs about the educational system, language barriers, and employment demands. Immigrant-American families are those that consist of parents born overseas and children born in America, as well as entire families born overseas that have lived in the United States for a substantial amount of time (twenty years or more). These parents will most likely have more involvement in their children's education, as they are more accustomed to the culture of America. Differences may exist in opinions and values between parents and children as their levels of acculturation may be at different stages, and this can at times cause conflict in an Asian-American family. Finally, American-born families are those in which all members of the family are American-born. These families may subscribe to many Asian values but may practice them to a lesser extent.
Preserving Honor and Harmony
A third major tenet shared by many Asian and Asian-American cultures is the presence of behaviors designed to "save face" or preserve honor and harmony. Saving face is important not only for oneself but also for others with whom one might be interacting, including groups outside of the ingroup. Disagreements are usually avoided and maintaining a polite and conscientious appearance is more important than winning an argument. This approach must be understood as appropriate in Asian-American children, though it differs from Western viewpoints about asserting oneself. Even children from American-born Asian-American families may retain these types of behavior patterns, as they are central to the Asian value system.
There are, of course, many differences between the various Asian-American cultures as well. On one level, traditions and customs, language, and dress differ from group to group, while on another level, differences exist in the immigration practices and regulations of the different groups, as well as in historical experiences. These differences may cause Asian Americans to develop culturally in different ways.
The Effect of Immigration Practices on Asian-American Children
Chinese Americans are the Asian-American group that has been in America the longest. Many Chinese individuals immigrated to the United States to find jobs and fortune in the early 1800s and were welcomed at first because of the cheap labor they provided. Soon sentiments turned negative, however, leading to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. This act prevented immigration from China and lead to discriminatory practices in the United States, including lack of access to certain legal rights and segregation. In addition, the prevention of immigration created a Chinese-American population comprised mostly of men, leading to lower numbers in subsequent generations. This act was not repealed until 1943 and had extreme influences on both the physical and psychological well being of Chinese Americans. Such practices had an effect on the children of these Chinese immigrants as well, as feelings of shame and the results of discrimination and poverty were passed on from previous generations. Good education is often a main focus for these families and is a key reason for their immigration to the United States. Thus, educational achievement remains an immensely important goal for Chinese-American children.
Korean individuals arrived in America about a century later than the Chinese and also served as laborers. Again, attainment of better education was a major goal of these first Korean immigrants. The anti-Asian sentiments that continued to effect all Asian-American populations at this time in the United States caused many Korean and Korean-American families to settle close to one another, forming tightly knit communities. It is important for those working with Korean-American children to respect these communities and to try to work within them, making attempts to involve parents as much as possible. Though most Korean-American parents are highly respectful of teachers and educational administrators, they may not see it as their place to enter into the educational forum, deferring instead to teachers. Using material in the language of the parent is one way of ensuring more involvement.
Japanese individuals first immigrated to the United States in the late 1800s and early 1900s, with a desire for better education and financial opportunities as the primary force behind their immigration. While welcomed at first, anti-Asian sentiments resulted in the halting of immigration practices from 1931 to 1940. Whereas immigration was prevented quickly for the Chinese, this process took longer with the Japanese, allowing time for both males and females to immigrate to America. Thus, the Japanese-American population was not affected by the same setbacks suffered by the Chinese-American population. As a result, the Japanese-American population continued to thrive with two-thirds of the Japanese population being American-born by the 1940s. The discriminations directed against the Japanese-American population during World War II affected the acculturation of these citizens drastically, however, leading to less identification with America in some and highly overt identification, to the destruction of some of their own customs and practices, on the parts of others. World War II's relative recentness means that many Japanese-American children might come from families directly affected by its events.
The central roles of family and culture are common tenets in most Asian populations. A young girl wearing traditional Southeast Asian clothing holds an American flag for Independence Day festivities in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. (Kevin Fleming/Corbis)
The Effect of Historical Experiences on Asian-American Children
Historical experiences also differ for the various groups of Asian Americans. As mentioned before, during World War II, more than 100,000 Japanese Americans were interned in concentration camps in the United States, an event that continues to affect many Japanese-American families. Though two-thirds of these individuals were Nisei, or second-generation individuals who had been born in America, the U.S. government viewed them as a danger to their country following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. This indignation resulted in most Japanese-American families losing all that they owned, leading to a step backward in their solidification as productive landowners and business owners. Because of the emphasis placed on the tenet of honor in Japanese societies, many of these families did not speak of the internment for many years afterwards, and Japanese-American children might be just beginning to understand the effects of this imprisonment on their own families.
The end of the Vietnam War in 1975 and the immigration that followed provides another example of a historical influence on a different group of Asian Americans. This group of Southeast Asian immigrants came from three different countries: Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Although the first immigrants who came to the United States around 1975 were generally wealthy and quickly established themselves in their new country, immigrants that followed came from more desperate circumstances, escaping refugee camps and war-ravaged conditions in their homelands. Following these immigrants came the people released from reeducation camps and many biracial Asian children whose American fathers were in the service during the Vietnam War. Understanding which group the families of Southeast-Asian-American children are associated with can provide those working with them in schools and elsewhere with crucial information about their backgrounds, value systems, and behaviors. In the Southeast-Asian-American community, there is a high level of respect for education and those who provide it, and thus good grades and hard work are emphasized by these families.
Having more knowledge about the value systems, practices, and histories of Asian-American children can aid all those who work with them in better understanding their differences from and their similarities to non-Asian-American individuals.
Bibliography
California State Department of Education. A Handbook for Teaching Korean-Speaking Students. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Bicultural Education, 1983.
Leung, Brian. "Who Are Chinese-American, Japanese-American, and Korean-American Children? Cultural Profiles." In Valerie Pang and Li-Rong Cheng eds., Struggling to Be Heard: The Unmet Needs of Asian Pacific American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Pang, Valerie, and Li-Rong Cheng, eds. "The Quest for Concepts, Competence, and Connections: The Education of Asian Pacific American Children."Struggling to Be Heard: The Unmet Needs of Asian Pacific American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Tran, My Luong. "Behind the Smiles: The True Heart of Southeast-Asian-American Children." In Valerie Pang and Li-Rong Cheng eds., Struggling to Be Heard: The Unmet Needs of Asian Pacific American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Jennifer Teramoto Pedrotti
Asian American Heritage, Differences among Asian-American Cultures
Asian Americans are a diverse group of individuals made up of several "micro" cultures under the umbrella of a larger shared "macro" heritage. It is important to note this inner diversity—Americans of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other Asian heritages—as the various groups are at times as different as they are similar. Nonetheless, there are some common features that may help in better understanding Asian-American children.
The Shared Asian-American Heritage
Before considering some of the shared values and practices of Asian-American groups, it is necessary to reiterate that these groups are exteremly diverse and that individual differences must be kept in mind as these broad generalizations are discussed. There are, however, some similar threads found in various Asian culutres, including the tendency to be more collectivistic (as opposed to the more individualistic Western orientation), as well as the tendency to view the role of the family as central to existence. In addition, the value given toward preserving honor and harmony may be common across Asian-American individuals. These commonalities will be discussed before attention is turned to some of the differences present between the various Asian-American groups.
Collectivism
Valerie Pang and Li-Rong Cheng have called collectivism "one of the most powerful values" found in Asian-American communities (Pang and Cheng 1998, p. 6). Collectivism is characterized by a value system such that the group has more value than the individuals of which it is made. In this orientation, individuals sacrifice their own goals for the greater good of the community, and norms and traditions are emphasized. Virtually every Asian culture is collectivist in nature, in contrast to the more individualistically oriented American framework. This has special implications for Asian-American children, as they may incorporate both Asian and American value systems into their own beliefs. This can be difficult for them as they straddle both cultures. An example is the extreme focus on independence as a positive quality in Western value systems such as that in the United States. An Asian-American child might allow his family more of a role in decisions regarding career or marriage and may thus be viewed in a negative light because of "dependence" on his family. It is important to understand that collectivist societies such as those in Asian cultures may have different values and priorities than those adhered to by Western societies.
Deep Familial Ties
The role of family as central is another common tenet in most Asian cultures, and this familial devotion is often seen in Asian-American children as well. Brian Leung discusses these deep familial ties, noting that Asian-American parents are often seen as sacrificing their own needs for the needs of their children, and in turn adult children are often expected to care for their elderly parents. Also, respect for elder family members is more common in Asian-American cultures than in Western societies.
It is also important to note that not all Asian-American families are at the same stage in their own process of acculturation to the United States. Leung divides these families into three potential groups: recently arrived immigrant families, immigrant-American families, and immigrant-descendant families. Recently arrived immigrant families may struggle with involvement in educational practices in America because of differences in beliefs about the educational system, language barriers, and employment demands. Immigrant-American families are those that consist of parents born overseas and children born in America, as well as entire families born overseas that have lived in the United States for a substantial amount of time (twenty years or more). These parents will most likely have more involvement in their children's education, as they are more accustomed to the culture of America. Differences may exist in opinions and values between parents and children as their levels of acculturation may be at different stages, and this can at times cause conflict in an Asian-American family. Finally, American-born families are those in which all members of the family are American-born. These families may subscribe to many Asian values but may practice them to a lesser extent.
Preserving Honor and Harmony
A third major tenet shared by many Asian and Asian-American cultures is the presence of behaviors designed to "save face" or preserve honor and harmony. Saving face is important not only for oneself but also for others with whom one might be interacting, including groups outside of the ingroup. Disagreements are usually avoided and maintaining a polite and conscientious appearance is more important than winning an argument. This approach must be understood as appropriate in Asian-American children, though it differs from Western viewpoints about asserting oneself. Even children from American-born Asian-American families may retain these types of behavior patterns, as they are central to the Asian value system.
There are, of course, many differences between the various Asian-American cultures as well. On one level, traditions and customs, language, and dress differ from group to group, while on another level, differences exist in the immigration practices and regulations of the different groups, as well as in historical experiences. These differences may cause Asian Americans to develop culturally in different ways.
The Effect of Immigration Practices on Asian-American Children
Chinese Americans are the Asian-American group that has been in America the longest. Many Chinese individuals immigrated to the United States to find jobs and fortune in the early 1800s and were welcomed at first because of the cheap labor they provided. Soon sentiments turned negative, however, leading to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. This act prevented immigration from China and lead to discriminatory practices in the United States, including lack of access to certain legal rights and segregation. In addition, the prevention of immigration created a Chinese-American population comprised mostly of men, leading to lower numbers in subsequent generations. This act was not repealed until 1943 and had extreme influences on both the physical and psychological well being of Chinese Americans. Such practices had an effect on the children of these Chinese immigrants as well, as feelings of shame and the results of discrimination and poverty were passed on from previous generations. Good education is often a main focus for these families and is a key reason for their immigration to the United States. Thus, educational achievement remains an immensely important goal for Chinese-American children.
Korean individuals arrived in America about a century later than the Chinese and also served as laborers. Again, attainment of better education was a major goal of these first Korean immigrants. The anti-Asian sentiments that continued to effect all Asian-American populations at this time in the United States caused many Korean and Korean-American families to settle close to one another, forming tightly knit communities. It is important for those working with Korean-American children to respect these communities and to try to work within them, making attempts to involve parents as much as possible. Though most Korean-American parents are highly respectful of teachers and educational administrators, they may not see it as their place to enter into the educational forum, deferring instead to teachers. Using material in the language of the parent is one way of ensuring more involvement.
Japanese individuals first immigrated to the United States in the late 1800s and early 1900s, with a desire for better education and financial opportunities as the primary force behind their immigration. While welcomed at first, anti-Asian sentiments resulted in the halting of immigration practices from 1931 to 1940. Whereas immigration was prevented quickly for the Chinese, this process took longer with the Japanese, allowing time for both males and females to immigrate to America. Thus, the Japanese-American population was not affected by the same setbacks suffered by the Chinese-American population. As a result, the Japanese-American population continued to thrive with two-thirds of the Japanese population being American-born by the 1940s. The discriminations directed against the Japanese-American population during World War II affected the acculturation of these citizens drastically, however, leading to less identification with America in some and highly overt identification, to the destruction of some of their own customs and practices, on the parts of others. World War II's relative recentness means that many Japanese-American children might come from families directly affected by its events.
The central roles of family and culture are common tenets in most Asian populations. A young girl wearing traditional Southeast Asian clothing holds an American flag for Independence Day festivities in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. (Kevin Fleming/Corbis)
The Effect of Historical Experiences on Asian-American Children
Historical experiences also differ for the various groups of Asian Americans. As mentioned before, during World War II, more than 100,000 Japanese Americans were interned in concentration camps in the United States, an event that continues to affect many Japanese-American families. Though two-thirds of these individuals were Nisei, or second-generation individuals who had been born in America, the U.S. government viewed them as a danger to their country following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. This indignation resulted in most Japanese-American families losing all that they owned, leading to a step backward in their solidification as productive landowners and business owners. Because of the emphasis placed on the tenet of honor in Japanese societies, many of these families did not speak of the internment for many years afterwards, and Japanese-American children might be just beginning to understand the effects of this imprisonment on their own families.
The end of the Vietnam War in 1975 and the immigration that followed provides another example of a historical influence on a different group of Asian Americans. This group of Southeast Asian immigrants came from three different countries: Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Although the first immigrants who came to the United States around 1975 were generally wealthy and quickly established themselves in their new country, immigrants that followed came from more desperate circumstances, escaping refugee camps and war-ravaged conditions in their homelands. Following these immigrants came the people released from reeducation camps and many biracial Asian children whose American fathers were in the service during the Vietnam War. Understanding which group the families of Southeast-Asian-American children are associated with can provide those working with them in schools and elsewhere with crucial information about their backgrounds, value systems, and behaviors. In the Southeast-Asian-American community, there is a high level of respect for education and those who provide it, and thus good grades and hard work are emphasized by these families.
Having more knowledge about the value systems, practices, and histories of Asian-American children can aid all those who work with them in better understanding their differences from and their similarities to non-Asian-American individuals.
Bibliography
California State Department of Education. A Handbook for Teaching Korean-Speaking Students. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Bicultural Education, 1983.
Leung, Brian. "Who Are Chinese-American, Japanese-American, and Korean-American Children? Cultural Profiles." In Valerie Pang and Li-Rong Cheng eds., Struggling to Be Heard: The Unmet Needs of Asian Pacific American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Pang, Valerie, and Li-Rong Cheng, eds. "The Quest for Concepts, Competence, and Connections: The Education of Asian Pacific American Children."Struggling to Be Heard: The Unmet Needs of Asian Pacific American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Tran, My Luong. "Behind the Smiles: The True Heart of Southeast-Asian-American Children." In Valerie Pang and Li-Rong Cheng eds., Struggling to Be Heard: The Unmet Needs of Asian Pacific American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Jennifer Teramoto Pedrotti
订阅：
博文 (Atom)