The following words, towards the end of US President Obama's inauguration speech last week struck me as being particularly incisive: "It is … a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate." Bringing a child into the world is the easy part; it is the raising of the child to be a good member of society that is really important, and his point is that when parents fail to nurture their children properly, that is what can create tremendous problems for the rest of us.

There would be few to disagree that the two greatest problems facing Jamaica right now are crime and the underperforming economy, and one could trace the source of these problems to substandard parenting. Sociology 101: the primary function of the family is 'production and reproduction' - the biological production of children, and the reproduction of the society by transmitting its norms and values and ways of operation to the next generation.

Implications

When children receive and internalise norms and values which promote order and discipline and society-building, they will contribute to national growth and development; when children are incompletely or improperly socialised, and fail to learn good work habits and self-discipline, then they are likely to be the source of antisocial behaviour, and they are unlikely to pull their weight in growing either their personal economy or the national economy.

What are the implications of President Obama's words? Clearly, families have to be helped to better nurture their children, and we will have to wait to see what programmes he introduces in the USA to do this. Already, we know that he has decided to fix the dysfunctional US education system, which will add reinforcement in the right direction, but I think we can expect him to address the problem of the dysfunctional family directly.

In some countries, electability is linked to good family values, which is good. And sexual foibles lead to immediate shame and resignations. But notoriously, that is not the case in Jamaica. President Obama can talk about our fates being sealed by nurturing parents because he and Michelle provide that example. In Jamaica, to be a real man is to 'have plenty gal' and 'young gal' and 'plenty pickney'. How will we ever make progress in improving the quality of our family life unless there is good example coming from a broad band of those at the top?

What are we doing?

What are we doing here in Jamaica to promote effective parenting? We have road-safety campaigns and energy-conservation campaigns, but have we ever had a sustained public awareness campaign to teach men and women how to nurture their children? What social and economic incentives have we put in place to encourage parents to properly bring up their children? What disincentives have we put in place to discourage men and women from neglecting the children they have fathered and mothered?

Let's face it, having a child is not a private matter; it is very much a public activity, with public social and economic consequences. The state has to find the resources to educate the kids people have, has to provide health care for them, and has to stimulate the economy to find employment for them. Therefore, the Government has an interest in the baby-making business.

Which means that the State has an interest in the sexual habits of its citizens. Promoting good mental health and self-actualisation, promoting self-control and self-discipline, means that fewer people will take what does not belong to them, will eat themselves into obesity, and drink themselves into besottedness. And sexual self-control will mean fewer unwanted children, and better parenting, and less crime, and more economic prosperity. By promoting the culture of the stud and the skettel, we are certainly deciding our fate, and I can't imagine we are going to like it.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and a Roman Catholic deacon.