Anthropologists propose that in order to become attuned to a particular culture we need to be socialised into that culture by constant exposure to its norms and values as we grow.
(This, of course, is evident from the phenomenon of upward and downward causation that I described in the Chapter on Systems Theory).
It follows from this proposition that behaviour is far more influenced by our culture than by our genes. This has been a contentious issue for educators, behaviourists, sociologists, social scientists and even religious zealots for many decades if not centuries – even before people knew what genes were.
It is called the nature vs. nurture debate; and it is not intended to offer a definitive answer to the question here. It must be said that neuroscience posits the influence of cultural factors as being very important, so perhaps the pendulum is swinging a little that way. Though – as is the case with most contentious debates – the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.
From our point of view it is enough to say that there is overwhelming evidence to show that culture influences behaviour in humans. Practitioners in the field of helping people in distress need to be very aware of this.
Consider the social/cultural norms and values at play in a family. The first humans that a baby comes into contact with are invariably in his/her own family of origin. (With adopted babies the family of origin are the adoptive parents, depending of course on the age of adoption. For those babies who remain in orphanages or other care settings, the first contact humans will be the care workers in the institution).
Whatever setting a baby is born into, the humans s/he comes into contact with will have been socialised by both the family (and/or setting) into which they were born and the community in which they were raised. (This is where, from our point of view, it gets interesting, i.e. the Atlantic Ocean-type waves of feelings that I described near the bottom of this post).
Many families affected by imprisonment are resident in particular geographic communities and are immersed in, and get their emotional needs met from a smaller community within a community that have particular social/cultural norms and values that can often be quite different to the social/cultural norms and values of the wider community in which they live and indeed society at large.
I propose that educational/social/health interventions designed by (and for) the wider, mainstream community (mostly by the Pillars) have limited relevance for the community within a community, i.e. the Focus Group.