A client recently described how thrilling it was to take her daughter to see the Broadway musical Annie.  She recalled that her mother took her to see it when she was a child, and it had been an indelibly wonderful experience. Now she had the pleasure of providing the same thrill for her daughter. I thought how special it was for my client to share this with her daughter and how lucky my client was that her daughter had the same feelings about the experience. It also reminded me that so many parents who want to provide what they believe to be all the right things for their children are not always met with such good feelings.

I recalled another client whose desire to recreate his delight for his son was dashed when he took him to the rodeo and was met with the response, “This is stupid.” In spite of their most nurturing and positive intentions, parents may find that their wishes and rules for their children are met with rejection. This can create painful feelings, including insult, hurt, anger, and disappointment. “Drew,” a 42-year-old client, was in a prolonged struggle with his 8-year-old daughter about piano lessons she adamantly refused to take. He told me, “When I was a kid, I refused to continue piano lessons after a few months. My parents never insisted I continue. I’m not going to let that happen to my daughter. She isn’t old enough to know what she wants or what the consequences of her actions will be.”

As Drew and I explored his feelings, it became clear that he not only felt disappointed, he felt rejected by his daughter. “It feels like she is telling me, ‘Get out of here, you don’t know what’s good for me,’ ” he said. I responded: “I can see how upset you are about this, but I wonder what it is that makes you feel so personally rejected. Is it possible that your daughter is different from you?” Drew’s first response was, “She’s my daughter and she is like me. I just know this is very important for her to do. When I was a child, I didn’t know I was making a terrible mistake. My parents should have known and pushed me to continue.”

It took a lot of talking for Drew to become aware of his many disappointments about the ways his parents had been involved in his life when he was a child. He began to consider that he might not need to protect his daughter from this disappointment. He recognized that his daughter might, like him, regret not learning the piano, but forcing her to take lessons could easily turn her away from the piano. He realized that her experience and development was and will be different from his and she is a different person with her own thoughts and feelings. After all, she has different parents than he did. The more Drew could understand his daughter’s need to differentiate from him, the easier it was not to feel so rejected and hurt.

When parents assert their desires for their children, it is not unusual for them to be met with expressions of different or opposing wants and needs. Pushing back against what parents want is a necessary part of a child’s development. For a healthy sense of self to grow, children need to differentiate from their parents and become unique, separate, individual selves. This doesn’t mean children are totally different from or always in opposition to their parents. It does mean children need to develop minds of their own. Having one’s own mind is about being able to think about your needs and wants without being overly influenced by others. Ideally, the wishes of others are considered, but ultimately one makes his or her own life choices. Obviously, the degree of autonomy for a 4-year-old differs from that of a 13-year-old and again for a 20-year-old. When children are not given the space to differentiate from their parents and don’t develop a self that is confident and strong, they will not have developed the autonomy to make life choices and get what they want as they enter full adulthood.

At age 53, “Anne” was struggling with her teenage son, “Noah.” She came to therapy expressing feelings of anger and insult from their encounters. She explained that he fought her at every turn about anything she asked of him: cleaning his room, doing household chores, getting his college applications completed.  “I don’t believe how he treats me,” she said. “He says things like, ‘Leave me alone and mind your own business.’ Is that any way to speak to your mother? I feel so hurt and insulted. Doesn’t he know I only want what’s best for him?” In great distress, Anne added, “He has become a terrible person. He is so mean and inconsiderate. He seems like a completely different person than the son I felt loved me a year ago.”

As we talked, Anne described how when she was growing up she never went against her parents. When we explored her past and present relationships, Anne began to wonder if her early experiences being compliant are related to her difficulty asserting herself as an adult. She described how difficult it is for her to disagree with her husband and how she doesn’t always feel so good about herself. She realized that it wasn’t just with her son that she felt so badly treated. “I guess I don’t feel very powerful,” she said. “I have a lot of trouble believing that what I think and feel is OK. I always followed the rules with my parents. Maybe I didn’t develop what Noah needs to do—be someone who feels OK asserting himself when there is opposition.” Many parents with teenagers experience difficult feelings in their parent-teenager relationships. For Anne, the feelings of insult and rejection were intolerable. Even worse for her was the terrible shame she felt about her negative feelings toward her son: “I’m the terrible person. Mothers shouldn’t feel this way.”

How to handle this kind of situation with teenagers is controversial. Furthermore, how any parent hears what a child says is open to interpretation and may be related to how the parent differentiated from his or her own parents. While Anne felt insulted and hurt, another parent in these circumstances might shrug and think, “When will these awful teenage years pass?” On one end of the continuum of parental response, parents might believe that a child of any age should never be permitted to say anything that is hurtful, disrespectful, or angry to a parent. At the other end of the response continuum, parents might accept any expression their child makes without intervening. An extreme example might be if a teenager said, “You’re an awful parent, you have no business having children,” and a parent made no protest about being treated that way. On this far end of the continuum, the lack of a parental response to push against doesn’t provide the child with the feeling that there is a strong parental self to separate from. If there is no other out there to individuate from, it becomes difficult for a child to develop a sense of who he or she is and the ability to be autonomous. The child is left wondering, “Who am I?” Potentially more problematic, the child may be left with a feeling of powerlessness. He or she has not been given the experience of successfully asserting his or her developing self in the world.

There is a lot of room along this continuum for parents to develop responses that feel comfortable to them while allowing some room for their children to develop their unique selves. It helps if parents let their children know what behaviors are acceptable. For instance, telling a child, “You can’t talk to me that way” is not the same as saying, “You can’t be angry at me,” or “You are hurting my feelings.”

When children respond to parents in disappointing or unacceptable ways, it is important that parents stop and consider how they will meet that response. Each situation requires thought. Sometimes, interfering with the child’s wishes or experiences provides an opportunity for the child to push back against the parent and feel a sense of his or her developing self. At other times, supporting the child’s differentiation provides the child with a sense of confidence and recognition of his or her developing self. No matter the age of the child, parents who are curious and interested in why there is disparity or opposition are communicating their openness to more than one way of behaving and/or feeling. This openness to difference helps children develop into self-confident, autonomous adults. Moreover, parents are less likely to repeat the dynamics of their own childhoods if they consider their children’s behavior from a developmental perspective. They will be in a better position to not take things so personally and will feel less hurt, insulted, or disrespected by their children.

Cyber bullying has become more common with advances in technology. Messages can be posted on social networking websites, and pictures can be downloaded, altered, and made available to the world in seconds. Although there has been abundant research into the consequences of cyber bullying and traditional bullying, little has been done to determine which type may cause more psychological damage. It is well established that bullying itself—the act of terrorizing, intimidating, and ridiculing another through verbal or physical acts—can have numerous deleterious effects.

Those who endure bullying are at increased risk for internalizing problems such as anxiety, depression, and suicide ideation. Understanding how each type of bullying impacts young people is of critical importance in order to target those most vulnerable and help them deal with the ramifications. To get a better idea of the effects of cyber bullying in comparison to traditional bullying, Sheri Bauman of the University of Arizona’s College of Education recently conducted a study asking college students to rate their levels of distress based on hypothetical cyber and traditional bullying scenarios. The scenarios were similar in nature and differed only in delivery.

Bauman discovered that three main bullying themes emerged, including generalized bullying, name calling, and sexual victimization through explicit sexual images. Although the female participants reported higher levels of distress for all three types of bullying, the method of delivery did not impact emotional response. Specifically, although their responses varied by bullying scenario, all participants reported similar distress levels whether the bullying event was traditional in nature or cyber bullying.

However, Bauman found that one type of bullying was the most distressing. “We … found that bullying with sexual material, whether conventionally or by technological methods, is the most upsetting kind of incident to targets,” she said. This was especially true for female participants. Those with a history of victimization had higher distress than those without. In sum, Bauman believes that these findings demonstrate that it may not be the delivery method of bullying behavior that is most detrimental to young people, but rather the content of the message conveyed.

Reference:
Bauman, S., Newman, M. L. (2012). Testing assumptions about cyber bullying: Perceived distress associated with acts of conventional and cyber bullying. Psychology of Violence. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0029867

Play therapy is widely recognized as an effective therapeutic approach for children who are unable or unwilling to communicate their psychological distress. Elementary-aged children represent an especially vulnerable segment of the population when it comes to mental health barriers. First, it is during these formative years that behavior patterns are set. Children who have psychological problems early on tend to have higher rates of substance misuse, aggression, risk-taking behavior, and academic challenges than their peers. Additionally, many young children who have attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress, autism, or other difficulties may have significant academic challenges and can benefit greatly from effective and meaningful in-school therapy.

But believing in the viability of play therapy and delivering it are two different things. Many school counselors report significant barriers to play therapy. Christine Ebrahim of the Department of Counseling at Loyola University in New York wanted to take a closer look at the barriers that counselors faced and how they overcame them. Ebrahim enlisted 359 elementary school counselors from the American School Counselor Association and had them complete online surveys regarding barriers to play therapy. The participants reported barriers such as time, space allocation, financial resources, and administrative and parental support. However, nearly all the counselors who cited these obstacles also described how they overcame them. For instance, they used their own money for supplies when they could not get funding, moved sessions to alternative locations when space was limited, and provided education about the benefits of play therapy when administrative and parental support was lacking.

One barrier was more difficult to surmount: the limited availability of play therapy training. “In looking at the data, most counselors identified specifically a lack of training as their primary problem,” Ebrahim said. Play therapy courses are not part of the curriculum at all colleges. Therefore, counselors are forced to learn through textbooks or online, or they must pay for training out of their own pockets. These results are promising in that they suggest that counselors are willing to do whatever it takes to offer play therapy to students in need. However, Ebrahim believes the findings clearly demonstrate that elementary school counselors are in desperate need of more professional play therapy training.

Reference:
Ebrahim, C., Steen, R. L., Paradise, L. (2012). Overcoming school counselors’ barriers to play therapy. International Journal of Play Therapy. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0029791

One of the most common methods for assessing the behavioral and emotional state of a child is a parental report. This type of evaluation usually comprises a parent’s observation and evaluation of the child’s feelings, mood states, and behaviors over a period of time. But just how accurately do parents gauge the emotional temperature of their children? That was the question at the center of a recent study conducted by C. Emily Durbin of the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University. Because parental reports can vary quite dramatically from reports obtained by other observers, such as teachers, counselors, and classmates, Durbin wanted to determine what factors, if any, skewed parents’ perceptions.

Durbin chose to focus on the effects of maternal depression on parental reports. She based her decision on the fact that other conditions, such as alcoholism, parental anxiety, and family distress, have been shown to influence maternal reports. Durbin extended the existing research and compared mothers’ reports with those of unbiased observers on a sample of 190 children ranging from 3 to 6 years old. Participants were instructed to rate levels of sadness, fear, happiness, surprise, and anger in the children after they completed 10 emotion-inducing tasks. Durbin found that the mothers with a history of depression or anxiety tended to rate their children as less happy than mothers with no such history. Additionally, these same mothers viewed their children as overly fearful, and rated girls as sadder than boys. This could be a result of maternal sensitivity to emotions such as fear and sadness. However, the outcome showed a significant disparity between observers’ ratings and those of the mothers with a psychological history. “These mothers may have greater difficulty setting aside their perceptions of the child’s typical emotional adjustment to focus solely on rating the behavior the child is currently exhibiting,” Durbin said. Although the sample size was limited to young children and did not contain a large number of mothers currently exhibiting depressive symptoms, the results warrant further investigation. Durbin believes it is essential to expand this research to include older children, comparison to other assessment tools, and evaluation of other aspects of childhood development.

Reference:
Durbin, C. Emily, and Sylvia Wilson. Convergent validity of and bias in maternal reports of child emotion. Psychological Assessment 24.3 (2012): 647-60. Print.

It is normal for adolescents to conflict with family members, especially parents. In fact, this transition from obedient, caring, and emotionally attached child to sometimes distant, moody, and rebellious teenager is often seen as a normal stage of development. Adolescents begin to find their own identities, their own sets of friends, and their own interests during the teen years. During this exploratory period, they begin to pull away from the safety of family and assert their own independence as they start their foray into adulthood. But even though moderate conflict is viewed as relatively normal, researchers have raised questions about the effects of conflict on social functioning. In a recent study, Katherine B. Ehrlich of the Department of Psychology at the University of Maryland took this question one step further. Using a sample of 189 adolescents, Ehrlich assessed how parental conflict and peer conflict affected social functioning independently and collectively.

The participants and their two parents, mothers and fathers, were observed as they engaged in conversations about topics that caused conflict. The adolescents were then asked to detail any conflicts in their closest peer relationships. Finally, the participants’ friends were interviewed about the level of social acceptance and general behavior of the participants while in social environments. Ehrlich discovered that although conflict with parents was linked to more aggression and risk taking, this effect was significantly amplified when peer conflicts were occurring simultaneously.

It has been suggested that conflict is a catalyst for social development and that adolescents need to experience disagreements in order to learn how to engage in problem solving and adaptive stress coping strategies. However, Ehrlich believes that when there is too much conflict present in teens’ lives, their resources may become quickly depleted, thus impairing their ability to function socially. It should be noted that the results gathered in this study were only obtained from married, heterosexual parents and were not examined independently. Future work should isolate mother-child conflict and father-child conflict to capture a more in-depth look at the individual influence of each. Additionally, single-parent environments should be examined in relation to parent-child conflict and its effect on social functioning. Ehrlich added, “We encourage researchers to continue using a multimethod approach to explore the ways in which conflict across family and friend relationship contexts influences adolescent development.”

Reference:
Ehrlich, K. B., Dykas, M. J., Cassidy, J. (2012). Tipping points in adolescent adjustment: Predicting social functioning from adolescents’ conflict with parents and friends. Journal of Family Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0029868

This is the first in a series of articles designed to explore some of the issues and concerns that arise around what is currently called Asperger’s syndrome, which will soon be incorporated into the broader spectrum of autism disorder when the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) is published in 2013.

As a therapist, I see clients with a variety of traits clustered at the high-functioning end of autism, now commonly referred to as Asperger’s syndrome, a term I will use until the DSM-5 makes it no longer accurate.

No two clients with Asperger’s syndrome exhibit the same cluster of traits, nor does any one client exhibit them all. However, there is one element that I recognize as pervasively diminished in all Asperger’s clients. This element is called “theory of mind.”

What is theory of mind? It is a person’s ability to imagine the interior life of another person. This includes understanding why someone else does something, how someone might feel in a certain circumstance, what might be important to that person: in short, it is the ability to put oneself in the mind of another person and see the world from that person’s point of view. Theory of mind means being able to create a theory about the way another person’s mind works.

Theory of mind provides the basis for empathy because if you can walk in someone else’s shoes, you also become capable, by extension, of feeling any pain or delight that person experiences. You understand motivation. You catch a glimpse of fears and dislikes. You get to know the other person from the inside out.

According to autism specialist Simon Baron-Cohen, individuals with Asperger’s syndrome typically have delayed access or no access to this phenomenon of human communication and share a problem that is called mind-blindness. Since interpersonal communication is approximately 65% nonverbal, you can quickly see that not being able to formulate a theory of mind leaves these individuals at a distinct disadvantage in relationship with others because the behavior of other people does not make sense to them.

For parents, this gap can create difficulties when they treat their son or daughter with Asperger’s with the same set of interpersonal expectations with which they treat their other children and assume intact theory of mind capabilities. This can lead to incorrect understanding of the child’s behavior as being intentionally hurtful, for example, when in fact it was based in lack of awareness.

A common test used with children suspected of being autistic is called the Sally and Anne Test:

Sally has a basket. Anne has a box. Sally has a marble. She puts the marble into her basket. Sally goes out for a walk. Anne takes the marble out of the basket and puts it into the box. Now Sally comes back. She wants to play with her marble. Where will Sally look for the marble?

Most children will answer that Sally will look in her basket, because that’s where she put it and that’s where she expects it to be when she returns from her walk. Baron-Cohen discovered that only 20% of children with autism were able to answer correctly. A full 80% answered that Sally would look in the box, because that is where the marble is.

This test is often used to demonstrate the theory of mind deficits in children with Asperger’s syndrome. They believe Sally will look in the box for her marble because they know that’s where it is. They are unable to put themselves into Sally’s mind in order to understand that from her perspective the marble should be right where she left it: in her basket. Can you imagine how unpredictable and irrational the world must appear to a child whose logic is denied in such a manner? This is the world of a child with Asperger’s syndrome.

I work with children to help them build bridges toward understanding the behavior of others, so that they can come to anticipate that their own logical view of the world may not apply in all circumstances. This is one of the primary goals of therapy with these children. It is an attempt to help them experience the world as a safer place than it appears when their logical perspective is consistently shattered by experiences that do not align with it.

Destructive parentification is a behavior in which a parent transfers the emotional or physical responsibility of parenting to their child. Some parents turn to their children for emotional support and expect their children to fill emotional voids. Other parents who engage in destructive parentification may expect their children to fulfill physical obligations such as caretaking. These behaviors diminish the appropriate boundaries between a parent and child that are necessary for a child to develop his or her own identity. Additionally, boundaries that are blurred can expose children to events and circumstances that they are emotionally and physically unprepared to handle. This type of parentification can have significantly negative outcomes for children. Research has shown that children who are the victims of parentification, which is considered a form of abuse, have higher rates of externalizing and internalizing problems in childhood and adolescence than those who do not experience parentification.

When victims of parentification become parents themselves, the risk of the cycle continuing is extremely high. However, few studies have examined how maternal behavior in adult victims of childhood parentification affects future generations. To explore the relationship between maternal behavior and childhood psychological development, Amy K. Nuttal of the Department of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana assessed 374 pairs of mother-child participants through the first 3 years of the children’s lives. The mothers were evaluated for childhood parentification in their own families of origin and and for mixed histories of emotional abuse, sexual abuse, or physical abuse.

Nuttal found that the women with destructive parentification were less responsive to their children at 18 months than those with no history of parentification. The unresponsiveness was predictive of externalizing behaviors in the children at 36 months. When Nuttal examined the effect of the father’s presence, she discovered that the participants who maintained a relationship with the father of the child had significantly lower levels of prior parentification than those who had no relationship with the fathers. Nuttal also found that previous parentification directly predicted low levels of maternal warmth in the participants, which indirectly predicted negative developmental outcomes for the children. She added, “This finding suggests that facilitating the development of maternal contingent responsiveness among mothers with a history of destructive parentification may promote more adaptive child development in the next generation.”

Reference:
Nuttall, A. K., Valentino, K., Borkowski, J. G. (2012). Maternal history of parentification, maternal warm responsiveness, and children’s externalizing behavior. Journal of Family Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0029470

Related articles:
Welcome to Your Child’s Brain: Interview With Sandra Aamodt
Importance of Coping Skills, Part 2: Building Resilience
How to Teach Children Emotional Intelligence

We are all familiar with the experience of good intentions having negative consequences. In my work as a therapist, I often encounter this phenomenon when I work with parents who, in their desire to make things better, easier, or less painful for their children, interfere with their child’s ability to develop the capacity to do for themselves. These are parents who feel an urgent need to fix their child’s problems. For the purpose of this discussion, “fixing” will refer to the intervening and usurping of problem-solving when one’s child experiences difficulty.

Gloria wanted to fix her daughter Alice’s feelings. She worried when Alice was unhappy, angry, upset, or had any feeling she felt caused discomfort for her child. For example, when Alice got frustrated and tearful when she practiced piano, Gloria suggested she stop her lessons. In therapy, Gloria told me how disturbing it was to her when Alice was upset. She recalled, “When Alice was an infant, I couldn’t stand to let her cry even for a minute. My heart felt like it would break. When Alice gets upset because I say ‘no’ to her, I always give in. I can’t stand it. It always seems like I’ve hurt her when I say ‘no.’” Gloria urgently needed Alice’s bad feelings to go away. What Gloria eventually came to understand was that what was urgent was that she, Gloria, be rid of her own uncomfortable feelings.

[fat_widget_right]Fred had a hard time when his fifth-grade son Eddie brought home average grades from school. He told me that he felt Eddie was much smarter than his grades showed, and he felt his job as a parent was to help him do better. This sounds like a responsible, caring parent talking. Unfortunately, Fred didn’t just provide some assistance so Eddie could do better, like going over his homework and helping him with his social studies projects. Rather, Fred intruded in what Eddie needed to do every day. For example, when Eddie was assigned to do a book report and make a diorama about the life of the protagonist, Fred read the book, bought supplies, outlined what should be in the diorama, and essentially did the project for Eddie. Eddie got an A, and Fred was thrilled!

While Fred’s intervention did fix Eddie’s grades, Eddie was given little opportunity to figure things out for himself. In therapy, Fred became aware that “this isn’t helping my son. I’m really scared that Eddie could follow in my footsteps and repeat my terrible academic failures.” As we focused on Fred’s anxiety around allowing Eddie to become a separate, self-confident individual with his own strengths and failures, Fred was increasingly able to talk with his son. He was able to encourage Eddie rather than take over his academic life.

Pam, a 29-year-old woman had difficulty dating and forming relationships. When she started therapy she told me that she didn’t have much trouble meeting men, but there was always some difficulty in the relationships, and they never got very far. As we explored her life and dating experiences, she explained that her biggest help was her father. She described him as exceptionally loving and caring and her “go-to” person when she had trouble in a relationship. She explained that a typical difficulty when she dated was that she would feel very hurt and upset when someone she dated didn’t call or text her quickly enough. Pam said, “When that happens, I call my father right away and I know he will comfort me. When I was a kid, he would do the same when a girlfriend hurt me. He gives me the same advice with guys as he did with those girls. He always says the same thing: ‘get rid of them—you don’t need people who hurt you in your life.’”

As we explored this dynamic further, it became evident that Pam’s well-intentioned father couldn’t bear witnessing Pam feeling hurt or upset. He would fix her relationships by encouraging her to get rid of the person who hurt her. This would not only alleviate Pam’s hurt but would take away the feelings he couldn’t tolerate. As a consequence, Pam had not developed the ability to manage her feelings and correctly judge how others were treating her. She had not learned how to deal interpersonally with another person in a relationship.

When parents can’t allow their children to struggle through problems and feelings, it is often because they, themselves, can’t tolerate how watching the struggle makes them feel. Some parents identify with their child. They recall their own feelings, like frustration or hurt or anger, and may assume that their child is experiencing what they experienced in that situation (although it may be a very different experience for the child). The desire to protect one’s child is necessary and desirable in a parent. But when the protection stems from the parents’ discomfort around their own feelings, it can create issues that impact the child’s development of self.

Children who are never allowed to cry, for example, may not learn how to soothe themselves. When children don’t learn how to self-soothe, they are frequently unable to cope with the normal stresses and frustrations of everyday life. Very often a parent’s worry about their child’s feelings can be communicated to the child. When a parent anxiously steps in to help or fix, the child may feel (consciously or unconsciously) that the parent doesn’t think the child has the capacity to work things out on his/her own. Children whose parents take over their work and do it for them are deprived of experiencing “I can do it.” Their ego enhancement, self-confidence, and self-esteem are interfered with. Parents who interrupt whenever a possible failure lurks do not prepare their children for success, because one must be able to tolerate failure in order to achieve success.

While there certainly are times when it is useful and wonderful to be there for your child and be helpful, the “fixer” parents described here did not help their children. They made themselves feel better. They may have made their children feel temporarily better: Eddie got his project done and got an A, and Pam felt reassured that she knew what to do when a date didn’t respond the way she wanted. Alice was relieved of her painful feelings, but didn’t develop the ability to cope. Not one of these children was helped toward developing a strong sense of competence or the ability to manage his or her feelings in the world.

Rather than extreme fixing, there are alternative behaviors when the urge to fix things for your children is present. Trying to address the problem with your child—rather than springing into action to help—can allow a child to feel like a participant, giving him or her a sense of self-esteem. Leaving space for a child to be uncomfortable communicates that you have faith that your child can find a way to figure out what he or she wants, and how to get it. It is important to communicate that it is okay to struggle, that it is a human experience that we all must learn to endure. It has to be okay to be uncertain and not know what results efforts will bring. Parents have to be able to tolerate their own anxiety and not jump in to solve their child’s problems. This allows the child to develop a healthy separate self and become a competent, assertive, and confident person in the world.

I was talking with a new client and he was telling me about his temper when he gets mad and what consequences he receives. As he was talking, he stated, “when I’m bad…” and continued the conversation about his consequences. When he was done, I asked if he thought he was a “bad” kid. He said no. I was glad to hear that because I think overall, we are inherently good. Yes, there are people out there who would fit more in the “bad” category, but that is not what is being addressed.

As parents and disciplinarians, we try to shape our kids to make wise decisions so the negative consequences can be few or needed when necessary. When a kid gets angry and has tantrums and it happens over and over, it can be very frustrating to deal with. When the kid understands the consequence of his behavior but continues to still get angry and throw tantrums, parents may not be sure of what else to do. Parents slip. Teachers slip. The slip is telling the child that he is “bad” even though the behavior that he is doing may be more the focus of “bad.” I do not think that parents or even teachers slip on purpose and telling the kid that he is “bad,” but we are human and make mistakes, and it happens. Repeating this slip impacts the child’s self esteem. Over time, these children may see themselves as “bad” because they keep repeating the “bad” behavior, receiving the consequence, and having parents become frustrated, and a negative self-image begins to form. I know that is not what we as parents want for our kids. We want them to have a good sense of self and know what is “bad” behavior. So, how can this happen?

Here’s an idea: How about getting away from “bad” and “good” behavior. I know it’s hard to do because “good” and “bad” has been around for a very long time; it’s habitual and creating a newer way can be difficult.

What I am suggesting is to name what is “bad.” For example, your child is hitting a younger sibling because the sibling did not want to share a toy with the child. Instead of saying, “that’s bad,” point out that “hitting is bad.” Tell the child, “It’s not okay to hit when you are angry.” When we point out the behavior that is not okay, it helps us to not get into the “good” versus “bad” cycle. Another example: When your child is sitting on the floor and waiting patiently and you tell him “good boy.” Point out the WHAT that he is doing: sitting and waiting patiently. When he knows what he is doing that makes him a “good” boy, he will be able to associate that behavior in other areas and he will know he is doing well.

Objectifying the behavior takes away the “good” or “bad” titles, which decreases the opportunities for us parents to accidentally say that the child is “bad.”

Remember when your child was a baby and you were telling him what type of person he was going to grow up to be? If not, it’s okay. What I am getting at is when a kid is younger, parents may encourage the child a little more than at an older age. We encourage young children to try new foods, feed themselves, and use utensils, and we teach/show them how to do it then praise them for what they learned, even if it may not turn out well. Somehow as the child ages, the cycle of “good” or “bad” begins or replaces the encouraging aspect of parenting. Yes, kids do need to know right from wrong AND they still need to know that they are capable of doing great things.

Objectifying the behavior can help start a different way of helping your child to know how to make healthy choices. Continuing to encourage your child to try new things or to keep trying something can also help. Asking children what they think about their behavior and maybe what they could have done instead to not receive a consequence can also help. The asking can help your child learn how to see the cause and effect of a particular behavior. This can be a great learning and shaping tool for preparing the child to see more cause and effect as he or she ages and matures. Reminding the child that he or she is a wonderful child, has great possibilities, and is loved unconditionally can also reinforce a positive sense of self, regardless of whether the child has made a mistake or chooses wisely.

The goal of parenting is to help shape a child to have a good sense of self, to know how to behave appropriately, and to be able to self correct or recognize when he or she does not make a good choice. When the “bad” behavior is directly addressed, it takes away from parents accidentally slipping and saying that the child is “bad” when the focus needs to be more on the actual behavior.

It takes awareness and practice to create a new way of responding. Hopefully, this article will enlighten and small steps can be made to get out of the good/bad cycle and help the child to still have a good sense of self, even when he or she makes a poor choice.

Related articles:
Temper Tantrum Behaviors
Building Self-Confidence From the Ground Up
Adolescent Consequences, 100% Natural and Organic!

Play is an important part of a child’s development. It enables them to engage creativity and learn necessary social skills. Children are often introduced to concepts like sharing, taking turns, and working together when they participate in group play. This critical time of development allows children to learn how to practice patience, empathy, and other necessary social skills. Although the research on play has demonstrated the many benefits, such as creativity and emotional maturity, few studies have looked at how creativity exhibited through play affects storytelling and divergent thinking, two aspects that further emotional regulation and enhance psychological development.

To address this, Jessica Hoffman and Sandra Russ of the Department of Psychology at Case Western Reserve University conducted a study involving 61 young girls in kindergarten through fourth grade. The team used the Affect in Play Scale to assess the girls’ mood processes and cognitive behaviors as they construed narratives. The researchers also relied on parent reports to measure emotional regulation and evaluated the girls for divergent thinking abilities throughout the task. They found the pretend play allowed the girls to express creativity that directly increased their divergent thinking abilities. The creative play enhanced storytelling skills of the participants and allowed them to express high levels of emotional regulation. The team also explored how executive functioning was affected by creative play but found no relationship.

Hoffman noted that the participants in this study were typically performing young girls and believes that additional research on clinical and nonclinical participants would further add to the limited literature on the many positive influences of pretend play. She said, “Overall, results of this study are promising with regards to the associations between pretend play and other important life skills for children.” With play therapy and other creative approaches receiving more attention in recent years, understanding the forces behind these often successful treatment methods is vital for clinicians interested in using these techniques.

Reference:
Hoffan, J., Russ, S. (2012). Pretend play, creativity, and emotion regulation in children. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts 6.2, 175-184.

I am frequently asked what the best complementary or alternative therapies for kids are. This is a broad and potentially complex question, with appropriate courses of treatment depending on both on the child’s struggles and the balance of safety and efficacy of the therapy being considered. Eventually, many parents eventually find a complementary or alternative medicine (CAM) therapy that feels right for their child.

The most recent data from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) found that 12% of the 9,000 children surveyed in 2007 had used some form of CAM during the previous year. CAM use typically ranges from providing remedies in lieu of medical treatments—such as using a homeopathic flu remedy instead of a prescription—to using CAM in conjunction with conventional remedies. The latter can be as simple as giving a child a zinc lozenge or tea with honey in addition to the antibiotics a doctor prescribes when a child has a sore throat or throat infection. Another example is when a child has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and his or her parents employ dietary changes even if the child is also receiving medication or psychotherapy. CAM therapies are often used to help children manage symptoms of chronic pain conditions or notable anxiety, ideally in combination with psychotherapy (and appropriate medical care, if this is indicated).

Remembering Developmental Differences

A point NCCAM emphasizes is that children are not merely smaller versions of adults. Similarly, more studies have been conducted regarding the effects of many CAM therapies on adults, although there is a growing body of research on CAM with children. Thus, what may be considered an appropriate CAM therapy or dose of therapy for an adult is not necessarily what we can recommend for a child.

That being said, there are a number of treatments that are considered generally safe for children, particularly when provided or informed by appropriately trained professionals. My favorites are listed here. I chose to emphasize non-oral intake therapies, although at times these may also be appropriate.

1. Guided imagery or self-hypnosis can be helpful for managing mood symptoms, pain and itching, sleep difficulties, and nausea.
2. Mindfulness or other types of meditation can aid in improving mood, pain, itching, sleep, nausea, and concentration.
3. Aromatherapy can help reduce anxiety and enhance feelings of calm, especially when paired with other therapies, including cognitive behavioral therapy, meditation, imagery/hypnosis, or massage.
4. Movement therapies, such as yoga, dance therapy, or tai chi can increase a child’s feelings of mastery, discharge excess physical tension, provide focus, and improve mood.
5. Massage  decreases muscle tension or soreness and increases relaxation.
6. Energy therapies, such as Reiki or therapeutic touch, may help increase calmness and decrease stress. These may also help with some physical discomforts.
7. Art therapy can help children cope with change, shed light on emotions and concerns that they may have trouble verbalizing, and reinforce healing images created during guided imagery and hypnosis.
8. Homeopathy is gently calming and is reported to help with fears, anxiety, and tantrums. There is less data on this therapy, but it is generally considered to be safe.
9. Diluted ginger tea can help with upset stomach/nausea.
10. Dietary changes, which may include eliminating processed foods, caffeine, or sugar and emphasizing whole grains, fruits, vegetables, legumes, and healthy sources of protein, are health-supportive overall, and some parents report improved mood, sleep, and concentration when processed foods are limited or eliminated.

One common theme that runs through most of the therapies listed above is that they help children to feel calmer. Some of the approaches provide children with tools to help them directly impact how they feel via what they do (movement therapies, imagery/hypnosis, meditation, art), which enhances children’s feelings of mastery and control. All of these approaches require at least initial participation and monitoring from parents—a key ingredient in helping children to feel safe, loved, and supported.

As always, it is essential to keep healthcare providers in the loop when using CAM therapies with children, particularly with those who have a medical or psychological illness.

Modeling Emotional Intelligence

Finally, if I were to add a number 11 to the list, it would be to emphasize that children pick up on and are undoubtedly affected by their parents’ moods. It is essential for parents dealing with anxiety, depression, or other psychological challenges to obtain appropriate treatment. Doing so helps parents feel better, enhances their ability to cope with the many demands of parenting, and teaches children about the value of self-care. Furthermore, emotionally healthy parents tend to parent more effectively, which also reduces children’s feelings of anxiety and depression.

Resources:

• National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine: CAM Use and Children
• Columbia University’s Integrative Therapies Program for Children with Cancer: A leading program that emphasizes both research and clinical practice. Their website contains a wealth of information about a variety of therapies, as well as helpful links.
• This article details an integrative (CAM) treatment of pediatric pain and itch (pruritus) with a seven year-old girl:
  • Stein, T. R., Sonty, N., and Saroyan, J. M. (2012). “Scratching” beneath the surface: An integrative psychosocial approach to pediatric pruritus and pain. Child Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(1), 33-47.

Most parents don’t need an expert or a study to tell them what they already know: kids get more homework now than they ever have before, with many high schoolers getting as many as seven or eight hours of homework a night. Most parents are as overwhelmed by homework as their children are and constantly struggle to create incentives for their children to complete their piles of homework. Many parents believe they’re fighting this homework battle to ensure a quality education for their children, but the truth is that there’s little evidence that excessive homework helps children learn. Indeed, evidence is rapidly amassing that overworking children interferes with their ability to learn.

Understanding Learning

Our brains are programmed to learn things that are interesting to us and relevant to our lives. You’re more likely, for example, to remember where the aggressive dog who always chases children lives than you are to remember the color pattern on your neighbor’s shirt. Children in particular are primed to learn things that help them better function in their environment. Unfortunately, homework doesn’t pass this test. The overwhelming majority of homework assignments force children to sit down and memorize facts rather than experience their world. Not only does this make information more difficult to learn; it can also decrease your child’s motivation to learn. When learning is made miserable, children associate the thing they’re learning with misery and want to avoid it. This is why tactics such as forced silent reading time or flashcards rarely help children learn math and vocabulary.

The Stressed Brain

Even when homework is well-designed and does foster learning, too much of it can be damaging. Children who have more than one hour of homework each night overwhelmingly report that they feel stressed about their ability to complete their work. Over time, this stress can create real problems for a developing brain. When we are under stress, the brain produces cortisol, which lowers immune function and processing speed. On a short-term basis, cortisol can help us deal with stress. But when the brain is constantly releasing cortisol, development and learning can slow. This is especially damaging for children, whose brains are rapidly laying down neural connections. Even more troubling, excessive doses of cortisol can damage the hippocampus, which plays an important role in memory, inhibition, and spatial reasoning.

Fewer Activities

The value of friendships, extracurricular activities, and relaxation time to children’s intellectual and emotional development has been extensively documented. When homework is overwhelming, however, children are less likely to have the opportunity to participate in these activities. Thus even a child who is left unfazed by excessive homework or who excels in school may suffer as a result of excessive homework because he’s unable to engage in the activities that can help him become a well-rounded adult.

A Better Approach to Homework

Homework can help bridge the gap between home and school, encourage independent learning, and give children who find school stressful an opportunity to learn at home. So what are the characteristics of “good” homework assignments? They include:

• Activities that encourage students to interact with their environment
• Activities that give students flexibility to focus on things they are interested in
• Activities that make learning relevant instead of flashcards and drills
• Reasonable amounts of time spent on homework—no more than one hour for young children and no more than two hours for high schoolers
• Activities that can be completed at home without substantial cost or the purchase of lots of supplies

When choosing a school or classroom for your child, ask about homework and advocate on your child’s behalf when homework becomes excessive. Your child’s stressed mind will thank you, and your child just may end up learning more.

References:

1. Gerhardt, S. (2004). Why love matters: How affection shapes a baby’s brain. New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.
2. Harwood, R., Miller, S. A., Vasta, R. (2008). Child psychology: Development in a changing society. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
3. Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Eyer, D. E. (2004). Einstein never used flash cards: How our children really learn–and why they need to play more and memorize less. Emmaus, PA: Rodale.