‘A fox could bite my bottom’: Childhood worries and anxieties may be influenced by the anxieties of their parents

I grew up in the 1970s. To me it seemed a pretty anxious era. The Cold War, unemployment, staggering blindly around the house during power-cuts. Yet today, research shows, we are more anxious than ever. Children in particular are feeling the impact.

A recent report found that children as young as 8 are worried about the world today and a third of 10 and 11-year-olds are concerned about the credit crunch. And the Government has just announced that schools are to receive an extra £4.5 million to teach students about terrorism and violent extremism.

Against this backdrop, psychologists at Sussex University have embarked on research into the role that parents may play in transmitting anxiety to their children. At the Sussex University psychology lab, Isaac Maltby, 9, approaches with trepidation two cardboard boxes labelled “quoll” and “cuscus”.

A researcher asks if he’d like to stroke the animals inside. Isaac boldly puts his hand into the hole in the quoll’s box. Approaching the cuscus he is more circumspect, inserting his hand slowly, pulling it out again quickly.

His mother, Candida Maltby, 40, looks even more nervous when she comes into the room. “OK,” she murmurs, inching her fingertips in. “Feels still asleep to me,” she adds, swiftly pulling back.

Over the previous hour, Isaac and Candida have taken part in tests aimed at investigating how Candida’s feelings about these unusual animals might affect how confident her son is about them. When he was first told about the cuscus, Isaac sounded curious, keen to stroke one. As his mother’s trepidation became clear, so he, too, became more cautious.

Though the research is still incomplete, it looks likely to show scientifically what many parents feel instinctively: that children not only take seriously what their parents say about potential dangers, but are equally alert to more subtle, non- verbal clues. As Dr Andy Field, of Sussex University, puts it: “Do anxious parents give visual cues to their children that are anxiety-provoking? And do they overlook signs of anxiety in their children?”

Other adults can also let children down, particularly when it comes to social anxiety. “You have teachers saying things such as: ‘this child doesn’t really engage’. If I hear that, I think: they want to engage, but they’re anxious,” Dr Field says.

A child’s early environment can also be important, says Graham Music, child psychotherapist at the Tavistock Clinic, London. “Recent research has shown that maternal anxiety can be transmitted in utero; stress hormones can be transmitted across the placenta. As they grow up, children are often emotional barometers of their environments.”

There are times, though, when a child can have extremely high levels of anxiety, but may not show it. Music says: “Attachment experiments show that one-year-olds who don’t cry when their mothers leave them alone in a room, and who seem not to care, often have the same physiological signs of stress as the babies who cry out when left.” While some children might go into a “cut-off, almost dissociated state”, others “become very reactive to almost every stimulus, and these often become out-of-control children”.

What’s the best advice for most of us, when we find ourselves confronted by a fearful child? Sam Cartwright-Hatton, of Manchester University, says that the first thing to do is to check your general parenting environment. “For a sensitive child, things need to be calm, clear, warm and consistent. Avoid shouting and smacking.”

Show confidence to your children, even if you don’t feel it. “If you’re scared of dogs, try not to leap 6ft in the air. Keep calm.” And monitor what you tell children - whether about the environment, the economy or creepy-crawlies.

If all else fails, contact your GP and ask for professional help. “Beware the advice that children just grow out of anxieties,” she says. “They usually don’t.”

ANXIETY TIMELINE

0-2 YEARS Unusual situations, water, heights, not being around care-givers, fears about survival.

3-5 YEARS Ghosts, goblins, nightmares, monsters under the bed, increasing awareness of threat in the immediate environment.

5-8 YEARS Animals, growing awareness of the real threat in the immediate environment. Children of this age are aware that, while very mobile, they are still small and vulnerable.

9-11 YEARS Personal injury, fears of injections, breaking arms and legs.

11-13 YEARS Social anxieties, social phobias, fears about one’s place in the hierarchy, fears of being cast out if you don’t have the “right” clothes or trainers.

What children really fear

Elsie, 3 “I get scared when someone says they don’t want to be my friend and they don’t want to play with me any more.”

Charlie, 5 “In the daytime foxes have gone to bed but when they come out at night, a fox could bite my bottom.”

Millie, 5 “I am a bit scared of carrots. I used to be scared of pear but now I know it is nice.”

Maddie, 6 “I always tuck the duvet under my legs when I go to sleep because I don’t want snakes to eat my feet. When I was little the snakes got in and ate my feet.”

Jess, 6 “In the night, when everyone’s asleep, I can hear footsteps going up the stairs and I feel scared. I think there’s kind of a monster creeping up the stairs.”

Josh, 8 “It’s scary to think of the pollution destroying all the rainforest so the animals haven’t got anything to eat and then the plants will die and the human race will die.”

Nye, 9 “I don’t like burglars. When there’s a loud noise upstairs I always think that there’s a burglar breaking in.”

Ira, 10 “I’m scared of hookworms and tapeworms. I hate the thought of having one in my body because they worm their way into you and live inside you.”

Tula, 11 “I worry about all the people in Africa dying and I feel I should be doing something about it. I also worry about my house setting on fire.”

Lemar, 12 “I want to drive a car when I’m older, so I worry about petrol prices and more people driving electric cars which are really dangerous and will cause road deaths because people won’t hear them.”

Amy, 13 “It scares me thinking that one day I might get so old that I lose my sense of humour and no one wants to be friends with me because I’m no fun.”

Source: Times Online, UK
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article5124499.ece

I suspected it would happen; I just didn’t think it would happen so quickly. Shortly after the historic achievement of Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps, and just before the historic nomination of Sen. Barack Obama at the Democratic National Convention, a major newspaper ran a full-page story celebrating the news that single moms succeed in raising accomplished sons.

The article cited Mr. Phelps, Mr. Obama and others, including cycling great Lance Armstrong, to make the case that boys raised by single mothers are doing just fine, thank you. It also quoted a number of supportive experts, including Peggy Drexler, author of a book called “Raising Boys Without Men.”

Interestingly, Mrs. Drexler, who has been married for more than 36 years to the father of her son, asserts quite firmly that although boys do need men, they do not need fathers. Her position is essentially that one should not fret about fatherless boys because they have a way of finding the male involvement they need.

Well, yes and no.

Boys certainly will find male involvement, but since boys will be, well, boys, they often do not make the right choices. Case in point is convicted D.C. sniper Lee Malvo, who selected John Muhammad. And there are countless boys who join gangs to find the male involvement they so desperately crave.

That said, my biggest problem was less with the article than with the “straw man” - or rather, “straw father” - argument that it is “news” that single mothers can and do raise successful boys. As one who was raised by a single mother and has undergraduate and master’s degrees from two Ivy League universities, I am a bit of a poster child on this point. (Thanks, Mom.)

However, “Can single mothers do it?” is not the right question. There are more thoughtful ways of viewing the issue.

First, should single mothers have to raise their children alone? Remember, every child has an “involved” father at conception. I do a lot of speaking about the importance of involved fatherhood. No parent has ever come up to me after a speech to say they hope their daughter will become a single mother.

Second, this issue is not about what kind of a man a boy will become but, also, what kind of a father he will become. It’s difficult to be what you don’t see. Accordingly, as a nation, we have to ask this question - how does a culture that promotes and, too often, celebrates father absence, create an environment in which boys develop a desire to become present and involved fathers?

Third, in addition to the well-documented social and emotional costs of father absence for our nation’s children, it is also expensive. Recently, National Fatherhood Initiative released a report called, “The One Hundred Billion Dollar Man - The Annual Public Costs of Father Absence.” The report measured the federal expenditures on child-support enforcement and 13 means-tested benefits programs that support father-absent homes. The $100 billion cost represents nearly 4 percent of the 2006 federal budget. Indeed, in these difficult financial times, we cannot afford father absence.

Finally, I believe the way we look at smoking is the most appropriate and thoughtful way to look at father absence and the resulting single motherhood. Specifically, it is pretty clear the majority of people who smoke do not immediately get lung cancer. This is why it is so difficult to curb teen smoking. Nonetheless, we spend millions of dollars on campaigns and efforts to reduce smoking. Why? Because we know that those who smoke are at a higher risk for cancer, heart disease or worse. Knowing this, would anyone support celebrating the fact that many smokers beat the odds? I doubt it.

Social science data assert overwhelmingly that boys in father-absent homes are more at risk to be poor, fail in school, use drugs or be involved in the criminal justice system. Therefore, we should encourage responsible fatherhood and discourage a culture of single motherhood for the same reason - the increased risk to our sons. In my view, we do not have a fatherless boy to spare.

Source: Washington Times, DC
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/02/despite-successes-boys-need-fathers/

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

It’s meant to be love at first sight, but as many as one in five mothers find they cannot bond with their new baby, leading to feelings of shame and inadequacy. Eleni Kyriacou talks to three women about their struggles

When Sarah’s son, Joe, was 18 months old she remembers thinking, ‘”I don’t know who you are, I don’t know what you are and I don’t know what to do with you.” I’d pick him up if he cried, but I couldn’t play with him or interact.’

Despite a planned pregnancy and a happy relationship with her husband, Sarah, an administrator from Oxford, found herself living out the ultimate taboo. She was a new mother who couldn’t bond with her child. From the moment that blue line appears on the pregnancy testing kit, expectant mothers are bombarded with messages all telling the same tale: that as soon as they hold their newborn child they’ll experience a deep, unconditional love. So powerful is this love that it will make any monotony, isolation and exhaustion they may encounter on their journey into motherhood worthwhile.

While that love usually does take hold and a deep bond develops between most new mothers and their babies, it is certainly not a given. There are many women who have feelings of indifference, ambivalence or even dislike for their child, but they rarely admit it for fear of seeming ‘unnatural’ or inadequate. A survey for Johnson’s Baby found that more than a third of mothers have felt they have not bonded with their baby as much as they should have, and 18 per cent say they’ve had moments when they’ve felt no bond at all.

Pat Spungin, a child psychologist and the founder of the parenting website raisingkids.co.uk, says, ‘There’s an automatic assumption in our culture that mothers will bond with their babies. Mothers who don’t immediately feel this tremendous engagement think there must be something wrong with them and ask, “Am I normal?”‘

‘Joe arrived five weeks early,’ says Sarah, now 40, ’so perhaps I didn’t make the transition from having an imaginary baby to having a real one. When I got home, my midwife said, “I’m not surprised he was early; you were very stressed.” Which wasn’t true – I was just busy and had only finished work six days before. That comment sat there, and it was a condemnation of my ability to be a good mother.’

Sarah’s first few months as a mother were riddled with pain. ‘I found breast-feeding absolute agony, and I also had gallstones. I was so tense Joe picked up on it, and things went from bad to worse. Only later did I realise I’d slipped into postnatal depression (PND). I was getting through one day at a time and don’t remember any of his milestones, like when he first sat up or started to crawl.’

At 18 months, Joe’s behaviour deteriorated; he would line up all his toys around himself as he withdrew into his own world, and started kicking Sarah. ‘I would grab him and feel the need rising up to shake him,’ she says. ‘I’d have to put him down, go into another room for 10 minutes and shut the door to keep him safe. I’d hear him screaming on the other side. I’d return out of a sense of duty rather than love. My husband only saw the tip of the iceberg; he now admits he withdrew into his work as a police officer by taking longer shifts.’ Sarah put Joe’s behaviour down to her failing. (It was not until he was six that a diagnosis of autism was made.) ‘I felt I had no control over him and even called my husband home from work a couple of times because I didn’t trust myself and was worried I’d hurt him.’ When Joe was two, Sarah gave birth to Lola, who seemed to underline the problems between son and mother. ‘Lola was sheer bliss and radiated peace. I bonded with her instantly. I felt such guilt about that.’

Although she had started taking medication to alleviate her PND, it was not until her husband, Samuel, pointed out the effect her mood had on Joe that real changes took place. ‘If I was having a bad day, he would, too. So I started looking after myself – taking breaks to sleep, doing yoga, having counselling. I suspected autism from the age of three, but once the formal diagnosis came at six I felt that rush of love that people talk about. Suddenly I realised it wasn’t my fault. I could do things to help him. Today we’re very close.’

Experts agree that, as Sarah’s case shows, a mother who has bonding difficulties with a newborn can still develop a bond later. Richard Woolfson, a child psychologist and the author of How To Have a Happy Child, explains: ‘There’s a lot of mystique about bonding. The myth is that it’s love at first sight, and it’s all or nothing. In my experience it takes time. There are so many everyday issues like feeding and sleeping that can make mothers feel anxious and lose confidence. The real emotional connection between a mother and child – the bond – is built gradually over a period of months. Don’t give up. If you’re not physically connected with your baby – by changing and feeding and soothing when he or she’s crying – you’re going to struggle to be emotionally connected.

‘Bonding is the bedrock of a baby’s later emotional development, and if babies don’t form a secure emotional connection with an adult by the age of four they’re highly likely to have relationship problems later in life – and perhaps have issues bonding with their own children.’ There can be many reasons a mother and child don’t bond. Woolfson says that unresolved emotional baggage may mean some mothers find it harder to give or receive love, while some may simply find the responsibility of motherhood too demanding. ‘And if PND is involved, of course you must get medical help.’

High-profile sufferers of postnatal depression include Brooke Shields, Elle Macpherson and Sadie Frost. Recently, Gwyneth Paltrow spoke out about her PND following the birth of her second child, Moses, and shed light on the fact that even experienced mothers can have bonding difficulties.

This was the case for Jessica, 35, a former nurse from the south-west of England who already had two children when she gave birth to Daisy. ‘I remember saying to the doctors, “Can you hurry up – cut this cord and take her from me, please!” I held her for a few minutes but I was in a lot of physical discomfort and just wanted to have a shower and escape because she wouldn’t stop screaming. I looked at her and thought, “She’s really ugly.” I’d never felt that with my other babies and those feelings stayed for several weeks.

‘I’d leave her in her pram and get my mother to jiggle it to keep her asleep as long as possible. I didn’t love her like I did the others, so I overcompensated by breast-feeding on the hour, and made a rod for my own back. I became very resentful of her because I was hardly sleeping. I was jealous of the sleep my husband, Dominic, was getting. At one point I said, “If she were never to wake up again I wouldn’t be too worried because at least I’d be able to sleep.” He was appalled, of course, and said he didn’t want to hear me speak like that.’

Jessica’s mood had been worsening ever since she suddenly came off Prozac on discovering she was pregnant. ‘I was afraid to return to my GP once I’d given birth because he’d probably tell me to go back on the medication and stop breast-feeding. I became quite obsessed with breast-feeding.’

By the time Daisy was three months old, Jessica was at her wits’ end. ‘As well as Daisy, I had my three-year-old, Johnny, and my 18-month-old baby, Marie. One day I was arguing with Dominic and I just grabbed Daisy and ran to the car. I didn’t know what I was going to do. I needed to get away but knew I couldn’t leave her behind because of the breast-feeding – I didn’t want to fail her on that. I ended up staring at a wall in the village car park, thinking, “That’s what I have to do.” I drove at speed towards it, then Daisy suddenly started crying. I stopped and sat and cried. Then I fed her. I think her crying had made me snap out of it.’

After this Jessica finally saw a different GP, who prescribed an antidepressant that could be used while breast-feeding. ‘As my mood lifted, gradually the bond and love increased. The turning-point, though, was when Daisy caught pneumonia and I thought she would die. I remember thinking how vulnerable she looked, and a tidal wave of pure emotion hit me, as well as a huge feeling of guilt. By the time she was one, I felt the same for her as my other children.

‘Accepting help from others was very difficult because there’s a huge stigma attached to not bonding. I have four children now, and people are always shocked when they hear what I went through with Daisy because I’m a real earth-mother type – I even use cloth nappies! Which just goes to show, it can happen to anyone.’

Even if the bond is strong, there are no guarantees it will always be that way. ‘Bonding is about connectedness, and that can ebb and flow over the years,’ Pat Spungin says. ‘For some of that time you might not get on with one child if they’re going through a difficult period, and suddenly it can all change back again. The love itself is still there – that’s why parents hang on in during those difficult teenage years – but you may feel you don’t like your child very much.’

For 36-year-old Susan, an insurance administrator from Cardiff, this is her everyday reality. ‘I used to spend hours playing with Dan when he was little, cuddling him, singing his favourite pop songs to him. He was the first of my four children and got lots of attention. Now he’s 17 and I can’t get through to him. I do wonder if I did something wrong, but the others have turned out fine. I did make some bad choices when he and his sister were little – staying longer than I should have done with his father.’

When he was 11, Dan’s behaviour changed dramatically. ‘He went from being a sweet, loving boy to one who broke windows and was verbally abusive.’ Today it is not unusual for him to swear at Susan and then retreat into prolonged silences. ‘The relationship we have is much worse than the one he has with anyone else. Over the years I’ve tried grounding him, taking his iPod from him – nothing has worked. He goes out and doesn’t come home when he should, lies and steals money from my purse or his brothers’ money boxes.’

Susan’s friends also recount tales of not being able to ‘reach’ their teen offspring, but she feels Dan’s behaviour is more extreme than most. She suspects he resents the fact she went on to have another two children with her new husband, Ray. According to Pat Spungin, ‘Staying out later than you agreed falls within normal teen behaviour. Being destructive with property doesn’t. If the child has step-parents, that can complicate matters, but most teens come out the other side if there’s love and support.’ Although Susan feels her bond has weakened, her love hasn’t waned. ‘But it breaks my heart that I don’t like the child I love so much,’ she says. ‘In a month he’s joining the Army; I feel guilty because when he was 13 I suggested the Cadets as a route to focusing his energy. I’m frightened and hate him leaving when our relationship is this way. And yet he wanted to take time off before joining and I said no. I’m looking forward to no arguments. Yes, I feel guilty about that, too.’

Richard Woolfson says that when parents worry about the bond they have with their children, most give themselves a hard time and little credit for what they’ve done right. He believes every woman has the potential to be a loving mother but some find motherhood harder than others. ‘Accept who you are and stay involved, no matter how many barriers they put up. Few of us become the parents we want to be – I certainly didn’t. And remember, only one parent can be the best in the world. The rest of us will have to settle for second best.’

Source: Telegraph.co.uk, United Kingdom
http://tinyurl.com/5gswn5

The picture below is of my baby # 8, William, and his expression tells all. He is in charge. The entire household runs around his schedule. He is Master and Commander (or so he thinks).

Yes, initially your baby will be in charge (at least for the first few months). But by three months (if your baby is following the average growth chart) his training must begin and the first lesson to learn is Yes and No.

A firm, but loving No should be given when needed; for example when baby:

* Bites (while nursing)
* Scratches you or himself
* Yells in anger

And remember, there is never any reason to yell or raise your voice.
The idea is to teach your baby, not discipline.

And a kind and loving Yes should be stated over and over again, each and every day; for example:

* Yes, mommy loves you
* Yes, it’s time to eat
* Yes, let’s read a book, let’s dance, etc.

At one point or another all of us mothers (and oftentimes fathers) have given up sleep, food, comfort, and social standing for our little bundles of joy. Their demands come first. And we happily, though oftentimes sleepily answer their calls time after time. Something amazing happens to us the moment we first hold our baby. The love we feel is overwhelming and changes our life forever. Number one on our list of priorities has suddenly changed. And our little baby is now the center of our world.

But who is in charge? The loving care for your baby can all too easily lead you into a downward slope. A slope that baby recognizes and uses to his advantage. They learn all too quickly that they can manipulate their loving parents like puppets.

Warning: consistency is vital! No one said parenting was easy. And this can be one of the most difficult jobs a parent has. You must be consistent. Without consistency justice cannot be exercised, and without justice the baby will only learn manipulation and become a master at tantrums.

But just look at that adorable face how can you not lovingly indulge his every desire? Well, if your goal is to create a monster, a possible menace to society or a delinquent, then go on indulging him. But should your goal be otherwise, then the training starts now! Even baby must learn that mom and dad are in charge. And by the age of two this should be something he is fully aware of and respects (at least most of the time). Out of love a parent must instill at a very early age a sense of order and an understanding of the words Yes and No. A baby thrives on a routine, an orderly schedule and love. With these three things in place it is relatively simple to remain in charge.

By two months most babies have already formed an emotional bond with their parents and are giving them their “social” smile. And by nine months they are fully capable of letting you know when you’ve displeased them and when they don’t want to be left alone. If they can relate this at nine months then they can certainly learn the concept of yes or no. I have found that most of my children were very aware of yes and no by the age of eight months and can even communicate no with a shake of the head. If they can clap their hands when happy then shaking their head for no isn’t all that astounding.

And it is so easy to teach your baby. Talk to baby and read to baby. Communicate. Baby started learning in the womb, where he heard and responded to familiar voices. By your tone of voice, the inflection you give your words, your baby will begin to learn the basic concepts of yes versus no and you will remain in charge of a happy and peaceful home.

Source:Examiner.com
http://tinyurl.com/3kcrng

It is a most taboo question, and it was asked by the British Web site netmums.com early last month (of course, they spelled it “favourite”). Of the 1,000 mums who responded, 16 percent said that yes, they loved one of their children more than the others, 33 percent said they loved all their children the same and half said they loved them differently, but equally.

I love both my boys equally. (Can infinity equal infinity?) But I like them differently, and for different reasons, and at different times.

The seesaw began even before Alex arrived, and I had the fear that nearly every parent seems to have — that I would never be able to love a second as much as I did the first. That was followed by guilt, because while I’d had the postpartum blues after Evan was born, I felt a giddy elation with Alex, and what kind of mother greeted one child with giggles and the other with tears?

Over the years there have been similar bouts of inequity, but with decreasing amounts of guilt. Sometimes one needs me more than the other. Sometimes one is more deeply entrenched in an obstreperous phase and we’re both better off in our separate corners. Sometimes our moods just mesh, or clash, or our interests dovetail or diverge. I do notice that when one son pushes my buttons, the other works twice as hard to prove his own angelic-ness, which means they, too, notice this ebb and flow.

To truly love one better than the other must be an enduring ache. It does happen. But often what feels like unequal love is more likely unequal like. One of the favorite bedtime stories at our house over the years was I Love You the Purplest, by Barbara M. Joosse, about a mother whose two boys ask, “Mama, who do you love best?” Mama explains that she loves the jubilant Max the “reddest” and the quiet Julian the “bluest,” and together she loves them…well, that’s where the title comes from.

My boys put the story aside long ago. But it is still in the bookshelf next to my bed.

Source: New York Times
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/do-you-have-a-favorite-child/?hp

It’s probably not surprising that mothers excel at recognizing and interpreting the moods and emotions of their infants. Although infants can’t speak, mothers seem to know what their babies are thinking: they smile when their baby smiles and they frown when their baby is upset. Research suggests that the mother’s ability to understand the needs of her infant is very important for establishing a secure mother-infant relationship. However, the neural mechanisms that underlie these behaviors are poorly understood. Such knowledge is crucial for understanding normal as well as abusive and neglectful mothering.

Maternal Rewards

In recent years, several studies have been carried out using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to better understand how a mother’s brain responds to her own child’s cues. The most recent, led by neuroscientist Lane Strathearn and colleagues at Baylor College of Medicine, investigated what happens inside the brain of a mother when she looks at the facial expressions of her own infant. In the study, 28 first-time mothers were shown pictures of their seven-month old child that they had never seen before. (The pictures were taken when the mother was not present.) The pictures spanned a wide range of human emotion and included images of the child making happy, sad or neutral faces. These pictures were then matched with images of an unknown infant. The central finding was that seeing the happy face of the mother’s own infant activated all of the key areas in the brain associated with reward processing. These regions include the ventral tegmental area, substantia nigra and the striatum. This finding suggests that for mothers the sight of their smiling baby is a potent reward and represents a uniquely pleasurable experience. Furthermore, this neural response was graded, so that happy faces led to more activation than neutral faces. Sad faces generated the least activation. In other words, the response of mothers in their reward areas seemed to directly mirror the emotions the infant displayed.

The argument put forth by Strathearn and colleagues is that maternal behavior is fundamentally rooted in these reward areas. Positive sensory cues from infants, such as a smiling facial expression, stimulate dopamine release and thus promote responsive maternal care. However, many questions remain. In their paper, Strathearn et al. do not discuss the significance of the orbitofrontal cortex, although its activity was clearly influenced in the experiment by seeing one’s own infant’s compared with an unknown infant. The importance of the orbitofrontal cortex shouldn’t be too surprising, as this brain area is believed to receive ascending dopamine projections from reward areas and is critical in representing the “value” of a reward. Other studies have also demonstrated that the orbitofrontal cortex is correlated with the positive feelings of the mother, suggesting that it plays a key role in modulating maternal behavior.

Is the Smile Enough?

This study also raises a more fundamental question: is the infant smile the most important element for motivating maternal behavior? It goes without saying that the smiling face of one’s own baby is highly rewarding and encourages maternal care. On the other hand, babies aren’t always smiling and mothers must also learn to respond to infants in distress. In fact, a human mother’s response to an infant in distress is a good indicator of how responsive she is to other infant cues. Studies also show that abusive and neglectful mothers show less empathy and more aversive feelings towards a crying infant when compared with nurturing mothers, suggesting that how a mother reacts to a baby when it’s upset and not smiling is a crucial test of maternal behavior.

According to our own recent work, the orbitofrontal cortex and striatum were more activated in the brain of a mother when she looked at her own infant compared with other infants regardless of the infant’s situation or mood. These brain areas also showed a greater activation when mothers were viewing their infant when he or she was crying (the distressed condition) as opposed to when he or she was happy (the play situation). This discovery makes sense, as a distressed baby might require more effort and thought as the mother must quickly identify the source of the distress and respond appropriately. Another reason to highlight the importance of the orbitofrontal cortex in guiding maternal behavior is that, in our experiment, the activity of this brain area showed a positive correlation not only with pleasurable feelings but also the anxious feelings experienced by the mother. Of course, these anxious feelings are important for maternal care, as anxiety and worry can be powerful motivators. Taken together, these findings suggest that maternal behavior is guided by elaborate and complex neural mechanisms. Although reward processing is clearly an important part of this mental process—it seems to mediate maternal love and feelings of joy—other mechanisms are required in order to explain the full range of the mother-infant relationship.

In conclusion, a smiling face of a mother’s own infant is certainly rewarding and it motivates maternal care, but this is not the only motivator. We hope that in the future other aspects of maternal behavior—such as the maternal desire to protect her infant, which is a biologically essential mechanism for preservation of the species—will get investigated and explored.

Source: Scientific American
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=smiles-and-mother-baby-bond

American taxpayers invest heavily in education. Last year, spending on public K–12 education totaled $553 billion, about 4 percent of gross domestic prod­uct (GDP) in 2006. For each child enrolled in a pub­lic elementary or secondary school, expenditures averaged $9,266 that year—an increase of 128 per­cent, adjusted for inflation, since 1970.

Despite this increase in public spending, student achievement and educational attainment over the last four decades has remained relatively flat. In 2007, a significant portion of students, disproportionately from disadvantaged backgrounds, scored “below basic” in reading and math on the National Assess­ment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Sadly, in many of the nation’s largest cities, fewer than half of high school students graduate.

While academic research has consistently shown that increased spending does not correlate with edu­cational gains, the research does show a strong rela­tionship between parental influences and children’s educational outcomes, from school readiness to college completion. Two compelling parental factors emerge:

2. parents’ involvement in their children’s schoolwork.

Consequently, the solution to improving educa­tional outcomes begins at home, by strengthening marriage and promoting stable family formation and parental involvement.

The Erosion of Family Stability in America

“Perhaps the most profound change in the American family over the past four decades,” writes sociologist Paul Amato, “has been the decline in the share of children growing up in households with biological parents.” In 1960, 88 percent of all children lived with two parents, compared to 68 percent in 2007. In 1960, 5 percent of all children were born to unmarried mothers. That figure rose to 38.5 per­cent in 2006. Demographers have estimated that, overall, one child in two will spend some portion of his or her childhood in a single-parent family.

Studies show that children raised in intact families, i.e., with two con­tinuously married parents, tend to fare better on a number of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral outcomes than children living in other family forms. Not surprisingly, the changes in family structure over the last 40 years have affected child and adoles­cent well-being. In 2002, nearly 7 million children between the ages of 12 and 18 repeated a grade. Based on this figure, Professor Amato estimates that if the share of two-parent fami­lies had remained unchanged be­tween 1980 and 2002, some 300,000 fewer teens would have repeated a grade. Some 750,000 fewer students in 2002 would have repeated a grade if the share of two-parent families remained at the level it was in 1960.

Social science research over the past decades suggests that family structure affects children’s school outcomes, from preschool to college. Some of the variations in school performance could be explained, in part or in whole, by the differences in family resources such as time and money, family dynamics and parental characteristics that are asso­ciated with the various family forms. These are mediating factors, or mechanisms through which family structure affects schooling outcomes. Family structure may also exert a direct influence, inde­pendent of mediating factors. Thus, depending on the outcome, family structure’s total effect may con­sist of one or more mediating influences or a com­bination of both direct and mediating influences.

Though various methodological research issues— e.g., data quality, inconsistent definitions of family structure, the selection effect (e.g., are individuals who possess better parenting qualities more likely to choose marriage and stay married, or does mar­riage per se bolster children’s well-being?)—limit the findings, the evidence, nonetheless, is strong: Fam­ily structure matters.

School Readiness. A number of early-childhood outcomes contribute to children’s eventual school readiness. The evidence suggests that potentially important early-childhood outcomes vary by family structure. One study, analyzing 1,370 mothers in the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study who were continuously married or in cohabiting rela­tionships from the child’s birth to age three, found that three-year-olds born to cohabiting mothers tended to exhibit more aggressive, withdrawn, and anxious or depressive behavior than children born to married mothers. For aggressive and with­drawn behaviors, the association was explained by income differences. For anxiety and depressive symptoms, even controlling for income, the cohab­itation effect remained.

Studies show that reading to young children aids their literacy development. Toddlers and preschool-age children in married-parent families are read to more often than peers in non-intact families. One study of 11,500 kindergartners living with two par­ents orparent figuresreported that, accounting for parental education and income, children living with married parents averaged higher reading achieve­ment test scores than peers living in cohabiting or stepparent families.

Elementary and Secondary Education. The research on family structure and elementary and secondary educational outcome is extensive. Studies have reported that:

1. First-graders whose mothers were married when they were born are less likely to engage in dis­ruptive behavior with peers and teachers than those whose mothers were single or cohabiting at the time of their birth.

2. Children aged three to 12 who live in intact fam­ilies have higher average math scores than peers whose mothers live in cohabiting relationships.

3. The association between family structure and nine-year-olds’ science and math achievement appears to be cross-national.

4. Children aged seven to 10 who live in continu­ously intact families tend to score higher on read­ing tests than peers who have lived in other family structures.

5. Children aged six to 11 who live in intact fami­lies tend to be more engaged in their schoolwork than peers in other family structures.

6. Eighth-graders in two-parent families perform, on average, better on math and science tests than peers in single-parent or stepparent families.

7. The predominant family structure of a school’s student population appears to be linked to the individual science and math scores of eighth-graders.

8. Ninth-graders whose mothers were married when they were born are more likely to complete an algebra course than are peers whose mothers were single when they were born.

9. Middle school and high school students who expe­rience a parental divorce tend to suffer declines in their grade point averages and are more likely to fail a course one year later compared to peers of married parents; the evidence suggests a causal link.

10. Among middle school and high school students, the portion of childhood spent in a single-parent family is associated with declines in GPAs over time; and living in a single-mother family with a cohabiting partner is associated with a greater likelihood of suspension or expulsion from school at a later time.

Finally, studies have also shown a robust link between family structure and high school dropout or graduation rates, and the evidence suggests that the relationship may be causal.

Higher Education and Educational Attainment. The impact of family structure on educational out­comes appears to last into young adulthood. Throughout the college entrance process, students from non-intact families tend to fall behind their peers from intact families. The gap increases when the process involves selective college admission. Overall, children from intact families complete more years of schooling and achieve higher educational attainment than do peers from other family forms.

One study, analyzing two nationally representa­tive data sources, reported that longer durations in single-parent or blended families during child­hood appear to have a negative impact on college attendance and graduation. Though family income and parental education explained the association between single-parent families and lower college attendance and graduation rates, the disparities in these outcomes between children in intact families and those in blended families persisted.

Similarly, another study showed that, accounting for family income and estimated financial aid, an average student from a non-intact family was 5 per­cent less likely to attend a four-year college and 6 percent less likely to graduate from college than an average student from an intact family.

Parental Involvement

Parental involvement emerges as another robust influence on educational outcomes. It is multi-dimensional. Examples include monitoring chil­dren’s activities outside home and school; setting rules; having conversations about and helping chil­dren with school work and school-related issues; holding high educational expectations; discussing future planning with children and helping them with important decision making; participating in school-related activities such as meeting with teach­ers and volunteering in the classroom; and reading to children or engaging in other enrichment or lei­sure activities together.

A meta-analysis of 77 studies, consisting of 300,000 elementary and secondary students, found that parental educational expectations are a particu­larly important aspect of parental involvement. Parenting style, reading to children, and, to a lesser extent, participation in school-related activities appeared to be influential as well. Furthermore, parental involvement is associated with multiple measures of student achievement, for the entire stu­dent population as well as for minority and low-income student populations. Overall, “the academic advantage for those parents who were highly involved in their education averaged about 0.5–0.6 of a standard deviation for overall educational out­comes, grades and academic achievement.”

Parental Involvement and Family Structure. The level of parental involvement varies by family structure, and the relationship between parental involvement and educational outcomes depends on the family context as well. One study, for exam­ple, found that compared to high school students from intact families, those from single- or step­parent families reported less parental involvement in their school work, supervision, and parental educational expectations, which, in turn, affected school outcomes.

Early Childhood. Studies show that a sensitive, warm, and respon­sive type of parenting and engaging in play activities with young children bolster their social and emotional development, communication skills, and ability to focus. Doing arts and crafts with children, reading to them, showing them how to write words, and using a more complicated vocab­ulary around them also aid their liter­acy and language development. One study reported a link between these types of parental engagement and a range of school readiness out­comes such as “children’s motivation to learn, attention, task persistence, and receptive vocabulary and…fewer conduct problems.”

Frequent contact between parents and their children’s preschools as well as parent participation in school-related activities, such as volunteering in the classroom or meeting with a teacher, appear to benefit children on a num­ber of dimensions, including classroom performance and social interaction with peers and adults. One study reported that children whose teachers per­ceived more parental involvement tended to exhibit fewer problems and higher language and math com­petencies compared to children whose teachers per­ceived less parental engagement. The evidence also suggests that parental school involvement’s pos­itive influences buffer against some of the negative effects of poverty.

Elementary Education. Parental involvement during elementary school affects children’s school­ing outcomes as well. The quality of the parent-child relationship is significant. Middle school stu­dents who received sensitive, supportive parenting from their mothers during kindergarten tend to per­form better in school. Children of parents who frequently praise and show affection to them are less likely to require classroom attention for behavior and socio-emotional issues.

Studies also show that parental involvement in school-related activities during elementary school is associated with long-term educational gains. One study reported that among low-income African-American families, children of highly involved par­ents during elementary school were more likely to graduate from high school. In the same study, children of parents who were involved in school-related activities for three or more years completed more years of schooling compared to peers of less involved parents. Involvement, specifically by fathers, is significant as well. Children of fathers who visit their classrooms and meet with teachers tend to fare better in school than peers whose moth­ers are the only involved parent.

Reading with children and the way in which par­ents read to their children affect children’s reading ability. The research shows a distinction between reading storybooks to children, which contributes to their literacy development, and teaching children to read and write, which aids their language devel­opment. Both types of activities affect third- and fourth-grade performance.[50] Furthermore, parents’ use of vocabulary and their attitude toward home­work appear to influence corresponding outcomes in their children. Not surprisingly, children of parents who provide appropriate help with their homework tend to fare better in school.

The home environment in which children are raised plays a role in schooling outcomes. For ex­ample, in a study of middle-class families, elemen­tary students whose parents offered them math and science learning materials showed greater incli­nation toward and interest in math and science activities. Finally, parental expectations of achieve­ment, particularly adolescents’ perceptions of such expectations, appear to strengthen their actual mo­tivation and ability in school.

Secondary Education. Parent-child relation­ship quality continues to be an effective factor in schooling outcomes throughout adolescence. For example, in one study, youths who felt bonded to their parents and enjoyed good communication with them tended to have higher grades and physical well-being. In another study, among low-income youths, those whose parents encouraged individual decision making in their children during early ado­lescence were more likely to graduate from high school and attend college. Beyond academics, teens who receive more support from their parents are more likely to participate in structured after-school activities, which, in turn, are positively corre­lated with achievement and social competence.

During adolescence, parental monitoring to the extent to which parents know their children’s activ­ities outside of home and school, plays a crucial role in adolescent outcomes, particularly when children and adolescents perceive genuine care from their parents. Parental monitoring is associated with fewer school problems, less substance use, and reduced delinquency. Moreover, parental monitor­ing is positively linked to social development, school grades, and school engagement, such as pay­ing attention in class and being motivated to do well in school. The evidence also suggests that paren­tal monitoring may have different effects on boys and girls.

Not only does parental involvement in their chil­dren’s school-related activities send a positive mes­sage to students and teachers, such involvement is also related to high school completion. The research also suggests that minority students benefit from their parents’ participation in formal leader­ship roles at the school district level. The effects of parental involvement, however, may vary by par­ents’ education. One study showed that involve­ment from more-educated parents was associated with fewer behavioral problems in students, which, in turn, affected achievement and aspirations. Among students whose parents are less educated, parental involvement was related to student aspira­tions but not achievement.

At the secondary education level, high parental expectations continue to yield significant schooling benefits. In one study of high school seniors, “parental expectations for achievement stand out as the most significant influences on [their] achieve­ment growth, high school credits completed, and enrollment in extracurricular academic high school programs.” High parental educational expecta­tions are also associated with math and reading scores, interest in school, academic self-discipline, future planning, and motivation for school work. In one study of African-American families, when parents taught that success originates from effort rather than surpassing peers, their expectations had a strong effect on eighth- and ninth-grade math grades. Overall, parental expectations appear more influential than peer effects.

Finally, discussions with parents about the future and pursuing further education support teens’ aspi­rations and college preparation. One study of high-achievement Latino college students found that their parents imparted strong encouragement and values that emphasized education as a means to escape poverty.

Policy Implications

Social science research over the last few decades indicates a strong relationship between family struc­ture, parental involvement and children’s educa­tional outcomes, with enduring influences from early childhood to young adulthood. The empirical evidence points to several policy implications:

* Family policy intersects critically with education policy. Fortifying the intact family structure may lead to improvements in individual student out­comes as well as the American education system as a whole.

* Policies that strengthen healthy marriage and stable family formation may bolster child well-being, including school outcomes, both at the individual and aggregate levels.

* Conversely, policies and laws that facilitate fur­ther family breakdown may have adverse impacts on children’s educational outcomes and provide additional stress on the education system.

* In education reform efforts, greater emphasis on parental involvement and parental choice could yield significant gains in student achievement and attainment. Importantly, the research shows consistent benefits of high parental involvement for minority and low-income students, which deserves serious consideration in light of the achievement gap.

* On the other hand, education initiatives that dis­regard the importance of families and parental involvement, instead focusing on strategies such as increased expenditures, are likely to continue to prove less effective or ineffective altogether.

Conclusion

American taxpayers invest heavily in education, with annual public education spending totaling $553 billion. The average annual expenditure per child enrolled in a public school amounts to $9,266. Though per-pupil expenditures have increased dra­matically over the past few decades, student achieve­ment has remained relatively flat. A significant portion of students attending public schools score “below basic” in reading and math on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. In some of the most disadvantaged central cities in America, fewer than half of high school students graduate.

While numerous education reforms over the last quarter century have demonstrated little impact on overall student achievement, the research clearly shows that the intact family structure and strong parental involvement are significantly correlated with educational outcomes, from school readiness to college completion. Instead of favoring proven ineffective education policies, policymakers seeking effective education reform should consider policies that strengthen family structure in America and bol­ster parental involvement and choice in education.

Christine C. Kim is Policy Analyst in the Domestic Policy Studies Department at The Heritage Foundation.

Source: Heritage.org
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/bg2185.cfm

Up to one in 11 children in Britain may suffer from an attention deficit disorder, government advisers will say this week.

Recommendations on the treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) say families in which pre-school children have behavioural problems should be given parenting classes, reigniting a debate about whether the condition is a medical diagnosis or the result of poor upbringing.

The guidance by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) is expected to say that up to 9 per cent of children and 2 per cent of adults fall within broad definitions of ADHD. It will recommend that the stimulant Ritalin be prescribed to all children and adults with a severe form of the condition and to all moderate cases which do not respond to talking therapies or parenting classes.

Prof Philip Asherson, one of the experts who produced the guidance, due out on Wednesday, said they tried to avoid following the model of ADHD care in the United States, where medication is the norm and routinely used to tackle minor behavioural and educational problems.

He said: “We worked very hard to avoid the approach in the US, where one in 10 children are being treated with stimulants. The guidance makes it clear that medication is the right approach in some cases but that it should not be used for everyone and certainly not to tackle minor educational problems.”

The psychologist Oliver James accused psychiatrists of medicalising a problem that was caused by upbringing. He said: “Psychiatrists invented this category to medicalise when in fact it is a social problem linked to low incomes and parenting difficulties.” He said the best approach to children with ADHD-like symptoms was to give them more attention and affection.

Andrea Bilbow, chief executive of the National Attention Deficit Disorder Information and Support Service, also attacked the guidance. She said the parenting programmes it recommended were not specific to ADHD and would offer little help to families.

Dr Sami Timimi, a child and adolescent psychiatrist in Lincolnshire, who does not believe ADHD is a valid diagnosis, said Nice had produced no evidence that the condition existed, or that medication worked, despite coming to conclusions supporting its use.

Dr Timimi, author of Naughty Boys: Anti-social Behaviour, ADHD and the Role of Culture, said draft guidance produced by Nice cited a study that showed Ritalin improved the performance of patients after 14 months but did not consider the longer-term results of the same study, which showed that after three years it made no difference.

Stoke uses drug 23 times less than the Wirral

Doctors are 23 times more likely to prescribe drugs such as Ritalin for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in some areas of the country than in others.

In the Wirral, one prescription of the drug class methylphenidate, which includes Ritalin, was dispensed for every seven children last year, according to the Health Service Journal. Other areas with high rates included the Isle of Wight, Great Yarmouth and Medway in Kent.

Doctors in Stoke on Trent handed out the drugs least frequently, with one prescription per 159 children.

Latest figures show almost 500,000 prescriptions for stimulants for under-16s last year, more than double the 200,000 issued in 2003. The Department of Health said the figures reflected the number of prescriptions, which could include repeat orders for the same child.

Solurce: Telegraph.co.uk
http://tinyurl.com/53uulo

If your baby could talk, she wouldn’t need to cry. But until she can start forming words, she’ll likely stick to the whimpers and tears she’s using now to let you know what she wants.

What makes baby cry?

– Different types of crying mean different things. There’s the “I’m tired” or “I’m hungry” as well as the “I’m frustrated … need a diaper change … want to be held…” cries. The best way you can determine what each cries means is to listen intently each time your infant cries. You’ll soon get to know what baby is trying to say with each pitch and wail.

– As baby grows. Experts agree that babies will often cry right before they experience a growth period. They have an amazing ability to sense a change about to occur - physically and developmentally.

– Bath time. Infants do not like the feeling that comes with being totally undressed during bath time. To avoid this situation, keep baby’s diaper on if you can, or wash quickly taking turns covering baby’s top half while washing the bottom - then reverse it.

– Bedtime. Nighttime is the time to release pent up frustration and energy baby has built up during the day. P.S.: Fussy babies usually sleep soundly and for longer periods of time.

– Crib time. Babies need some time to adjust to a sterile crib after nine months inhabiting a warm, comfy womb. Bright lights, sharp sounds, lots of action - it’s a different life than your infant was used to.

– Are you stressed? Infants are like little sponges and can pick up on the stress you may be feeling, putting a tearful spin on it on your behalf.

– Does baby not feel well? Colic, which can last for a long time, may make baby cry. The American Academy of Pediatrics says colic causes severe abdominal discomfort. If crying is intense, starts around the same time each day, causes baby to pull her legs up to her chest or get a bloated tummy, colic can be the cause.

– Other medical conditions can also cause crying: fever, diarrhea, vomiting. With each of these conditions, a call to the pediatrician is in order.

– Is this cry different? Is baby sounding more screechy? Is he louder than usual or whining as well? Again, it’s time to call the pediatrician.

Ways to soothe baby

– Hold baby to your shoulder to comfort her.

– Turn on the music. The rhythm found in music mimics the mother’s heartbeat as heard in the womb. Put your MP3 player on the speakers and turn up the music (classical is great for this purpose). Listening to classical music at a young age also helps increase math skills later on.

– Babies may also be soothed by familiar, rhythmic sounds such as the vacuum cleaner, hair dryer, air conditioner or the sound of trickling water.

– Comfort object. A blankie, favorite toy or perhaps an old T-shirt with your smell on it may help baby calm down.

– Help baby zone out by watching repetitive activity, such as fish going round a fish tank, a mobile turning gently or a lamp that projects figures on the wall as it swirls.

Parenting tip from the trenches

If baby’s crying is constant and lasts more than three months, it’s time for a pediatrician to run some tests.

Doreen Nagle is author of But I Don’t Feel Too Old To Be A Mommy (…)

Source: Hattiesburg American
http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080918/MOMS03/80917016