We now have new evidence, after the publication of a study in Human Reproduction, that women who are severely depressed during pregnancy are at much higher risk of giving birth prematurely.

The recent report is one of a handful of scientific studies to document the association between maternal depression and premature birth. But it’s the most important to date because of its size and the large, representative group of women sampled.

Previous research suggests that 9 to 12 percent of women become clinically depressed during pregnancy. The question, of course, is why a mother’s mental state would affect the timing of a birth.

No one knows for sure. But experts speculate that depression affects a woman’s neuroendocrine system, which in turn affects the hormones circulating in her body, which in turn affects the functioning of the placenta that nourishes the infant.

“To sustain a healthy pregnancy, normal placental function is essential,” said Dr. De-Kun Li, a reproductive and perinatology epidemiologist at Kaiser Permanente in Northern California and lead author of the report. “Potentially, depression can lead to malfunction of the placenta,” he suggested.

Indeed, there is increasing evidence that something along these lines occurs with women who experience stress during pregnancy.

Dr. Diane Ashton, deputy medical director for the March of Dimes, notes that stress can alter a woman’s immune function, leading to “increased susceptibility to intra-amniotic infection or inflammation.” Research studies indicate these infections may play an important role in pre-term births.

Also, Ashton says, maternal stress can jump-start the production of “fight or flight” hormones like cortisol, which in turn can prematurely activate placental hormones that can set off a cascade of events leading to premature birth.

Even if a baby is born full term, being bathed in cortisol in utero can affect fetal brain development, research shows.

Dr. Laura Miller, director of the women’s mental health program at the University of Illinois at Chicago Medical Center, said research shows that children of stressed-out pregnant women can be affected at least to age 10.

These children often have hyper-reactive responses, physiologically and emotionally, and have “greater difficulty dealing with stress,” she says. Also, infants of stressed mothers can be “more irritable and difficult to soothe” and demonstrate “poorer growth and increased risk of infection,” she notes.

As for maternal depression, it may operate through similar mechanisms – by altering similar hormones and producing similar physiological responses – or it may not. The research necessary to clarify what’s happening hasn’t yet been done.

We don’t know, either, if it makes a difference at what point during a pregnancy a mom becomes depressed (the Human Reproduction report studied only moms who reported depressed symptoms in the first trimester) or how long the depression lasts.

Miller suggests the take-home message for moms is “depression during pregnancy can be prevented, and if a woman suspects she might be at risk she really should strongly consider pre-conception counseling.”

Factors that can put women at risk include previous bouts of depression and a family history of maternal depression.

For women who are considering pregnancy but have concerns about mental health, there are several therapeutic options, including psychotherapy, strengthening social supports, and medication, Miller notes. For those who become depressed during pregnancy, these options remain, but the profile of potential benefits and risks differs, depending on the type of depression a woman has and other factors.

Since surveys show that most ob/gyns don’t feel comfortable treating depression, it’s important to find a medical expert who is prepared to help. Be honest about what you’re feeling and ask your ob/gyn directly if she’s the right person to offer assistance.

Among the questions that Miller suggests: “Have you had experience treating depression during a pregnancy?” “Do you have special training in working with pregnant women who are depressed?” “Do you refer people with these kinds of problems to a psychiatrist – and, if so, can I get a referral?”

Source: Chicago Tribune, United States
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/triage/2008/10/depression-and.html

A major puzzle for neurobiologists is how the brain can modify one microscopic connection, or synapse, at a time in a brain cell and not affect the thousands of other connections nearby. Plasticity, the ability of the brain to precisely rearrange the connections between its nerve cells, is the framework for learning and forming memories.

Duke University Medical Center researchers have identified a missing-link molecule that helps to explain the process of plasticity and could lead to targeted therapies.

The discovery of a molecule that moves new receptors to the synapse so that the neuron (nerve cell) can respond more strongly helps to explain several observations about plasticity, said Michael Ehlers, MD, PhD, a Duke professor of neurobiology and senior author of the study published in the Oct. 31 issue of Cell. “This may be a general delivery system in the brain and in other types of cells, and could have significance for all cell signaling.”

Ehlers said this could be a general way for all cells to locally modify their membranes with receptors, a process critical for many activities — cell signaling, tumor formation and tissue development.

“Part of plasticity involves getting receptors to the synaptic connections of nerve cells,” Ehlers said. “The movement of neurotransmitter (chemical) receptors occurs through little packages that deliver molecules to the synapse when new memories form. What we have discovered is the molecular motor that moves these packages when synapses are active.”

When neurons fire at the same time, their connections strengthen and a person can associate certain features. “Once you have heard someone’s name, seen his face, where he was standing, all these features can be bound into a unified packet of information — a percept — and at a very cellular level this occurs by strengthening synaptic connections between co-active neurons,” said Ehlers, who is also a Howard Hughes Medical Investigator.

To learn and make new associations, the brain alters the strengths of the synapses’ electrical inputs onto cells that compute these features. Scientists studied the hippocampus, where memories form, but this machinery could operate in other brain areas.

“One of earliest changes in Alzheimer’s disease is synapse dysfunction, so this molecule might be a new target for that disease,” he said. “Abnormal movement of receptors may be implicated in brain development, in autism.” He said the molecule potentially is involved “in the abnormal electrical activity of epilepsy and the overactive brain pathways of addiction.”

In a series of biochemistry and microscopic imaging experiments, Ehlers and colleagues found that the myosin Vb (five-b) molecule in hippocampal neurons responded to a flow of calcium ions from the synaptic space by popping up and into action. One end of the myosin is attached to meshlike actin filaments so it can “walk” to the end of the nerve cells where receptors are. On its other end, it tows an endosome, a packet that contains new receptors.

“These endosomes are like little memories waiting to happen,” Ehlers said. “They are reservoirs of neurotransmitter receptors that brain cells deploy to add more receptors to a particular synapse. More receptors equals stronger synapses.”

Electrical impulses cause one nerve cell to dump its neurotransmitter, in this case, glutamate, into the small space between neurons (the synapse), which activates neurotransmitter receptors on the receiving side. These are ion channels that open in response to neurotransmitter and generate the electrical impulse.

When the scientists blocked myosin in single cells, this stopped the addition of new receptors and prevented electrical impulses from getting stronger, showing that myosin is essential to enhancing nerve cell connections.

“This is a very basic cellular mechanism of brain plasticity. It is likely fundamental to brain development and disease,” Ehlers said. “The myosin Vb molecule gives us a new way to think about designing therapies for treating memory loss, psychiatric disease and brain development.”

Source: eMaxHealth.com, NC
http://www.emaxhealth.com/2/85/26047/scientists-identify-machinery-helps-make-memories.html

Spending some quality time with the children might seem the perfect antidote to a stressful day at the office.

Around 24 per cent of fathers sometimes even leave for work early or return late so they spend less time with their children.

More than 40 per cent become really stressed if they go straight home from work to a house full of rowdy youngsters.

The survey of 3,000 fathers was carried out by Bounty, a company which offers advice to parents.

Managing director Ian Beswetherick, who is a father of two young children, said:

‘Nowadays most modern dads are happy to share the responsibility of looking after the children and in doing so they now truly appreciate mums’ hard work.

‘The fact that dads are leaving for work early and not heading home to help with bath and bedtime can also be due to the pressures of working for old style ‘dinosaur dads’.

‘Traditionally supported by wives that stayed at home to raise their kids, these older dads hold senior positions and don’t appreciate the fact that they employ a different kind of dad who is struggling to get to grips with combining his work with the expectations of modern fatherhood.’

The survey also found that whilst 80 per cent of dads felt an instant rush of love when their baby was born, 28 per cent said it took them longer to bond with the newborn than their partner did.

Seventeen per cent said they bonded with their baby two days after it was born, 10 per cent said it took a week, and 8 per cent said it took a whole month before they finally felt close to the child.

A quarter of fathers said they felt completely left out when their partner was pregnant - which could explain why they took longer to bond with their new baby.

But 55 per cent tried to get closer to their unborn child by stroking their partner’s bump and 44 per cent spoke to baby in the womb.

More than a third, 34 per cent, attended all ante-natal classes and around 10 per cent stopped drinking and smoking.

Two-thirds of fathers admitted that when their partner was pregnant they were secretly hoping their firstborn would be a boy.

Overall, 57 per cent said they preferred boys over girls.

That said, 30 per cent of dads said they actually bonded better with their daughters than their sons, and 46 per cent feel much more protective of their little girls.

In an ideal world, fathers would like to have two girls and two boys.

Bounty conducted the survey to mark the launch of its website newdadssurvivalguide.com, which provides advice for fathers.

Mr Beswetherick said it is aimed at new and expectant fathers who ‘worry about asking the wrong thing at the wrong time’.

Source: Daily Mail, UK
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1081667/Stay-home-No-thanks-work-easier-say-dads.html

Parents, you can keep those flash cards and alphabet books.

But there’s another device in your home that can help develop language and visual skills. It’s called - hold on to your remotes - the television set.

Instead of being simply society’s whipping boy and the root of all cultural evil, the so-called “idiot box” might actually boost test scores, especially in disadvantaged homes, a recently published study out of the University of Chicago says.

Even as it baby-sits electronically, the TV can be teaching both modes of learning and facts, other studies suggest, and keeping those who watch it from engaging in more destructive behaviors.

That’s the good news about the boob tube. There’s certainly bad, including the warning that “there’s no two-dimensional screen that can equal a three-dimensional caregiver,” says Dr. Donald Shifrin, the American Academy of Pediatrics spokesman on the impact of media on children. Then there’s the study showing kids who watch more TV do less reading.

But we’ll get to the numerous caveats - especially the one about “Desperate Housewives” being less helpful than “Sesame Street” - later.

For now, let’s deal with what many may find surprising.

The prevailing, almost unquestioning cultural bias against TV, especially among the upper-middle class, is nailed by the humor blog Stuff White People Like, which puts “Not having a TV” at No. 28 on the list.

“The number one reason why white people like not having a TV is so that they can tell you that they don’t have a TV,” the authors write. But there is an academic consensus, if not a popular-culture one, that TV may actually be useful as more than just a means for frazzled parents to buy a few moments of uninterrupted time or wind down mindlessly at day’s end.

“I used to laugh and say, ’I did 25 years of research on children in television, and I can summarize it in one sentence: It’s the content that matters,’” says Aletha Huston, a professor of child development at the University of Texas.

“If used correctly, television can be a wonderful medium for kids. It can be a way of exposing them to the world. It can be a resource for kids to get to places and times they wouldn’t get to,” says Huston.

Yet, “it is a message that doesn’t get out there somehow,” she says, citing the surprisingly intense interest when “we published a study a few years ago showing the positive effects of ’Sesame Street’ on early schoolkids’ performance.”

The Chicago study came out of the Graduate School of Business, where young economists have been looking at media and its effects. Although based on an old data set, it offers new confirmation of the evolving views of television.

Standardized testing of almost 350,000 6th, 9th and 12th-grade students showed that the students who had more exposure to television in early childhood did slightly better on the tests than those with less exposure.

“We find strong evidence against the view that childhood television viewing harms the cognitive or educational development of preschoolers,” write Jesse Shapiro and Matthew Gentzkow in the paper, published this year in the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

There’s a big caveat: The testing data are from 1965, because those kids had been around when television rolled out from city to city in the U.S., providing what essentially hasn’t been seen in the United States since, a large-scale, clear-cut, before-and-after comparison.

“It’s an open question how the ways in which television is different now than then would affect the data,” says Shapiro, an assistant professor of economics at the GSB.

But even with more recent data, another U. of C. economist reached a similar conclusion to that of Shapiro and Gentzkow.

“Despite the conventional wisdom, watching television apparently does not turn a child’s brain to mush,” wrote Steven Levitt, with co-author Stephen Dubner, in the 2005 hit book Freakonomics.

They looked at a huge early-childhood study conducted by the U.S. Department of Education in the 1990s and found “no correlation,” they wrote, “between a child’s test scores and the amount of television he watches.”

One of the big questions for economists is not just examining an activity in isolation but considering what activity it replaces.

Psychological research shows that violence in media increases aggression, for example. But “violent crime decreases on days with larger theater audiences for violent movies,” another recent study of media effects found. The implication: However aggressive you may feel, you can’t do the crime if you don’t have the time.

Violent movies aren’t the same as children’s afternoon television shows. But Shapiro and Gentzkow also found that much of the impact of the medium they were studying seemed to be related to what activities it might be replacing.

In their findings, even after controlling for parental income and education levels, TV’s “effects are more positive for children from less advantaged families or from families where English isn’t the first language,” Shapiro says.

Put another way, that translates into a whopper of a caveat: “For children with highly educated parents and rich home environments, the cognitive effects of television appear to be smaller and may even be negative,” they write.

In other words: TV as a surrogate parent is not equal to Scrabble with an English-lit-major mom.

The common wisdom is that TV has been in decline for decades, but many critics share the view of another popular book, Everything Bad Is Good for You. In it, author Steven Berlin Johnson contends that TV now is actually much better, “more complex and nuanced,” than it was at the time of Shapiro’s study.

“The most debased forms of mass diversion - video games and violent television dramas and juvenile sitcoms - turn out to be nutritional after all,” Johnson writes, largely because the storytelling and complexity of action demands much more of the viewer.

He’s looking at adult TV, comparing the intricate “The Sopranos” to the simple “Starsky & Hutch,” for instance, but the argument can also be made for children’s television, where the straight-ahead action-hero cartoon story has been replaced by the subtle social interactions and multiple layers of meaning in “SpongeBob SquarePants.”

Patricia Greenfield has looked at more contemporary data, too, and concluded television is a mixed educational blessing. It’s likely responsible for a rise in verbal IQ scores, while it may be to blame for declines in verbal SAT scores.

“The real strength of television in teaching vocabulary is the visual context for teaching definitions,” says Greenfield, director of the Children’s Digital Media Center at UCLA and California State University at Los Angeles. That applies to IQ tests, which use “everyday vocabulary,” she says. Meanwhile, SATs look for “Latin-based, literary vocabulary,” which TV, by and large, does not offer.

Her 1998 paper, “The Cultural Evolution of IQ,” also makes the case for television’s helping to teach “visual intelligence,” the reading of signs, symbols, images so vital in today’s culture.

With television and DVDs being used widely in schools and by parents, her reading is that anti-TV forces may actually be “in decline,” to the point that “I’m a little bit more concerned about people not understanding the costs, only looking at the benefits.”

That’s certainly a worry of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which recommends no screen time for children under age 2 and a maximum of two well-chosen hours per day for older kids.

The concern is not TV per se so much as what TV, especially relevant with one study showing nearly 40 percent of children age 6 and younger have TVs in their bedrooms.

“Are we viewing ’Elimidate’?” the academy’s Shifrin asks. “Or are we viewing ’Dora the Explorer’?”

The doctors group understands that youngsters are growing up “as digital natives,” he adds. “We want parents to understand it’s up to them to be literate enough to know what’s being taught” on the screens.

He recommends the Web site Common Sense Media (commonsensemedia.org) as a good way for parents to achieve such literacy.

“We are not going to censor television - we’d like to censure it at times - but what we are going to say is, ’Caveat emptor,’” Shifrin says. “It’s about what you watch, how much you watch and where it’s watched.”

—

HOW TO USE IT

1. Don’t be passive. The stereotype is of the viewer numbly flipping through channels, looking for anything of interest. Instead, seek out what you have good reason to believe will be good or interesting and watch then or set your DVR or VCR to record it. You don’t read books or go to films at random, do you? One quick way to find out what the critical consensus is: the Web site Meta critic.com, which sums up what major critics say about a show then provides an average rating. For kids’ TV, try common sensemedia.org.

2. Ignore TV series in their first run. If you don’t need to be part of water-cooler chatter the next morning, the much more efficient, educated way is to get a well-reviewed series from Netflix or your library after it has come out on DVD. Watch at your pace, without commercials.

3. “Documentary” does not equal “medicine.” Many of us have some brain filter that counts nonfiction as castor oil, even when another part of our brain knows better. To take docs out of the equation - the great work of PBS’ “Frontline,” for instance - is to miss some of television’s best work.

4. Take the TV out of the bedrooms. We’ve all got great kids with great judgment, but they are curious creatures, and left alone with the box, they’ll seek out its most shocking fare - not to mention get one more reason to procrastinate. Take temptation off the dresser.

5. If they must have TVs, use filters. All those ratings that were put in place do actually work. Spend 10 minutes with your TV’s manual (”Ratings”), and you’ll be able to limit the viewing possibilities to appropriate levels, plus be able to set a password strong enough to keep your settings from being overridden by the electronic-media genius you’re raising. (…)

Source: Boston Herald, United States
http://tinyurl.com/5l7cb5

Is our generation too heavily dependent on the Internet? According to a recent Wi-Fi Alliance and Wakefield Research survey, almost three out of five students would not go to a college that does not offer free wi-fi. In fact, “nine out of 10 college students in the United States say wi-fi access is as essential to education as classrooms and computers,” says the study.

Some scientists and writers suggest that spending a great deal of time on the Internet can significantly shorten a person’s attention span. The same survey states, “More than half [of the students surveyed] have checked Facebook or MySpace and sent or received e-mail while using their laptop in class.” I have seen, in my lecture classes, no shortage of high-achieving and academically motivated Brandeis students surreptitiously checking Facebook instead of taking notes. The temptation is strong. Is the Internet so addictive it prevents even the best students from concentrating in class?

The Atlantic Monthly recently published a popular article by Nicholas Carr titled “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” The Internet allows us a vast range of instantly accessible information; research used to entail hours spent in libraries poring over books, articles, newspaper archives and so on. Now we can click-click-click our way through the Internet, jumping from Web page to Web page, skimming through information from one hyperlink to another. In the article, Carr describes the effect years of doing so has had on his way of thinking: “My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.”

People who are used to reading on the Internet might find it difficult to concentrate on the linear narrative of a book. A New York Times article states: “Some traditionalists warn that digital reading is the intellectual equivalent of empty calories. Zigzagging through a cornucopia of words, pictures, video and sounds, they say, distracts more than strengthens readers.” Despite all the obvious advantages of having so much information at our fingertips, it is possible that the format in which it’s presented erodes our reading skills.

In general, it seems to me that spending so much time in the virtual world is slowly turning us into zombies. We are increasingly disconnected from real life. We spend less time outdoors or engaging in physical activity. We are so immersed in our technology we end up limiting our interactions with other people. Talking to friends on Facebook is not the same as talking to them in person. Talking to friends you’ve “met” on the Internet but not in real life doesn’t count at all. The more that technology advances, it seems, the more isolated we become; take the example of Netflix. Even the drive to the video store and the basic interaction with the guy behind the counter is no longer a necessary part of the process of renting movies. We can get them mailed to us directly, so we don’t even need to leave the house and make that tiny effort.

We seriously need to reevaluate our priorities. Do we really need wi-fi so desperately that we’re willing to cross colleges off our lists just because they don’t offer it in restaurants, classrooms, parks, coffee shops, even in our cars? Large percentages of students, according to the Wi-Fi Alliance, use the Internet in all these places.

Despite all its advantages, the Internet, when used so excessively, seems to impair our social skills and numb our brains. The survey even found that “If forced to choose, nearly half of respondents (48 percent) would give up beer before giving up Wi-fi.” For college students, that seems extreme.

Source: Justice, MA
http://tinyurl.com/5jcevc

You can help your child develop skills for reading and writing while doing ordinary chores around the house! Supporting your child’s literacy development is one of the most important tasks you have, and it can be done even when you are busy (and isn’t that most of the time?).

Following are some simple ideas that will help you make the most of every opportunity you have with your preschool child:

- As you put away the groceries, ask your child to name the items in the boxes. He may not be able to read the words on the label yet, but he will begin to recognize logos and pictures, which he will later associate with the printed word.

- While you dust the furniture, let your child write his name in the furniture polish.

- Give your child simple jobs to do as you cook; measuring ingredients or rolling dough are examples. Talk about the words in the recipe you are using; explain terms like mix, stir, or sift. This is a great time to also talk about cleanliness and the importance of “clean cooking hands.”

- When making biscuits, give your child a portion of the dough. He can shape the dough into letters and bake his name. What a fun way to learn to spell! You can also use leftover dough and add a little food coloring - instant play-dough (keeps in refrigerator a few days with kneading).

- Let your child place magnetic letters on the refrigerator while you cook. Talk about the letters and sounds he is using.

- Even bath time can be a learning experience! Let your child lather up the side of the tub with soap. Encourage him to write his name or draw pictures in the lather.

- Make a book with your child. Let him draw pictures and scribble (a toddler’s version of writing) a story. Place the pages in plastic storage bags and staple together like a book or punch holes in the sides and tie pages together with yarn.

- Let your child help sort the laundry by color. Talk about the colors. You can also sort into items (linens, clothes, etc.) and in sizes (large, small, medium) to nurture those all-important pre-math skills.

- Look for restaurant signs, toy store signs, etc., as you travel. Most children recognize their favorite fast food place simply by its outdoor sign! This is a child’s first reading experience (recognizing familiar signs and symbols). We call this “environmental literacy.”

Remember, you as a parent are your child’s first and most important teacher! Think about the simple ways you can support your child’s literacy development as you go about your daily activities! In doing so, you are nurturing your child’s natural curiosity and promoting a life-long love of learning. Happy Parenting! (…)

Source: Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, MS
http://www.djournal.com/pages/story.asp?ID=281094&pub=1&div=News

The Internet is not just changing the way people live but altering the way our brains work with a neuroscientist arguing this is an evolutionary change which will put the tech-savvy at the top of the new social order.

Small, however, argues that the people who will come out on top in the next generation will be those with a mixture of technological and social skills.

“We’re seeing an evolutionary change. The people in the next generation who are really going to have the edge are the ones who master the technological skills and also face-to-face skills,” Small told Reuters in a telephone interview.

“They will know when the best response to an email or Instant Message is to talk rather than sit and continue to email.”

In his newly released fourth book iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind, Small looks at how technology has altered the way young minds develop, function and interpret information.

Small, the director of the Memory & Aging Research Center at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience & Human Behavior and the Center on Aging at UCLA, said the brain was very sensitive to the changes in the environment such as those brought by technology.

He said a study of 24 adults as they used the Web found that experienced Internet users showed double the activity in areas of the brain that control decision-making and complex reasoning as Internet beginners.

“The brain is very specialized in its circuitry and if you repeat mental tasks over and over it will strengthen certain neural circuits and ignore others,” said Small.

“We are changing the environment. The average young person now spends nine hours a day exposing their brain to technology. Evolution is an advancement from moment to moment and what we are seeing is technology affecting our evolution.”

Small said this multi-tasking could cause problems.

He said the tech-savvy generation, whom he calls “digital natives,” are always scanning for the next bit of new information which can create stress and even damage neural networks.

“There is also the big problem of neglecting human contact skills and losing the ability to read emotional expressions and body language,” he said.

“But you can take steps to address this. It means taking time to cut back on technology, like having a family dinner, to find a balance. It is important to understand how technology is affecting our lives and our brains and take control of it.”

Source: Reuters
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE49Q34A20081027?sp=true

Dear Dr. Fournier: I just came from a school council meeting where parents were furious because of low achievement test scores. These are the same people that put stickers on their cars saying their child is an A student. How can you love your child’s school one day and hate it the next? When they give our children good grades, they’re great, but when they flunk standardized tests, our schools are bad?

Grades and achievement tests are both important. A law school student might have graduated with top honors and even been the editor of his school’s law review but will not be able to practice law until he passes the state bar exam. The challenge lies in the fact that children must do well from day to day in the classroom yet they must be able to pass tests made by others from outside your child’s school in order to be deemed a success.

Neither of these accomplishments guarantees your child success as an adult because school systems and standardized test makers are operating on the 1940s structure of education in this country, which was designed for the industrial era.

Your children must learn skills that are not being taught in schools.

WHAT TO DO

Harper’s magazine reports in the article “Figuratively Speaking” by John MacIntyre that 77 percent of parents of school-aged youth say they are satisfied with their children’s education. If this many people are happy, why do politicians and international studies indicate that our schools are so far below world standards? Obviously not everyone is happy. The same report says that the number decreases when adults in this country are asked the same question.

Only 44 percent of this group is all right with primary and secondary education. That means 56 percent does not believe our school systems are producing well-educated young adults. Of course these are many of the people that are supposed to employ our kids when they are older, so we have to admit that their opinion counts.

Strong American Schools chaired by former Colorado Governor Roy Romer found in 2004 that 33 percent of this country’s high school graduates needed remedial courses in college. Even though they had the grades to get into college and may have passed the SAT or ACT, they did not have the elementary/high school skills to do college work!

Furthermore, 29 percent of all students in four-year colleges and 43 percent of those in junior colleges needed remedial courses. Every one of those remedial students took courses in high school, passed those courses but learned close to nothing.

Taxpayers are paying billions a year to educate our children while college tuitions are increasing in part because colleges have to provide reeducation services — that is they have to teach high school (and sometimes elementary school) all over again.

The bottom line is that schools in our country are so busy teaching and trying to prove that they have taught by raising achievement scores that no one is watching the store. Schools are for children to learn.

Do not let your child go to bed celebrating an A unless he can prove to you that they still know what was on that test one month after they received the grade.

The system is fighting the wrong battle and losing the war.

Focus your energy on making sure your child has learned and let the bureaucrats and “happy with their school” parents knock themselves out losing the war and their children’s future, as well. (…)

Source: Henderson Gleaner, KY
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2008/oct/28/parents-should-focus-on-learning-more-than-on/

Stress during pregnancy can have unfortunate consequences for children born under those conditions - slower development, learning and attention difficulties, anxiety and depressive symptoms and possibly even autism.

That such stress during a mother’s pregnancy can cause developmental and emotional problems for offspring has long been observed by behavioral and biological researchers, but the objective measuring and timing of that stress and its results are difficult to prove objectively in humans, since the evidence is based to a large extent on anecdotal recollections and is also strongly influenced by genetic and other factors.

One researcher who has long wrestled with the problem of how to prove the connection between prenatal stress and its effects on offspring is Prof. Marta Weinstock-Rosin of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem School of Pharmacy, who in her experimental work with rats has been able to demonstrate that relationship in a conclusive, laboratory-tested manner.

“There is an enormous advantage in working with rats,” says Weinstock-Rosen, “since we are able to eliminate the genetic and subjective element.” The researchers were able to compare the behavior of the offspring of stressed rat mothers with those whose mothers were not stressed. They also were able to compare the results of administering various types of stress at different periods during the gestation process to see which period is the most sensitive for the production of different behavioral alterations.

Weinstock-Rosin’s work, along with that of colleagues from Israel, the UK and elsewhere, will be presented at an international conference, “Long Term Consequences of Early Life Stress,” which she is co-chairing with Dr. Vivette Glover of the Imperial College, London, and that will be held at Mishkenot Sha’ananim in Jerusalem on October 29 and 30.

Weinstock-Rosin has been able to show through her laboratory experiments that when rat mothers were subject to stressful situations (irritating sounds at alternating times, for example), their offspring were later shown to have impaired learning and memory abilities, less capacity to cope with adverse situations (such as food deprivation), and symptoms of anxiety and depressive-like behavior, as compared to those rats in control groups that were born to unstressed mothers. All of these symptoms parallel the impairments that have been observed in children born to mothers who were stressed in pregnancy, she points out.

Further experiments by Weinstock-Rosin and her students have shown the crucial effect of excessive levels of the hormone cortisol that is released by the adrenal gland during stress and reaches the fetal brain during critical stages of brain development. Under normal conditions, this hormone has a beneficial function in supplying instant energy, but it has to be in small amounts and for a short period of time. Under conditions of excessive stress, however, the large amount of this hormone reaching the fetal brain can cause structural and functional changes. In humans, above-normal levels of cortisol can also stimulate the release of another hormone from the placenta that will cause premature birth, another factor that can affect normal development.

Weinstock-Rosin says that further experimental work is required in order to study possible other effects on the offspring resulting from raised hormonal levels. What does seem to be obvious already is that avoidance of stress to as great an extent as possible is a good prescription for a healthy pregnancy and healthy offspring.

Husbands take note!

Source: Medical News Today, HK
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/127086.php

Many parents cringe at the thought of discipline. They also seem reluctant to have high expectations of their kids, or to hold them accountable for their performance. They do not want to “hurt” or “pressure” their children.

A harried mother approached me after my talk in an exclusive private school. “My son is at his computer till two in the morning,” she said. “He says he has to do a lot of research.” Her son is in first year high school, and has low grades.

“I do a lot of research,” I replied, “but I do not stay at the computer for more than a couple of hours every day. Your son is more likely playing games instead of doing his homework.”

She sighed. “I think so, too. My husband and I actually told him we would ban the computer, but he got mad at us. So we lifted the ban. What do we do now?”

I stifled a sigh. “You need to set limits,” I said. “An outright ban is difficult, because he needs to use the computer for tasks like word processing. But make sure he does not use the computer for more than two hours a day.”

“But he will get very angry!” she said. “He will tell us that he hates us!”

I looked her in the eye. Our children often say things they do not really mean. Your son will at first hate the fact that you are curtailing his leisure, but when his grades improve, he will be thankful, and so will you. Learn to say no—gently but firmly. Set limits because you care for him. He is your son, after all.”

Permissive parenting

In the incisive book Think, award-winning writer Michael LeGault discusses the lost art of sharp and critical thinking in American life. Permissive parenting is one trend; others are pervasive commercialism, anti-intellectualism, and promoting image without substance.

Without clear thinking and the willingness to persevere, LeGault says bad scenarios may repeat themselves such as the United States government’s failure to respond after Hurricane Katrina, the declining quality of US businesses, and the dismal scores of students in international tests.

I believe permissive parenting is one of the causes of educational problems not only in the US, but in our society as well. LeGault cites statistics showing that teenage boys play video games for 13 hours a week and watch television for another 25 hours. Many American parents are aware of this, but do not know what to do. In a 2001 Time magazine/CNN poll, 80 percent of Americans said, compared to kids of 15 years ago, their children were more spoiled; 35 percent said they were more permissive with their kids; 75 percent said children had fewer chores; 48 percent said children had too much influence in family decisions.

I am not saying that kids should have no say at all in the family, but when they stay up till the wee hours to play games, then something is wrong. When boundaries are not set, things go haywire.

In the past five years, I found myself becoming not just a teacher, but a de facto parent to several students, who suffered from depression, insomnia, anxiety; who slept no more than three hours a night, who did not eat well, who had sex without lasting relationships, who were angry at their parents and/or the world.

I ask them about their parents’ role. “Do your parents know you have not been sleeping well?” A shrug. “Do they know you are having sex?” A shake of the head.

Set limits

“Children not only need standards and rules for healthy social, ethical, and intellectual development,” says LeGault, “they desire them. [Standards lead to] good work and study habits, nurturing an outlook that aspires toward excellence, and acquiring a wide, eclectic base of knowledge … I think it’s a very valuable, realistic lesson to teach your kids at a young age that nothing is easy or automatic (even though it looks like it is), and that to be good at even one thing is going to take them way more work and struggle than they ever imagined.”

What happens when parents set limits? “Kids may sulk and be visibly unhappy,” LeGault says. “Parents can feel their pain but know it’s not going to kill them.” I repeat—it is not going to kill them.

LeGault says authoritative parents may appear “stodgy and uptight,” but they can take comfort in the fact that they are doing the right thing.

“The fear of growing up, or fear or loss of a child’s love and respect, or maybe just the path of least resistance, has led many parents to choose to be their child’s friend rather than their guide and mentor,” LeGault says. “Such an approach focuses on providing kids with material pleasures and comforts rather than demanding that they meet high expectations and do the work required to do so. The net result is a generation of adults who have transformed the traditional meaning of the child-parent relationship by adopting the most lax and permissive parenting practices in history.”

Thankfully, many parents have seen the light. Actor and comedian Bill Cosby urged his fellow African-Americans to become better parents in a 2004 speech: “I am talking about these people who cry when they see their son [in jail]. Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18 and how come you didn’t know that he had a pistol? The church is only open on Sunday and you can’t keep asking Jesus to do things for you. You can’t keep saying that God will find a way … People with their hats on backwards, pants down around their crack, isn’t that a sign of something or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up?”

LeGault gives parents a rallying cry: “Dare to try to let your kids fail. Dare to say no. Dare to use punishment when your child misbehaves. Dare to turn off the television. Dare to make them do chores. Dare to kick them off the computer. Dare to turn their world upside down. Dare to set the agenda.” (…)

Source: Inquirer.net, Philippines
http://tinyurl.com/5sqehj