One of the recurring themes of this blog is the
tendency of mental health researchers and practitioners to look at patients' symptoms without any investigation into the home environment, and decide that they,
or their brains, are the entire problem.
Psychological problems in kids are roughly divided into externalizing behaviors and internalizing behavior. The former is basically acting out: doing poorly in school, being hyperactive, being oppositional, getting into fights, throwing tantrums and the like.
The latter refers to things like anxiety and depression. Either way, today kids
who have any of these problems are in danger of being labeled with mental
disorders such as ADHD, bipolar disorder, and even "oppositional defiant
disorder," which I refer to as "spoiled brat disorder." And of course there is "conduct disorder," which I refer to as "juvenile delinquency."
These know-nothing researchers act as if living in a tense or chaotic home
environment is good for children's emotional life and that they do not become
distractible or agitated under these circumstances.
As I have often joked, when it comes to looking at the home environment, most mental health professions will - if they say anything at all - label it as "within normal limits (WNL)." What WNL usually really means is "We never looked." If they do "look," they may ask the parents one or two questions about discipline, and take their answers at face value as well as valid or complete.
As I have often joked, when it comes to looking at the home environment, most mental health professions will - if they say anything at all - label it as "within normal limits (WNL)." What WNL usually really means is "We never looked." If they do "look," they may ask the parents one or two questions about discipline, and take their answers at face value as well as valid or complete.
Or if they really want to pretend they have obtained the
whole picture, they can ask the child's teacher what the kid's behavior is like
at school. Of course, teachers are likely to have less patience with kids who are
distractible, and then have lower expectations of them. The kids will pick up on
this, and the teacher's attitude causes these kids to become even more distressed, which makes the teacher have even less
patience and lower expectations of them, and so on in a vicious circle. (This long-term process was described by Peter M. Senge in his amazing book, The Fifth Discipline).
Researchers in psychiatry, as I described in a
post about borderline personality disorder researchers, are even worse than practitioners at
ruling out environmental causes as the explanation for symptomatic children. They never even read summaries of the literature produced by developmental
psychologists.
One developmental psychologist, E. Mark Cummings, summed up quite nicely the type of results that this literature routinely shows . He was quoted in a recent article in the Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/10/the-effects-of-a-simmering-parental-grudge/503015/#article-comments)
that described a recent study ("The
Multiple Faces of Interparental Conflict: Implications for Cascades of
Children's Insecurity and Externalizing Problems," P.T. Davies, R.F. Hentges, J.L. Coe; E.M. Cummings, Journal of Abnormal Psychology [in press]):
“Children are like emotional
geiger counters,” said E. Mark Cummings, a professor of psychology at the
University of Notre Dame who has conducted extensive studies on the effects of marital discord on kids for more than 20
years. Children, he explained, are incredibly attuned to parents’ emotional
communication with each other; they’re keenly aware that, for their parents,
nonverbal expression is key to communicating feelings.
For
many couples, holding onto a grudge—smoldering but not letting a disagreement
erupt into a fighting match—may seem like the best way to deal with a conflict.
But research shows this kind of discord can significantly interfere with a
child’s behavior and sense of emotional security. When exposed to prolonged
unresolved conflict, kids are more likely to get into fights with their peers
at school and show signs of distress, anger, and hostility. They may also have
trouble sleeping at night, which can undermine their academic performance. In
fact, according to various studies that measured children’s
emotional responses to interparental hostility, disengagement and
uncooperative discord between couples has shown to increase a child’s risk of
psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, social withdrawal, and
aggression."
Here is the abstract of the study. Notice how
the study was longitudinal - meaning it looked at parental behavior and children's
reactions to it over an extended period of time - and used multiple measures and
multiple observers. Researchers also actually observed the family members interacting with one
another while engaged in various conflict resolution tasks. That's what a researcher has to do to in order vastly improve his or her chances to see what
is really going on at home and to see what the most important causal factors are for
psychological distress in young people.
This multistudy
article examined the relative strength of mediational pathways involving
hostile, disengaged, and uncooperative forms of interparental conflict,
children's emotional insecurity, and their externalizing problems across 2
longitudinal studies. Participants in Study 1 consisted of 243 preschool
children (M age = 4.60 years) and their parents, whereas Study 2 consisted of
263 adolescents (M age = 12.62 years) and their parents. Both studies utilized
multimethod, multi-informant assessment batteries within a longitudinal design
with 3 measurement occasions. Across both studies, lagged, autoregressive tests
of the mediational paths revealed that interparental hostility was a
significantly stronger predictor of the prospective cascade of children's
insecurity and externalizing problems than interparental disengagement and low
levels of interparental cooperation. Findings further indicated that interparental
disengagement was a stronger predictor of the insecurity pathway than was low
interparental cooperation for the sample of adolescents in Study 2. Results are
discussed in relation to how they inform and advance developmental models of
family risk.