Recently Robin Marantz Henig wrote an article for the New York Times Magazine entitled “What Is It about 20-Somethings?” In the article, she explains the trend of adults in their 20’s who are taking longer (or failing altogether) to reach various milestones of adulthood – along with the concern that many have about the trend. 

 

The bulk of the article, however, focuses on the work of Jeffrey Jensen Arnett, a psychology professor, who has written extensively on “emerging adulthood” (as he calls it). Arnett has been pressing for the recognition of this period as a distinct developmental phase, also implying a new set of societal considerations for them. Then, drawing upon the research of others, she points out that there are still some changes going on in the brain throughout the 20’s – especially the pruning of synapses. She comes to this startling conclusion: “Maybe it’s only now, when young people are allowed to forestall adult obligations without fear of public censure, that the rate of societal maturation can finally fall into better sync with the maturation of the brain.” In Henig’s defense, she does point out that Arnett has his critics, but she comes back in the end to present this discussion as a full of promise: “…if this longer road to adulthood really leads to more insight and better choices, then Arnett’s vision of an insightful, sensitive, thoughtful, content, well-hone, self-actualizing crop of grown-ups would indeed be something worth waiting for.”

 

Having just left my 20’s this past year and working full-time with college students, it’s not that I disagree that contemporary 20-somethings haven’t met some new challenges – or even that the period labeled “emerging adulthood” doesn’t exist. The problem is that Henig has present an ethical question in the flattest manner – as if nice biological coincidences conclude the matter. There are other details which need significant exploration. For instance, the freedoms that have become a hallmark of the contemporary American 20-something do have profound impact. The rise of STDs among this age group, the emotional toll of abortions, the physical and social cost of routine substance abuse, and so on profoundly impact the shape of subsequent life. Even in the biological terms by which Henig presents the discussion, reproduction – especially for women – would be much easier if it occurred in the teenage years. Yet none of us are prepared to conclude that in 21^st century America, teenagers ought to be having children. Additionally, it might be worthwhile for those who are optimistic about this cultural shift to read the anonymously written Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student,[1] which recounts just how profoundly disturbed many university students are becoming by exercising the freedoms Arnett promotes.

 

Henig’s article reveals just how complex many ethical questions are – and how flat much of our public ethical discourse has become. The question of how we treat those struggling through “emerging adulthood” does require an ethical stance, but such a stance is forged through acknowledgement of the complicated details not the glossing over of them. For the Christian, it requires that we reflect upon the gospel – “while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.”

---