Editor,
The letter entitled “Lack of discipline in modern parenting” by Ms Nengnong that appeared in the Shillong Times on Oct 4, 2025 makes some good points but is unnecessarily harsh.
That children need discipline at home and school is a well-accepted and time-honoured truth. Children need care and nurture and much kindness, but also need guidelines and directions for good behaviour. Childhood and adolescence are critical stages not only for cognitive development but also for social and moral development, and good parenting is important.
While every generation is alike in some respects, the environment that children grow up in has changed significantly in the last few generations. Which is why generations have been designated as Baby Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y, Gen Z and Gen Alpha. These are not mere Western labels. They portray the marked evolution in every child’s social, economic, academic environment from generation to generation. These changes and challenges cause enormous stress and threaten the child’s wellbeing.
There is no point in using phrases like “back in the days”, “back then’ and “old-school parenting”. Old school parenting, by the way, included spanking, ear-pulling and caning. Of course, I don’t think the author is advocating physical punishment. However, in the last line she says, “Whoever spares the rod hates his son.” I presume she means this in a figurative sense, and does not actually mean beating a child. Anyway, harking back to the “old days” is not relevant.
In a balanced discussion, one would not use extreme words and phrases like “pathological liars, murderers, drug dealers, vandals, rapists, Satan”. A very small percentage of children grow up to be criminals and most of these children have had deprived childhoods such as abject poverty, broken homes and lack of opportunities. Hardly any of this can be blamed on the lack of parental discipline.
In fact, there is much valid data that shows the current Gen Z has lower drug use, less crime, and less promiscuous sex than all the preceding generations. They are more socially responsible, environment-conscious, and more empathetic to mental illness. They are considered the best- behaved generation. I’ll be happy to supply copies of these research studies to anyone who is interested.
Nothing in this one-sided letter looks at the child’s point of view. Children in this age are growing up with stresses and pressures that we never experienced. They did not create this high-stress world. We did. So let’s be more empathetic. Evidently there are many other factors that contribute to a child turning out bad or good, not just parenting.
I’ll end by saying again that good parenting to inculcate discipline in children is important. But we need a more balanced discussion.
Yours etc.,
Glenn C Kharkongor (Retired professor of pediatrics & child development specialist)
Via email
In Gratitude
Editor,
We express our heartfelt gratitude to the Headman and members of Mawpat Dorbar, Shillong, for their yeoman service on 2nd October 2025. Our precious son, Timothy, is Autistic (ASD) and we were in our church service at the LEF Church, Itshyrwat on 2nd October. At around 10.30 am, he suddenly ran away from the Church campus without informing anyone. We found Timothy missing within fifteen minutes and we frantically searched for him in the entire locality. Out of desperation we called the Headman of Mawpat Mr Judah Wallang and with his able and timely help the Dorbar announced it over the PA system and the people of Langkyrding who saw our Timothy and handed him over to us around 12.45 noon.
We are extremely grateful to the Headman and the members of Mawpat Dorbar for their timely and invaluable help in helping us to trace our very precious son.
Yours etc.,
Neovah & Thangboi Paite
Shillong – 14
To what extent de-extinction?
Editor
As the old proverb goes, “Just because we can, does not mean we should.” This thought came powerfully to mind while reading the article “AI and the Dream of Reviving Extinct Species” by Tanveer Singh, published in The Shillong Times on October 4, 2025. The piece offered a fascinating exploration of how Artificial Intelligence is being harnessed to reconstruct the DNA of vanished creatures — from the passenger pigeon to the Tasmanian tiger — through the emerging science of de-extinction. It was a work of rare clarity and imagination, reflecting both admiration for human ingenuity and faith in technological progress.
Yet, behind the brilliance of such achievement lies a quiet moral dilemma. In our determination to revive the past, are we in danger of neglecting the living present? The mammoth, for instance, was shaped by an age of ice and grassland that no longer exists. To restore it without recreating its natural world would be to bring forth a wonder without a home — a being marooned in a world it never knew. Science may be able to recreate life, but it cannot easily recreate belonging.
Mr Singh rightly praised the sophistication of AI models such as Hifiasm and Evo 2, which can knit together fragments of ancient DNA with remarkable precision. Yet precision alone cannot replace prudence. De-extinction raises questions that reach beyond laboratories: What is our ethical responsibility towards the creatures we re-engineer? Will they live freely or exist merely as curiosities of human ambition? And should not our first duty be to safeguard the sparrows, rhinos, and tigers that still share the earth with us, before seeking to resurrect those already lost?
Artificial Intelligence, when guided by restraint and wisdom, can become a guardian of biodiversity rather than a gambler with destiny. It can help us anticipate ecological threats, restore habitats, and prevent the next extinction rather than undo the last. The measure of scientific maturity lies not in how many species we can bring back, but in how many we can still protect from vanishing.
Singh’s article was therefore both timely and necessary. It reminded us that true progress demands balance — between innovation and conscience, discovery and duty. As humanity stands at the crossroads of power and responsibility, perhaps the greater triumph is not to resurrect what is gone, but to cherish what endures.
Yours etc,
Jairaj Chhetry,
Tura
