Favorite Scary Movie

Do you like scary movies? About this time of the year - today, especially, we enjoy a good fright night to go with our Halloween experience and that rush of adrenaline from being scared, surprised, and creeped out even at the risk of getting nightmares.

Thinking about parents, allowing children to watch scary movies is another way to be intentional about the role. As you can see from this list at Commonsense Media, selecting a good/scary movie can mean weighing the child's age, developmental ability to understand what's happening, to know that it's make believe, temperament and sensitivity to images and actions that another child might not find frightening, and the setting in which the movie is viewed. As with all media, someone should engage with the child while viewing to make it a positive experience. In part, this scaffolding can attune to what the experience is like for the individual child. It also allows asking the child questions to correct misunderstandings or to deepen comprehension of what is being viewed. Questioning and engagement can also help children understand consequences (of for instance, violence, often portrayed as cartoony and painless, or of gender representations).

As adults we like to watch favorite films and TV shows for lots of reasons. Memories, emotions, the story, who we watch it with and sometimes to just get a good scare.

In class I shared that my favorite scary movie is The Haunting (1963), directed by Robert Wise. Here's the IMDB page with information about the film: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057129/?ref_=nv_sr_4  . This film came out when I was 8, and I probably saw it for the first time when I was 9 or 10. I love it because it is very well done - in the pre-cgi era - showing what happens with a mixture of talent, good camera work and imagination. And for its indelible impact on me (as I still think twice at leaving my hand off the side of the bed) . Below is the trailer:

What is YOUR favorite scary movie and why? Or, if you don't like scary movies, why not? 

Intervene or Ignore?

We've all been there. At a store or airport or other public place when a child has a meltdown and the parent loses it. It's not comfortable for anyone, least of which for the parent who balances his or her own emotions, thoughts about how best to handle the situation and the child, and feeling judged by those around.

What do you do? If you're like most (including me, most of the time) you don't do much of anything. You remain proactive by looking away or looking busy so that the frazzled parent at least has one fewer person to feel watched by. Yet perhaps (like me) you remain attentive enough to weigh when some kind of assistance or intervention may be actually helpful. Strangers are not likely to welcome your picking up the child or giving the child something like candy (though some are), but they may welcome distracting the child with a silly voice. Or hearing a simple calm adult voice that asks if there is help that can be offered "Can I help unload your grocery cart for you while you tend to your daughter". Or even a glance that says or actual expression of, "I know what you are going through. It's tough when they are tired, isn't it?"

But what about other times when it appears that the child might be in danger? Check out this story from the New York Times a couple weeks ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/us/should-you-intervene-when-a-parent-harshly-disciplines-a-child-in-public.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

What is happening that might lead someone to consider intervening? What is your opinion about this? Do you agree or disagree with the recommendations expressed? Would it be an invasion of privacy for the family? What is the boundary at which a stranger 'should' get involved? Consider too our points from class about preserving the parent-child relationship? Might intervention escalate something in a parent that might somehow damage, rather than support future parenting?

Laws in the US against spanking?

In class this week we are continuing our look at learning and guidance for young children, with a specific focus on discipline and the use of punishment as a tactic.

We've discussed our attitudes about spanking as a discipline practice, and motivations for why some (many) parents continue to use the practice, even on an occasional basis. And those who do, generally do have a variety of discipline practices. There is division however, about the value and effectiveness of spanking for helping children learn the limits that are valuable for their self-regulation and socialization. And questions about the impacts on the relationship with the parent and what else children learn from being spanked (fear? avoiding punishment rather than problem solving? the promotion of use of physical force and acceptance of violence as a resolution?).

And there are questions about the practice when it is nearly exclusively used by parents (adults with larger bodies, brains and strength) with small children (as in small bodies and brains). As a power assertive technique toward discipline, there is the very real potential that it can escalate to something more than getting the child's attention or reminding a child that the parent disagrees with the behavior (Exhibit A: Adrian Peterson). There is the possibility when adrenaline flows and strikes come with more force, that a child can be injured, and can suffer from abuse. And when it gets to that level, as we know from our discussion about toxic stress and the brain, that child most certainly isn't learning much about the actual problem that started the whole situation.

These questions have led to policy movements in the US toward enacting laws around spanking. Other countries outside the US do have policies that prohibit spanking or physically striking a child. Not so much in the US. Primarily our policies step in when a child has been injured or abused. Spanking is permissible but only to the point that it is used 'reasonably'.  

Please see the following short article from Time magazine in 2014: http://time.com/3379862/child-abuse/.  It lays out some of the efforts that states have made toward passing legislation, and the barriers. Based on our discussion of attitudes in class, this shouldn't be too surprising.

Nevertheless, what are your thoughts on this? Do you believe that we should have anti-spanking laws in the US? If so, should they be within states or would it be federal? How might these be enacted, and what definitions would be in place. Does your personal history or current experience inform your view? 

At the heart of this, do you feel that parents know what is 'reasonable' in the degree to which they use of physical punishment like spanking? If going to the extreme of legislation isn't necessary in your view, then what would you advocate for, so that parents employ strategies for teaching their children (especially young children) limits that are effective in the short and long term, that teach children prosocial and constructive lessons, and that maintain the quality of the parent-child relationship?  

Are children better off when a parent stays home?

Suppose you picked up the phone one day and a survey researcher asked you the following questions:

1. Answer the following statement. Children with 2 parents are a) better off with a parent at home or b) just as well off when parents work.

2. Which parent should stay home?
a) Mother
b) It doesn't matter?

How would you respond?

Consider your answers, then check out the results to those questions posed to a random selection of US citizens by the Pew organization: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/10/most-americans-say-children-are-better-off-with-a-parent-at-home/

You'll see demographic differences in people's responses - based on characteristics like age, gender, religious affiliation, and ethnicity.

How do your own sentiments compare to those of the survey sample, and to those who represent you in the data?

And what do you think these responses say about what people believe 'better off' for children really means? A serious consideration is that many parents don't have a choice around work, full or part time, as it is an economic necessity for the family. If that's the case, then would those who believe that children are 'better off' with a parent at home also be willing to pay more taxes to give non-working parents a subsidy to cover what they aren't earning? On the other hand, are those who believe that children are not better off with a parent at home, willing to support what it takes for our country to provide high quality child care for all children of working parents?

What do you think?

Toddler Tantrum at Nighttime

As we move to the next section of the course we explore parent-child relationships during toddlerhood and early childhood. This is the ages of 18-mos to 3 years, and 3-6 years. This continues to be an incredibly active time for brain development and for the development of little bodies and physical abilities (walking, gaining fine and large motor control), cognition and learning, self-regulation and socialization.

As young children seek to explore and use their developing abilities, they misbehave. Or at least that's what it seems like to adults. And parents need to figure out how best to respond to their children when this happens. We'll be talking a lot about this during these weeks.

Please watch the following video: 

https://youtu.be/8s3F_gN_1wc?list=RD5IM1p-Tn-jA

And share your reactions to what you see. 

Consider a few things. What does Hannah want? How does her mother respond? What are the outcomes, or consequences of the interaction? What might be the impact on the relationship between Hannah and her mother (and possibly her father)? Does this signal anything to you about the relationship dynamics if they continue over time?

Or share other aspects of the video that you'd like to discuss. 

Attachment Disorder, Matt Damon Style

As we discussed insecure attachment classifications during class on Monday, a clip from Good Will Hunting (1997) was mentioned. That clip is below. If you aren't familiar with the film*, it's about a young man who is gifted but who has conduct issues. He is taken under the wing by a Math Professor at MIT, who invites a therapist friend to help him. The scene is between the main character, Will, (Matt Damon) and Sean, the therapist (Robin Williams).

After you watch the clip, discuss in the comment section the type of attachment you believe Will's file identifies for him and why. What is it about Will's behavior suggests this? What about his early parenting and family life suggests that Will's early attachment was insecure? How has that followed him into his adulthood? 

And, a bit of a journey into armchair psychology, but why might Will 'break' on Sean's persistent phrase, "It's not your fault?"

"It's Not Your Fault" (Good Will Hunting, 1997) 

* The film is currently streaming on Netflix (https://www.netflix.com/search/Good%20will%20Hunting?jbv=17405997&jbp=0&jbr=0) and available in most public libraries.

Attachment Parenting: How Much is Enough?

A few years ago, Time magazine ran this rather controversial cover:

with the inside story on attachment parenting (read the article here: http://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,2114427,00.html ).

In class we've been reading and talking about secure attachment and the benefits that it provides to early brain development, and as a basis through the secure base for learning, exploration, positive self-concept, and executive functioning. And in our observations of what sensitive parenting looks like, we used words in class like responsivity, bidirectionality, eye contact, warmth, smiling, language, and reciprocity.

Parents establish secure attachments with their children in a number of ways, and groups like Attachment Parenting International and the Circle of Security promote ways for parents to form nurturing bonds, express warmth, and offer a trusted base. Techniques recommended include baby wearing, co-sleeping, and birth bonding.

As the Time article notes, however, this can be demanding on parents, particularly mothers when breastfeeding and traditional expectations on caregiving are considered. When mothers are straddling work and infant caregiving, co-sleeping may not be a long term strategy if it leaves the parent tired. Might babywearing exacerbate back problems for some, leaving them to feel guilty for offering a 'good enough' environment? Are these additional efforts toward secure attachment necessary? And are they the concerns of those who are more privileged?

What do you think? What might be the essential ingredients for providing a secure attachment relationship for a baby?