Ethnocentrism

This incidence shows that The New York Times did a responsible job of reporting the Danish point-of-view. In Denmark, it is not uncommon at all for parents to leave their babies outside for the reasons outlined by the commentator. What is ironic and interesting, however, is the fact that the commentator forgot to mention that Americans are also paranoid -- perhaps rightfully so -- about safety. In this case, the child protective services might have been more concerned for the safety of the child in terms of its being kidnapped or worse. The exposure to the elements is a relatively minor concern, but the Danish commentary shows that such types of violence are almost unheard of in Danish culture.

The concerned citizens of the city actually did the right thing by calling the authorities and alerting child protective services. The parents may have been unaware that the United States is a relatively dangerous and anti-social society compared with Denmark. However, there were much better ways of handling the situation that would have avoided a lot of trouble and stress. One thing that might have been done would have been for a concerned citizen to actually go inside the restaurant and ask if anyone left their baby outside. The parents might have then been able to ask the restaurant owner if the baby might be placed inside for the time, unless it started to cry. This would have been a far more productive response to the situation.

Ethnocentrism is ironically at play on both sides of this issue. The Danes were acting in an ethnocentric fashion by not being aware of American customs and culture. If they had been aware that Americans do not consider it appropriate to leave their baby alone in the cold outside and exposed to danger, then they would have acted more responsibly in this case. Likewise, the commentator in the New York Times neglects to mention the dangers of exposing the baby to kidnapping. Ultimately, though, both sides exhibit ethnocentrism in their responses to this situation.